Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CCPC Agenda 10/05/2023
COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 October 5, 2023 9: 00 AM Edwin Fryer- Chairman Joseph Schmitt, Environmental - Vice -Chair Paul Shea, Environmental - Secretary Christopher Vernon Robert Klucik, Jr. Randy Sparrazza Chuck Schumacher Amy Lockhart, Collier County School Board Note: Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Individuals selected to speak on behalf of an organization or group are encouraged and may be allotted 10 minutes to speak on an item if so recognized by the chairman. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. In any case, written materials intended to be considered by the CCPC shall be submitted to the appropriate county staff a minimum of seven days prior to the public hearing. All material used in presentations before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners if applicable. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the CCPC will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Collier County Planning Commission Page I Printed 912812023 October 2023 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call by Secretary 3. Addenda to the Agenda 4. Planning Commission Absences 5. Approval of Minutes 6. BCC Report - Recaps 7. Chairman's Report 8. Consent Agenda 9. Public Hearings A. Advertised 1. PL20220001779 - Rock Creek Estates RPUD (PUDZ) - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2004- 41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District with an Airport Zoning Overlay to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District with an Airport Zoning Overlay for a project known as Rock Creek Estates RPUD to allow development of up to 15 unit single- family dwelling units, a private recreational amenity, and a boat ramp with up to 15 private boat slips on property located west of Airport -Pulling Road, on the south side of North Road, across the street from Terminal Drive to the Naples Airport, in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East; consisting of 11.36+/- acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Timothy Finn, AICP, Planner III] PL20220003791 - Marco Shores Golf Course CPUD - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 81-6, as amended, the Marco Shores Golf Course Community (Marco Shores) Planned Unit Development (PUD), to increase the maximum number of residential multi -family dwelling units from 1,580 units to 1,670, adjust off-street parking standards, and add an Airport Disclosure and Permitting Commitment, by providing for amendment to the Master Plan; and by providing an effective date. The subject 4.04+/- acre property is a portion of the 314.7+/- acre Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD and is located near the Marco Island Executive Airport in Section 26, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, CSM, Planner III] Collier County Planning Commission Page 2 Printed 912812023 October 2023 3. PL20210000660 - Housing Initiatives GMPA - An Ordinance amending Ord. No. 89- 05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan (CCGMP) of the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, adopting an amendment to the CCGMP relating to affordable housing, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) 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; and to establish a Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict and a Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict (TODS); and directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce (FDOC); and specifically amending the Golden Gate City Sub -element of Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and FLUM to address housing initiatives to allow affordable housing by right in certain commercial zoning districts with a sunset date and to establish a (TODS); and directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the FDOC; and specifically amending the Immokalee Area Master Plan Element and FLUM to establish a TODS, directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the FDOC, and specifically adding a Policy to the Transportation Element pertaining to affordable housing along transit routes; and directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the FDOC; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Planner III] 4. PL20230000930, US 41 East Overlay & South US 41 TCEA Expansion GMPA - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the US 41 East Overlay to allow certain economic development uses within the Corridor segments; and, allow increased height and density, and certain economic development uses in Regional Centers and Community Centers through incentives; and furthermore directing the transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. and An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Transportation Element and maps to expand the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area; and furthermore directing the transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Planner III] B. Noticed 10. Old Business 11. New Business 12. Public Comment 13. Adjourn Collier County Planning Commission Page 3 Printed 912812023 9.A.1 10/05/2023 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.1 Doc ID: 26487 Item Summary: PL20220001779 - Rock Creek Estates RPUD (PUDZ) - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District with an Airport Zoning Overlay to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District with an Airport Zoning Overlay for a project known as Rock Creek Estates RPUD to allow development of up to 15 unit single-family dwelling units, a private recreational amenity, and a boat ramp with up to 15 private boat slips on property located west of Airport -Pulling Road, on the south side of North Road, across the street from Terminal Drive to the Naples Airport, in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East; consisting of 11.36+/- acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Timothy Finn, AICP, Planner IIl] Meeting Date: 10/05/2023 Prepared by: Title: — Zoning Name: Tim Finn 09/05/2023 10:00 AM Submitted by: Title: Zoning Director — Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 09/05/2023 10:00 AM Approved By: Review: Planning Commission Diane Lynch Review item Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Zoning Mike Bosi Review Item Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Zoning Mike Bosi Review Item Growth Management Community Development Department James C French Planning Commission Ray Bellows Meeting Pending Completed 09/12/2023 12:02 PM Completed 09/15/2023 11:08 AM Skipped 09/14/2023 8:47 AM Completed 09/15/2023 2:40 PM Completed 09/20/2023 2:25 PM GMD Deputy Dept Head Completed 09/21/2023 10:45 PM 10/05/2023 9:00 AM Packet Pg. 4 9.A.1.a Goibe- -r County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION — ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 5, 2023 SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20220001779; ROCK CREEK ESTATES RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) Owner: Agent: Erik Mogelvang, Manager Josephine Medina, AICP ELAH Holdings, LLC RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 2590 Golden Gate Parkway 28100 Bonita Grande Drive #305 Naples, FL 34105 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application to rezone property from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District with an Airport Zoning Overlay to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District with an Airport Zoning Overlay for a project to be known as the Rock Creek Estates RPUD to allow development of up to 15 unit single-family dwelling units, a private recreational amenity, and a boat ramp with 15 private boat slips. The subject property is comprised of one parcel owned by ELAH Holdings, LLC. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located west of Airport -Pulling Road, on the south side of North Road, across the street from Terminal Drive to the Naples Airport, in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 11.36+/- acres (see location map on page 2). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This petition seeks to rezone the property to RPUD to allow for the development of up to 15 dwelling units at 1.3 (DU/AC), a private recreational amenity, and a boat ramp with 15 private boat slips for a project to be known as Rock Creek Estates RPUD. [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 1 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 5 9.A.1.a SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses, zoning classifications, and maximum approved densities for properties surrounding boundaries of Rock Creek Estates RPUD: North: North Road (local road), then developed as Naples Municipal Airport with a current zoning designation of Airport Commercial (C4) District in the City of Naples. East: Developed single-family residential, with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural (A) District. South: Canal, then developed with single and multi -family residential, with a current zoning designation of Residential Multi -Family (RMF-6) District. West: Developed single-family residential, with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural (A) District Source: RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 3 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 7 9.A.1.a GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict and is in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). Relative to this petition, the Urban Residential Subdistrict allows a residential density of 3.0 dwelling units per acre (3 DU/A) — as well as associated recreational uses (base density of 4 DU/A less 1.0 DU/A for lying within the CHHA). This petition proposes a residential density of 1.33 DU/A (15 DUs/11.36 acres) and recreational amenities. Comprehensive Planning staff has found this project consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the GMP. Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant's June 8, 2022, Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the current 2022 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states, "The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and C. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project's significant impacts on all roadways. " Staff has evaluated the TIS submitted with the proposed petition and has found that the proposed Rock Creek Estates PUDZ will add +/- 17 PM peak hour two-way trips on the adjacent roadway network. The additional trips will impact the following roadway network links: [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 4 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 8 9.A.1.a Link Roadway Link Location 2022 P.M. Peak 2022 AUIR # AUIR Hour Peak Remaining Capacity Existing Direction LOS Service Volume/Peak Direction 5.0 Airport Radio Rd to Davis C 2,800/North 720 Pulling Blvd Road 4.0 Airport Radio Rd to D 2,800/North 587 Pulling Golden Gate Road Parkway 6.0 Airport Davis Blvd to US- C 2,700 South 1,046 Pulling 41 Road Staff notes that the roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed Rock Creek Estates development. Therefore, the proposed development is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan within the 5-year planning period, and Transportation Planning staff recommends approval of the request. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (COME). The project site consists of 0.52 acres of native vegetation. A minimum of 0.13 acres (25%) of native vegetation is required to be preserved. GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions, such as this proposed rezoning. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. This petition is consistent with the GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS: Applications to rezone to or to amend RPUDs shall be in the form of a RPUD Master Plan of development, along with a list of permitted and accessory uses and a development standards table. The RPUD application shall also include a list of developer commitments and any proposed deviations from the LDC. Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, noted explicitly in LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Section 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses the criteria above as the basis for its recommendation to the Board, which in turn uses them to support their action on the rezoning or amendment request. These subsections are evaluated below under the heading "Zoning Services Review." In addition, staff offers the following analyses: [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 5 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 9 9.A.1.a Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition to address environmental concerns. The required preserve is 0.13 acres (25% of 0.52 acres); the applicant has provided 0.51 acres of preservation onsite. The proposed preserve is a mangrove fringe that exists along Rock Creek. No listed animal species were observed within the property. The applicant is proposing a 15-slip docking facility with a boat ramp. In accordance with LDC section 5.05.02, all proposed multi -slip docking facilities with ten or more slips are required to be reviewed for consistency with the Manatee Protection Plan (MPP). The marina citing criteria establishes three rankings for proposed multi -slip docking facilities: "Preferred," "Moderate," and "Protected." The manatee consistency determination review (PL20220006922) resulted in a Preferred ranking for the proposed docking facilities. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval. Utility Review: The project lies within the potable water and sanitary sewer service areas of the City of Naples Utilities Department. The City of Naples provided a Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Availability Letter for the project on March 3, 2022, included in Attachment D. Landscape Review: The applicant seeks a deviation from an internal buffer. However, the perimeter buffers labeled on the Master Plan are in accordance with the Land Development Code. Stormwater Review: Stormwater Management Section staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project. Historic Preservation Review: The subject property lies within a Historical/Archaeological Probability Area, and the petitioner was required to submit a waiver application from the required historical and archaeological survey and assessment application. (See Attachment B — Waiver from Cultural Archaeological Assessment) This application was heard before the Historical/Archaeological Preservation Board (HAPB) at its June 17, 2022, meeting. It approved this waiver subject to the condition, "If any cultural materials are found during the excavation process, the developer must contact an archaeologist." As such, the condition was added as a developer commitment in Exhibit F of the PUD document. Naples Airport Authority — In a July 13, 2023, letter from the Naples Airport Authority, they determined that the proposed development would negatively impact the Naples Airport. For the letter with correspondence materials, See Attachment C — July 13, 2023 — Naples Airport Authority Letter) As stipulated in this letter, if the CCPC does recommend approval of this petition, then the Naples Airport Authority recommends the following developer commitments: As a condition precedent to the County approving this PUD, and prior to encumbering, selling, leasing, or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD, the Owner and Developer shall execute and record in the Public Records of Collier County avigation easements and declaration of restrictive covenants titled `Naples Municipal Airport Avigation Easements And Declaration Of Height Restrictions And Covenants, " in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT "F-I " and [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 6 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 10 9.A.1.a approved by the City of Naples AirportAuthority (the "NAA'), that stipulates, among other things, the following: The Owner and Developer shall grant unto the AAA and its successors and assigns, and impose upon and bind Owner and Developer and their successors, successors -in -title and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public for so long as the Naples Municipal Airport is used as an airport, perpetual avigation, aircraft operations and aircraft noise easements and rights of way appurtenant to the AAA and the Naples Municipal Airport for the unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft in and through any and all of the airspace above the subject property; ii. The maximum height of any dwelling unit, building, structure or other man-made or artificial improvement (including rooftop appurtenances) shall not exceed fifty (50) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport, which is a total height of fifty eight and two tenths (58.2) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (AA VD 88); provided, however, trees, landscaping and other objects of natural growth shall be permitted so long as the height thereof never exceeds an "imaginary surface " (i. e., horizontal surface) one hundred fifty (150) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport in accordance with the federal obstruction standards contained in 14 C.P.R., Part 77, Subpart C (as the same may be amended from time to time); iii. The Owner and Developer shall provide in any and all declarations of restrictive covenants, sales contracts, leases and other instruments encumbering, selling, leasing or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD the following disclosure: "NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. THE NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT IS LOCATED LESS THAN EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTYFIVE (855) FEET FROM THE [PROPERTY] [PREMISES], IN CLOSE PROXIMITY THERETO. [PURCHASERS][OWNERS][TENANTS] CANEXPECTALL OF THE USUAL AND COMMON NOISES AND DISTURBANCES CREATED BY, AND INCIDENT TO, THE OPERATION OF AN AIRPORT. "; and iv. The Owner and Developer shall comply with all stipulations of any FAA Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued with respect to the land within this PUD (including any crane used for construction and/or maintenance therein). Zoning Services Review: The subject property is approximately 11.36 +/- acres in size. The request is to rezone the property from Rural Agricultural (A) to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to allow for the development of a 15-unit single-family residential subdivision containing a private recreational amenity and boat ramp with up to 15 private boat slips. The proposed RPUD will permit residential density at a level that would be compatible with surrounding densities and meet the County's identified goals of providing for new development within established urban areas with adequate infrastructure, particularly along arterial corridors. The RPUD master plan demonstrates residential development tracts will be accessed via a private internal roadway system. A 40-foot-wide right-of-way is proposed due to the relatively low traffic volume. The internal looped roadway system was developed to help reduce speeding within the [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 7 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 11 9.A.1.a development to allow for a more walkable and safe community; a reduced right-of-way width will only further this intent. As shown on the PUD master plan's cross-section, the right-of-way can accommodate a sidewalk, utilities, and drainage. The proposed RPUD would permit a low -density single-family development that protects the existing surrounding residential pattern, which consists of a dynamic mixture of residential uses of low -density single-family lots, multifamily developments, and a mobile home park. The request is to rezone the property from Rural Agricultural (A) to RPUD, which would not create an isolated district unrelated to nearby districts and would be in line with the residential zoning districts nearby, such as the Rural Agricultural (A) and RMF-6 to the west and south of the property. The proposed development standards ensure that the development does not seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The RPUD proposes a maximum density of 1.3 du/acre consisting of no more than 15 single-family homes at a maximum height of 45 feet. The proposed rezoning is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The proposed change provides for additional dwelling units within an urbanized area of the county. It uses existing infrastructure to accommodate the additional units at an appropriate 1.3 du/acre density that retains the neighborhood's residential character. PUD FINDINGS: LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria in addition to the findings in LDC Section 10.02.08": 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. The project lies within the potable water and sanitary sewer service areas of the City of Naples Utilities Department. The City of Naples provided a Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Availability Letter for the project on March 3, 2022, included in Attachment D. Moreover, stormwater management details will be addressed at the time of SFWMD Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) and County Site Development Permit (SDP)/Plans and Plat Permit (PPL) permitting. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application, which the County Attorney's Office reviewed, demonstrate unified control of the property. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 8 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 12 9.A.1.a policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). County staff has reviewed this petition and offered an analysis of conformity with the GMP's relevant goals, objectives, and policies within the GMP Consistency portion of this staff report. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. As described in the StaffAnalysis section of this staff report subsection Landscape Review, staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. The perimeter buffer labels on the Master Plan are consistent with the LDC. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The RPUD is required to provide at least 60% of the gross area for usable open space. No deviation from the open space requirement is being requested, and compliance would be demonstrated at the time of SDP or platting. 6. The timing or sequence of development to ensure the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The project lies within the potable water and sanitary sewer service areas of the City of Naples Utilities Department. The City of Naples provided a Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Availability Letter for the project on March 3, 2022, included in Attachment D. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at the time of the first development order (SDP or Plat) when a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are sought. 7. The ability of the subject property and surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The project lies within the potable water and sanitary sewer service areas of the City of Naples Utilities Department. The City of Naples provided a Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Availability Letter for the project on March 3, 2022, included in Attachment D. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on a determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to the literal application of such regulations. [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 9 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 13 9.A.1.a Four deviations are proposed in connection with this request to rezone to RPUD. See deviations section of the staff report beginning on page 12. Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.08.17 states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following when applicable": 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. Comprehensive Planning staff determined the subject petition is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the FLUM and other elements of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern (of the abutting properties) is described in this staff report's Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section. The proposed use would not change the existing land use patterns of the surrounding properties. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The properties that abut the project to the east, south, and west allow for residential uses. Therefore, the proposed petition would not create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. As shown on the zoning map included at the beginning of this report, the existing district boundaries are logically drawn. The proposed PUD zoning boundaries follow the property ownership boundaries. The zoning map on page 2 of the staff report illustrates the perimeter of the outer boundary of the subject parcel. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed rezoning is not necessary, but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes. It should be noted that the proposed uses are not allowed under the current zoning classification. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed RPUD is not anticipated to adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 10 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 14 9.A.1.a 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed RPUD request is not anticipated to create any off -site stormwater management impacts or problems in this area provided an environmental resource permit that adequately addresses on -site stormwater treatment, attenuation storage, and floodplain compensation is obtained from the South Florida Water Management District. County staff will also evaluate the project's proposed stormwater management system, calculations, and design criteria at the time of SDP and/or plat review. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. It is not anticipated this RPUD would reduce light or air to the adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent areas. This is a subjective determination based on anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by various factors, including zoning; however, zoning by itself may or may not affect values since value determination is driven by market value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. As previously noted, east, north, west, and south properties are developed. The basic premise underlying all the development standards in the LDC is that sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner, contrasting with the public welfare. Because the proposed development complies with the GMP through the proposed amendment, that constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 11 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 15 9.A.1.a be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. According to the existing classification, the proposed uses and development standards are not permitted. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the neighborhood's or the County's needs. It is staff s opinion that the proposed uses and associated development standards and developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the community's needs. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services is consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The project lies within the potable water and sanitary sewer service areas of the City of Naples Utilities Department. The City of Naples provided a Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Availability Letter for the project on March 3, 2022. 18. Other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in protecting public health, safety, and welfare. To be determined by the Board during its advertised public hearing. DEVIATION DISCUSSION: [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 12 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 16 9.A.1.a The petitioner is seeking four deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are directly extracted from PUD Exhibit E. The petitioner's rationale and staff analysis/recommendation are outlined below. Proposed Deviation #1: (Type B Buffer) Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C, which requires a 15-foot-wide Type `B" buffer between single-family dwelling units and amenity centers, to allow instead for a 7.5-foot- wide Type `B" buffer between single-family dwelling units and on -site recreation/amenity uses. The buffer will contain 3-gallon muhly grass, planted 3 feet off -center on the single-family residential side of the 7.5' buffer, in addition to all required Type `B' plant materials. No buffer is required between the single-family dwelling unit on Tract A and the recreational uses on Tract A." Petitioner's Justification: The proposed Residential/Private Recreation Amenity tract located on the northwest corner of the site contains an existing 6,100 +/- structure intended for private uses similar to an accessory structure and uses permitted within a residential lot. This would allow for private recreational uses not open to the public of indoor basketball/shuffle courts, walking paths, picnic areas, and a private garage. Furthermore, the Tract is not intended to serve as the amenity center for the residential tracts to the east. Unlike typical on -site recreation/amenity centers no outdoor active recreational uses are allowed within this tract to produce the noise typically associated with pickleball, swimming pools, volleyball or other active outdoor recreational uses. Furthermore, the Applicant is only proposing a reduction to the buffer width from 15 feet to 7.5 feet. The buffer itself will provide the code minimum number of plantings within the 7.5-foot-wide buffer strip required for the 15 foot buffer. This will ensure the deviation does not result in a net loss of vegetation within the project and provide appropriate screening and noise abatement between uses. The Applicant will provide a buffer that will contain 3-gallon muhly Grass spaced 3' on center on the residential side of the Type B buffer plantings in the buffer. This proposed planting will provide additional vegetative coverage, screening, and visual interest in the buffer area. Control of the permitted uses within Tract A will correspond to the single-family dwelling unit within Tract A. As previously mentioned above under Deviation 1, the non-residential uses permitted within this tract are intended for private use of the property owner similar to accessory buildings and structures permitted within a residential lot, are non-commercial uses and used by the resident and/or property owner (should no dwelling unit be developed) and their guest. Therefore, no compatibility issue would exist between the uses within Tract A. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 13 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 17 9.A.1.a Proposed Deviation #2 (Fence/Wall Height) "Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.2, which permits a maximum fence/wall height of 6 feet for certain lots in residential zoning districts, to allow for a maximum fence/wall/berm height of 10 feet along the northern PUD perimeter boundary, abutting North Road." Petitioner's Justification: The proposed wall height will mitigate the noise impact and appropriately screen the site from the surrounding residential and municipal airport uses. This is particularly beneficial to ensure the mitigation of light and noise pollution from the Naples Municipal Airport to the north which also contains the airport's commercial terminal and parking area facilities. The proposed deviation will allow for additional visual screening between the proposed uses, utility sites, and adjacent roadways while ensuring a quality design aesthetic via screening of the wall by required perimeter plantings. The design will serve to enhance public health, safety and welfare. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Proposed Deviation #3: (Right -of -Way Width) "Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.0l .N, which establishes the minimum right-of- way width of 60 feet to be utilized to allow for a 40-foot right-of-way internal private right-of- way." Petitioner's Justification: The reduced roadway width will provide for traffic calming and increased lot sizes, while accommodating standard 10' wide travel lanes and appropriate infrastructure for this relatively small residential project. The community will be developed with a maximum of 15 homes. Thus, larger roadways are unnecessary to accommodate high traffic volumes and higher design speeds. The interior road has been designed in a curvilinear shape to help reduce speeds. The additional land area gained by the right-of-way reduction will allow for more expansive green areas/yard space and reduced impervious surfaces and runoff. The demand for larger yards and the maximization of "outdoor living" continue to influence a community's quality of life that the applicant seeks to accommodate in this small, infill community. Studies have determined that reduced right-of-way widths act as a traffic calming feature and will assist in maintaining public health, safety, and welfare within the community. [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 14 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 18 9.A.1.a Please also refer to the PUD master plan's cross-section, which demonstrates that the proposed right-of-way width can accommodate a sidewalk, utilities, and drainage. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Proposed Deviation #4: (Parking Spaces) "Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Table 17, which requires boat ramps to provide a minimum of 10 spaces per ramp with dimensions of 10 feet wide by 40 feet long, and vehicular parking shall be provided at four spaces per ramp, to allow for no boat trailer or vehicular parking spaces to be required." Petitioner's Justification: The LDC parking requirement has been generally written for commercial/public boat ramps. The use of the boat ramp on this site shall be limited to the residents living within this small residential community of 15 dwelling units or less. Furthermore, private entry signs shall be posted at the Rock Creek Estates development, identifying this is a private community. The purpose of the boat ramp is to provide residents of this small single-family development with ease of access to their boats for travel or maintenance purposes. Each lot will have access to a boat slip and will be able to unload their boat and park at their private residence near the boat ramp, removing the need for any parking for the boat ramp. The distance from the furthest residential lot from the boat ramp will be approximately 1, 000 feet (less than '/ mile) from the boat ramp entrance. This will function similarly to Riverbend Mobile Home Park, which has a private boat ramp and boat slips for the sole use of the community but no vehicular or boat trailer parking for the use of the boat ramp. Additionally, this request will further serve to deter any members of the public from trying to access this private boat ramp, as no parking will be available for use. The deviation will help to reduce impervious paved areas on -site, which is of environmental benefit, particularly due to its proximity to the Rock Creek waterbody. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 15 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 19 9.A.1.a NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on November 7, 2022, at the Naples Alliance Church at 2504 Estey Avenue, Naples, FL. The meeting commenced at approximately 5:35 p.m. and ended at 6:08 p.m. Josephine Medina, the agent, conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and staff and gave a PowerPoint. The presentation consisted of an overview of the proposed RPUD rezoning application. Following the agent's presentation, the meeting was open to attendees to make comments and ask the consultant team questions regarding the proposed development. The issues discussed were water and sewer availability, boat docks, the width and depth of the creek, gated community, house style, private or public boat ramps, open space, FEMA height, and proximity of houses to the creek. A representative from the Naples Airport Authority said that they oppose the project. The representative read the commitments proposed by the Naples Airport Authority and sent these commitments in a memo to Mike Bosi. A copy of the NIM Summary, sign -in sheet, and NIM PowerPoint presentation are included in Attachment D. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW: This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Environmental Services staff recommends approval of the proposed petition. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office reviewed this staff report on August 29, 2023. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the CCPC forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval, subject to the following conditions: Per the Naples Airport Authority July 13, 2023 letter, if the CCPC does recommend approval of this petition, then the Naples Airport Authority recommends the following developer commitments As a condition precedent to the County approving this PUD, and prior to encumbering, selling, leasing or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD, the Owner and Developer shall execute and record in the Public Records of Collier County avigation easements and declaration of restrictive covenants titled "Naples Municipal Airport Avigation Easements And Declaration Of Height Restrictions And Covenants," in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT "F-1" and approved by the City of Naples Airport Authority (the "NAA"), that stipulates, among other things, the following: The Owner and Developer shall grant unto the NAA and its successors and assigns, and impose upon and bind Owner and Developer and their successors, successors - in -title and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public for so long as the Naples Municipal Airport is used as an airport, perpetual avigation, aircraft operations and aircraft noise easements and rights of way appurtenant to the NAA and the Naples [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 16 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 20 9.A.1.a Municipal Airport for the unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft in and through any and all of the airspace above the subject property; ii. The maximum height of any dwelling unit, building, structure or other man-made or artificial improvement (including rooftop appurtenances) shall not exceed fifty (50) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport, which is a total height of fifty eight and two tenths (58.2) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88); provided, however, trees, landscaping and other objects of natural growth shall be permitted so long as the height thereof never exceeds an "imaginary surface" (i.e., horizontal surface) one hundred fifty (150) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport in accordance with the federal obstruction standards contained in 14 C.F.R., Part 77, Subpart C (as the same may be amended from time to time); iii. The Owner and Developer shall provide in any and all declarations of restrictive covenants, sales contracts, leases and other instruments encumbering, selling, leasing or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD the following disclosure: "NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. THE NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT IS LOCATED LESS THAN EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY FIVE (855) FEET FROM THE [PROPERTY] [PREMISES], IN CLOSE PROXIMITY THERETO. [PURCHASERS] [OWNERS] [TENANTS] CAN EXPECT ALL OF THE USUAL AND COMMON NOISES AND DISTURBANCES CREATED BY, AND INCIDENT TO, THE OPERATION OF AN AIRPORT."; and iv. The Owner and Developer shall comply with all stipulations of any FAA Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued with respect to the land within this PUD (including any crane used for construction and/or maintenance therein). Attachments: A) Proposed Ordinance B) Waiver from Cultural Archaeological Assessment C) July 13, 2023 — Naples Airport Authority Letter D) Application/Backup Materials [21-CPS-02177/1775224/1 ] PUDZ-PL20220001779 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Page 17 of 17 Revised: August 29, 2023 Packet Pg. 21 9.A.1.b ORDINANCE NO.2023- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT WITH AN AIRPORT ZONING OVERLAY TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT WITH AN AIRPORT ZONING OVERLAY FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS ROCK CREEK ESTATES RPUD TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 15 UNIT SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, A PRIVATE RECREATIONAL AMENITY, AND A BOAT RAMP WITH UP TO 15 PRIVATE BOAT SLIPS ON PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF AIRPORT -PULLING ROAD, ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF NORTH ROAD, ACROSS THE STREET FROM TERMINAL DRIVE TO THE NAPLES AIRPORT, IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST; CONSISTING OF 11.36+/- ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. IPLPL202200017791 WHEREAS, Josephine Medina, AICP, of RVI Planning representing ELAH Holdings, LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE; The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district with an Airport Zoning Overlay to a Residential PIanned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district with an Airport Zoning Overlay for an 11.36+/- acre [22-CPS-02227/ 1805224/ 1 ] 106 Rock Creek Estates 1 of 2 PUDZ-PL20220001779 7/25/23 Packet Pg. 22 9.A.1.b project to be known as Rock Creek Estates RPUD to allow up to 15 unit single-family dwelling units, a private recreational amenity, and a boat ramp with up to 15 private boat slips in accordance with the RPUD Documents, attached hereto as Exhibits "A" through "F" and incorporated herein by reference. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super -majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko �t ` Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A — Permitted Uses Exhibit B — Development Standards Exhibit C — Master Plan Exhibit D — Legal Description Exhibit E — List of Deviations Exhibit F — Developer Commitments [22-CPS-02227/ 1805224/11106 Rock Creek Estates PUDZ-PL20220001779 7/25/23 2 of 2 2023, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Rick LoCastro, Chairman Packet Pg. 23 9.A.1.b EXHIBIT "A" LIST OF PERMITTED USES Rock Creek Estates RPUD Regulations for development of this PUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this document and all applicable sections of the Growth Management Plan (GMD), the Land Development Code (LDC), and the Administrative Code in effect at the time of approval of the subdivision plat (PPL). Where the PUD ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provision of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. PERMITTED USES: A maximum of 15 dwelling units (1.3 du/acre) shall be permitted in this PUD. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: RESIDENTIAL TRACTS A. Principal Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwelling units. Any other principal use and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, or Hearing Examiner, pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). B. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses customarily associated with Permitted Principal Uses, including but not limited to: 1. Customary accessory uses and structures including carports, garages, and utility buildings. 2. Temporary sales trailers and model units. Any other accessory use and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, or Hearing Examiner, pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). II. RESIDENTIAL/PRIVATE RECREATION AMENITY TRACT A A. Principal Uses: 1. Maximum of one (1) Single-family detached dwelling unit. 2. Private recreational uses and facilities including, up to 6,100 +/- square foot recreational building, indoor basketball/shuffle courts, and private garage. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Customary accessory uses and structures including carports, garages, and utility buildings. 2. Outdoor recreational uses shall not be permitted. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 1 of 11 Packet Pg. 24 9.A.1.b Any other accessory use and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, or Hearing Examiner, pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). III. PRIVATE DOCK AREA A. Principal Uses: 1. A golf cart path, parking, private recreational single-family boat docks, private boat ramp, mooring pilings, boat lifts /davits, picnic areas, and kayak launches to serve residents and their guests. All docks are reserved for the exclusive use of the owners of dwelling units within this RPUD. No more than fifteen (15) slips may be constructed within this project. IV. PRESERVE A. Principal Uses: 1. Preserve B. Accessory Uses: 1. Allowable uses within County required preserves as set forth in the LDC Section 3.05.07. H V. GENERAL The following structures and uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the RPUD: 1. Essential services, including interim and permanent utility and maintenance facilities 2. Water management facilities. 3. Walls, berms and signs. 4. Passive open space uses and structures, including, but not limited to landscaped areas, gazebos, playgrounds, park benches, and walking trails. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 2 of 11 Packet Pg. 25 9.A.1.b EXHIBIT "B" DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Rock Creek Estates RPUD The standards for land uses within the development shall be as stated in these development standard tables. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the subdivision plat (PPL). Guardhouses, gatehouses, access control structures, clock towers, columns, decorative hardscaping or architectural embellishments associated with the project's entrance are permitted and shall have no required setbacks; however, such structures cannot be located where they create sight distance issues for motorists and pedestrians, and cannot exceed 35 feet in actual height. PERMITTED USES AND STANDARDS Single -Family Detached Recreational Buildings and Structures Min. Lot Area 7,500 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft Min. Lot Width 50' 80' Min. Lot Depth 150' 150' PUD Setback (Principal) 15' 20' Front Yard') 20' (2)(3) 25' Side Yard (Principal) Side Yard (Accessory)(') 7.5' 5' 15' 10, Rear Yard (Principal)(') Rear Yard (Accessory) (') 15' 5' 15' 10, Preserve (Principal) Setback Preserve (Accessory) Setback 25' 10, 25' 10, Min. Distance Between Principal Structures 15' 20' Maximum Height Actual Zoned Height 45' 35' 35' 25' (1) Front setback is measured from the property line, right-of-way line or road easement. (2) Front-loading/front-entry garages shall be setback a minimum of 23' from the back of sidewalk. Units with side -loaded garages shall have a minimum 10' setback from the front property line/right-of-way. No structures will overhang into the utility easement. (3) Corner lots shall provide one (1) front yard setback within the yard that contains the driveway/vehicular access to the dwelling unit. The secondary front yard that does not contain the driveway/vehicular access to the dwelling unit shall provide a minimum 10-foot setback measured from the right-of-way and will have no overhang into the utility easement if there are any buildings adjacent to that side setback. (4) 0' principal and accessory setbacks are permitted from lake maintenance easements and landscape buffer easements, which will be separate platted tracts on the PPL. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 3 of 11 Packet Pg. 26 9.A.1.b GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Homeowners' association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. Landscape buffers and lake maintenance easements shall be platted as separate tracts at time of subdivision plat approval, or shown as separate tracts on the SDP. Note: Nothing in this PUD document shall be deemed to approve a deviation from the LDC unless it is expressly stated in a list of deviations. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 4 of 11 Packet Pg. 27 9.A.1.b 15'TYPE'S"BUFFER WITH cPnowt FENF USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTJAL ZONING: A EASTINC FC1YAT` — R'CREATION BUILDING PROPERTY POVN;�ARY Usk, s INGL k-F Ah11L Y RPSJU + 1IAL 7PNINr,: A 1LT TYPE 'A,, SUFFER WJTFo O�MNAL FENCE BOAT EXHIBIT "C" RPUD Master Plan Rock Creek Estates I F ''1k 'JuE, %RPLE$ FAMCJPAL 10? +NIRF TYPO "D' SUF I I-R WITH OP'TIVAL S AJRPOV�T MAR, L ON51NED FENI-ElWALLIU--R M HEIC-IT F rrg, oH�y 1 717NINE�, AUIP01T OF 19 AND MIN. 0176' - - -- N09TH ROAD J,4' TYPE 'e" wore -ER .— VATHCNTIONA. y �1RAc1 A FENCE!1AWALI 11 JRFSIDCNTIAIJ � 1 F; 4 R'R:IYhTE ` � � AINAMlyl USE: SINCLE-FAMLY 1 k 1 REnInF-WIA, I 5 � L I YDNIN6;A I t i Lr --J I Tr. IWE'A' BU=F,=a 7&TYPE'18"130FVER f Voltl UPTICNHAL FENCF WIT-+QFTIONAL + f FENi.'IT? VA.tL f e % J L'0 NL7ARr r OFEN 5pArEr 2 FORUWAtEk - - FAANAGEK141 AI4 A J IU,65 AC} r 6 LfaJL}5C.Ai-E /R� l3L*O.ERRESOAVA PION o-R{�ERYE- ... MANInFROVE L114E I r 5� p,S1UAI APf MXIMVt MEAN 'ar" NATE11 LINE —GENERA- LCICATION OF PRIVATE DCYCKAREA 7FEN EAAGE SUMMA.RV IPOU10FIJ lTFgN !WAf:E bx7 Aj. WIA F.40VIOEG OPEN WALE 6.E2 AC B]'S UB.�iPJGfi-FAMILY;e9jDSNTjAL 20NING; RW4 �r1N6 U36 5L1MMAr1Y iFsIWNTIAL *RACI HAD AC Sf% RESUENT"L+ PRIti ATERECREATIONAI AJWENPi .79 AC 7% �R"FFFYF Al AG eh fR,�FEIY .R7 AG 5% ;KK WAGE 1 s FOAM NIAT=_'INANAi:3,l ARCA :0 AC 4% LIM=; I.1i II_rI*AlILY"Ledril. N r1A1 iIOHr�iF-WAY �.17 RC 2t% ZU414G: R*AF-6 TOTgt=RRJECi AREA 51...W AG I PLAN REVISICAS E1! i ]C4.T-+6Za RE4 gED PEa CCIU -FY A41� 4Rk+5 G2t-.i,ir PEtF CGL] T^rCt4i Td i dRd. -1' 3 PEi C91J TY 1ME T3 REVS M24)2-23 REVISED PE,R (huUIjTYfaMIYENTS r LiGF-NO 1 rioRmmEORESS R REMBMT1AL 3EV p4710 H LOCATION OPEN SPACE? ® SORIANArER DAAHAGFKOC-HT AREA 0 PRESERVE!aY Av] r Na -rs 1. Trls PV N Is F9NCEPT VAL IN NATURE WI11c�3ul3JECTTo MD[)IFIG++T1grylkl3LJE T'a ACENCY'E4MTrINa REOuLREMENr3. Z. A.+ ACREAG�B ARE APPFIGXDMTE AMa s4e.,Ltr iumwIFlcgTlwN A, ft+ rk1F ❑F SOP --q P",LT7WF-Rorv,L. 3, ]I4I.n AI k',N IjF r«F rMSIT . SI-DRIA WATER #M"A=ENT AND gt-9IDtNTIAL rRAEOm 10 MLLLMINARV AND MAY SE AD PJSTEU AT Sf'E PLAN 1. NAT VE VEGETA7IOM PRlEBERVE fh-QhI,t -u: AN OL NA f IW 'V6U I A TION I0.52 tC x7.75- L417 A£6 NATIVE PKSIAVATION PREN IMED O q t AC. E, UAXIWM RERAtI--- EO UNITS Lt-NBITY CALCLah71ON: t •,90t ACRES J 1,1A LUJ1Trr �'RE =1S JN LTS,- tTn nu II� I ROCK CREEK ESTATES • RPUD MASTER PLAN (EXHIBIT C) OGL4IE900UPITY FLLIRICA .. � Fj-RNUAf2Y� ]ltri PryC rfrlK�lr'I�E^ -LA- •10L.DPJG& LLO Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 5 of 11 Packet Pg. 28 a 9.A.1.b EXHIBIT "C" RPUD Master Plan Rock Creek Estates 4, V&AIES r4P' NaP.TN FR4HCAty IWOUNOM) PE -NI METEF,,W�RFO LMkX.COMEINED'MATZ"--"'T"" FEMC--iWALUREFtNt GRADE HE10HT OF'10' AND WAIN. aF 0' WALL CROSS SECTION (TYP.) - - PUBLic �. 10, IGIfT OF WAY 1D' 3' 10S. ISM L,ILj'Y - - -iVFL - - - UTILITY EA.SEWWr l.liNf TRAt+FI iANF EAEL-MENT s.O ���Ax 7n, 5A4fJ 2°A Mlh f'� htAlr I SIDEA'AL% S IDewALR VALLEY GLPY N (TYP.p TYPICAL 40' ROW CROSS SECTION JZPJJ� ROCK CREEL{ ESTATES • RPUD MASTER PLAN (EXHIBIT C) a � flOW�iCGN.IpITT',F+ORIQA � a� i �LrFwaSv 7> 1� E sLW+ MOLDPIGS. LLG a+ Q Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 6 of 11 Packet Pg. 29 9.A.1.b EXHIBIT "D" LEGAL DESCRIPTION Rock Creek Estates RPUD PARCEL 1 PARCEL ID #00386760404 A CERTAIN LOT OR PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FURTHER BOUNDED AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CENTER OF SAID SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH 1/4 LINE OF SAID SECTION 2, S 0 DEGREES 26'20" E 30.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH ROAD AND A CONCRETE MONUMENT FOR A PLACE OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY N89 DEGREES 38'10"E 664.90 FEET, TO THE EAST LINE OF WEST 1/2 LOT 21, NAPLES GROVE AND TRUCK COMPANY'S LITTLE FARMS NUMBER 2, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 27A OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE AND ITS EXTENSION S 0 DEGREES 32'15"E 641.80 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT; THENCE CONTINUING S 0 DEGREES 32'15"E 20 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE OF ROCK CREEK; THENCE MEANDERING ALONG SAID APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE SOUTHWESTERLY, WESTERLY, NORTHWESTERLY AND SOUTHEASTERLY TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH 1/4 LINE OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH AND SOUTH 1/4 LINE N 0 DEGREES 26'20"W 184.00 MORE OR LESS TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT; THENCE CONTINUING N 0 DEGREES 26'20"W 645.56 FEET TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING. LYING IN THE WEST 1/2 OF LOT 21, THE WEST 1/2 OF LOT 22, AND THAT PART OF THE WEST 1/2 OF LOT 23 LYING NORTH OF ROCK CREEK OF SAID NAPLES GROVE AND TRUCK COMPANY'S LITTLE FARMS NO. 2. A/K/A 2250 NORTH ROAD, NAPLES FL 34104 PARCEL CONTAINS 11.36 ACRES, MORE OR LESS Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 7 of 11 Packet Pg. 30 9.A.1.b EXHIBIT "E" LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC Rock Creek Estates RPUD Deviation 1: Deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02.C, which requires a 15-foot-wide Type "B" buffer between single-family dwelling units and amenity centers, to instead allow for a 7.5-foot-wide Type "B" buffer between single family dwelling units and on -site recreation/amenity uses. The buffer will contain 3-gallon muhly grass, planted 3-feet off - center on the single-family residential side of the 7.5' buffer, in addition to all required Type "B' plant materials. No buffer is required between the single-family dwelling unit on Tract A and the recreational uses on Tract A. Deviation 2: Deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.2, which permits a maximum fence/wall height of 6 feet for certain lots in residential zoning districts, to allow for a maximum fence/wall/berm height of 10 feet along the northern PUD perimeter boundary, abutting North Road. Deviation 3: Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.01.N which establishes the minimum right-of-way width of 60 feet to be utilized, to allow for a 40-foot right-of-way internal private right-of-way. Deviation 4: Deviation from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Table 17, which requires boat ramps to provide a minimum of 10 spaces per ramp with dimensions of 10 feet wide by 40 feet long and vehicular parking shall be provided at 4 spaces per ramp, to allow for no boat trailer or vehicular parking spaces to be required. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 8 of 11 Packet Pg. 31 9.A.1.b EXHIBIT "F" DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS Rock Creek Estates RPUD 1. GENERAL A. One entity (ELAH Holdings, LLC) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD approval, the Managing Entity is ELAH Holdings, LLC. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgment of the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. B. Pursuant to Section 125.022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. C. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before the commencement of the development. 2. TRANSPORTATION A. The maximum total daily trip generation for the PUD shall not exceed 17 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL A. The subject site contains approximately 0.52 acres of native vegetation of which 25% (0.13 acres) is required to be preserved. The subject site shall provide 98% (0.51 acres) of native vegetation preservation. The native preservation requirement will be satisfied on - site in accordance with the Land Development Code. Any replanting of native vegetation to meet preserve standards shall comply with all requirements set forth in the LDC Section 3.05.07.H. B. Preserves may be used to satisfy the landscape buffer requirements after exotic removal in accordance with LDC Sections 4.06.02 and 4.06.05.E.1. Supplemental plantings with native plant materials shall be in accordance with LDC Section 3.05.07. In order to meet the requirements of a Type `B' buffer along the southern boundaries of the RPUD; a 6- foot-wide landscape buffer reservation located outside of the preserve will be conveyed by owner to a homeowner's association or condominium association at time of SDP or plat approval. In the event that the preserve does not meet buffer requirements after removal of exotics and supplemental planting within the preserve, plantings will be Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 9 of 11 Packet Pg. 32 9.A.1.b provided in the 6' wide reservation to meet the buffer requirements. The type, size, and number of such plantings, if necessary, will be determined at time of initial SDP or plat and included on the landscape plans for the SDP or plat. 4. UTILITIES A. At the time of application for subdivision Plans and Plat (PPL) approval, offsite improvements and/or upgrades to the wastewater collection/transmission system may be required to adequately handle the total estimated peak hour flow from the project. Whether or not such improvements are necessary, and if so, the exact nature of such improvements and/or upgrades shall be determined by County, during PPL or SDP review. Such improvement and/or upgrades as may be necessary shall be permitted and installed at the developer's expense and may be required to be in place prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any portion or phase of the development that triggers the need for such improvements and/or upgrades. 5. CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY ("NAA") A. As a condition precedent to the County approving this PUD, and prior to encumbering, selling, leasing or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD, the Owner and Developer shall execute and record in the Public Records of Collier County avigation easements and declaration of restrictive covenants titled "Naples Municipal Airport Avigation Easements And Declaration Of Height Restrictions And Covenants," that stipulates the following: The Owner and Developer shall grant unto the NAA and its successors and assigns, and impose upon and bind Owner and Developer and their successors, successors -in -title and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public, for so long as the Naples Municipal Airport is used as an airport, perpetual avigation, aircraft operations and aircraft noise easements and rights of way appurtenant to the NAA and the Naples Municipal Airport for the unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft in and through any and all of the airspace above the subject property. ii. The maximum height of any residence, building or other structure (including rooftop appurtenances) shall not exceed fifty (50) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport, which is a total height of fifty eight and two hundredths (58.20) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). iii. The Owner and Developer shall provide in any and all declarations of restrictive covenants, sales contracts, leases and other instruments encumbering, selling, leasing or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD the following disclosure: "NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. THE NAPLES MUNICPAL AIRPORT IS LOCATED LESS THAN EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY FIVE (855) FEET FROM THE [PROPERTY] [PREMISES], IN CLOSE PROXIMITY THERETO. [PURCHASERS][OWNERS][TENANTS] CAN EXPECT ALL OF THE USUAL AND COMMON NOISES AND DISTURBANCES CREATED BY, AND INCIDENT TO, THE OPERATION OF AN AIRPORT." Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 10 of 11 Packet Pg. 33 9.A.1.b iv. The Owner and Developer shall comply with all stipulations of any FAA Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued with respect to the land within this PUD (including any crane used for construction and/or maintenance therein). 6. MISCELLANOUS A. Should any significantly historical cultural materials or human remains be found during excavation process, the developer shall contact a certified archeologist. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 11 of 11 Packet Pg. 34 9.A.1.c COLLIER COUNTY WAIVER APPLICATION FROM THE REQUIRED HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT DATE SUBMITTED: PLANNER: Melissa Zone, Principal Planner PETITION NUMBER ASSOCIATED WITH THE WAIVER: (To Be Completed By Zoning and Land Development Review Staff PROJECT NAME: Estates at Rock Creek RPUD LOCATION: (Common Description) 2250 North Road, Naples FL 34104 SUMMARY OF WAIVER REQUEST: The Applicant is seeking a waiver from the required Historical And Archaeological Survey and Assessment. The Property was shows signs of soil disturbance on a portion of the property has been previously cleared and surrounded by developed properties. (Properties located within an area of Historical and Archaeological Probability but with a low potential for historical/archaeological sites may petition the Community Development & Environmental Services Administrator County Manager or designee to waive the requirement for a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment. Once the waiver application has been submitted, it shall be reviewed and acted upon within five (5) working days. The waiver request shall adequately demonstrate that the area has low potential for historical/archaeological sites.) Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 Packet Pg. 35 9.A.1.c SECTION ONE: APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DATA A. Name of applicant (s) (if other than property owner, state relationship such as option holder, contract purchaser, lessee, trustee, etc.): Elah Holdings, LLC c/o Erik Mogelvang Mailing Address: 2590 Golden Gate Pkwy #106 Phone: (239) 272-7774 E-Mail: Erik@floridaprime.com FAX: B. Name of agent(s) for applicant, if any: Josephine Medina, A I C P RVI Planning + Landscape Architecture Mailing Address: 28100 Bonita Grande Drive Suite 305, Bonita Springs, FL, 34135 Phone: ( 239 ) 908.3421 E-Mail: JMedina@RVRanning.com FAX: C. Name of owner(s) of property: Same as the applicant Mailing Address: Phone: ( ) E-Mail: FAX: Note: If names in answers to A and/or B are different than name in C, notarized letter(s) of authorization from property owner (C) must be attached. Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 N G a 0 IL d N W d m L U Y 0 0 a) ti ti 0 0 0 N N O N J a ti 00 IV to N Packet Pg. 36 9.A.1.c SECTION TWO: SUBJECT PROPERTY DATA (Attach copy of the plat book page (obtainable from Clerk's Office at the original scale) with subject property clearly marked.) A. Legal description of subject property. Answer only 1 or 2, as applicable. I10 C. Di 1. Within platted subdivision, recorded in official Plat Books of Collier County. Subdivision Name: Plat Book Page Unit Block Lot Section Township Range 2. If not in platted subdivision, a complete legal description must be attached which is sufficiently detailed so as to locate said property on County maps or aerial photographs. The legal description must include the Section, Township and Range. If the applicant includes multiple contiguous parcels, the legal description may describe the perimeter boundary of the total area, and need not describe each individual parcel, except where different zoning requests are made on individual parcels. A boundary sketch is also required. Collier County has the right to reject any legal description, which is not sufficiently detailed so as to locate said property, and may require a certified survey or boundary sketch to be submitted. Property dimensions: Area: square feet, or 11.26 +/- acres Width along roadway: 665' Depth: 643' Average Present use of property: Single -Family Home and Warehousing Present zoning classification: Agricultural Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 Packet Pg. 37 9.A.1.c SECTION THREE: WAIVER CRITERIA Note: This provision is to cover instances in which it is obvious that any archaeological or historic resource that may have existed has been destroyed. Examples would be evidence that a major building has been constructed on the site or that an area has been excavated. A. Waiver Request Justification. 1. Interpretation of Aerial Photograph Based on 1952 & 1969 aerial photography identifies soil distubances and clearing occuring on the property as can be seen in contrast to the property to the west. 2. Historical Land Use Description: Historically the property has been use for single family residents, warehouse, and animal husbandry. 3. Land, cover, formation and vegetation description: FLUCCS MAP identifies the majority of the site as Mixed Hardwoods and Exotic Dominated and with some Mangroves - shorebanks along the shoreline. 4. Other:A Florida Master Site File letter was recieved for the Property and indicates the there a no recorded historical resources on the subject property or along the already developed shore to the south of Rock Creek B. The County Manager or designee may deny a waiver, grant the waiver, or grant the waiver with conditions. He shall be authorized to require examination of the site by an accredited archaeologist where deemed appropriate. The applicant shall bear the cost of such evaluation by an independent accredited archaeologist. The decision of the County Manager or designee regarding the waiver request shall be provided to the applicant in writing. In the event of a denial of the waiver request, written notice shall be provided stating the reasons for such denial. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the County Manager or designee regarding a waiver request may appeal to the Preservation Board. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the Preservation Board regarding a waiver request may appeal that decision to the Board of County Commissioners. Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 Packet Pg. 38 SECTION FOUR: CERTIFICATION A. The applicant shall be responsible for the accuracy and completeness of this application. Any time delays or additional expenses necessitated due to the submittal of inaccurate or incomplete information shall be the responsibility of the applicant. B. All information submitted with the application becomes a part of the public record and shall be a permanent part of the file. C. All attachments and exhibits submitted shall be of a size that will fit or conveniently fold to fit into a legal size (8 %" x 14") folder. Sig t o Applicant or Agent Josephine Medina Printed Name of Applicant or Agent -TO BE COMPLETED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION - SECTION FIVE: NOTICE OF DECISION The County Manager or designee has made the following determination: ❑ Approved on: Approved with Conditions on: - 7- LZ By: (see attached) Denied on: _ (see attached) oEess� .� cla,� or�r- ►�n.-c.} c�.,�z�� Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 are -��� ►.,' ��Y , �� u'► arcl-,geC1C5, eil cn ..* feu„ 5 Packet Pg. 39 "' �r� ►°' =��, '" North RoadT Al 1i • r o . w - xv rs Estey Avenue r fRTif""' r a .1 It Legend r pert Irl Subject Pro p 9.A.1.c Legal Description A certain lot or parcel of land located in Section 2, Township, South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, further bounded and described as follows: Commencing at the center of said section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida; thence along the North and South line of said Section 2, S 0 degrees 26'20" E 30.00 feet southerly right-of-way line of North Road and a concrete monument for a Place of Beginning; thence along said right-of-way N 89 degrees 38'10" E 664.90 feet, to the East line of the West % of Lot 21, Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little Farms Number 2, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 27 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence along said East line and its extension S 0 degrees 32'15" E 641.80 feet to a concrete monument; thence continuing S 0 degrees 32'15" E 20 feet more or less to the Approximate Mean High Water line of Rock Creek; thence meandering along said Approximate Mean High Water line Southwesterly, Westerly, Northwesterly and Southeasterly to the North and South % line of said Section 2; thence along said North and South % line N 0. Degrees 26'20" W 184.00 more or less to a concrete monument; thence continuing N 0 degrees 26'20" W 645.56 feet to the Place of Beginning. Lying in the West %z of Lot 21, the West % of Lot 22, and that part of the West% of Lot 23 lying North of Rock Creek of said Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little Farms No. 2. AIK/A 2250 North Road, Naples FL 34104 Packet Pg. 41 -16 N 0 a 0 a o: a� r M r N W Y d L U U 12-09-1952 AERIAL MAP ° o: CD L �� •�� t Ott; M O lies04 N t � J a co , . As. T� I N Packet Pg. 42 1-29-1969 AERIAL MAP Packet Pg. 43 9.A.1.c This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a • project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at CompliancePermits@dos.MyFlorida.com for project review information. March 4, 2022 Josephine Medina, AICP Project Manager RVi Planning+Landscape Architecture 28100 Bonita Grande Dr, Suite 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 In response to your request of March 4, 2022, the Florida Master Site File lists no cultural resources recorded at 2250 North Road, west of Airport -Pulling Road and on the south side of North Road within Section 2 / Township 50 South / Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. When interpreting the results of this search, please considertielowing inforhma been- as a single • This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. • Because vandalism and looting are common at Florida sites, we ask that you limit the distribution of location information on archaeological sites. • While many of our records document historically significant resources, the documentation of a resource at the Florida Master Site File does not necessarily mean the resource is historically significant. • Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws, you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at CompliancePermits@dos.MyFlorida.com Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Kind Regards, v� Eman M. Vovsi, Ph.D. Sr. Data Base Analyst Florida Master Site File Eman. Vovsi?_DOS.MyFlorida.com 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph 1 850.245.6439 fax SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us Packet Pg. 44 9.A.1.c Runway 5-23 Historically the site has been used as a single Naples Municipal Airport .tea.• Packet Pg. 45 9.A.1.c FLUCCS MAP Labels Drawing Points Drawing i V Lines Drawing Polygons Drawing Selected Custom Parcels rl Streets OSM Hybrid County Boundaries A t Y Parcel Outlines 0 120 240 350It Copyright 2022 MapWise, Inc. All rights reserved. www.mapwise.com. This map is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. MapWise and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any losses resulting from such use. Packet Pg. 46 9.A.1.c FLUCCS CODE AND VEGETATION INVENTORY FLUCCS CODE (Description) Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Status 612 Mangroves - Shorebank This habitat is the interface between the project site and Rock Creek. The area is vegetated with BIack mangroves and Australian pine. There are pockets of with mangroves the pockets of exotics along the shoreline. Black mangroves Avicennia germinana OBL Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Exotic Cabbage palm Sabal palmetto FAC Shoebutton ardisia Ardisia elliptica Exotic Wedelia Wedelia trilobata Nuisance Red Mangroves Rhizophora mangle OBL Leather ferns Acrostichum aureum OBL Mangrove rubber Rhabdadenia biflora Vine Australian pine Casuarina equisetifolia Exotic 438 Mixed Hardwoods Exotics Dominated Portions of this area have been previously cleared. The site has a home and a warehouse on the premises. The site is disturbed by dense exotics as canopy, midstory and ground cover. The canopy does have some native trees such as Slash pines and live oaks. There are some areas with soil disturbance. Remnant fencing and cross fencing from some past animal husbandry can be seen. The entire site has been impacted by homesteading and exotic vegetation. At times these exotics form impenetrable strands. Slash pine Pinus elliotti FACW Cabbage palm Sabal palmetto FAC laurel oak Quercus laurifolia FACW Live oak Quercus virginiana FACU Australian pine Casuarina equisetifolia Exotic Strangler fig Ficus aurea FAC Ear leaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis Exotic Banyan Ficus benghalensis Exotic Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Exotic Java Plum Syzygium cumin Exotic Woman tongue Albizia lebbeck Exotic cocoplum Chrysobalanus icaco FACW wax myrtle Myrica cerifera FAC+ Broom sedge Andropogon virginicus FAC- Flat sedge Cyperus ligularis FACW Packet Pg. 47 2�� i _P/A� AIRPORT AUTHORITY 160 Aviation Drive North • Naples, Florida 34104-3568 1 239.643.0733 1 www.FLyNaptes.com July 13, 2023 Mr. Noel J. Davies, Esq. Davies Duke, PLLC 1415 Panther Lane, Suite 442 Naples, FL 34109 Dear Mr. Davies, This correspondence is in response to your email of May 23, 2023, which included substantial suggested revisions to the proposed "Naples Municipal Airport Avigation Easements And Declaration Of Height Restrictions And Covenants" that was first submitted by the City of Naples Airport Authority (the "NAA") to Collier County and Elah Holdings LLC (the "Developer") on November 1, 2022. The principal changes that you requested, which undermine the intent and purpose of the original document recommended by the NAA, included the following: 1. Deletion of all avigation and aircraft noise easement provisions which effectively removes all of the rights granted to the public relating to the use and passage of aircraft near and over airspace above the proposed development (despite it being located less than 855 feet from a public airport); 2. Removal of critical provisions under Paragraph 3, including, but not limited to, those which would better ensure any and all subsequent home buyers are constructively notified in advance they would be purchasing a home immediately across the street from a public airport, to include the related noise and disturbances, through a publicly recorded instrument; 3. Removal of the revisions that the NAA previously submitted to the Developer on May 4, 2023 concerning the height restriction under Paragraph 4 (where the NAA increased the permissible height of natural growth (i.e., trees) from 58 feet to 150 feet above the elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport); 4. Elimination of language under Paragraph 5 which would improve disclosure and provide more comprehensive notice to prospective buyers and renters of the proximity of, and the noises incident to, the airport (which is consistent with local past practice); 5. Removal of Paragraph 7 which would ensure the as -built height of any dwelling has been constructed in compliance with the height restriction; and 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 48 Mr. Noel J. Davies, Esq. July 13, 2023 Page 2 6. Elimination of all injunctive relief provisions under Paragraph 10 (which are customary for these types of avigation easements, height restrictions and covenants). Prior to your engagement as legal counsel to the Developer, the NAA informed both the Developer and Collier County of its objections to the proposed development. While the subject property lies outside the established 60 decibel (dB) Day Night Level (DNL) average noise contour that has been adopted by the County, future residents will be impacted by high levels of noise, particularly as the airport continues to experience increased jet aircraft activity and projects even more jet aircraft activity in the future. Although the zoning currently allows for the development of two residential units, it is the strong belief of the NAA that the increased density with luxury dwellings presents an incompatible land use and will result in greater public pressure to take adverse action against the airport. In fact, the NAA is already experiencing the effects of increased residential development nearby the airport, including new residents of the adjacent neighborhoods immediately to the south and west of the proposed development, who have recently appeared at public meetings and demanded that the airport be relocated or closed altogether. However, the NAA recognizes the Collier County Board of Commissioners has ultimate authority to approve the petition. In the event of their approval, we urge the County to require, as a condition precedent of such approval, the following Developer commitments: As a condition precedent to the County approving this PUD, and prior to encumbering, selling, leasing or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD, the Owner and Developer shall execute and record in the Public Records of Collier County avigation easements and declaration of restrictive covenants titled "Naples Municipal Airport Avigation Easements And Declaration Of Height Restrictions And Covenants," in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT "F-1" and approved by the City of Naples Airport Authority (the "NAA"), that stipulates, among other things, the following: The Owner and Developer shall grant unto the NAA and its successors and assigns, and impose upon and bind Owner and Developer and their successors, successors - in -title and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public for so long as the Naples Municipal Airport is used as an airport, perpetual avigation, aircraft operations and aircraft noise easements and rights of way appurtenant to the NAA and the Naples Municipal Airport for the unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft in and through any and all of the airspace above the subject property; ii. The maximum height of any dwelling unit, building, structure or other man-made or artificial improvement (including rooftop appurtenances) shall not exceed fifty (50) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport, which is a total height of fifty eight and two tenths (58.2) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88); provided, however, trees, landscaping and other objects of natural growth shall be permitted so long as the height thereof never exceeds an 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 49 Mr. Noel J. Davies, Esq. July 13, 2023 Page 3 "imaginary surface" (i.e., horizontal surface) one hundred fifty (150) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport in accordance with the federal obstruction standards contained in 14 C.F.R., Part 77, Subpart C (as the same may be amended from time to time); iii. The Owner and Developer shall provide in any and all declarations of restrictive covenants, sales contracts, leases and other instruments encumbering, selling, leasing or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD the following disclosure: "NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. THE NAPLES MUNICPAL AIRPORT IS LOCATED LESS THAN EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY FIVE (855) FEET FROM THE [PROPERTY] [PREMISES], IN CLOSE PROXIMITY THERETO. [PURCHASERS] [OWNERS] [TENANTS] CAN EXPECT ALL OF THE USUAL AND COMMON NOISES AND DISTURBANCES CREATED BY, AND INCIDENT TO, THE OPERATION OF AN AIRPORT."; and iv. The Owner and Developer shall comply with all stipulations of any FAA Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued with respect to the land within this PUD (including any crane used for construction and/or maintenance therein). Prior precedent requiring Avigation Easements in favor of the NAA to protect the public interest is well established. Several examples are enclosed, including: 1. Deed of Easement between ANJO Development, Inc (commonly referred to as the Waterfront Condominiums on North Road) and the NAA dated August 8, 1989; 2. Avigation Easement between Andrew B. Wolfe, Trustee (commonly referred to as Beaumaris Subdivision) and the NAA dated October 13, 1989; 3. Naples Municipal Airport Avigation and Hazard Easement between Rock Creek Holdings, LLC (commonly referred to as the Beach House) and the NAA dated October 11, 2011; 4. Naples Municipal Airport Avigation and Hazard Easement between Naples 5th Avenue Hotel, LLC (commonly referred to as the Hyatt House) and the NAA dated October 20, 2014. Enclosed please find an updated clean version of the "Naples Municipal Airport Avigation Easements And Declaration Of Height Restrictions And Covenants" which includes concessions made by the NAA to address certain changes requested by the Developer. It is important to note that, at a meeting of the NAA's Board of Commissioners on August 18, 2022, Mr. Erik Mogelvang, the owner and manager of the Developer, publicly acknowledged that 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 50 Mr. Noel J. Davies, Esq. July 13, 2023 Page 4 aircraft like helicopters would fly over the proposed development and various noises would be heard from the airport. The NAA believes the enclosed version better protects the public and more appropriately addresses the adverse airport impacts acknowledged by Mr. Mogelvang. As such, the enclosed version represents the NAA's final position on this matter. We look forward to discussing this petition further with the Collier County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners. Sincerely, CLA , Christopher A. Rozansky Executive Director 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 51 9.A.1.d EXHIBIT "F-1" Prepared without review or opinion of title by: William L. Owens, Esq. Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 250 Naples, FL 34103 (239) 659-3800 NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AVIGATION EASEMENTS AND DECLARATION OF HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS AND COVENANTS This Naples Municipal Airport Avigation Easements And Declaration Of Height Restrictions And Covenants (this "Declaration") is made as of the day of , 20 ("Effective Date"), by ELAH HOLDINGS LLC, a Florida limited liability company whose address is 2590 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 106, Naples, Florida 34105, and its successors, successors -in -title and assigns (collectively "Declarant"), and the CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida whose address is 160 Aviation Drive North, Naples, Florida 34104, and its successors and assigns (collectively "Grantee"). RECITALS A. Declarant is the fee simple owner of certain real property located in the County of Collier, Florida, as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof (the "Property"). As used herein, the term "Property" includes the land described in Exhibit A attached hereto and any and all dwelling units, buildings, structures, trees, landscaping and improvements now and from time to time hereafter erected or to be installed thereon. B. The Property lies in close proximity to Naples Municipal Airport located in the City of Naples, Florida (the "Naples Municipal Airport"). C. Declarant acknowledges that although the Property is located outside the approach and noise zones, it is subject to and affected by noise, vibrations, fumes, vapors, exhaust, dust, deposits, odors and any and all other effects and nuisances that may be incident to or caused by the operation of aircraft over or in the vicinity of the Property or by aircraft landing at, taking off from or operating around or at Naples Municipal Airport. D. Declarant desires to develop the Property in accordance with the terms, conditions and requirements of the Estates at Rock Creek RPUD submitted for approval to the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (the "RPUD"), and Grantee has agreed to not object to or oppose the RPUD so long as Declarant agrees to impose certain Avigation Easements (as defined below), covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements on the Property to promote safety, provide awareness of the proximity of the Naples Municipal Airport and grant the rights set forth herein. E. The parties enter into this Declaration for the purposes set forth above and below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of premises and the forgoing recitals and the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantee hereby agrees that it will not object to the (i) development of the Property or (ii) permitting, construction or maintenance of dwelling units, buildings, structures, trees, landscaping and improvements to be constructed and developed on the Property, including temporary cranes required for such construction, so long as such development, dwelling units, buildings, structures, trees, landscaping, improvements and temporary cranes comply with the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements set forth in this Declaration, the RPUD, all required governmental approvals and conditions thereof and conditions of any Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") Letter of Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued in conjunction with the construction or use of temporary cranes for the dwelling units, buildings, structures, trees, landscaping Page 1 of 6 Packet Pg. 52 9.A.1.d and improvements that are legally applicable to the Property, in consideration for which Declarant, for itself and its successors, successors -in -title and assigns, hereby voluntarily submits declares, agrees and subjects the Property, together with all dwelling units, buildings, structures, trees, landscaping and improvements now and from time to time hereafter erected or to be installed thereon, to all of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements contained in this Declaration: TERMS 1. Recitals. All of the Recitals set forth herein are hereby adopted and accepted and by this reference made a part of this Declaration. 2. Submission Statement. All of the Property (including any and all dwelling units, buildings, structures, trees, landscaping and improvements now and from time to time hereafter erected or to be installed thereon) shall be owned, held, improved, transferred, sold, conveyed, leased, licensed, mortgaged, encumbered, used, repaired and maintained subject to all of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements of this Declaration which Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements shall run with the title to the Property. This Declaration shall be binding upon all parties now or hereafter having any right, title or interest in any portion of the Property and their successors, successors -in -title and assigns. 3. Avigation Easements. Declarant, for itself and its successors, successors -in -title and assigns, hereby declares, grants, sells and conveys unto Grantee and its successors and assigns, and hereby imposes upon and binds Declarant and its successors, successors -in -title and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public (including, without limitation, any and all users, customers, tenants, invitees and licensees of Grantee and the Naples Municipal Airport, together with any and all persons and entities operating aircraft to or from the Naples Municipal Airport) for so long as the Naples Municipal Airport is used as an airport, perpetual avigation, aircraft operations and aircraft noise easements and rights of way appurtenant to Grantee and the Naples Municipal Airport for the unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft (as defined below) in and through the Avigation Easement Area (as hereafter defined), which allows and permits all those navigating the airspace contained in the Avigation Easement Area to have the right to cause in and discharge and emit from the Avigation Easement Area such noise, vibrations, odors, fumes, vapors, air currents, illumination, fuel particles, smoke, dust and other particulate matter and all other effects, whether or not confined to the Avigation Easement Area, as may be incident to or caused by the operation of aircraft within the Avigation Easement Area and to, from or at the Naples Municipal Airport (collectively the "Avigation Easements"). As used in this Declaration, the term (i) "Avigation Easement Area" shall mean any and all of the airspace above the Property, including, without limitation, that portion of the airspace above ground level (AGL) at the Property as shall be permitted by Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 or such other applicable U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (Title 14) in effect from time to time or of any successor agency, or of any other agency having jurisdiction and (ii) "aircraft" shall mean any contrivance now known or hereafter invented, used or designed for navigation of or flight in the air without limit, now or in the future, as to speed, size, characteristics, frequency, or time of operation, by whomsoever owned and operated. Declarant, for itself and its successors, successors -in -title and assigns, hereby further declares, grants, conveys, acknowledges, covenants and agrees as follows: (a) Declarant, for itself and its successors, successors -in -title and assigns, declares, covenants and agrees that the Property shall not be used at any time and in any manner so as to (i) create interference with visual contact, radio, radar, microwave, electromagnetic or any other communication between any installation serving the Naples Municipal Airport and aircraft, (ii) create glare, misleading lights or otherwise make it difficult for flyers to distinguish between airport lights and others, (iii) cause a discharge of fumes, dust or smoke or otherwise impair visibility in the vicinity of the Naples Municipal Airport, (iv) endanger the landing, taking off or maneuvering of aircraft or (v) constitute a hazard under or violate any applicable regulations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Page 2 of 6 Packet Pg. 53 9.A.1.d Administration, in effect from time to time or of any successor agency, or of any other agency having jurisdiction. (b) Any and all subsequent owners of all or part of any interest in the Property shall, by acceptance of conveyance of the Property, be deemed to have acknowledged and agreed that aviation is an expanding and developing activity and that the degree to which one or more of the rights and obligations granted herein may affect the Property may change with the passage of time, and any such changes shall not be cause for any such subsequent owners, their successors, successors -in -title and assigns, to seek or recover compensation or damages. The Avigation Easement Area includes the free and unobstructed rights of use and passage by aircraft in and through any and all of the airspace above the Property, with such rights of use and passage by aircraft to be unlimited as to frequency, time of passage and type of aircraft so long as the exercise of such rights is not in violation of the applicable federal law governing aircraft flight operations (collectively the "Passage of Aircraft"). (c) It is expressly intended by Grantee and Declarant, and its successors, successors - in -title and assigns, that the Avigation Easements shall apply to the Passage of Aircraft and to noise and all other effects of aircraft operations that may otherwise be objectionable or constitute a trespass, a permanent or continuing nuisance, personal injury, a taking, an inverse condemnation or damage to the Property. Declarant, for itself and its successors, successors -in -title and assigns, does hereby agree (and any and all subsequent owners of all or part of any interest in the Property shall, by acceptance of conveyance of the Property, be deemed to have agreed) to: (i) expressly waive and release Grantee, its commissioners, officers, employees, agents, attorneys, insurers, successors and assignees, from and against any and all claims, liabilities and demands of any nature whatsoever for injury to persons or property damage now or in the future arising out of or in any way related to the Passage of Aircraft, aircraft operations to, from or at the Naples Municipal Airport and all other matters covered by this Declaration and the Avigation Easements granted hereunder and (ii) be forever barred from bringing or continuing any suit or proceeding against Grantee, its commissioners, officers, employees, agents, attorneys, insurers, successors and assignees, under any theory of recovery, arising out of any matters covered by this Declaration and the Avigation Easements granted hereunder, including, but not limited to, noise, vibrations, odors, fumes, vapors, air currents, illumination, fuel particles, smoke, dust and other particulate matter and all other effects as may be incident to or caused by the Passage of Aircraft or any other aircraft operations, as well as discomfort, inconvenience or interference with the use and enjoyment of the Property and any damage to or reduction of market value of the Property. 4. Heiaht Restriction. No dwelling unit, building, structure or other man-made or artificial improvement, including Rooftop Appurtenances (as defined below), shall be constructed, installed, affixed or otherwise placed on the Property which is or will be erected to a height of greater than fifty (50.00) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport, which is a total height of fifty eight and two tenths (58.2) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88); provided, however, (a) trees, landscaping and other objects of natural growth shall be permitted on the Property so long as the height thereof never exceeds an "imaginary surface" (i.e., horizontal surface) one hundred fifty (150) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport in accordance with the federal obstruction standards contained in 14 C.F.R., Part 77, Subpart C (as the same may be amended from time to time) and (b) Declarant, Declarant's successors, successors -in -title and assigns and any subsequent owners of all or part of any interest in the Property shall be required (at their sole expense) to trim and maintain all trees, landscaping and other objects of natural growth on the Property as necessary from time to time to remain in compliance with the height restrictions set forth herein. As used herein, Rooftop Appurtenances means appurtenances commonly affixed to or placed on the roof of a dwelling unit, building, structure or other improvement such as chimneys, satellite dishes, antennas and equipment (collectively "Rooftop Appurtenances"). Temporary cranes required for construction and/or maintenance of dwelling units, buildings, structures, trees, landscaping and improvements on the Property that comply with the RPUD, all required governmental approvals and conditions thereof and conditions of any FAA Page 3 of 6 Packet Pg. 54 9.A.1.d Letter of Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued in conjunction with such construction and/or maintenance are not subject to the forgoing height restriction. 5. Disclosure Requirements. Declarant covenants and agrees that a disclosure substantially similar to the following shall be included in and made part of any and all declarations of restrictive covenants, sales contracts, leases and similar instruments encumbering, selling or transferring any interests in the Property or any portion thereof "NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. THE NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT IS LOCATED LESS THAN EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY FIVE (855) FEET FROM THE [PROPERTY][PREMISES], IN CLOSE PROXIMITY THERETO. [PURCHASER] [OWNERS] [TENANT] CAN EXPECT ALL OF THE USUAL AND COMMON NOISES AND DISTURBANCES CREATED BY, AND INCIDENT TO, THE OPERATION OF AN AIRPORT." 6. Running with Property. All of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements set forth in this Declaration shall be perpetual and burden Declarant, Declarant's successors, successors -in -title and assigns and any subsequent owners of all or part of any interest in the Property. This Declaration shall attach to and run with the Property and shall be forever binding upon Declarant and all successors -in -title to all or any portion of the Property (including any and all dwelling units, buildings, structures, trees, landscaping and improvements now and from time to time hereafter erected or to be installed thereon). All of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements set forth in this Declaration shall be enforceable by Grantee and its successors and assigns against Declarant and any future owners of the Property or any part thereof or interest therein, including, but not limited to, any purchaser, tenant, licensee, occupant or invitee of or on the Property or any portion thereof. 7. Certification. Within thirty (30) days after a certificate of occupancy or its equivalent is issued by the applicable government authority for each dwelling unit, building, structure or other man- made or artificial improvement that has been constructed, installed, affixed or otherwise placed on the Property, Declarant and any future owners of the Property or any part thereof or interest therein shall provide Grantee with written certification from an architect, engineer or surveyor licensed in the State of Florida that the as -built height of each such dwelling unit, building, structure or other man-made or artificial improvement, including Rooftop Appurtenances, is in full compliance with all of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements contained in this Declaration. 8. No Waiver. No waiver by Grantee at any time of any Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements set forth in this Declaration shall be deemed or taken as a waiver at any time thereafter of the same or any other Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements or of the strict and prompt performance thereof. No waiver shall be valid against Grantee unless reduced to writing and executed by Grantee. 9. Default and Remedies. If Declarant or any future owners of the Property or any part thereof or interest therein fail to comply with or violate any of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements set forth in this Declaration, then Grantee shall be entitled to exercise any and all rights or remedies available at law or in equity or under the express terms of this Declaration, including injunctive relief as provided herein. All rights and remedies of Grantee shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another. The exercise of any one or more rights and remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect to any other available rights and remedies. No delay or omission to exercise any rights and remedies accruing upon any failure to comply with or violation of any of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements set forth in this Declaration shall impair those rights and remedies or shall be construed to be waiver thereof, but any such rights and remedies may be exercised from time to time and as often as may be deemed necessary. Page 4 of 6 Packet Pg. 55 9.A.1.d 10. Injunctive Relief. Declarant and any and all future owners of the Property or any part thereof or interest therein acknowledge and agree that damages as a result of a failure to comply with or violation of any of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements set forth in this Declaration are not readily ascertainable, that money damages or other legal relief will not adequately compensate Grantee for any such failure or violation, and, in addition to any entitlement to monetary damages, that Grantee is entitled to injunctive relief compelling the specific performance of all of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements set forth in this Declaration. Declarant and any and all future owners of the Property or any part thereof or interest therein further acknowledge and agree that failure to comply with or violation of any of the Avigation Easements, covenants, equitable servitudes, restrictions and requirements set forth in this Declaration would constitute irreparable harm to Grantee, and Declarant and any and all future owners of the Property or any part thereof or interest therein hereby waive any defenses to the grant of a temporary injunction or restraining order related to any such failure or violation based on the adequacy of legal remedies. 11. Recording and Modification. Declarant shall, at is sole cost, record this Declaration in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. This Declaration may only be modified, amended, released or terminated by a written instrument executed by Grantee and Declarant or Declarant's successors, successors -in -title and assigns to the fee simple title to the Property or any portion thereof, and recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 12. Miscellaneous. This Declaration and all rights hereunder shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida and applicable Federal laws and regulations and shall be binding upon Declarant and its successors, successors -in -title and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of Grantee and its successors and assigns. If more than one party executes this Declaration as Declarant, the liability of all such parties hereunder shall be joint and several. In the event any one or more of the provisions contained in this Declaration shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provisions of this Declaration, and this Declaration shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein. This Declaration may be executed in counterparts by manual signature or authenticated by any electronic signature or other method effective under applicable law, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. A photographic or other reproduction of this Declaration may be made by Grantee, and any such reproduction shall be admissible in evidence with the same effect as the original itself in any judicial or administrative proceeding, whether or not the original is in existence. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant and Grantee have made, executed and delivered this Declaration as of the Effective Date. Witness #1 Name: Witness #2 Name: DECLARANT: ELAH HOLDINGS LLC, a Florida limited liability company Erik Mogelvang, Manager Page 5 of 6 Packet Pg. 56 9.A.1.d STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF COLLIER ) ss.: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, by means of physical presence, this day of , 20_, by Erik Mogelvang, as Manager of ELAH HOLDINGS LLC, a Florida limited liability company, on behalf of the limited liability company, who ❑ is personally known to me or ❑ has produced as identification. [Place Notary Seal and/or Stamp Above] Witness #1 Name: Witness #2 Name: STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF COLLIER ) ss.: Notary Public Name of Notary (typed, printed or stamped) My Commission Expires: GRANTEE: CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida By: Printed Name: Printed Title: Chair The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, by means of physical presence, this day of , 20 , by , as Chair of the CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, on behalf of the political subdivision, who ❑ is personally known to me or ❑ has produced as identification. [Place Notary Seal and/or Stamp Above] Notary Public Name of Notary (typed, printed or stamped) My Commission Expires: Page 6 of 6 Packet Pg. 57 9.A.1.d F,xhihit A Parcel Identification Numher- 00386760404 r A certain lot or parcel of land located in Section 2, Towmhi O'�outh, Range 25 East, Collier County, l+ lorida, further bounded and described as follow : 610menring at the center of said Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,- lorida; thence along the North and South l line of said Section 2, S 0 degrees 26120" E 30.00 feet to.tbe $outheriy right-of-way line of North Road and a concrete monument for a Place of Beginning; thenco along said right-ur--way N 89 degrees 38°10" E 664.90 feet, to the East line of the West'f2 of Loth, Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little Farms Number 2, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page , ofithe Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence along said East line and its extension S 0 tlegrees 321151, E 641.8€1 feet to a concrete monument; thence continuing S 0 degrees 32'15" E 20 feet fnore or less to the Approximate Mean High Water line of Rock Creek; thence nt.eanderingalong id Approximate Mean High Water line Southwesterly, Weaterly, Northwesterly and Southeasterl to the North and South 14line of said Section 2; thence along said North and South'!. line N 06°20" W 184.00 mere or less to a concrete monument; thence continuing N 0 degrees 26'20" W645.56 feet to the Place of Beginning. Lying in the West'A of Lot 21, the Nest 'lz of Lot 22, and that part of the West VI of Lot 23 lying North of Rock Creek of said Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little Farms No. 2. A/K/A 2250 North road, Naples FL 34104 15522488.E Packet Pg. 58 0 13 133 23 COLLIER COUNTY v 9.A.1.d This Instrument prepared by: 1909 SEP 13 PH 3: 54 F. Joseph McMackin III, Esquire Quarles & Brady RECORDED Barnett Center 4501 Tamiami Trail North DEED OF EASEMENT Naples, FL 33940 (813) 262-5959 RE ANJO DEVELOPMENT, INC., a Florida corporation of 2448 North CS PRM .*" r..� I��T Road, City of Naples, County of Collier, State of Florida, owner 0 CD of land described as: '\ N The Northwest one -quarter (NWJ) of the Northeast (NE#) of o the Southwest one -quarter (SWJ) of Section 2, Township 50 D a South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, o in consideration of TEN ($10.00) DOLLARS, and other good and a valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, a� w does herby -grant, bargain, sell, and convey to the NAPLES a� MUNICIPAL`AIRPIOR�,T AUTHORITY, a public corporation organized under 1�". U C. Y the laws of# State of Florida, with its principal place of rri 0 t State of business in the City of Naples, County of Collier, � r O Florida, Grantee ;_,t )following: o 0 N A perpetual, anon exclusive easement for the passage of o aircraft in the irspace above the height of one hundred a fifty (150.0') fet "over the ground level of Grantor's property, together :t an easement to cause in said air co space or upon Grantdr,1 s property such noise, vibrations, and movements of air 'as €z►a be reasonably inherent in the operation of aircraft, ow or hereafter used, for navigation of or flight in the,, air space, we arriving at or J _' departing from the Napa 'z,rport, or as may emanate from r the Naples Airport in, ,' connection with the repair, c maintenance, or operatiorib4 f..�rcraft and aircraft engines J now or hereafter present orf,above or about the Naples Q Airport. ;= �a}! Q The easement granted by this aed�st.=for the sale benefit of a U the NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AUTHORITYnd appurtenant only to that real property owned by NAPLES MUNIC AIRPORT AUTHORITY, ? At, v u N nn or any portion of. such property, in the Count 'wf Collier, State o M of Florida, described more particularly as f ow21 •J North one-half. of Section 2, Township 50 o th, Range 25 L) j East and the South one-half of Section 35{'_Township 49 v `�J \ South, Range 25 East, less right-of-way, collier County, Florida. E ' The rights, privilege, and easement granted by this easement r IL 6 9 OR BOOK oOO882 PAGE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have caused this Deed to be executed ) .-L..- at Naples, Florida, on this `'N day of i�L, 1� 1989. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: witUiess 01 Witness u STATE OF FLOR COUNTY OF COLL (CORPORATE SEAL) ANJO DEVELOPMENT, INC., a Florida Corporation f By: ANDRE N. de LESTANG, as/ President I HEREBY CERTLFYkthat on this day before me, an officer duly qualified to take-ercknowledgments, personally appeared ANDRE N. si de LESTANG, as Predent of ANJO DEVELOPMENT, INC., a Florida corporation, to me known, to be the person described in and who executed the foregoingin4trument and acknowledged before me that he executed the same.""`. WITNESS my hand a last aforesaid this S My Commission expires: A1/MPR21/7-19-89:9 is seal in the County and-,. State 1989. :. NOTARY PUBLI ( SEAL) --.k ., �-'%OTARY PUBLIC; STATE OF FLORIOA i1C'IA �� f.COF!MISi.l01Y ERFIUES I :,i.l:b l i. IS93 TES R1jOEO THEU Hi1CY.tE1 EFEY 1,SSOC�D, f `i'HIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY: David W. Rynders, City Attorney 735 8th Street South Naples, FL 33940 r;. /, 7 00 (813) 649-3450 o?ob AVIGATION EASEMENT I' THIS AVIGATION EASEMENT, made this 13th day of October , 1989, between ANDREW B. WOLFE, TRUSTEE Under Land Trust Agreement dated 5/1!5/8$ Grantor (hereinafter referred to as co "Owner"), and the NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY, a public corporation e" organized under the laws of the State of Florida (hereinafter RE o CD � referred to as "Authority"). o co o p a w WITNESSETH: CD 0 C=) CD �_ D WHEREAS, Owner owns certain Property located in Collier �� a.C" o� County, Florida, near the Naples Airport, which Property is more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and w as as incorporated herein by reference (the "Property"); � rn NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of TEN and 00 z No/100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and the mutual covenants herein set a� N � forth, the receipt and sufficiency of which consideration is � o) M J IT1 N o o hereby acknowledged, and inet�ne legally bound, Owner, o� a r J for itself, its success K1 ,5a. A d assign. hereby grants, bargains, 00 sells transfers, an4`- cailvey's to Authorit is successors and e nd invitees as an assigns, and its and the-1- ag�s , appurtenance to the' I a, ,es 4, r o f id �n r additions thereto, a J w� perpetual and nonexcl#oive easement for Ithe passage of aircraft ° in the air space above -about or near the°ltbperty, together with Q o an easement to cause in_sgae� upon the Property such Q .� ns; fallout, movements of air, and noise, smoke, fumes, vibratioQ other physical invasions as may be inherent in the operation of Z M N aircraft, now or hereafter used, for navigation of or flight in N M the said air space, whether arriving at or departing from the Naples Airport, or as may emanate from the Naples Airport in 7 V connection with the repair, maintenance, or operation of aircraft E ,. ,"a nirr•raf+- Pnaines now or hereafter present on, above, or about U 9.A.1.d of the passage of aircraft through the airspace above or near the Property or by reason of any noise, smoke, fumes, vibrations, fallout, movements of air, and other physical invasions of the Property or the airspace above or near the Property, or by reason of any other condition, action, or operation on or near the Naples Airport otherwise permitted by this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner has caused this Avigation Easement to be executed, as of the day and year first above written. SIGNATURES WITNESSED BY: STATE OF XR%%X F COUNTY OF X DDDMX I HEREBY CERTIFY authorized to administ personally appeared who executed the for before me that he exec WITNESS my hand aid =see 1989. (SEAL) ANDREW B. WOLFE, TRUSTEE Under Land Trust Agreement dated 5/15/88 i B Andrew Wolfe, Trustee Attest: "Owner" -V-L1115 a'aytiP rpre me an officer duly �hs and take <' ' edgments, B. WOLFE, TRU, E , Owner, �t1:0n s1R1asem t ')and acknowledged " - ,.... . lot October !:i" .�?UBLIC ,"mission expire : JAMES F. HADLEY NOTARY PUBLIC . STATE OF 01dAQ LIELHd6i CA4M19WM Received $ S� Documentary Stamp Tax Received $ y, Class "C" Intangible Personal Property Tax ' COLLIER COUN I Y CLERK F COURTS BY D. G 0 c� CD CD C7 M gin. .. v•.ri• 9.A.1.d EXHIBIT A PARCEL 1 O O O Commence at the Southeast corner of.the North 25.00 feet of Lot 14 of the Beaumaris Replat of a part of Beaumaris Subdivision according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 4, Page 107 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence N 00° 07' 40" E 333.67 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING; thence N 890 52' 20" W 120.00 feet; thence N 000 07' 40" E 155.00 feet; thence N 89° 52' 20" W 104.62 feet to the face of a seawall; thence along said seawall N 000 24' 00" E 11.45 feet, S 890 38' 00" E 36.42 feet, along a irregular curve whose cord bears N 370 33' 00" E 36.35 feet; N 00 21' 40" W 119.40 feet; thence leaving said seawall N 890 31' 20" E 167.10 feet; thence S 890 52' 20" E 137 57 t 4thence S 560 11' 40" E 38.00 feet; thence S 330 48' 20" ri�� t; thence S 000 07' 40" W 41.33 feet to the PLACE C��1TNING . Bearings based on the eari-2eplata Plat Book 4, Page 107. PARCEL 2 Commence at the Sou hoaq orri4r 14 of the Beaumarit')eh�a according to the platlereof as recc the Public Records of \l" r County 375.00 feet; thence 48' 20" BEGINNING; thence N 560 �11-"',, 40" W 3 117.57 feet; thence N 04Q° right-of-way of U.S. -41 (Taoii 215.79 feet to the Point of a"fur West having a radius of 38.44 feet; a central angle of 920 16' 20" and thence S 330 48' 20" W 84.66 feet to f �"the 'North 25.00 feet of Lot pa t-L, o IBeaumaris Subdivision tied In," 144t Book 4, Page 107 of 2PE10r/ thence N 000 07' 40" E W° 7B0r,5",-14/ feet to the PLACE OF 00" r; thence N 890 52' 20" W ATM•. 2 feet to the Southerly thence S 580 28' 00" E Iture of a curve concave to the thence curving to the right thru an arc distance of 61.91 feet; the PLACE OF BEGINNING. Bearings based on the Beaumaris Replat, Plat Book 4, Page 107. DOM 70 $0.70 REC $44.00 hoc Is -40. 76 Prepared by: F. Joseph McMackin III, Esq. Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 250 Naples, FL 34103 NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AVIGATION and HAZARD EASEMENT WHEREAS, Rock Ore 1.1Holdings, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose address is 2670 Horse , oe Drive North, Suite 201, Naples, Florida 34104, hereinafter called the Grantor(s), is the ow er(s) in fee simple of that certain parcel of land situated in the City of Naples, C6 iP1y 'f Collier, State of Florida, more particularly described as follows: ;H/B/T A hereinafter called "Grantors' property," a,' stayed on the attached map (Exhibit B); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of , F,1 of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the re sufficiency of which is hereby .; acknowledged, the Grantors, for thems their heirs, administrators, representatives, successors and assigns, do b y .grant, bargain, sell, transfer and convey unto the City of Naples Airport Author political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter called the Grantee, its sors and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public, an easement and right -off appurtenant to the Naples Municipal Airport for the unobstructed use and passage: -of; 111 types of aircraft (as hereinafter defined), in and through the airspace above;; ' rags' property above an imaginary plane rising and extending in a generally eassoutheast direction over Grantors' property, said imaginary plane running from appromatply 6.82 feet Mean Sea level above (Point L13) on Exhibit B at the rate of one foot :f'1{y for each seven (7) feet horizontally to approximately 150 feet Mean Sea I the Airport Reference Point ("ARP") on Exhibit B, to an infinite height above said irrt inary plane. This easement shall be appurtenant to and for the benefit of the -real property now Z) known as the "Naples Municipal Airport" including any additions thereto wherever located, hereafter made by the City of Naples Airport Authority, a political subdivision of r N the State of Florida or its successors and assigns, guests, and invitees, including any a u and all persons, firms, or corporations operating aircraft to or from the Airport. E This easement and burden, together with all things which may be alleged to be incident U Yto or resulting from the use and enjoyment of said easement, including, but not limited a E A� AVIGATION EASEMENT 10/11 W 290879.1 1011111-4 to the right to cause in all airspace above or in the vicinity of the surface of Grantors' property noise, vibrations, fumes, deposits of dust or other particulate matter, fuel particles (which are incidental to the normal operation of aircraft), and any and all other effects that may be alleged to be incident to or caused by the operation of aircraft over or in the vicinity of Grantors' property or in landing at or taking off from, or operating at or on the Naples Municipal Airport is hereby granted; and Grantors do hereby fully waive, remise; release any right or cause of action which they may now have or which they may : e in the future against Grantee, its successor and assigns, due to such noise, vib- i fumes, dust, fuel particles and all other effects that may be caused or may haves°', n caused by the operation of aircraft landing at, or taking off from, or operating _a vr,t the Naples Municipal Airport. As used herein, the term "aircraft" shall mean a�j and all types of aircraft, whether now in existence or hereafter manufactured and developed, t include, but not limited to, jet aircraft, turbine aircraft, propeller driven aircraft,`',' ircraft, military aircraft, commercial aircraft, helicopters and all types of aircraft or v icles now in existence or hereafter developed, regardless of existing or future noise lev6 `ib the purpose of transporting persons or property through the air, by whoever owr,.KOfpperated. The easement and right-of-way porrar�rlV" prevent the erection or growth uc or other object, extending into the airspaoe. remove from the air space, or at the sole mark and light as obstructions to air navic other objects now upon, or which in the futu with the right of ingress to, egress from, a above purpose. is to the Grantee the continuing right to �' property of any building, structure, tree, Love the aforesaid imaginary plane and to ion of the Grantee, as an alternative, to Z any such building, structure, tree or upon Grantors' property, together p gp over Grantors' property for the THE GRANTOR(S), for themselves, their heir `;.. anistrators, representatives, successors, and assigns, do hereby agree that for a> Iau;ing the life of said avigation easement, they will not hereafter erect, permit the erection or growth of, or permit or suffer to remain upon Grantors' property (i) any structure in the Runway Protection Zone which is an airport hazard or (ii) anything which might creataare or misleading lights, fuel handling and storage facilities, or smoke generating activitis.,, AND for the consideration hereinabove set forth, the Grantors,,J,Veir emselves, their heirs, administrators, representatives, successors, and assigns, do by agree that for and during the life of said easement and right-of-way, they will not hereafter erect, permit the erection or growth of, or permit or suffer to remain upon '6rantors' property any building, structure, tree or other object extending into the airspace above the aforesaid imaginary plane, and that they shall not hereafter use or permit or suffer the use of Grantors' property in such a manner as to create electrical interference with radio communication between any installation upon said airport and aircraft, or as to make it difficult for flyers to distinguish between airport lights and others, or to permit any use of the Grantors' land that causes a discharge of fumes, dust or smoke so as to impair visibility in the vicinity of the airport or as otherwise to endanger the landing, taking off or AVIGATION EASEMENT 10/11 -2- 290879.1 101+ 2nn I J maneuvering of aircraft. Grantors furthermore waive all damages and claims for damages caused or alleged to be caused by or incidental to such activities. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said easement and right-of-way, and all rights appertaining thereto unto the Grantee, its successors, and assigns, until the Naples Municipal Airport shall be abandoned and shall cease to be used for public airport purposes It being undefoo .:aid agreed that the aforesaid covenants and agreements shall run with the land art' sl a binding upon the heirs, administrators, executors, successors and assigns of the 'Gr' ,toss until said Naples Municipal Airport shall be abandoned and cease to be used for p4;giirport purposes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,#` rantors have hereunto set their hands and seals this /y/s day of October, 2fifi' GRANTOR: '. ROCK CREEK HOLDINGS, LL a Florida-tifffi e�-,Uabibtv-comr)ai Michael H. Metcalf Managing Member STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER BE IT REMEMBERED, that on this i day undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the County"at H. Metcalf, as Managing Member of Rock Creek Hit company, who is personally known to me to be the sa within instrument of writing and such person duly ackn same. ,tober, 2011, before me, the ate aforesaid, came Michael ngs,,.a Florida limited liability leer, ons who executed the wled1 ` d:: the execution of the IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and an ear last above wr' en. Notary Public My Commission Expires PAIMELA s. AmMEMAAT NOtI+r P16k - sac. of � �fEEOM 1 (aroe Md Tina„ o &a" a AVIGATION EASEMENT 10/11 seal, the day -3- 290879.1 1 Q winn i l OR: 3772 PG: 3153 DESCRIPTION COMM ENCINGAT�;T It ,EAST 114 CORNER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER) , FLORIDA; THENCE SOUTH''8,4;0"WEST 13.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF AIRPORT ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 00°3126 EAST 1312.46 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTH LINE OF ESTEY AVENUE AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89037't 0:',WF-ST 340.07 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF ESTEY AVENUE; THENCE LEAVING SAIDLIWE AkD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BOUNDARY LINE AGREEMENT AS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 764;:. AGE 757, THE FOLLOWING NINE (9) COURSES AND DISTANCES; f 1) NORTH 01.09-40-WEST 129.40 ET; 2) NORTH 88'50'20"EAST 40.00 I EET; 3) NORTH 01'09'40"WEST 50.76 FEET;" 4) SOUTH 88'50'20"WEST 135.00 FEET• ,,r.. 5) NORTH 01'09'40"WEST 50.76 FEET-" 6) NORTH 88'50'20"EAST 135.00 FEET• . R Cot 7) NORTH 01 0940"WEST203.04 8) NORTH 88°50-20"EAST 344.12 F 9) NORTH 00°43'3T'WEST 372.75 E EIS TO TH HIGH WATER ELEVATION 1.61 (NGVD29): THENCE GENERALY MEANDE IN N H L E, 940 FEET MORE OR LESS; THENCE SOUTH 42°06'50"EAS 46 6 E ' S RIGHT OFWAY LINE OF AIRPORT -PULLING ROAD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT NE S H 00 6" S .75 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING , E PARCEL HEREI S RI SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND ICTIONS OF REC Tffi EXH I BIT 'A° 102yzv. l4aw Var. al I- GLOO NOTE: RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE IMPACT AREA WILL BE CONFIRMED AND MARKED AT SDP APPLICATION PHASE F�OG� PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION z J J A AVE N ESTEY AVEN 100 200 IN FEET �\ PRDJE C' CUEN . DATE SIEET NJ 2011 1E MERIDIAN VILLAGE MPUD ROCK CREEK DES'GNEDfir HOLDINGS, LLC FEx Dt VIDSON 5435 JAEGER ROAD DR i'er: t N I N[ E R I N G SFEEi Tf'LE sS, 3 Ex 300 K10R-45,*. 301 EXHIBIT A: PART 77 AVIGATION OTIR HY: N.p/.f.FbM. x105 NAPLES, FL 341D9 F rlx JEFF L DAVO6CI( IE H . INSTR 5083313 OR 5119 PG 3631 E—RECORDED 2/11/2015 11:40 AM PAGES 7 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC@.70 $0.70 REC $61.00 Prepared by: F. Joseph McMackin III, Esq. Bond, Schceneck & King, PLLC 4001 Tamiamr Trait North, Suite 250 Naples, FL 34103 MAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AVIGATION and HAZARD EASEMENT AGREEMENT, made October 90_, 2014, between MAPLES 5TH AVENUE HOTEL, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose address is c/o Finfrock Enterprises, Inc., 2400 Apopka Boulevard, Apopka, Florida 32703, hereinafter called the Grantor, and CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose address is 161 Aviation Drive North, Naples, Florida 34104, hereinafter called the Grantee, its successors and assigns. RECITALS A, Grantor is the owner of certain real property more particularly described and illustrated on Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property"), B. Grantee is the owner of certain real property commonly known as the Naples Municipal Airport (the "dominant tenement") and more particularly described on Exhibit B attached hereto. Exhibit B also depicts the height limitations for airport hazards over the Property. C. Grantee desires to acquire certain rights in the Property for the use and benefit of the public, an easement and right-of-way, appurtenant to the Naples Municipal Airport for the unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft (as hereinafter defined), in and through the airspace above the Property. In consideration of the matters described above, and of the mutual benefits and obligations set forth in this agreement, the parties agree as follows: SECTION ONE. GRANT OF EASEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the payment to Grantor the sum of Ten and 00/100 Dollars ($'10.00) from Grantee, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor, for itself, its successors and assigns, does hereby grant, bargain, sell, transfer and convey unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public, an easement and right-of-way, appurtenant to the Naples Municipal Airport for the unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft (as hereinafter defined), in and through the airspace above Grantor's Property. -I- 342867.1 1011=014 i Packet Pg. 69 OR 5119 PG 3632 9.A.1.d SECTION TWO. CHARACTER OF EASEMENT The Easement granted in this instrument is appurtenant to the dominant tenement, and shall be for the benefit of the real property known as the "Naples Municipal Airport" ("Airport") described in Exhibit B, including any additions thereto wherever located, hereafter made by the City of Naples Airport Authority, or its successors and assigns, including any and all persons, firms, or corporations operating aircraft to or from the Airport. SECTION THREE. DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT. The Easement and burden, together with all things which may be alleged to be incident to or resulting from the use and enjoyment of this Easement, including, but not limited to the right to cause in all airspace above or in the vicinity of the surface of Property noise, vibrations, fumes, deposits of dust or other particulate matter, fuel particles (which are incidental to the normal operation of aircraft), and any and all other effects that may be alleged to be incident to or caused by the operation of aircraft over or in the vicinity of the Property or in landing at or taking off from, or operating at or on the Airport is hereby granted; and Grantor does hereby fully waive, remise, and release any right or cause of action which it may now have or which it may have in the future against Grantee, its successors and assigns, due to such noise, vibrations, fumes, dust, fuel particles and all other effects that may be caused or may have been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at, or taking off from, or operating at or on the Airport. As used herein, the term "aircraft" shall mean any and all types of aircraft, whether now in existence or hereafter manufactured and developed, to include, but not limited to, jet aircraft, turbine aircraft, propeller driven aircraft, civil aircraft, military aircraft, commercial aircraft, helicopters and all types of aircraft or vehicles now in existence or hereafter developed, regardless of existing or future noise levels, for the purpose of transporting persons or property through the air, by whoever owned or operated. The Easement and right-of-way hereby conveyed further grants to the Grantee the continuing right to prevent the erection or growth upon the Property of any building, structure, tree, or other object, extending into the airspace above the aforesaid imaginary plane as depicted in Exhibit B and to remove from the air space at Grantor's expense or, at the sole option of the Grantee, as an alternative, to mark and light as obstructions to air navigation, any such building, structure, tree or other objects now upon, or which in the future may be upon the Property, together with the right of ingress to, egress from, and passage over the Property for the above purpose. The Easement and right-of-way conveyed hereby also grants to the Grantee the continuing right and authority to review and approve all future development or improvement plans contemplated by Grantor on the Property. Grantor agrees to exclude Grantee from any discussions it has with the FAA or FDOT related in any way to the Airport. -2- 342887.1 10/13/2014 Packet Pg. 70 OR 5119 PG 3633 9.A.1.d THE GRANTOR, for itself, its representatives, successors, and assigns, does hereby agree that for and during the term of this avigation easement, it will not hereafter erect, permit the erection or growth of, or permit or suffer to remain upon the Property (i) any structure which is an airport hazard or (ii) anything which might create glare or misleading lights, fuel handling and storage facilities, or smoke generating activities. AND for the consideration hereinabove set forth, the Grantor, for itself, its representatives, successors, and assigns, does hereby agree that for and during the term of this avigation easement, it will not hereafter erect, permit the erection or growth of, or permit or suffer to remain upon the Property any building, structure, tree or other object extending into the airspace above the aforesaid imaginary plane as depicted in Exhibit B, and that they shall not hereafter use or permit or suffer the use of the Property in such a manner as to create electrical interference with radio communication between any installation upon said Airport and aircraft, or as to make it difficult for flyers to distinguish between airport lights and others, or to permit any use of the Property that causes a discharge of fumes, dust or smoke so as to impair visibility in the vicinity of the airport or as otherwise to endanger the landing, taking off or maneuvering of aircraft. Grantor furthermore waives all damages and claims for damages caused or alleged to be caused by or incidental to such activities. It is expressly agreed and understood that the Grantee is a body politic and corporate, which operates a municipal airport, and is subject to regulation by the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") and Florida Department of Transportation ("FDOT'), Notwithstanding anything in this Easement to the contrary, Grantor shall not unreasonably withhold authorization, consent, or approval for any activities on the Property required by the FAA or FDOT for enhancement of public safety. The Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or expenses related to the operation, upkeep or maintenance of the Property. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Easement and right-of-way, and all rights appertaining thereto unto the Grantee, its successors, and assigns, until the Naples Municipal Airport shall be abandoned and shall cease to be used for public airport purposes, It being understood and agreed that the aforesaid covenants and agreements shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the administrators, successors and assigns of the Grantor until said Naples Municipal Airport shall be abandoned and cease to be used for public airport purposes. -s- 342WA M13k014 Packet Pg. 71 OR 5119 PG 3634 9.A.1.d IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set its hand and seal this day of October, 2014, GRANTOR.: MAPLES 5T" AVENUE HOTEL, LLC, a Florida limited liability company By: Finfrock Development, LLC, a Florida Signature of Witness limited liability company, Manager Printed Name:_ J�i'1 k� 1�S ko s-e4b c. L By: Finfrock E rprises I a Florida ar 'on, g Signature of Witness B �=.�. Printed Name:-�— Robert D, Finfr President STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 29' day of October, 2014 by Robert D. Finfrock, as President of Finfrock Enterprises, Ine., the Manager of Finfrock Development, LLC, the Manager of Maples 5th Avenue Hotel, LLC, a Florida limited liability company on behalf of the company. He is personally known to me or has produced his _ as identification. Notary Public Printed Name of Notary Public My Commission Expires: -4_ ,•��•""' PCB DARLENE SUMNER SANDERS J•SPRY ,`1: Notary Public - State o1 Florida : •? My Comm. Expires Mar 11, 2017 _' `" '%�° . +� Commission # EE 860192 Bonded Through Nalional Notary Assn. i f 34207.1 1011312014 Packet Pg. 72 OR 5119 PG 3635 9.A.1.d OR; 3192 PG; 2903 F. Exhibit A A portion of Government Lot 9 of Section 3, Township 50 South, Range 2$ East, Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Commence at the Northwest comer of Government Lot 9 of Section 3, Township 50 South, Mange 25 East, Collier County, Florida; thence run North 89 degrees 14'32" East, along the North line of Government Lot 9 of said Section 3, for a distance of471.31 feet to a point on the Northeasterly right-of- way line of State Road 90 (U.S, HWX . 41), Tamiami Trail, as the same is shown on the State of FloH&, State Road Department, right-of-way map for State (toad 90, Section 03010.2116, the same being a point on a circular carve, concave Southwesterly, whose radius point bears South 28 degrees 59'11" West, a distance of 1422.35 feet therefrom; thence run Southeasterly, along the Northeasterly right -of --way line of State Road 90, and along the arc of said curve to the right, having a radius of 1422.35 feet, through a central angle of 01 degrees 38'07", subtended by a chord of 40,59 feet at a bearing of South 60 degrees 11146" East, for a distance of 40,59 feet to a point on the Southerly mean high water line of the pay of Naples; thence run North 30 degrees 2548" East, along said mean high water line; for a distance of 11,39 feet; thence run North 47 degrees 22'03" East, along said mean high water line, for a distanve of4.96 feet; thence run North 89 degrees 54'54" East, along a high water line, for a distance of51,78 feet to a point on the Northeasterly right -of --way 1' 10�6 he same is shown on the Florida Department of Transportation right-o , r toe , ection 03010-2545, and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel of I to described; thence th $8 degrees 4N45" East, along the Northeasterly right-of-way lit}6 of J to Roo 90, for a distanc of 2,30 feet; thence tun Nwh 31 degrees 15'15" East, along the brth ast dy ' ht-o - a i�"ii of Ste c R d 90, for a distance of 5.00 feet; thence run South 58 degre s ! " St a o rig t-ofway line of State Road 90, for a distance of 15.00 feet; the ce n o 3 s ' S ,Ion the Northeasterly right-of- way line of State Road 90, for dis e o e ca S u 8 egrces 44'45" East, along the Northeasterly right-of-way line f- "a a r d c t; thence run North 31 degrees 15'15" East, along the Northeas ght-of-way line of e R ad a distance of 5,00 feet; thence run South 58 degrees 4445" Eas the Northeasterly - E- c of State Road 90, for a distance of 10.00 feet; thence ninth i degrees 1S'15" W can' he Northeasterly right-of-way line of State Road 90, for a distance tf t thence run egrees 4445" East, along the Northeasterly right-of-way 11 of State a, o , t P27,57 feet; thence, departing fromsaid right-of-way line, run North 31 dcgtes 151t cc of 354,66 feet to a point on the North line of Government Lot 9 of said Section 3; thence run South 89 degrees 14'32" West, along the North line of Government Got 9 of said Section 3, for a distance of 324.32 feet; thence tun South 31 degrees 15115" West, for a distance of 11,24 feet to a point on the mean high water line of the Huy of Naples as the same is shown on the Florida Department of Transportation right-of-way map for State Road 90, Section 03010-2545; thence run North 88 dcgnecs 54'03" West, along said mean high water line, for a distance of 34.25 feet; thence run South 88 degrees 541I7" West, along said mean high water line, for a distance of 181.31 feet,, thence tun South 89 degrees 54'54" West, along said mean high water line, for a distance of 110.15 feet to the POINT OF BEGMNiNG, EXHIBIT A 1 BeSt Available t1 ..- N d tL uJ ar CU M W Y a� L U Y 0 W w ti ti 0 O O N N O N J tL M N O N ca> 21 3 A a Packet Pg. 73 OR 5119 PG 3636 9.A.1.d •-,/ 404 Aa4U 9ARRON COLLIER Exhibit Parcel lyinq Hortharly of U.S. 41 and betwaen t;ordon River Bridge and Naples Channel Bridge, Section 3, 'Township:150 South, Ranga x5 F.aQt, Collier County, Florida; j cofitnanairsg on the Northeasterly right-oC-w4y lime or U.S. 41 at they moxt Southerly eornar of a p:�Voel 09 land described in O.R. Book 194, Page 97, publ,ic records of Co111or'County, Florida, run South 590571416It East 175.00 Poet along raid right-•ofwwax to the point$ot beginning, continue along said right-oC-way 333.00 Eeilt tnot-e or less to the bank of tho Gordon River; thenco Noirtherly aoo.00 toot more or las4 along said bank; thonae Ws4stet:ly 254.00 feat more or lass along said bank; thence soouth 31 °lo 15 n West 353,00 feet more or Jess :.o t"htr.Of beginning, lczv the Zollowing daseribod� �?,Ic0U, That portion of Covernme 9 i �Towovhip so South, Range 23 Eas , • li,aX County, 1, ri a. $wing desori.bad as its Jo M. 0 004 Commanoe at the nort sre m nt LoG 9; thence along tht or i f s c t Lot 4„ North 69,141321, 4hst, 3 B P.t t t su v y a line ;.._, of states Road 90 � �l � d the bcglnning of a curve `ih Ave southerly; Q1 lea g said survey baao line, they of said our 1 right, having a rnd3.us of I, 36 faat, a c ngle or 00,09117", an arc ,long 147.42 feet, hard for which bear* south 61.04 ast to �of said curve; thano" continula $lo • s (vb c line South 58•44,450 Bast, 581.66 festj No> (�15'15n task, 50.00 Bent to the northerly ex l iq Qf way line of vai.d State Road 90 (per Section 0301t -2116) for a koxNT of BEGxNNxNGj thsanoQ cont ,0 North 1 915' x5" East, 43.00 feetj thanes south 50144145" East, 7126.76 teat to the westerly mean high water like of thei•por;don River; thancer along waid westerly mean high watser line South 30•15113" 'West, 41.43 feet; thenaQ cotltirlUv- along Said wecte>rly mean high water line South 68.071411E3" West, 3_9a feat to said northerly existing right odl way line of State Road 901 thence along said northerly 4xisting right cat way line North 58°44145" west, 336,30! Peet to the P019T Or $BGxNNxNG. {, • of wt�tmg, TYv;ng er ,>rnc,rsx ur>yati3t;jctc;rl+toth1. �o,•,,;iy EXHIBIT A 2 Best Available Imaf; . Packet Pg. 74 *** OR 5119 PG 3637 *** 9.A.1.d *** OR 4992 PG 3586 *** Y 1J" eSt Available Ima Packet Pg. 75 INSTR 5083314 OR 5119 PG 3638 E-RECORDED 2/11/2015 11:40 AM PAGES 19 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA REC $163.00 Prepared by and return to: F. Joseph McMackin III, Esq, Bond, Schoaneek & King, PLLC 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 250 Naples, FL 34103 DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS This Declaration of Restrictive Covenants (the "Declaration"), made this Q day of October, 2014, by Naples 51h Avenue Hotel, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (the "Declarant" ), in favor of the City of Naples, Florida, a municipality of the State of Florida (the "City") and City of Naples Airport Authority, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (the "Authority") (the City and Authority are collectively, the "Grantees"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the Declarant holds fee simple title to certain real property in the City of Naples, Florida, located at 1345/1355 5`h Avenue South, Naples, Florida 34105, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Declarant seeks a conditional use of the Property as a transient lodging facility specifically for hotel related uses and 500 square feet of marina related use including related facilities (the "Conditional Use Permit"); and WHEREAS, this Declaration is intended to provide assurances to reduce interior noise exposure in Hotel guest rooms arising froth issuance of the Conditional Use Permit as more fully hereafter provided; and WHEREAS, the Property is located in the City of Naples Airport Overlay District as codified in Chapter 58, "Zoning", Article 11I, Division 4, Code of Ordinances of the City of Naples (the "AOD"); and WHEREAS, the purpose of the AOD is to provide both airspace protection and land use compatibility in relation to the normal operation of public -use airports located within the City; and WHEREAS, the AOD requires the maximum safety oftransient lodgers and property within areas surrounding the Naples Municipal Airport (the "Airport"); the maximum safety of aircraft arriving at and departing from the Airport; and compliance with building standards including the ability to meet and maintain sound level requirements of no greater than 45 dB DNL for interior spaces; and WHEREAS, the Declarant is desirous of making this dedication and declaration that the Property shall be developed in accordance with representations and commitments made to the Grantees; and WHEREAS the Declarant has commissioned a study from Harris Miller Miller & Hanson, Inc. dated June 13, 2014 entitled "Technical Memorandum" attached hereto marked Exhibit "B" and by reference incorporated herein, to provide acoustical design and associated land use mitigation recommendations (all of the recommendations specified in the Technical Memorandum are referred to as the "Recommendations") for the proposed transient lodging facility (the "Hotel"); and WHEREAS the Recommendations include without limitation requirements for: (a) reducing interior noise exposure in Hotel guest rooms resulting from aircraft departing from and arriving at the 3425371 10/13/2014 Packet Pg. 76 OR 5119 PG 3639 9.A.1.d Airport with a conservative margin of safety, to ensure that the interior levels are consistent with noise compatibility standards adopted by the Authority, the City and Collier County; (b) ensuring that Hotel guests are aware of the proximity of the Hotel to the Airport, and the associated overflights and noise exposure; (c) ensuring that Hotel guests are aware of the actions the Declarant undertook to mitigate the noise exposure and obtain development approval from the Authority and City; and (d) protecting the Authority from any claim that the Declarant, owner or Hotel guests might make relative to aircraft noise; and WHEREAS Declarant acknowledges that compliance with all of the .Recommendations is in its best interest as a hotel developer; and WHEREAS the Grantees' requirement that the Declarant fully comply with all of the Recommendations serves a legitimate police power and not a taking within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution or the Constitution of the State of Florida. The Recitals and findings set forth in this Declaration are hereby adopted by reference thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth in the Covenants / Restrictions. NOW, THEREFORE, the Declarant voluntarily covenants and agrees that the Property shall be subject to the following obligations and restrictions which shall be deemed to be covenants running with the land and binding upon the Declarant, its successors in interest and assigns: COVENANTS / RESTRICTION'S 1. The Hotel shall be constructed to incorporate design, component, and construction ' features that meet or exceed all acoustical design Recommendations set forth in Exhibit "B" including but not limited to the following, provided, however, that this Declaration shall amend, supersede any, and take priority over Recommendations which conflict with this Declaration. 2. All exterior windows and sliding glass doors located in Hotel guest rooms shall be constructed to provide at least 40 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction. This level of noise insulation may be achieved using two panes of 9/16-inch laminated glass spaced at least 6 inches apart, which achieves a sound transmission class ("STC") rating of 48 and an outdoor -indoor transmission class ("OITC") rating of 44, or such other window and door designs so as to provide a comparable exterior -to - interior noise reduction of about 40 decibels and achieve similar STC and OITC ratings.' For example, two panes of 5/8 inch laminated glass spaced at least 4.5 inches apart would provide an equivalent noise level reduction. 3. All non-structural interior walls adjoining Hotel guest rooms shall be constructed using two layers of 1/2-inch drywall on each side of an intervening 6-inch air space.' I and '` minor modifications to the design specifications consistent with the objectives of the Recommendations, may be adopted after acoustical engineering review and endorsement and approval by the Authority's Executive Director, including modifications described on the attached Exhibit "C" which is incorporated herein by reference which the parties acknowledge have been adopted after acoustical engineering review and endorsement by the Authority's Executive Director which the parties agree and acknowledge constitute modifications to the Recommendations approved by the Grantees. This Exhibit "C" shall amend, supersede any, and take priority over Recommendations contained elsewhere which conflict with this Exhibit "C." 2 342537A 10/13/2014 Packet Pg. 77 1 OR 5119 PG 3640 4. Declarant its successors and assigns shall maintain the acoustical elements incorporated in the Hotel in satisfactory condition and without modification, and to maintain the specified noise level reduction performance specified in Exhibit "B" as revised hereby. 5. Declarant its successors and assigns shall provide the Authority or its designee access and cooperation at the completion of construction and at any future time upon reasonable notification to Declarant or its successors without interfering with construction and at the Authority's expense to test and confirm the implementation and maintenance of all the Recommendations. 6. Declarant its successors and assigns shall immediately, at their own expense, correct any construction deficiencies identified by the Authority at the completion of construction or at any future date. 7. Declarant its successors and assigns shall provide the Authority with an avigation easement containing terms and provisions satisfactory to the Authority conveying airspace rights over the Property, including, but not Limited to, the right for overflights by aircraft operating at the Airport and the right to expose the Property and Hotel guests to noise associated with those overflights. The avigation' easement on the Property shall "run with the land" and bind Declarant's successors and assigns. $. Declarant, its successors and assigns, shall post a legible notice in a prominent location in each Hotel guest room alerting guests of the proximity of the Property to the Airport, the likelihood of direct overflights by aircraft operating at the Airport, the likelihood of noise exposure from Airport operations, the fact that the Hotel was built in a location in which the Authority and the City consider the use compatible with the expected level of aircraft noise exposure only if the noise exposure be mitigated, that acoustical design and construction elements are incorporated in the structure to provide that mitigation with a margin of safety and that the Declarant has provided the Authority with an avigation easement over the Property which precludes the Declarant, its successors, assigns and Hotel guests from pursuing any claim against the Authority for aircraft overflights and associated noise exposure in Hotel guest rooms. 9. Declarant, its successors and assigns, shall post a legible notice in a prominent location on each sliding glass door in each Hotel room with a request worded to the general effect that: "The hotel management requests that guests only open exterior doors when moving between the interior of their suite and their balcony or patio, so as to respect the guests in adjacent rooms right to a quiet environment, free from exterior noise that may enter through an open door and pass through interior walls." 10. Declarant, its successors and assigns shall, prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy from the City, or any government authority, shall have the Hotel inspected by a qualified acoustical engineer, approved by the Authority in writing, who shall, after inspection, certify to the Authority that the Hotel as constructed meets the Recommendations set herein and in Exhibit "B", as revised by this Declaration. 11. The Property shall only be used as a transient lodging facility in compliance with the City's Zoning Code and shall not be used for any residential purpose. GENERAL PROVISIONS This voluntary Declaration shall remain. in full force and effect and shall be binding upon the Declarant, its successors and assigns of the Property, for an initial period of thirty (30) years from the date this instrument is recorded in the public records of Collier County, Florida, and shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten (10) years, unless modified, amended or released prior to the expiration thereof provided, however, that this Declaration shall automatically terminate and be void and 342537.1 10/1312014 Packet Pg. 78 OR 5119 PG 3641 9.A.1.d of no further force and effect if and when (i) the Conditional Use Permit expires because the Hotel was not constructed, or (ii) the Hotel authorized under the Conditional Use Permit is ever demolished and the Declarant, its successors or assigns makes application with the City of Naples to use the Property for something other than a transient lodging facility and Grantees agree at that time to execute and record a Termination of Declaration to evidence that the Declaration has been terminated and is void and of no further force and effect. This Declaration may only be modified, amended or released as to any portion of the Property by a written instrument executed by the Grantees and the Declarant, or its successor or assigns to the fee simple title to the Property, and recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, Invalidation of any provision of this Declaration by judgment of Court shall not affect any of the other provisions of this Declaration, which shall remain in fill force and effect. Tlus Declaration shall be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida at the cost of the Declarant. It is understood and agreed that any designee of the Authority has the right at any time during normal business hours of entering and investigating the compliance of the Property, to determine whether the conditions of this Declaration subject to the limitations heretofore provided are being complied with. An action to enforce the terms and conditions of this Declaration may be brought by the City or the Authority and may be, at law or in equity, against any party or person violating or attempting to violate any provision of this Declaration, either to restrain violations or to recover damages. The prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to recover costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, at all levels of trial and appeal. This enforcement provision shall be in addition to any other remedies available under the law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has signed and sealed these presents the day and year first above written. NAPLES 6Trt AVENUE HOTEL, LLC, a Florida limited liability company By: Finfrock Development, LLC, a Florida Signature of Witness limited liability company, Manager Printed Name:_ NA, I,, s o se'l w, By: Finfrock Enter . s, Inc , )' rid corporation nago Signature of Witnes > / By: _ Printed Name: d /�`Jc� Robert D. Fin resident E", DARLENE SUMDSANDERSSc' Notary PutiliC daSTATE OF FLORIDA ) : • My Comm. Expi17COUNTY OF ) �+ Commissiong t``�, Bonded Through Nssn. 1 4 342537.1 1011312014 Packet Pg. 79 OR 5119 PG 3642 9.A.1.d The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this r day of October, 2014 by Robert D. Finfrock, as President of Finfrock Enterprises, Inc., the .Manager of Finfrock Development, LLC, the Manager of Naples 5'h Avenue Hotel, LLC, a Florida Iimited liability company on behalf of the company. He is personally known to me or has produced his as identification. Notary Public IN-4NEJ � �&( ()mb Printed Name of Notary Public My Commission Expires: SPay p��� DARLENE SUMNER SANDERS ;r° ,`�; Notary Public - State of Florida « : •; My Comm. Expires Mar 11, 2017 Commission # EE 860192 ' %4; 1 Bonded Through National Notary Assn. 342537.1 10/13/2014 Packet Pg. 80 OR 5119 PG 3643 9.A.1.d *** OR; 3192 PG: 2903 Exhibit ,A A portion of Government Lot 9 of Section 3, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Commence at the Northwest corner of Government Lot 9 of Section 3, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida; thence run North 89 degrees 14'32" East, along the North line of Government Lot 9 of said Section 3, for a distance of471.31 feet to a point on the Northeasterly right-of- way line of State Road 90 (U.S. HWY . 41), Tamiami Trail, as the same is shown on the State of Florida, State Road Department, right-of-way map for State Road 90, Section 03010-2116, the same being it point on a circular curve, concave Southwesterly, whose radius point bears South 28 degrees 59'11" West, a distance of 1422.35 feet therefrom; thence run Southeasterly, along the Northeasterly right -of --way line of State Road 90, and along the arc of said curve to the right, having a radius of 1422.35 feet, through a central angle of 01 degrees 38'07", subtended by a chord of 40.59 feet at a bearing of South 60 degrees 11'46" East, for a distance of 40.59 feet to a point on the Southerly mean high water line of the Bay of Naples; thence run North 30 degrees 2548" East, along said mean high water line; for a distance of 11.39 feet; thence run North 47 degrees 22'03" East, along said mean high water line, for a distance of 4.96 feet; thence run North 89 degrees 54'54" East, along s ' e high water line, for a distance of 51.78 feet to a point on the Northeasterly right-of-way lin . off t t IQO he same is shown on the Florida Department of Transportation right-o or toe , ection 03010-254S, and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel of 1 ` g to described; thence nth 58 degrees W45" East, along the Northeasterly right-of-way lirl6 of,S#ateR90, for a distant of 4�{2.30 feet; thence run North 31 degrees 15' 15" East, along the rthast tsly ht-o -wa tr of Sta a Ra d 90, for a distance of 5.00 feet; thence run South 58 degre s 4 " t e- rig t-of-way line of State Road 90, for a distance of 15.00 feet; the ce n o 3 e s S t, Ion the Northeasterly right-of- way line of State Road 90, for dis e o cc S ut 8 egrets 445" East, along the Northeasterly right-of-way line f a o a ,-f6r ' ne f t; thence run North 31 degrees 15'15" East, along the Northeas ght-of-way line of e R ad a distance of 5.00 feet; thence run South 58 degrees 4445" Eas the Northeasterly R1 - f- a of State Road 90, for a distance of 10.00 feet; thence run �th i degrees I5'15" W du he Northeasterly right-of-way line of State Road 90, for a distance et thence run So egrets 4445" East, along the Northeasterly right-of-way line of State a_ 0 q , any 7.57 feet; thence, departing from said right-of-way line, run North 31 degrees 15' 1 1 cc of 354.66 feet to a point on the North line of Government Lot 9 of said Section 3; thence run South 89 degrees 14'32" West, along the North line of Government Lot 9 of said Section 3, for a distance of 324.32 feet; thence run South 31 degrees I S'15" West, for a distance of 11.24 feet to a point on the mean high water line of the Bay of Naples as the same is shown on the Florida Department of Transportation right-of-way map for State Road 90, Section 03010-2545; thence run North 88 degrees 54'03" West, along said mean high water line, for a distance of 34.25 feet; thence run South 88 degrees 54' 17" West, along said mean high water line, for a distance of 181.31 feet; thence run South 89 degrees 54'S4" West, along said mean high water line, for a distance of 110.15 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, EXHIBIT .1 Page 1 of 2 N d 0 a tY CU W w Y m a� U Y 0 W w r• ti 0 0 0 N N 0 N J d r• eo 1* to a� r a J .r 0 t Q 0 0. a m a R Z M N O N M 21 3 A r a Packet Pg. 81 1 OR 5119 PG 3644 9.A.1.d c014 1440 BARRON COLLIER fz 004 EXhibit T Parcel, lyin3 Northerly of U.S. 41 and between i and Naples Channel Bridge, Ssction 3, 'rawn�hip1@ordart Otl River Bridge Sant, Collier County, Florida: 50 h, Range 25 I Commencing on the Northeasterly right-oP`wrbY line of U.S. 47 at the most Southerly corner aP a p�tcel og land described in O.R. Book 194, page 97, pubiis records of collier County, Florida, run South 56°57'4!i'c East 275.o0 font along said right-of-way to the pointloc beginning; continue along said right-of-way 333.00 fe4jt snore or less to the bank of the Gordon River; thence Noirtherly 790.a0 feet more ox lesx along said bank; thence Withsterly 254.00 feet more or less along said bank; thence South 3i°16'15" West 353 .00 feat: more or lass to tha .pointi1 of be i ' "r, the following described • , Of ; 9 nhing, That portion covernme 50 South, Range 28 Eas KM9 in Sect d# Township Mier county,a. 9aing described am fa COMMencp at the nortrbwe 9° thence Along the Q I f s G ( hm nt Lot North 89014,32" East 3 t Lot 9„ of Statd Road 90 6 e f t t su v X a line beginning of a curvy I've ���''' d ina -survey base line they a southerly; Qir a ,� q said having a radius of l Of said our tight 06009117" 35 sect, a ngle aC , an arc sang 'o 147.42 feet, e chord for Which bears south 6Z°4u ass tc curve; thence continua $io d aid 58*44145" East, 581.66 Peet• s '( y€-Y e line South so • 0o feet to the northarlI tk4r� 101511510 East, Of aa3.d State Road 90 Y ®xist'a�ir secti n 030 It of wax lino PpiNx of P1EG2NN.ING; thQncepeontinue Nor�ho3!�°2116j1, for a 43°Oo feet; thence South 58044'45" East, 3265765 East, the westerly mean 'high water line of thcipardonfRiv to thance' along said. westerlytnea 'G River. 30®15' 13" West, 41.43 feet, thence n high wader• line South westerly glean high water line South 68•0 'n 8COntibe'long said feet to said northerly existing ri ht o West, 1.98 State Road i 9o; thence along said northerly a� F' Rline of °P �"';Y' line North 580441451, west, J25.30! lxis9 fight POINT OEGTNNXNG. Ce @t into the, 116 +a c.n w s-A s 4 bo 36 so R�GC?RbkR'S ME of wrEtM TMQ , u�atiahctrry Pn' EXHIBIT A n ►e,e�v�d. Page 2 of 2; Best Available image Packet Pg. 82 OR 5119 PG 3645 9.A.1.d 77 South Bedford Street Burlington, MA 01803 Tel. (781) 229-0707 Fax (781) 229-7939 W www.hmmh.com TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Mr. William Finfrock, Executive Vice President, Finfrock From: Eric Cox and Ted Baldwin Date: June 13, 2014 Subject: Acoustical Design and Associated Mitigation Recommendations for Proposed Hotel Near to Naples Municipal Airport Reference: HMMH Project No. 306800 1. INTRODUCTION Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. (HMN" was retained by Finfrock to provide acoustical design and associated land use mitigation recommendations for a proposed new hotel to be constructed in close proximity to the Naples Municipal Airport. The purpose of the recommendations include: (1) reducing interior noise exposure in hotel guest rooms resulting from aircraft departing from and arriving at the nearby airport with a conservative margin of safety, to ensure that the interior levels are consistent with noise compatibility standards adopted by the City of Naples Airport Authority, the City of Naples, and Collier County; (2) ensuring that hotel tenants are aware of the proximity to the airport, and the associated overflights and noise exposure, (3) ensuring that hotel tenants are aware of actions the hotel developer undertook to mitigate the noise exposure and obtain development approval from the Airport Authority and City, and (4) protecting the Airport Authority from any future recourse that the hotel developer, owner, or tenants might seek relative to aircraft noise. Figure I depicts the proposed location of the new hotel relative to the Naples Municipal Airport. The hotel would be built about 2,200 feet from the end of Runway 5/23 and near to the intersection of 51h Avenue and River Point Drive. Figure 1. Location of Proposed Hotel Relative to Naples Municipal Airport G:1Pro1ectM306XXX\306800_Nap1as_Hotel\Report\Naples-Hotel_Acou3tical-Report HMMH_6-13-2014Aocx EXHIBIT /g Best Available Image Packet Pg. 83 OR 5119 PG 3646 9.A.1.d Acoustical Design and Associated Mitigation Recommendations for Proposed Hotel Near to Page 2 Naples Municipal Airport June 13 2014 Figure 2 presents a design rendering of the proposed hotel, which includes several guest rooms with balconies. We investigated the acoustical performance of the exterior walls, windows and sliding glass doors that are shown, as well as the interior wall design since noise exposure to adjacent guest rooms may occur through interior walls when sliding glass doors are open during aircraft noise events. Figure 2. Design Rendering of Proposed Hotel The Naples Airport Authority has conducted several studies under 14 CFR Part 150, "Airport Noise Compatibility Planning," which sets forth a voluntary federal program for airport proprietors to use in determining aircraft -related noise exposure levels and — in consultation with local land -use jurisdictions — to identify associated land -use compatibility criteria. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) oversees the Part 150 program. The Authority's most recent Part 150 submission to the FAA (in September 2010) included Noise Exposure Maps for 2010 and 2015. The FAA accepted those maps and associated documentation, and found the submission in compliance with Part 150 requirements on November 23, 2010. The proposed hotel location is between the 60 and 65 decibel (dB) Day -Night Average Sound Level (DNL) noise contours for both of those Noise Exposure Maps. The Airport Authority, City of Naples, and Collier County have adopted land use compatibility criteria that extend out to the 60 dB DNL contour. The Authority's Noise / Land use Compatibility Guidelines state: "Residential land use is generally non -compatible in the 60-65, 65-70, and 70-75 dB DNL contour intervals. However, the City of Naples or Collier County (as relevant) may provide development approval if measures to achieve the specified minimum noise level reduction of 25 or 30 dB are incorporated into the design and construction of structures used for residential purposes." 1 The guidelines specifically call for 25 dB of noise level reduction between the 60 and 65 dB DNL contours. As discussed later in this report, HMMH recommends that the hotel construction provide 40 dB of noise reduction —15 dB beyond this criterion — to ensure that all patties are protected with a significant margin of safety. 1 Naples Municipal Airport 2010 and 2015 Noise Exposure Maps, September 2010," prepared for the City of Naples Airport Authority, by Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc., in association with ICF / SH&E, Inc., and Montgomery Consulting Group, Inc., Note 1 to Table 2, page 27. G:Wrojecls\306XXX1306800_Naples_Hotel\Report\Naples-Hotel_AcousOcal-Report HMMH 6-13-2014.docx Packet Pg. 84 OR 5119 PG 3647 9.A.1.d ARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON INC. Acoustical Design and Associated Mitigation Recommendations for Proposed Hotel Near to Page 3 Naples Municipal Airport June 13 2014 2. NOISE EXPOSURE MEASUREMENTS HMMH conducted acoustical measurements at the location of the proposed hotel on May 14th and 15", 2014 to determine the maximum exterior aircraft noise exposure at this site, as illustrated in Figure 3. Figure 3. Acoustical Monitoring at Location of Proposed Hotel The acoustical monitoring was conducted using an American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Type 1 "Precision" Bruel & Kjaer model 2250 sound level analyzer and accessory kit. This noise measurement instrumentation is owned by HND&I, conforms to ANSI Standard S I A for Type 1 (Precision) sound level meters, and has current calibrations traceable to the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NISI). Additional field calibrations were carried out before and after each measurement period using a N1ST- certiFied acoustical calibrator. During the measurements, an HMMH consultant logged the time periods of aircraft noise events and also noted the type of airplane (jet or propeller), the type of operation (arrival, departure, or overflight), and the airport runway utilization. Figure 4, provided on the following page, summarizes the maximum A -weighted fast -response sound levels (LAFinax) that were measured for a total of 38 operations which occurred during the acoustical monitoring. The results of the acoustical measurements indicate that the greatest exterior aircraft noise exposure at the site of the proposed hotel occurs due to jet arrivals onto Runway 5, with maximum sound levels of up to 93 dBA, followed by jet departures from Runway 23, which generate maximum sound levels of up to about 91dBA. For reference, note that the maximum sound levels generated by traffic on nearby 5th Avenue were around 60 dBA. However, maximum sound levels observed at different frequencies of sound vary substantially from operation to operation and are often generated by propeller aircraft at lower frequencies. Figure 5, provided on the following page, depicts the maximum octave -band sound levels measured during the acoustical monitoring. To ensure a conservative assessment, we used this sound spectrum to calculate interior noise levels in hotel guest rooms, which represents an overall sound level of approximately 96 dBA and thus provides a 3dB safety factor to our calculations. GlProjects\306XXX1306800_Naples_HotehReporMaple9-Hotel AcousVoal-Repod_HMMH_6-13-2014.docx Best Avallabl Packet Pg. 85 OR 5119 PG 3648 9.A.1.d 1nawb '' A RIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON INC. Acoustical Design and Associated Mitigation Recommendations for Proposed Hotel Near to Page 4 Naples Municipal Airport June 13 2014 Figure 4. Maximum Aircraft Sound Levels Measured at Location of Proposed Hotel 12 10 2 0 Count •Minimum LAFinax ®Maximum LAFinax XMedian LAFm ax rn erraxt mr ueparture JETOeparture PROP Arrival PROP Arrival PROP Oepartare PROP DeParture PROP Overfligh Rory 5 Rwy5 Rwy23 Rwy5 Rwy 14 Rwy 14 Rwy 23 100 90 80 0 N 70 60 q b4 Sq 40 Figure S. Maximum Octave Band Sound Levels Measured at Location of Proposed Hotel sd0 ®d0A 100 95 --------- --- ---- v 90 `o v°Q 85 `a a 80 v 75 0 70 --- -- E .q 65 -o G y 60 55 50 - 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 LAFntax Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz) G:Trojects1306XXX1306R00 Naples_HotellReportlNaples-Hotel Acoustical -Report HMMH_6-13-2014.docx Packet Pg. 86 OR 5119 PG 3649 9.A.1.d Acoustical Design and Associated Mitigation Recommendations for Proposed Hotel Near to Page 5 Naples Municipal Airport June 13 2014 3. EXTERIOR WALLS The proposed design provided by'Finfrock for exterior hotel walls consists of 8 inches of concrete on the exterior with 1/2-inch drywall on metal studs on the interior and 3.5 inches of insulation in the intervening space. Our acoustical modeling calculations indicate that this would provide approximately 50 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction, which would correspond to a maximum interior aircraft noise exposure level of 46 dBA given a maximum exterior noise exposure of 96 dBA. We find this exterior wall design sufficient and make no further acoustical recommendations for exterior walls. 4. EXTERIOR WINDOWS & DOORS The proposed design provided by Finfrock for exterior hotel windows consists of a single pane of 9/16-inch laminated glass with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 34 and an Outdoor -Indoor Transmission Class (OITC) rating of 32. The design for exterior hotel sliding glass doors consists of a single pane of 7/16-inch laminated glass with an STC rating of 31 and an OITC rating of 24. We were also provided with detailed acoustical testing reports for each product that included octave -band transmission loss data. We used the information provided for exterior walls, windows, and sliding glass doors to construct detailed acoustical models for several different hotel guest room types and configurations. Our modeling took into account the various room dimensions, layouts, and furnishings provided by Finfrock. We assumed that all windows were 6-foot by 6-foot in size and that all sliding glass doors were 6-foot by 7-foot in size. We also assumed that floors were carpeted in living room and bedroom spaces and ceramic tile in kitchen areas, that interior walls were generally painted drywall, and that ceilings were painted concrete. All of this information was provided to BARvIII by Finfrock. The results of our acoustical modeling efforts indicate that in hotel guest room spaces with only windows, the architectural designs proposed by Finfrock will provide at least 30 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction, which would correspond to a maximum interior aircraft noise exposure level of 66 dBA. In hotel guest room spaces with only sliding glass doors or both windows and sliding glass doors, the architectural designs proposed by Finfrock will provide at least 25 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction, which would correspond to a maximum interior aircraft noise exposure level of 71 dBA. Since Finfrock proposes to construct the hotel at a location where the Airport Authority and City consider the land use conditionally compatible with the aircraft noise exposure (i.e., the use is compatible only if the developer agrees to comply with acoustical design and mitigation conditions), we find these designs insufficient and recommend that an additional 10 to 15 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction be provided by exterior windows and sliding glass doors, respectively, such that the maximum interior aircraft noise exposure level is reduced to 56 dBA in all hotel guest rooms. This is equivalent to an architectural design that provides at least 40 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction. Our acoustical modeling indicates that the recommended level of noise insulation can be achieved using two panes of the 9/16-inch laminated glass spaced at least 6 inches apart, which achieves an STC rating of 48 mid an OITC rating of 44. This recommendation essentially requires two individual sliding glass doors to be used for practical reasons. Our proposed design will provide at least 40 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction and is recommended for all exterior windows and sliding glass doors installed in hotel guest rooms. Please note that the minimum 6-inch spacing between the two 9/16-inch laminated glass panes is very important to obtaining the recommended level of noise insulation. For example, if this air space were reduced to 3 inches, then the exterior -to -interior noise reduction provided would be reduced by approximately 6 decibels. The increased pane thickness for sliding glass doors from 7/16-inch to 9/16-inch is also essential. For example, two 7/16-inch sliding glass doors spaced at 10 inches provide an exterior -to -interior noise reduction that is around 6 decibels lower than recommended. Using a consistent design for both windows and sliding glass doors has the added benefit of providing a more uniform exterior fagade, which reduces the perception of aircraft noise events localizing through a particular building element. Also, note that other window and door designs may be acceptable so long as they provide a comparable exterior -to -interior noise reduction of about 40 decibels and achieve similar STC and OITC ratings. For example, we found that two panes of 5/8-inch laminated glass spaced at least 4.5 inches apart would provide a similar and acceptable level of noise reduction. G:\Projecls1306XXX1306800 Naples_HolellReport\Naples-Hotel_AcousVeal-Report HMM H_643-2014,docx Packet Pg. 87 OR 5119 PG 3650 9.A.1.d Acoustical Design and Associated Mitigation Recommendations for Proposed Hotel Near to Page 6 Naples Municipal Airport June 13 2014 5. INTERIOR WALLS It is possible that aircraft noise events may occur during periods when sliding glass doors are open, which can expose adjacent guest rooms to increased noise. For this reason, we conducted additional acoustical modeling to determine an appropriate level of noise reduction to be provided by non-structural interior walls that adjoin hotel guest rooms. Our acoustical modeling indicates that hotel guest room spaces with open sliding glass doors provide at least 15 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction, which would correspond to a maximum interior aircraft noise exposure level of 81 dBA. The proposed design provided by Finfrock for non-structural interior hotel walls consists of 1/2-inch drywall on metal studs with 6 inches of intervening air space. Our acoustical modeling calculations indicate that this would provide approximately 20 decibels of noise reduction, which would correspond to a maximum interior aircraft noise exposure level of 61 dBA in hotel guest rooms adjoining a room with an open sliding glass door. Our recommendation is to increase the noise reduction provided by non-sturctural interior walls by about 5 decibels such that the maximum interior aircraft noise exposure level is reduced to 56 dBA in hotel guest rooms adjoining a room with an open sliding glass door. Our acoustical modeling indicates that this recommended level of noise insulation can be achieved using two layers of 1/2-inch drywall on each side of non-structural interior walls. Our proposed design will provide at least 25 decibels of noise reduction and is recommended for all non-structural interior walls adjoining hotel guest rooms. 6. COMMON AREAS Information provided by Finfrock indicates that common use areas of the hotel such as lobbies are proposed to have exterior windows consisting of a single pane of 9/16-inch laminated glass, which will provide about 30 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction and would correspond to a maximum interior aircraft noise exposure level of 66 dBA given a maximum exterior noise exposure of 96 dBA. We find this design sufficient for all spaces outside of hotel guest rooms and make no further acoustical recommendations for such areas. Note that this noise level reduction still provides a 5-decibel margin of safety over the 25 dB criterion for residential uses discussed in Section 1. 7. RECOMMENDATIONS Our acoustical modeling efforts resulted in the following design recommendations for the proposed hotel: • All exterior windows and sliding glass doors located in hotel guest rooms will be constructed to provide at least 40 decibels of exterior -to -interior noise reduction. The reconnnended level of noise insulation can be achieved using two panes of 9/16-inch laminated glass spaced at least 6 inches apart, which achieves an STC rating of 48 and an OITC rating of 44.Other window and door designs are also acceptable so long as they provide a comparable exterior -to -interior noise reduction of about 40 decibels and achieve similar STC and OITC ratings. For example, two panes of 5/8-inch laminated glass spaced at least 4.5 inches apart would provide an equivalent noise level reduction. • All non-structural interior walls adjoining hotel guest rooms will be constructed using two layers of 1/2-inch drywall on each side of an intervening 6-inch air space. If all of the above recommendations are adhered to, then BNRv1H concludes that the proposed hotel will provide an adequate exterior -to -interior noise reduction which reduces the maximum interior aircraft noise exposure in hotel guest rooms to an acceptable level given construction of the hotel in a conditionally compatible noise zone. Minor modifications to the design recommendations, which are consistent with this report's findings and objectives, may be adopted after HMNIH review and endorsement as well as consultation with and approval by the Authority's Executive Director. EAB4H further recommends that, as a condition of obtaining all necessary approvals for the development, Finfrock commit to the following mitigation actions: 1. The hotel will be constructed to incorporate design, component, and construction features that meet or exceed all acoustical design recommendations set forth in this report. G:Ufiojects\306XXX\3068D0 Naples_Hotel\Report\Naples-Hotel_Acoustical-Report_HMMH_6-13201440ox Packet Pg. 88 OR 5119 PG 3651 9.A.1.d A RIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON INC. Acoustical Design and Associated Mitigation Recommendations for Proposed Hotel Near to Page 7 Naples Municipal Airport June 13 2014 2. Finfrock and any future owners of the hotel will commit to maintaining the acoustical elements incorporated in the structure in satisfactory condition and without modification, to maintain the specified noise level reduction performance specified in this report. 3. Finfrock and any future owners will provide the Airport Authority the right to test the noise level reduction performance of the hotel at the completion of construction or at any future date, with reasonable notification and at the Authority's expense for the testing. 4. Finfrock and any future owners will, at their own expense, correct any deficiencies that the Airport Authority might identify at the completion of construction or at any future date. 5. Finfrock will provide the Airport Authority with an avigation easement containing terms and provisions satisfactory to the Authority conveying airspace rights over the hotel property, including, but not limited to, the right for overflights by aircraft operating at the airport and the right to expose the hotel property and tenants to noise associated with those overflights. The avigation easement on the property shall "run with the land" and apply to any future owners and tenants. 6. Finfrock and any future owners shall commit to posting a clearly legible notice in a prominent location in each hotel guest room alerting tenants of the proximity of the property to the airport, the likelihood of direct overflights by aircraft operating at the airport, the likelihood of noise exposure from airport operations, the fact that the hotel was built in a location where the Airport Authority and the City of Naples consider the use compatible with the expected level of aircraft noise exposure only under the condition that the noise exposure be mitigated, that acoustical design and construction elements were incorporated in the structure to provide that mitigation with a margin of safety (as proposed in Acoustical Design and Associated Mitigation Recommendations, dated June 13, 2014, by Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc.), and that the developer and owner (original and future) have provided the Authority an avigation easement over the property that precludes the developer, owner, and tenants from pursuing any recourse against the Authority for aircraft overflights and associated noise exposure in hotel guest rooms. 7. Finfrock and any future owners shall commit to posting a clearly legible notice in a prominent location on each sliding glass door in each hotel room with a request worded to the general effect that: "The hotel management requests that guests only open exterior doors when moving between the interior of their suite and their balcony (or patio, if that is the case), so as to respect the interests of guests in adjacent rooms to enjoy a quiet environment, free from exterior noise that may enter through an open door and pass through interior walls." G:\Projects\306XXX1306800_Naples_HoteAReportWaples-Hotel_Acoustical-Repor _HMMH_8.13-2014.doex Packet Pg. 89 OR 5119 PG 3652 9.A.1.d MODIFICATION HMMH has reviewed your revised window and door designs. I have attached three charts that present the results of our detailed acoustical analysis. Overall, the noise reduction performance for both larger and smaller sized windows is comparable to HMNIH's previously proposed window design and meets or exceeds our proposed STC and OITC ratings targets. In rooms with only windows and no balcony doors, this results in sound level reductions for aircraft noise events that are comparable to our previously proposed decibel reduction target and meet the NC 25 to NC 35 noise criteria curve range for appropriate background sound levels in hotel guest rooms. Given the conservative nature of our analysis and the total number of daily aircraft noise events, as well as the fact that sound levels only exceed the NC 35 limit in the hotel guest rooms that have balcony doors and only at the lowest frequencies of sound, we conclude that your revised window and door designs are acceptable and indicate a good faith effort to significantly reduce the overall aircraft noise exposure in hotel guest rooms. Ted Baldwin, Senior Vice President Harris Miller Miller & Hanson, Lie. Dated: October 14 2014 Exhibit C Page 1 of 5 J. Eric Cox, Senior Consultant Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. Dated: October 14 2014 Packet Pg. 90 VON - 6LLL000ZZOZ-ld : LOV9Z) aa;;a-1 Al!joy;nd:podaid saldeN - £ZOZ `£l. Ainp - 0 luowLPeuv :;uGw'43e;}d s jo Z a5pd a azazuXH 0 0 00 i v qp o 0 o 0 o I:L > 0 s x CL _ u U 0 ® O -L p d- L S ii L L y U ® _ r (o ® (/� V) C U0 tW > N 0 a u O ® O 0 ZS O C s Lf1 N .E tv 'a11 �_ V1 ao > L 0 L� i u U Ln O N O 1-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �o u7 =t Co N rH (up) SSOI uOISS]Lusueal rn 6) a a� U fC a ES9E od 6TTS aO MOON-6 LLOOOZ OZ d:L8 §Z Jmm] A!,omnV Komi¥ s @eN-CZOZ %LAi nr-o pmmioeu :ivawl4oeuv S ;o E abed a RTC QZE \ e � \ g O \ 5- % 0 \ § : R � e g U / % 0 a o - & \ / / k cr / � } k § � > § % u o f � � 5 b c $ \ k R o \ j : � \ / & % § § % % m \ � e . � 0 2 S / 9 R % % (,aM Squgssw2g1 q a � k a VS9E Dd 6 IS ao VON - 6LLL000ZZOZ-ld : LOV9Z) aa;;a-1 Al!joy;nd:podaid saldeN - £ZOZ `£l. Ain - 0 Juampeuv :;uGWLjoe;;d a gzgzuxH O O O 3 O °' c, 0 ca a O a>i o o -� 0 0 a� ` 3 L'0 ago m a ro � v O O O rq 0 - v a (v +� _ ® O � i U L L v •O N z .fie � i u U O O Ln V O O = O C C U LL LL z N W ' c o _0 w o m N > @ u GJ J co o N o O 0 N ® E E 0 0 L V ® b i °° �L N v U �L L17 rq iJ Q1 aJ 41 O U U C o q� i o m C S U L- LL m O) 0 d0 O O O O (L-d-OJ31W OZ ;aa sp) lana-1 aanssaad punoS iolaalul ' 1 I o I ' I 1 � I � ' I I ' 1 r 1 1 � 1 1 1 I � � 1 f v i 10 ' r4 •r{ ?C W / / 0 / / / / / / / / SS9F od 6TT5 NO *** OR 5119 PG 3656 *** 9.A.1.d Naples Hotel, Hotel unit window/door material make up 1011312014 Window materials to be equivalent to YKK YFW 400 TUH insulated impact fixed windows with 1 inch glass and YKK YPI 1500 access panel with inch annealed laminate glass applied to interior side. See cross section to the right. Terrace door material to be equivalent YKK YTD 350 TH impact door with 1 inch insulated impact glass and YKK YPI 1500 access panel with'/ inch annealed laminate glass applied to interior side. See cross section to the right. Terrace door side lite material to be equivalent to YKK YHC 300 insulated impact fixed window and YKK YPI 1500 access panel with % inch annealed laminate glass applied to interior side. See cross section to the right. end Exhibit C Page 5 of 5 Packet Pg. 94 9.A.1.e Rock Creek Estates RPUD Collier County Rezone to PUD Application (PUDZ) PUDZ-PL20220001779 COLLIER COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION PACKAGE I v packet fig. �5 9.A.1.e N Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 PUDZ APPLICATION Packet Pg. 96 COAT County 9.A.1.e COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliercounty.gov 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Application for a Public Hearing for PUD Rezone, Amendment to PUD of PUD to PUD Rezone PETITION NO PROJECT NAME To be completed by staff DATE PROCESSED ❑■ PUD Rezone (PUDZ): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F., Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code ❑ Amendment to PUD (PUDA): LDC subsection 10.02.13 E. and Ch. 3 G. 2 of the Administrative Code ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone (PUDR): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F. APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): ELAH Holdings, LLC, Erik Mogelvang Name of Applicant if different than owner: Address: 2590 Golden Gate Pkwy City: Naples Telephone: State: FL ZIP: 34105 Cell:239-272-7774 Fax: E-Mail Address: Erik@floridaprime.com Name of Agent: Josephine Medina, AICP & Richard Yovanovich, Esq. Firm: RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture /Cole man,Yovanovich,Koester Address: 28100 Bonita Grande Drive #305 City: Bonita Springs State: FL ZIP: 34135 Telephone: 2399083421 Cell:9543760378 Fax: E-Mail Address: Jmedina@rviplanning.com /ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com Be aware that Collier County has lobbyist regulations. Guide yourself accordingly and ensure that you are in compliance with these regulations. March 4, 2020 Page 1 of 11 Packet Pg. 97 9.A.1.e COAT County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercounty.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 REZONE REQUEST This application is requesting a rezone from: Agricultural (A) Zoning district(s) to the RPUD zoning district(s). Present Use of the Property: Single Family Residential & Private Recreation Building Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Single Family Residential Original PUD Name: N/A Ordinance No.: N/A PROPERTY INFORMATION On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: • If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include a separate legal description for property involved in each district; • The applicant shall submit 4 copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale), if required to do so at the pre -application meeting; and • The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Section/Township/Range: 0�5�25 Lot: Block: Subdivision: Metes & Bounds Description: Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: 00386760404 Size of Property: _ ft. x ft. = Total Sq. Ft. Acres: 11.36 Address/ General Location of Subject Property: 2250 North Road Along the south side of North Road and West Aiport Pulling Road PUD District (refer to LDC subsection 2.03.06 Q ❑ Commercial ❑■ Residential ❑ Community Facilities ❑ Mixed Use ❑ Other: ❑ Industrial March 4, 2020 Page 2 of 11 Packet Pg. 98 COAT County 9.A.1.e COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliercounty.gov 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning Land Use N City of Naples - Airport Commercial (C-4) Naples Municipal Airport S RMF-6 & RSF-4 Urban Residential Subdistrict (UR)/ Single -Family Dwellings E Agricultural (A) Urban Resdiential Subdistrict (UR)/ Single -Family Dwellings W Agricultural (A) Urban Residentiall Subdistrict (UR)/ Single -Family Dwellings If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal description of the entire contiguous property on a separate sheet attached to the application. Section/Township/Range: ?__j5�25 Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book: 5901 page #: 3946 property I.D. Number: 00386760404 Metes & Bounds Description: See attached Survey with Legal Description ASSOCIATIONS Required: List all registered Home Owner Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner's website at http://www.colliergov.net/]ndex.aspx?page=774. Name of Homeowner Association: Naples Brookside Homeowners Association, Inc. Mailing Address: 2000 Harbor Lane City: Naples State: FL Zip: 31404 Name of Homeowner Association: The Waterfront in Naples Condominium Association, Inc. Mailing Address. Florida Coastal Association Manag...nt3806 Exchange Ave Name of Homeowner Association: City: Naples State: FL Zip: 31404 Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: Q Name of Homeowner Association: :r Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: c E �a Name of Homeowner Association: r Q Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: March 4, 2020 Page 3 of 11 Packet Pg. 99 9.A.1.e Co*er Count y COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercounty.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 EVALUATION CRITERIA Pursuant to LDC subsections 10.02.13 B, 10.02.08 F and Chapter 3 G. of the Administrative Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria. On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. a. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. b. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. C. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. (This is to include identifying what Sub -district, policy or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that Sub -district, policy or other provision.) d. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. h. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. March 4, 2020 Page 4 of 11 Packet Pg. 100 COAT County 9.A.1.e COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliercounty.gov 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? N/A Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? ❑ Yes ❑■ No if so please provide copies. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS This land use petition requires a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), pursuant to Chapter 3 E, of the Administrative Code and LDC section 10.03.06. Following the NIM, the applicant will submit a written summary and any commitments that have been made at the meeting. Refer to Chapter 8 B. of the Administrative Code for the NIM procedural requirements. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately. RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer (specify name) at their expense shall record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the recording requirements of Chapter 695, FS. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the Collier County Planned Unit Development Monitoring staff within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. LDC subsection 10.02.08 D This application will be considered "open" when the determination of "sufficiency" has been made and the application is assigned a petition processing number. The application will be considered "closed" when the petitioner withdraws the application through written notice or ceases to supply necessary information to continue processing or otherwise actively pursue the rezoning, amendment or change, for a period of 6 months. An application deemed "closed" will not receive further processing and an application "closed" through inactivity shall be deemed withdrawn. An application deemed "closed" may be re -opened by submission of a new application, repayment of all application fees and the grant of a determination of "sufficiency". Further review of the request will be subject to the then current code. March 4, 2020 Page 5 of 11 Packet Pg. 101 9.A.1.e COAT County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercounty.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): ELAH Holdings, LLC Address: 2590 Golden Gate Pkwy, #106 city: Naples Telephone: Cell: 239-272-7774 E-Mail Address: Erik@floridaprime.com Address of Subject Property (If available): 2250 North Road city: Naples State: FL ZIP: 34104 PROPERTY INFORMATION Section/Township/Range: Lot: Block: Subdivision: Metes & Bounds Description: Plat Book: Page #: State: FL Fax: Property I.D. Number: 00386760404 TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System ❑ b. City Utility System x❑ C. Franchised Utility System ❑ Provide Name: City Of Naples d. Package Treatment Plant ❑ (GPD Capacity): e. Septic System ❑ ZIP: 34105 I TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED I Check applicable system: a. County Utility System ❑ b. City Utility System 0 C. Franchised Utility System ❑ d. Private System (Well) ❑ Provide Name: City of Naples Total Population to be Served: 28 people (15 units x 1.81= 27.1) Peak and Average Daily Demands: A. Water -Peak: 5,175 GDP Average Daily: 4,312 GDP B. Sewer -Peak: Average Daily: If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: December 2023 March 4, 2020 Page 6 of 11 Packet Pg. 102 9.A.1.e Co*er Count y COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercounty.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. N/A Collier County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of Collier County's utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. N/A Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre -application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. March 4, 2020 Page 7 of 11 Packet Pg. 103 Co*er County 9.A.1.e COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliercounty.gov Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: ❑ PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code ❑ Amendment to PUD- Ch. 3 G. 2 of the Administrative Code ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre -Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with an up-to-date application. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. A Model PUD Document is available online at http://www.colliercountyfl.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=76983. REQUIREMENTS COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of why amendment is necessary 1 ❑ ❑ Completed Application with required attachments (download latest version) 1 Pre -application meeting notes 1 ❑ 0 Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 1 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Warranty Deed(s) 1 0 ❑ List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation 1 0 ❑ Signed and sealed Boundary Survey 1 0 ❑ Architectural Rendering of proposed structures 1 ❑ ❑ Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. 1 ❑ ❑ Statement of Utility Provisions 1 ❑ ❑ Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 1 ❑ ❑ Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner at time of public hearings. ❑ ❑ ❑ Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys. 1 ❑ ❑ Traffic Impact Study 1 El ❑ Historical Survey 1 ❑ ❑ School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable 1 0 ❑ Electronic copy of all required documents 1 0 ❑ Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional information)' ❑ 0 ❑ List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each (this document is separate from Exhibit E) ❑ ❑ ❑ Checklist continues on next page March 4, 2020 Page 9 of 11 Packet Pg. 104 COAT County 9.A.1.e COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliercounty.gov 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x 36"and One 8 %" x 11" copy ❑ ❑ 0 Original PUD document/ordinance, and Master Plan 24" x 36" — Only if Amending the PUD ❑ ❑ 0 Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru & underlined 1 ❑ 0 Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification 1 ❑ 0 *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal requirement 'The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet: Exhibit A: List of Permitted Uses Exhibit B: Development Standards Exhibit C: Master Plan- See Chapter 3 E. 1. of the Administrative Code Exhibit D: Legal Description Exhibit E: List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239- 690-3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan." PLANNERS — INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart El conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson ❑ Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey ❑■ Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams (Director) x❑ Emergency Management: Dan Summers ❑ Immokalee Water/Sewer District: ❑■ City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director ❑ Other: ❑■ City of Naples Utilities ❑ Other: ASSOCIATED FEES FOR APPLICATION Pre -Application Meeting: $500.00 PUD Rezone: $10,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre PUD to PUD Rezone: $8,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre PUD Amendment: $6,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $2,250.00 Environmental Data Requirements -EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre -application meeting): $2,500.00 Listed or Protected Species Review (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00 Transportation Review Fees: o Methodology Review: $500.00 *Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting. o Minor Study Review: $750.00 o Major Study Review $1,500.00 March 4, 2020 Page 10 of 11 Packet Pg. 105 Co*er Count y 9.A.1.e COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliercounty.gov Legal Advertising Fees: o CCPC: $1,125.00 o BCC: $500.00 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 School Concurrency Fee, if applicable: o Mitigation Fees, if application, to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County Fire Code Plans Review Fees are not listed, but are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. *Additional fee for the 5' and subsequent re -submittal will be accessed at 20% of the original fee. 3��- 01 /12/2023 Signature o - ner or Agent Date Josephine Medina Printed named of signing party March 4, 2020 Page 11 of 11 Packet Pg. 106 Department of State / Division of Corporations / Search Records / Search by Entity Name / Detail by Entity Name Florida Limited Liability Company ELAH HOLDINGS LLC Filing Information Document Number L16000066017 FEI/EIN Number 81-2296553 Date Filed 04/04/2016 Effective Date 03/29/2016 State FL Status ACTIVE Principal Address 2590 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY SUITE 106 NAPLES, FL 34105 Mailing Address 2590 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY SUITE 106 NAPLES, FL 34105 Registered Agent Name & Address BRYANT,BRADLEY 4851 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH SUITE 300 NAPLES, FL 34103 Authorized Persons) Detail Name & Address Title MGR MOGELVANG, ERIK 2590 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2020 03/04/2020 2021 03/09/2021 2022 01 /26/2022 .r a Packet Pg. 107 1 Document Images 01/26/2022 -- ANNUAL REPORT 03/09/2021 --ANNUAL REPORT 03/04/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT 03/19/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT 01/29/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format View image in PDF format View image in PDF format View image in PDF format View image in PDF format 01/17/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/04/2016 -- Florida Limited Liability View image in PDF format Packet Pg. 108 INSTR 6011924 OR 5901 PG 3946 RECORDED 3/3/2021 2:43 PM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC@.70 $7,735.00 REC $18.50 CONS $1,105,000.00 9.A.1.e Prepared by: Florida Prime Realty, LLC 2590 Golden Gate Pkwy, Ste 106 Naples FL 34105 239-417-2222 Consideration: $1,10! [Prepared without ext title] Above This Line For Recording Date $" x Warranty Deed This Warranty Deed made this -Lsay of February 2021 between Mogelvang Group, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose post office addresis,iak2590 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 106, Naples, FL 34105, grantor, to ELAH Holdings, LLC, a Florida li' ited liability company, whose address is 2590 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 106, Naples, FL 34105, gr1 , 1 e "' {whenever used herein the terms "grantor" and' of individuals, and the successors and assigns of Witnessi th, that said grantor, for and in considerat consideration to said grantor in hand paid by said gra bargained, and sold to the said grantee, and grantee's lying and being in Collier County, Florida to -wit: Parcel Identification Number: 00386760404 parties to this instrument and the heirs, legal representatives, and assigns trustees} of $1,105,000.00 and other good and valuable pt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, gns forever, the following described land situate, A certain lot or parcel of land located in Section 2, Tow.srshi 0 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, further bounded and described as follow ; Ca meacing at the center of said Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier Count i- lorida; thence along the North and South '/, line of said Section 2, S 0 degrees 26120" E 30.00 feet t"he ,Southerly right-of-way line of North Road and a concrete monument for a Place of Beginning; iEhenc along said right-of-way N 89 degrees 38110" E 664.90 feet, to the East line of the West'/Z of Lot 2, Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little Farms Number 2, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page,,2' , ofithe Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence along said East line and its extension S 0 d�grees 32'15" E 641.80 feet to a concrete monument; thence continuing S 0 degrees 32115" E 20 feetnmore or less to the Approximate Mean High Water line of Rock Creek; thence meanderingaloug id Approximate Mean High Water line Southwesterly, Westerly, Northwesterly and Southeasterly to, the North and South'/4 line of said Section 2; thence along said North and South'/< line N 0. degree"6'20" W 184.00 more or less to a concrete monument; thence continuing N 0 degrees 26120" W 645.56 feet to the Place of Beginning. Lying in the West %2 of Lot 21, the West''/Z of Lot 22, and that part of the West %z of Lot 23 lying North of Rock Creek of said Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little Farms No. 2. A/K/A 2250 North Road, Naples FL 34104 Grantor warrants that at the time of this conveyance, the subject property is not the Grantor's homestead within the meaning set forth in the constitution of the state of Florida, nor is it contiguous to or a part of homestead property. Packet Pg. 109 *** OR 5901 PG 3947 *** 9.A.1.e Together with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. To Have and to Hold, the same in fee simple forever. And the grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawfully seized of said land in fee simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land; that the grantor hereby fully warrants the title to saicland and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; and that said land is free 44 Ac titnbrances, except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31, 2020. In Witness Whereof, grantoil*-,, hereunto set grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written. Vf Signed, sealed and delivered in our , L-Y 4�41- Witness Name: L4,54A L State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1st day of of Mogelvang Group, LLC, on behalf of the corporation. The [_] is p driver's license as identification. [Notary Seal] oti o ••., NIKOLINAOIMITROVA a • • o NotaryPubk — State of Flodda • commission # GG 170734 My Comm. Expires Mar 23, 2022 8onded'h—,nhNa5ona:Notary Assn . irik Mogelvang, Manager me or [X] has produced a Packet Pg. 110 9.A.1.e N Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 NARRATIVE OF REZONE Packet Pg. 111 9.A.1.e November 18, 2022 Mr. Tim Finn Growth Management Department Zoning Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 RE: Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUD Rezone — PL2022001779 Dear Tim: RVI Planning + Landscape Architecture is pleased to submit this PUD Rezoning Application on behalf of our client, ELAH Holdings, LLC c/o Erik Mogelvang, for a property at 2250 North r Road generally located on the south side of North Road across the street from Terminal Drive c to the Naples Airport in unincorporated Collier County, Florida. The subject property is N approximately 11.36 +/- acres in size. The request is to rezone the Property from Agricultural N (A) to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to allow for the development of a 15- a unit single-family residential subdivision containing private recreational amenity and boat ramp with up to 15 private boat slips. v N EXISTING CONDITIONS & SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT •L The property is zoned Agricultural (A) which requires a minimum lot size of 217,800 square? feet, or 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres, resulting in a maximum of 2 dwelling units permitted on this 11.36-acre site. The property has a future land use designation of Urban, Mixed Use, Urban Residential Subdistrict which allows for a maximum density of 33 units or 3 dwelling units per acre (3 du/ac). m The property as well as the adjacent developments are located within the Airport Overlay c (APO), as well as within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA). CU 2 .Q a The Property is vegetated, with a mobile home, large garage, and carport currently Q constructed on the property and is adjacent to Rock Creek (southern boundary). Access to 0 the property is currently gained via North Road, a two-lane local roadway. a� SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT The Property is generally surrounded by single-family developments to the east and west and Q to the south. A portion of the property abuts a multifamily development to the south across Rock Creek. The Naples Municipal Airport is directly north of the Property. Further to the east E and west of the subject property along North Road is a multi -family development and a recreational vehicle park. Surrounding properties are further described below: Q RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Sutie 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239. • www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 112 9.A.1.e TABLE 1: INVENTORY OF SURROUNDING LANDS Future Land Use Zoning Existing Land Use North — City Airport Airport Commercial (C4) North Road (ROW)/ of Naples Naples Municipal Airport South Urban Residential Residential Multi -Family (RMF-6); Rock Creek/Single- Subdistrict Residential Single Family (RSF-4) and Multi- Family Dwellings East Urban Residential Agriculture (A) Single -Family Subdistrict Dwellings West Urban Residential Agriculture (A) Single -Family Subdistrict Dwellings North: North Road, a two-lane undivided local road, makes up the northern boundary of the property. Directly across is the Southern Quadrant of the Naples Municipal Airport whose access road, Terminal Drive, aligns with the northeast corner of the Property. Airport facilities north of the Property include airport parking area and commercial airline terminal facilities. South: Rock Creek makes up the southern boundary of the Property. Across the creek are mostly traditional, older, standard zoned single-family subdivision of densities ranging from 2 du/acre to 3.5 du/acre. On the creek are larger lots while density increases south of the Creekside properties. West: Abutting to the west is a single-family home on Agricultural zoned land that occupies 5+/- acres. The next project west is similar on nearly 6 acres. After the two agriculturally zoned single-family homes is a 10.1+/- acre parcel that has been zoned RMF-6 and is occupied by 30 coach homes with boats slips and dock on the creek. East: Abutting to the east is a single-family subdivision on Preacher Court made up of larger lots ranging from 0.2 acres to 1.50 acre parcels that is Agriculture zoned and are non- conforming lots. The next property east is the 11+/- acre Northtide RV Resort zoned TTRVC with densities exceeding 5 units per acre. The property has RV leasing spaces and park models along with typical amenities. It abuts Airport -Pulling Road. As outlined below the Applicant is proposing development of 15 single-family detached dwelling units, at an approximate density of 1.3 du/acre. This density is appropriate considering the below analysis of the Growth Management Plan, as well as the surrounding land use pattern, and well below the maximum permitted density of 3 du/acre to further ensure compatibility with surrounding single-family homes. GMP CONSISTENCY The Property is in the Urban — Mixed Use Future Land Use Category and the Urban Residential Subdistrict (UR). 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. 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. RV Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 2 of 8 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Cover Letter — Request Narrative Packet Pg. 113 9.A.1.e The property is also in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA). According to Policy B — Density Rating System — within the Urban Designated Areas, a base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed. However, Policy B.3.a. specifies that if the project lies within the Coastal High Hazard Area, one dwelling unit per gross acre shall be subtracted from the eligible base density of four dwelling units per acre. The base density permitted for the Property is 3 dwelling units per acre (3 du/ac) which equals 33 units on the 11.36-acre parcel. The Rock Creek Estates RPUD will be fully compliant with the Growth Management Plan proposing only 1.3 dwelling units per acre (1.3 du/ac) which equals 15 units on the 11.36- acre property. The density is less than 50% of the maximum permissible density which enhances this project's consistency with the neighborhood and provisions to density limit in the CHHA. The RPUD will allow for the development of single-family housing in the Urban Service Area in a manner that protects the residential character of development along North Road, which contains a dynamic mix of low -density single-family lots, mobile home park, and multi -family development. Specifically, the proposed RPUD is consistent with the following adopted policies: FLUE Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code. The proposed RPUD community will be compatible and complementary to the surrounding single-family residential area by providing for an extension of single-family development on i ' I i 77 ------- ■ , ESA Generalised Existing Lend _ m use i II �Y Agn-M. Cnmmerciel - Lodging f' - ('r �Commenial-Office �: + e � Commercial - fteleiuservicee _ _ �l du iaulAs,uracn,dng MI-AuinnallPublic S IAuoed-Ilse - Commerdal and -' Residential Open` Al �"y t Open Spaaa7Dutd Cityof J g`_1 =oor R—lion Naples ,I ■ ■ ❑ri it '� -Reaidenliel- Mobile Home '� y ■ _� �Residemim-Mule-Famiry f in f Reside nlie l- Single Family TranaporteGonlUtiliry W • L- I __JVa nVUnd-eloped © Hospital Numing'Conveasoent Home Liomry Nsbnd Red eHsmric n.�ea PleLand Resa ource QONL Contour =Runw ya • • •. I ! r' ' ! I. _:Airport Propen y an W6001111111111 AN ftoade f ■ HSh — —y 7 r + • Anerjai Road ^} �` Subject _ - '~ _tir Pfoperty collector Road ❑ t O • r r r 1 Local Road Z� N Feel or � � � ■ � RivedStream SOURCE: AEOT 3c; Cdfier C—Ay Appmi3ef3 Olioe, 2020; Ciy of Naples Airport AuUnrity, 2020; Adapted by ESA, 2321. Naples Al rport 14 CIF Part 150 Shcdy Figure 1 RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture i 3 of 8 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Cover Letter — Request Narrative Packet Pg. 114 9.A.1.e this infill parcel in a manner that is consistent with the adjacent communities. The RPUD development standards provide height and setbacks that are compatible with adjacent land uses. The local area, as it has developed, is not an appropriate location for agricultural activities and it is highly urbanized with moderate density residential and airport services. The Naples Municipal Airport across the street has runways that do not directly impact the property, so noise zones and flight patterns have not restricted residential development in the area as shown in Figure 1. The density and types of the development on the south side of North Road are varied ranging from a 5+ unit per acre RV Resort to the east to Airport -Pulling Road and the Waterfront coach homes at 3 units per acre and then scattered single-family lots abutting on both sides. The existing zoning only allows for 1 unit per 5 acres which is inconsistent with the type and density of development on North Road and south across Rock Creek which includes more traditional single-family subdivisions and multifamily developments. The requested zoning has development parameters that would allow the property to be developed to its potential of 15 units and be more consistent with surrounding styles of development. Below is a detailed analysis of the surrounding land uses. North: Directly across North Road is the access to Naples Municipal Airport. Terminal Drive access aligns with the northeast corner of the Property. South: Rock Creek makes up the southern boundary of the Property. Across the creek is a multifamily development that is surrounded by mostly older and traditional single- family subdivision of densities ranging from 2 du/acre to 3.5 du/acre. West: Abutting to the west is a single-family home on Agricultural zoned land that occupies 5+/- acres. The next project west is similar on nearly 6 acres. After the two agriculturally zoned single-family homes is a 10.1+/- acre parcel that has been zoned RMF-6 and is occupied by 30 coach homes with boats slips and dock on the creek. East: Abutting to the east is a single-family subdivision on Preacher Court made up of larger lots ranging from 0.2 acres to 1.50-acre parcels that is Agriculture zoned and are non -conforming lots. The next property east is the 11+/- acre Northtide RV Resort zoned TTRVC with densities exceeding 5 units per acre. The property has RV leasing spaces and park models along with typical amenities. It abuts Airport -Pulling Road. FLUE Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The RPUD will be accessed via North Road, a two-lane undivided local road, connecting residents to the collector and arterial roadway network via Airport Pulling Road, a six -lane divided arterial road to the east of the Property. FLUE Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 4 of 8 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Cover Letter — Request Narrative Packet Pg. 115 9.A.1.e The RPUD development pattern will have an insignificant impact on nearby collector and arterial roads. Due to the size of the site and the proposed layout of the project, looping will not be possible within the development. FLUE Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. Due to the previous development of large single-family lots on both sides of the development surrounding, interconnection of the streets from adjoining neighborhoods will not be possible or appropriate. FLUE Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. The RPUD proposes a 5-foot sidewalk on one side of each street consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.A.2. The sidewalks provide residents with walkability within the project and connect to North Road. A common open space area will be provided for the subject development and open space will be provided in accordance with the GMP and LDC. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT/JUSTIFICATION The proposed RPUD development will permit residential density at a level that would be compatible with surrounding densities and meet the County's identified goals of providing for new development within established urban areas with adequate infrastructure, particularly along arterial corridors. The Agricultural zoning district is no longer appropriate considering the surrounding urbanized development pattern in the area. The RPUD master plan demonstrates residential development tracts will be accessed via a private internal roadway system from North Road. Tract A is proposed to be accessed from an existing driveway access from North Road. Tract A will consist of private recreational amenity in the form of indoor active recreation like basketball/shuffle courts, passive recreational uses and private garage. Tract A is not intended to serve as an amenity center for the residential tracts to the east of this development as further exemplified by the lack of access from the eastern PUD to this tract. Tract A will also have the option to develop a maximum of one (1) single-family detached dwelling unit. A maximum of 15 single-family detached dwellings at a density of 1.3 du/acre are proposed for the entire project including the optional residential unit permitted within Tract A. The option to develop a single-family home on Tract A will not result in incompatibility issues with the private recreation amenity uses permitted within Tract A. In the case that a residential dwelling unit is developed within Tract A the private recreation amenity uses will serve similar to an accessory use to the residential use. The residential dwelling unit user within Tract A will have sole control over Tract A including any private recreational amenity uses allowed. A 40-foot-wide right-of-way is proposed due to the relatively low traffic volume in this small residential single-family subdivision. The right-of-way can accommodate a sidewalk, utilities, and drainage. The internal looped/curvilinear roadway system itself was developed in a RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 5 of 8 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Cover Letter — Request Narrative Packet Pg. 116 9.A.1.e manner to help reduce speeding within the development to allow for a more walkable community and safe community; a reduced right-of-way width will only further this intent. As shown on the PUD master plan's cross section, the right-of-way can accommodate a sidewalk, utilities, and drainage. Due to the project location and the surrounding area, the RPUD will not have connective access to areas outside of the project boundary. Within the project boundary, internal pedestrian connectivity will be provided via a 5-foot-wide sidewalk on one side of the right-of- way. Buffers are provided in compliance with the LDC including the 10-foot-wide Type D buffer along North Road, 10-foot-wide Type A buffers adjacent to the East and West property lines, 15-foot Type B buffer adjacent to the Western property line along the Residential & Private Recreational Amenity Tract and the existing mangrove vegetation preserve area identified in the PUD Master Plan will be preserved to serve as a buffer along the southern property line where the proposed single-family development abuts multi -family and single-family developments across Rock Creek. The northern buffer will be supplemented via an optional 6-10-foot-tall, proposed fence/wall along the property boundary to reduce any anticipated noise or light pollution from the adjacent Airport uses. The Applicant is requesting to be allowed a 7.5-foot-wide Type B buffer meeting the minimum number of required plantings of a 15-foot Type B buffer within the 7.5-foot-wide buffer strip to ensure appropriate screening and noise abatement between uses, instead of the LDC code required 15-foot-wide Type B buffer between internal Residential/Private Amenity (Tract A). No active outdoor recreational uses are proposed for Tract A all proposed active recreational uses are to be indoors. Open space will be provided in accordance with the GMP and LDC to uphold the County's intent for attractive, well -planned, and compatible development. A private boat ramp is proposed along the southwest corner of the RPUD and up to 15 private boat slips along Rock Creek on the south side of the site. Both the boat ramp and the boat slips are for the sole use of the RPUD residents. This will allow for residents to be able to enjoy ease of access to their boats for travel and maintenance purposes. Due to the private residential nature of the boat ramp use and the small number of residential units proposed for this development a deviation from the LDC parking requirement for boat ramps is being requested to allow for no boat trailer or vehicular parking to be required. The proposed PUD Master Plan and associated development standards for the residential units are compatible and consistent with the height and setbacks approved for similar residential projects in the immediate area. ENVIRONMENTAL: As outlined in the Environmental Report prepared by Marco Espinar, the entire site has been impacted by homesteading and exotic vegetation. The site itself contains a mobile home, a large garage, as well as past remnant fence and fence posts from previous use of animal husbandry on the property, and some areas with soil disturbance. Most of the site is vegetated by a dense canopy, midstory, and ground cover of nuisance and exotic plants. There are some native trees scattered throughout the site such as slash pines, live and laurel oaks and cabbage palms. Along the southern boundary of the property where the property abuts Rock Creek the area is vegetated by mangroves with pockets of exotics along the shoreline. RV Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 6 of 8 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Cover Letter — Request Narrative Packet Pg. 117 9.A.1.e Per the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS), 438 Mixed Hardwoods Exotics Dominated and 612 Mangroves — Shorebank land uses were identified on the property. Pursuant to Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) and in accordance with LDC Section 3.05.07.B.1 residential developments located within the CHHA and are equal to or greater than 2.5 acres are required to retain at least 25% native vegetation. The site consists of 0.52 acres of native vegetation communities along the Rock Creek shore bank and is required to retain 0.13 acres (0.52 x 25% = 0.13). The location of the boat ramp and portions of the boat dock are anticipated to impact 0.01 acres of the native vegetation community along the Rock Creek shore bank. The applicant is proposing to far exceed the native preservation requirement and maintain 0.51 acres or 98% of the existing native vegetation community on site. The listed species survey conducted on the property documented no listed species within the Property and the development will be compliant with the CCME Objective 7.1 which directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL: On June 17, 2022, the Historical/Archeological Preservation Board (HAPB) reviewed and approved a waiver request by the applicant from the requirement of a Cultural & Archaeological Assessment. The approval was based on aerial evidence provided that showed the entire site had been previously disturbed. Due to the subject property's proximity to the creek the approved waiver from the HAPB was subject to the condition that should any cultural materials or remains be found during the excavation process, the developer must contact an archeologist. The HAPB condition has been incorporated by the Applicant into the provided PUD document. Furthermore, a letter from the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, indicates no significant archaeological or historical sites are recorded or likely to be present within the subject property. INFRASTRUCTURE: Access to the subject property is proposed to be provided via two access points to North Road. The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) prepared by TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. included an assumption of 15 single-family units only, in order to provide a worst -case scenario, and demonstrates no roadway segments show a significant impact as a result of the development of traffic being added to the roadway network. Potable water and sanitary sewer are available and able to be supplied by the City of Naples Utilities, as per the provided availability letter dated March 3, 2022. Drainage and stormwater management systems will be designed according to the LDC. CONCLUSION: In summary, the proposed rezoning request will change the "default" Agricultural zoning designation to a Planned Unit Development to allow up to 15 residential units at a density that is more consistent with the GMP. The lower density development allowed by the current Agricultural zoning would result in a maximum of 2 units permitted for this site which is RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 7 of 8 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Cover Letter — Request Narrative Packet Pg. 118 9.A.1.e inconsistent with the implementation of the Urban Residential Subdistrict land use category. The proposed single-family RPUD development is compatible and consistent with the surrounding area and meets the LDC requirements. The design will ensure a well -planned, attractive neighborhood in an area well served by public infrastructure and services. Should you require additional information or have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly at (239) 908-3421 or jmedina(a�rviplanninq.com. Sincerely, RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture (3 - Josephine Medina, AicP, LEED Green Associate Project Manager RV Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 8 of 8 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Cover Letter — Request Narrative Packet Pg. 119 9.A.1.e N Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 REZONE EVALUATION CRITERIA 10.02.08. F Packet Pg. 120 9.A.1.e ROCK CREEK ESTATES EVALUATION CRITERIA REZONE CONSIDERATIONS (LDC SECTION 10.02.08.F) Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and future land use map, and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. The Residential Planned Development (RPUD) as proposed by this application is consistent with the future land use designation of Urban, Mixed -Use, Urban Residential (UR) and Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) designation and will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies as applicable in the Future Lands Use Element (FLUE) and all other Elements of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). 2. The existing land use pattern The proposed RPUD would permit a low -density single-family development in a manner that protects the existing residential pattern which consists of a dynamic mixture of residential uses of low -density single-family lots, multifamily developments and a mobile home park. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The request is to rezone the property from Agricultural (A) to RPUD which would not create an isolated district unrelated to nearby districts and would be in line with the residential zoning district nearby such as the RSF-4 and RMF-6 to the west and south of the property. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The proposed PUD boundaries have been logically drawn and appropriate to the existing conditions on the property. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The local area, as it has developed, is not an appropriate location for agricultural activities allowed under the current A zoning district as it is surrounded by various residential developments. Furthermore, it simply no longer makes sense for this highly urbanized area with moderate density residential and airport services to be limited to 1 du/ 5 acres a density that is more appropriate for a more rural area of the county that is not within the Urban Service Area where development should be concentrated. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Sutie 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239. • www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 121 9.A.1.e 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The property is being proposed to be developed as low -density single- family homes that are compatible with adjacent uses. Furthermore, RPUD development standards provide height and setbacks that are compatible with adjacent land uses. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. Access to the subject property is proposed to be provided via two access points to North Road. The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) prepared by TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. included an assumption of 15 single-family units only, in order to provide a worst -case scenario, and demonstrates no roadway segments show a significant impact as a result of the development of traffic being added to the roadway network. The type of traffic along North Road consists primarily of residential traffic except Naples Municipal Airport to the north. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. No drainage problems will be created by this development. Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage will be addressed through Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). Evaluation of the stormwater management system and design criteria will be reviewed by the county at the time of SDP. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed development standards assure that the development does not seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The RPD proposes a maximum density of 1.3 du/acre consisting of no more than 15 single-family homes at a maximum height of 45 feet. The proposed development will meet or exceed perimeter landscape buffering, and open space requirements and will be preserving over 98% of the existing southern mangrove area adjacent to Rock Creek. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. The proposed development will not adversely affect the property values in the adjacent area. The proposed development will provide for low -density high -quality single-family detached homes with a private boat dock and boat ramp. Currently, the property consists of an existing warehouse and mobile home. Furthermore, the property is currently zoned A which would allow for the property to be used for agricultural activities incompatible with the surrounding residential uses which could adversely affect the property values in the adjacent area. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 2 of 4 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Evaluation Criteria Packet Pg. 122 9.A.1.e 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Most of the properties adjacent to the proposed RPUD are already developed and due to the type of residential use being proposed by the Applicant, it is quite unlikely that this development will be a deterrent to the development or redevelopment of any property with existing regulations. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The proposed development will grant special privileges to the property owner as contrasted with public welfare but instead will allow the property to be more in line with the intent of the Urban Residential Subdistrict's future land use designation to provide for higher densities in an area with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The property can be used in accordance with its existing zoning but this would not be the highest and best use of the property. Currently, the existing zoning district allows for agricultural activities which are not compatible with how the surrounding residential area has developed. The maximum density permitted by the existing zoning district is 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres and though the property can and is developed this way it is not the best use of the existing infrastructure already in place in this area. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The proposed rezoning is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The proposed change provides for additional dwelling units within an urbanized area of the county and makes use of existing infrastructure already in place to accommodate the additional units at an appropriate density of 1.3 du/acre that retains the residential character of the neighborhood. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. It may be possible to find other sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such uses however these sites are further limited to sites that have access to waterways. The proposed development would provide for the highest and best use of the site while keeping the intensity of the development at an appropriate scale and intensity in line with the existing residential character along North Road and across from Rock Creek. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 3 of 4 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Evaluation Criteria Packet Pg. 123 9.A.1.e The site alterations that are needed to make the property usable for the proposed range of potential uses are common to any other single-family residential development with private boat docks in Collier County. It should be noted that the Applicant is proposing to preserve approximately 0.51 acres or 98% of the existing native vegetation community on the site. The project itself will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes, and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended. The proposed development will result in adequate public facilities and services that are consistent with the LOS adopted in the GMPA. The project will have two access points along North Road. The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) prepared by TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. included an assumption of 15 single-family units only, in order to provide a worst -case scenario, and demonstrates no roadway segments show a significant impact as a result of the development of traffic being added to the roadway network. Potable water and sanitary sewer are available and able to be supplied by the City of Naples Utilities, as per the provided availability letter dated March 3, 2022. Drainage and stormwater management systems will be designed according to the LDC. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of public health, safety, and welfare. Shall be determined by the Board of County Commissioners. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 4 of 4 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Evaluation Criteria Packet Pg. 124 9.A.1.e Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 PUD REZONE EVALUATION CRITERIA 10.02.13.13 Packet Pg. 125 9.A.1.e � V ROCK CREEK ESTATES EVALUATION CRITERIA PUD REZONE CONSIDERATIONS (LDC SECTION 10.02.13.13) a. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. The Estates at Rock Creek RPUD ("Property") is located in an area of existing and planned urban development within the County's Urban -designated area. The Property is an infill development ideally located within the Urban Mixed Use -Urban Residential future land use category. As outlined in the PUD Rezone application, the Applicant is proposing a site -specific Planned Unit Development to accommodate the proposed development program and density. The subject property is located in an urbanized portion of the County as evidenced by the property's proximity to Airport -Pulling Road, a six -lane arterial roadway, and Davis Boulevard, a six -lane arterial roadway. The Property is also proximate to existing and approved urban levels of development including the Naples Municipal Airport, as well as major public facilities including parks, schools, hospitals, and libraries. The Property is northwest and southwest of designated Mixed -Use Activity Centers, which is specifically intended for concentrated commercial and mixed -use development due to access to the arterial roadway network and available public services. Activity Center #14 at the intersection of Goodlette Frank Road and Golden Gate Parkway and includes a mixture of commercial and institutional uses. Activity Center #16 at the intersection of US-41 and Airport Pulling with a diverse mix of commercial, civic facilities and residential uses. Directly to the east of the subject property is a single-family home subdivision made of lots ranging from 0.2 acres to 1.50 acre parcels. To the west along North Road is a 10.1-acre site that has been zoned RMF-6 and is occupied by 30 coach homes with boat slips and docks on the Creek at a density. In terms of traffic, the subject property will be accessed via North Road which connects to Airport -Pulling Road, as depicted on the Location Map. As outlined in the Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) prepared by TR Transportation Airport -Pulling Road and North Road is shown to have adequate capacity under the projected traffic conditions to serve the project. The Property is located within the City of Naples potable water and sanitary sewer service area and water and wastewater service are readily available via existing RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Sutie 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239. • www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 126 9.A.1.e facilities. A statement of availability from the City of Naples Public Utilities Departments is enclosed as part of this application. Based upon the nature of surrounding uses, the established development pattern along North Road, and the existing levels of public infrastructure to service the proposed RPUD, the Property is suitable for the development of a residential community as proposed through this application. Moreover, the density proposed by the project will ensure the compatibility with the surrounding land uses and that existing land area within the County's Urban -designated is not underutilized from a public infrastructure standpoint, thereby upholding sound planning principles. b. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not toe be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. The subject property is under Unified Control by ELAH Holdings, LLC, who has filed this application, as demonstrated by the Covenant of Unified Control included in the PUDZ application. C. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. (This is to include identifying what subdistrict, policy or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that subdistrict, policy or other provision.) FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code. The proposed RPUD community will be compatible and complementary to the surrounding area and landscaping while providing a similar type of housing to surrounding PUD's and RSF-1 zoning district. Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The RPUD will be accessed via North Road, a two-lane local road connecting Airport - Pulling Road and Terminal Drive. Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. RV Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 2 of 4 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Evaluation Criteria Packet Pg. 127 9.A.1.e The RPUD development pattern will have an insignificant impact on nearby collector and arterial roads. Due to the size of the site and the proposed layout of the project, looping will not be possible. Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. The RPUD abuts large residential lots and interconnection would not be desired by adjacent neighbors nor appropriate. Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. The RPUD's proposes a walkable community having 5-foot sidewalks on one side of the road, which fully complies with the LDC standards, and an internal looped roadway system developed in a manner to help reduce speeding within the development to allow for a more walkable community and safe community by allowing narrower streets right- of-way widths 40-feet. Common open space will be provided as part of this project and the proposed development type will add to the variety of housing types and prices already in existence along North Road. d. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The RPUD proposes single-family residential uses as described in this application. These uses are compatible with the single-family community to the east and west and the multi -family and single-family communities to the south. The proposed design standards, setbacks, and building height limitations ensure the proposed development will be consistent with the surrounding development pattern. The proposed perimeter buffers will also provide for compatibility between adjacent uses. e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The RPUD will provide 60% on -site open space in accordance with LDC requirements. Open space will be satisfied via the lakes, buffers, and other areas of pervious open space placed throughout the development. f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. As outlined in the enclosed application, all required public infrastructure is available and adequate to service the proposed RPUD. RV Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 3 of 4 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Evaluation Criteria Packet Pg. 128 9.A.1.e g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The Property can accommodate the 15 dwelling units, as shown on the attached RPUD Master Plan, and represents an infill project that is adjacent to the Naples Municipal Airport and where public facilities are concentrated. The application demonstrates there is available public infrastructure to support the development as proposed. The project is within the Urban designated portion of the County per the Future Land Use Map. Therefore, the project represents a logical expansion of the existing development pattern to accommodate future growth within Collier County with the urban -designated area. h. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The proposed development is generally consistent with the PUD regulations contained in the LDC and a determination can be made that the subject development proposes to a degree or at least equivalent to a literal application of such regulations. The Applicant is requesting deviations from the Land Development Code (LDC) in order to support the infill development project. Development of the property in accordance with these deviations will uphold the intent of the RPUD regulations and ensure design consistency, internal connectivity and integration of dwelling types, appropriate vehicular circulation, and the protection of public health, safety and welfare. Further explanation and justification of the deviations are provided in Exhibit "E„ RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 4 of 4 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Evaluation Criteria Packet Pg. 129 9.A.1.e V Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST Packet Pg. 130 9.A.1.e COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net Coflr County 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the 701 )ercentage of such interest: Name and Address % of Ownership If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each: Name and Address % of Ownership ELAH Holdings, LLC 100% Erik Mogelvang 100% If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the >ercentage of interest: Name and Address % of Ownership Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 Packet Pg. 131 9.A.1.e COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net Co*.r County 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the eneral and/or limited partners: Name and Address % of Ownership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the c iiiLers, SWGKnuiders, Denericiavies, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or of" I!Lt-1 J, 11 d LUIPUrdLIUrr, PdrUiersrrlp, Ur lrUsl. Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired ❑ Leased: Term of lease years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Created 9/28/2017 a Page 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 132 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net Date of option: Cofer County 9.A.1.e 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Date option terminates: , or Anticipated closing date: AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest -holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition's final public hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 2Z Agent/Ow r Signature Date ELAH Holdings, LLC c/o Erik Mogelvang Agent/Owner Name (please print) (Managing Member) Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 133 9.A.1.e N Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 AFFIDAVIT OF UNIFIED CONTROL Packet Pg. 134 9.A.1.e COAT County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliiercounty.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 COVENANT OF UNIFIED CONTROL The undersigned do hereby swear or affirm that we are the fee simple titleholders and owners of record of property commonly known as 2250 North Road, Naples FL 34104 (Street address and City, State and Zip Code) and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. The property described herein is the subject of an application for Residential planned unit development (R PUD) zoning. We hereby designate RWPlanning ILandscape Architecture legal representative thereof, as the legal representatives of the property and as such, these individuals are authorized to legally bind all owners of the property in the course of seeking the necessary approvals to develop. This authority includes, but is not limited to, the hiring and authorization of agents to assist in the preparation of applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain zoning approval on the site. These representatives will remain the only entity to authorize development activity on the property until such time as a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to Collier County. The undersigned recognize the following and will be guided accordingly in the pursuit of development of the project: 1. The property will be developed and used in conformity with the approved master plan including all conditions placed on the development and all commitments agreed to by the applicant in connection with the planned unit development rezoning. 2. The legal representative identified herein is responsible for compliance with all terms, conditions, safeguards, and stipulations made at the time of approval of the master plan, even if the property is subsequently sold in whole or in part, unless and until a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to and recorded by Collier County. 3. A departure from the provisions of the approved plans or a failure to comply with any requirements, conditions, or safeguards provided for in the planned unit development process will constitute a violation of the Land Development Code. 4. All terms and conditions of the planned unit development approval will be incorporated into covenants and restrictions which run with the land so as to provide notice to subsequent owners that all development activity within the planned unit development must be consistent with those terms and conditions. 5. So long as this covenant is in force, Collier County can, upon the discovery of noncompliance with the terms, safeguards, and conditions of the planned unit development, seek equitable relief as necessary to compel compliance. The County will not issue permits, certificates, or licenses to occupy or use any part of the planned unit development and the County may stop ongoing construction activity until the project is brought into compliance with all term ,conditions nd safeguards of the planned unit development. Owner Owner ELAH Holdin s, LLC c/o Erik Mogelvang Printed Name Printed Name (Managing Member) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowleged before me by means of ®physical presence or®online notarization this 121h day of August , 2022 , by (printed name of owner or qualifier) ELAH Holdings, LLC c/o Erik Mogelvang Such person(s) Notary Public must check applicable box: ®Are personally known to me r'6 NIKOUNA DIMITROVA ®Has produced a current drivers license /,• Notary Public - State of Florida ®Has produced as identification. � Commission r HH 240555 '�oF '•`•`� My Comm. Expires Mar 23, 2025 Banded through National Notary Assn. Notary Signature: March 4, 2020 Page 8 of 11 Packet Pg. 135 9.A.1.e EXHIBITA LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Per O.R. 5901, Pg. 3964): A certain lot or parcel of land located in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, further bounded and described as follows: Commencing at the center of said Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida; thence along the North and South 1/4 line of said Section 2, S 0 degrees 26'20" E 30.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of North Road and a concrete monument for a Place of Beginning; thence along said right-of-way N89 degrees 38'10"E 664.90 feet, to the East line of West 1/2 lot 21, Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little Farms Number 2, as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 27A of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence along said East line and its extension S 0 degrees 32'15"E 641.80 feet to a concrete monument; thence continuing S 0 degrees 32'15"E 20 feet more or less to the Approximate Mean High Water line of Rock Creek; thence meandering along said Approximate Mean High Water line Southwesterly, Westerly, Northwesterly and Southeasterly to the North and South 1/4 line of said Section 2; thence along said North and South 1/4 line N 0 degrees 26'20"W 184.00 more or less to a concrete monument; thence continuing N 0 degrees 26'20"W 645.56 feet to the Place of Beginning. Lying in the West 1/2 of Lot 21, the West 1/2 of Lot 22, and that part of the West 1/2 of Lot 23 lying North of Rock Creek of Said Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little Farms No. 2. A/K/A 2250 North Road, Naples FL 34104 Packet Pg. 136 9.A.1.e N Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION Packet Pg. 137 9.A.1.e AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) PL20220001779 Erik Mogelvange (print name), as Managing Member (title, If applicable) of E:AH Holdings, LLC (company, If applicable), swear or affirm under oath, that I am the (choose one) owner0 applicant =contract purchaser=and that: 1. I have full authority to secure the approval(s) requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on the referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this application and the Land Development Code; 2. All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches, data or other supplementary matter attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true; 3. 1 have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application; and that 4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and restrictions imposed by the approved action. 5. We/I authorize RVIPlanning -Landscape Architecture&Richard Yovanovich,Esq to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above. *Notes: • If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp, pres. or v. pres. • If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L.C.) or Limited Company (L.C.), then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member." • If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. • If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general partner" of the named partnership. • If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee". • In each instance, first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then use the appropriate format for that ownership. Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that the facts ted in " are true. 8/30/2023 Signa a Date STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowleged before me by means of ®x physical presence or ® online notarization this 30tn day of August 20 23 , by (printed name of owner or qualifier) Erik Mogelvang Such person(s) Notary Public must check applicable box: ® Are personally known to me ►AY`•ouNIKOL NA DIMITROVA . ®x Has produced a current drivers license FLDL Notary public - State of Florida Commission < 14 2a0555 Has produced as identification.?oFt, My Comm. Expires Mar 23, 2026 Bonded through Natiorai rotary Assn. Notary Signature: CP\08-COA-00115\155 REV 3/4/2020 Packet Pg. 138 9.A.1.e Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 NIM INFORMATION Packet Pg. 139 9.A.1.e 13V i Memorandum To: Tim Finn, AICP, Collier County Zoning Division From: Josephine Medina, AICP, RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture, Inc. Date: November 12, 2022 Subject: Rock Creek Estates PUD Rezone (PL20220001779) Neighborhood Information Meeting Summary RVI Planning + Landscape Architecture, Inc. and Erik Mogelvang conducted a neighborhood informational meeting (NIM) for the Rock Creek Estates Planned Unit Development (PUD) Rezone. The meeting was held on Monday, November 7, 2022, at 5:35 p.m. at the Naples Alliance Church, 2504 Estey Avenue, Naples, FL 34104. The sign -in sheets are attached as "Exhibit A" and demonstrate approximately 18 attendees came to the meeting, including Collier County Staff, the applicant and the applicant's project team. Additionally, one (1) attendee participated via Zoom. A copy of the legal notice, affidavit of publication, a copy of the letter sent to surrounding property owners, and a list of the surrounding property owners are attached as Exhibit "B". Josephine Medina started the meeting by introducing herself and Fred Drovdlic with RVI Planning + Landscape Architecture, along with the property owner/applicant Erik Mogelvang. She introduced Collier County staff Tim Finn. Exhibit boards were provided for the audience depicting Rock Creek Estates PUD location Exhibit "D" and proposed RPUD Master Plan Exhibit "E". For the meeting, the applicant had prepared a 10-slide presentation Exhibit "C" that included a map and aerial of the area, development in the surrounding area. Ms. Medina explained the request for up to 15 single family dwelling units, up to 15 boat docks, a ramp, the retainment of existing warehouse structure at the northwest side of the site, 98% retention of mangrove along Rock Creek and the next steps in the approval process. It was explained there are two public hearings available for additional public input. Public Comment Summary: 1. What is the purpose of the boat ramp? RESPONSE: It is for the residents to be able to place there boats on the boat docks. 2. Will there be a connection to Water and Sewer? RESPONSE: Yes, there is a Letter of Availability from Naples Utilities explaining that they can capacity to provide water and sewer for up to 15 dwelling units. 3. Can you go back to the drawing its hard to see from here. Can you explain what I am seeing here RV Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Suite 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239.405.7777 www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 140 9.A.1.e can you walk us through that? RESPONSE: Ms. Medina went through the RPUD Master Plan identifying the entrance along North Road and proposed internal road for the development with possible reduced pavement in further iterations of the site plan, location of residential areas, keeping of warehouse to the west of the site with the ability of the tract to have a single-family home, perimeter buffers, the keeping of most if not all of the mangrove area to keep that heavy vegetation along Rock Creek. 4. Where are the boat dock located? There isn't much information on there? RESPONSE: Ms. Medina pointed to the location of the boat docks on the RPUD Master Concept Plan. She further explained there is not much details for the boat docks at this stage and were still working with the county as far as the Manatee Protection Plan. Turrell Hall & Associates is working on the boat dock permits. More details can be provided via email when available explaining they would be looking at a March 2023 Planning Commission Meeting. 5. So they will be linear horizontal or vertical (referring to boat docks)? RESPONSE: Mr. Mogelvang identified that the boat docks would most likely be parallel with the flow of water. He explained as it stands right now it will likely be 12 boat docks spaces. Likely 30 feet long and there will be one entrance to the area maybe another entrance to the lots here (pointing to residential tract area). Explained there is another entrance to this which is called Tract A which is somewhat separated from everything else because there is a warehouse here. 6. It would be helpful for future information if we were provided an overlay that also reflected the creek as this is very difficult to see what type of intrusion there is to the creek and many of us that are in the local neighborhood across the street are less concerned of what you are developing a community but it becomes very narrow there and traffic from this along with what already exists would be concerning. RESPONSE: Mr. Mogelvang identified the two properties to the east are owned by himself and his mother. They bought the subject property to knowing this would eventually be developed and with the intent to minimize the amount of traffic with a development like this. The likely design of the docks, dependent on what the County says, is likely parallel with the water flow keeping outside of the mangroves and dock spaces fitting a boat let's say no more than 24 feet long. Ms. Medina identified she would email more details of the boat dock design/an overlay when it was more concrete. 7. How wide is the creek from the property line and how deep is it currently? Do you have to dredge? Mr. Mogelvang explained in speaking with Turrell Hall & Associates he did not have number in front of him about how wide the Creek is but the dredging would most likely only be in the boat ramp area, the rest of the docks how would likely be deep enough in that area. Mr. Drovdlic explained that the county approval process is in steps and this part of the approval does not require that level of detail for the boat docks it is just is requesting to approve slips. We will end up knowing that and we will have a lot of detail by the time we get to planning commission but at this stage we do not know that and are still going through the process. RV Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Suite 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239.405.7777 www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 141 9.A.1.e 8. Is this going to be gated? How are you going to stop people from outside from using that boat ramp. RESPONSE: No. Well if you live there you will know. Its such a small community I do not foresee that being an issue when you have to pass by over 6 houses where everyone know everyone in the community. We will also have signs for private entry. 9. Have a whole bunch of questions about the boat docks not the development. I just heard that this is not the place to address these comments. RESPONSE: Well it would be more at the time when we have more details as far as what the idea is at. Ms. Medina identified that if everyone signed in, I have everyone's email and I can provide updates to when we have more details on the boat docks. But we will be meeting the County codes and what they require as well as what the state requires. And if there is any deviation from codes we are required to have a public meeting and you will be informed similarly to how you were about this meeting. 20. When it comes to the time of the decision concerning the waterway is there a meeting like this about the waterway not the community. RESPONSE: Well, you are welcome to come to the Planning Commission and have your concerns heard. 21. Will we be notified about the Planning Commission meeting? RESPONSE: Yes. Just like you were notified for this meeting it will be in the Naples Daily News. 22. If there is water and sewer would I be allowed to tie into it from my property and if there is a wall will it be higher than my property or lower than my property? Where is the lift station in this development? RESPONSE: The problem is they have a force main along North Road, so you have to have a lift station which this community will have which is extremely expensive so I would imagine the City would provide you the option to not have to get on water and sewer due to the cost unless they force the entire area to get a lift station. Identified the lift station would be near the cul-de-sac about 200 +/- feet away from North Road. 23. Do you have a style of house of house you are proposing for this development? The idea we are having is the first floor would likely not be living area it will be garage and second floor living area. 24. How much is the elevation? The elevation is just about 7 feet. The idea is to not go and see a bunch of mounds and keep as much of the trees and as little pavement as possible. 25. The Naples Airport Authority provided comments regarding the Naples Airport Authority Boards opposition to the development even though it is outside of the 60 dbl contour the board feels that the increase in density will lead to impacts from aircraft noise. However if the county chooses to RV Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Suite 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239.405.7777 www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 142 9.A.1.e approve the development request that the county look at commitments other developers have made including perpetual navigation easements, maximum building height restrictions, real estate disclosures and FAA coordination to make sure the project meets the FAA standards. RESPONSE: We are proposing conditions for proximity to the airport which will include putting language in the HOA documents contract that purchaser are aware they are proximate to the airport and should expect noise that is regularly expected from regular airport operations. 26. You mentioned an overlay that shows the Creek is that available for looking at? We don't at the moment but as I mentioned once we do we will definitely provide that. We aren't trying to hide anything we just don't have something where we can say okay this is exactly what this is going to look like but when we do we will provide that. Ms. Medina identified her business card was available to contact her with any additional question or comments and Mr. Mogelvang identified that they were able to contact him as well to address any questions. 27. That boat ramp is that going to be private or public boat ramp? Private. To residents of the community. 28. Is anyone here from water view? Doesn't seem like anyone is. Notification of this meeting was 500 feet from the property line. 29. What is being proposed in the center? Lake and green open space/park. 30. What is the property distance letting people know when the next meeting is potentially in March? RESPONSE: Ms. Medina identified that would be 500 feet and will be posting a sign in front of the property with meeting dates from Planning Commission and Board hearing dates. Mr. Drovdlic identified that the sign will be posted 15 days minimum prior to hearing dates. 31. How close are houses going to be to the Creek? I ask because we were flooded, and storm surge can really make a mess in that area. RESPONSE: Well we are required to have a minimum of 20 foot setback from the mangrove preserve area along the creek so they will be required to be at minimum that distance. But the actual layout of the houses that hasn't been set at this stage. There is also a sea level rise analysis that has been completed and required by the county which is also part of this application. 32. Will the houses be on stilts? RESPONSE: Not really sure I don't know if stilt is the right word. Like I said what I am hoping for is for the bottom floor to not have living area. There were no further comments and the meeting concluded at approximately 6:08 p.m. RV Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Suite 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239.405.7777 www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 143 sWls3 188aO Moot - 6LLWOOZZOZld : L8ti9Z) slepejeW dnMoe8-uoi;e3ijddV- Q;uewt43BPy :4uGwLI3811V LJ 1 �w W Q M Lo N O WM W W O z J J Z °cam aLU J w JCL CT ✓ '" N 1„ '� -C CJ � � N N Al J 1\ zell ,. 14 s8;e;s3 Naaa3 Maob - 6LLWOOZZOZld : L8b9Z) slepajew dnMaeg-uoijeaijddv - a Ju9wg3ejjV :;uawgDeIIV M � z LLI Cw � C z O � Q U) W ry I— O 11 I— rnLL V! Z W 0 "O W O LU = UO �e C) = w z O C'7 I N O N 1 r MW W S W O z N r-i O N a-i 4J 00 ro d 9.A.1.e Final Publication Date 10/18/2022 Ad Number GC10960035 Publication NAPLES DAILY NEWS Market NAPLES Delivery Method Email Number of Affidavits Needed 1 Customer Name RVI PLANNING INC Customer Phone Number 2394057777 Customer Address 28100 BONITA GRANDE DR STE 305 BONITA SPRINGS FL 34135 6219 Account Number (If Known) 507176 Customer Email JMEDINA@RVIPLANNING.COM Your Name PATTI ROUSE Email Address Prouse@gannett.com a Packet Pg. 146 9.A.1.e NaVICS 4 Ott lj NtWS PART OFTHE USATODAY NETWORK Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 RVI PLANNING INC 28100 BONITA GRANDE DR #30S BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34135 ATTN Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WISCONSIN COUNTY OF BROWN Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared who on oath says that they serve as legal clerk of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed. Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida , for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. 10/18/2022 Subscribed and sworn to before on OCTOBER 18TH, 2022 Notary, tate oZpires: ounty o r wn My commissio 51, , PUBLICATION COST: $470.40 AD No: GC10960035 CUSTOMER NO: 507176 PO#: PUBLIC NOTICE AD SIZE: DISPLAY AD W/ MAP 2X7 NANCY HEYRMAN Notary Public State of Wisconsin Packet Pg. 147 9.A.1.e NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting held by RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture, Inc. on behalf of ELAH Holdings, LLC at the following time and location: Monday, November 7, 2022, at 5:30 p.m Naples Alliance Church 2504 Estey Avenue, Naples, FL 34104 Attending Virtually is also available using Zoom Meeting ID: 691 105 7769, Passcode: 0000. Please be advised that ELAH Holdings, LLC has filed an application (PL20220001779) with Collier County. This application is seeking approval of a Planned Unit Development Rezone (PUDZ). The Application will allow for the development of up to 15 single-family residential dwelling units and up to 15 private boat slips on the subject property. The Rock Creek Estates Property totals 12+/- acres and is generally located on the south side of North Road across the street from Terminal Drive to the Naples Airport in unincorporated Collier County, Florida. WE VALUE YOUR INPUT Business and property owners and residents are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss the project with the owners' representatives and Collier County staff. If you are unable to attend this meeting, but have questions or comments, they can be directed to: RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture, Inc. c/o Josephine Medina 28100 Bonita Grande Dr., Suite 305, Bonita Springs, FL 34135 (239) 908-3421 OR Jmedina@RViPlanning.com Packet Pg. 148 9.A.1.e AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that pursuant to Ordinance 2004-72, of the Collier County Land Development Code, I did give notice by mail at least 30 days after receipt of letter indicating that the application is sufficient to the following property owners and or condominium and civic associations whose members may be impacted by the proposed land use changes of an application request for a variance or parking exemption. For the purposes of this requirement, the names and addresses of property owners shall be deemed those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the county to be notified. The said notice contained the laymen's description of the site property of proposed change. Per attached letters and or property owner's list, which are hereby made a part of this Affidavit of Compliance. (Sign�f Applicant) State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing Affidavit of compliance was acknowledged before me this day of 2022 by Josephine Medina , who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. (SignLiure of Notary Public) Printed Name of Notary o, t,CA K LINN 11c-State of Florida � Commission # HH 211052 My Commission Expires April 16, 2026 Packet Pg. 149 9.A.1.e October 21, 2022 RE: Rock Creek Estates PUD Rezone PL20220001779 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that ELAH Holdings, LLC has filed an application (PL20220001779) with Collier County. This application is seeking approval of a Planned Unit Development Rezone (PUDZ). The Application will allow for the development of up to 15 single-family residential dwelling units and up to 15 private boat slips on the subject property. The Rock Creek Estates Property totals 12+/- acres and is generally located on the south side of North Road across the street from Terminal Drive to the Naples Airport in unincorporated Collier County, Florida (see attached project location map). In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to hear a presentation about this application and ask questions. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Monday, November 7, 2022, at 5:30 p.m. at Naples Alliance Church, 2504 Estey Ave, Naples, FL 34104. Attending virtually is also available via Zoom. Please visit www.zoom.us, click on "Join A Meeting" in the top right corner, and enter Meeting ID: 691 105 7769, Passcode: 0000. Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me directly at (239) 908- 3421 or JMedina(cDRViPlanning.com Thank you, RVi Planning+Landscape Architecture Josephine Medina, AICP Project Manager RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Sutie 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239. • www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 150 9.A.1.e Terrace RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 2 of 2 Rock Creek Estates RPUD (PUDZ) PL20220001779 Packet Pg. 151 H LL O O V7 F- Z N � J W (� Q Z F J N Q W � Y � WW W Z U O Y U F O � W a O w IL safe;s3 Aaaa3 )ooU - 6LL WOOZZOZld : L8b9Z) slepejew dnj3e8-uoijeoijddV - a luawyoeuV :;uawy3L'IIV o v d) C') W co co O O U) O O O O W M In m co In co LV O r r m O N LO M N O � ao O 00 (O (O W N 00 M M N N Ln O O M M r N O M p M M N M M N M M M O M M N D O V V O O O O O V V M N 000 M O V O O V O O V O O N V N 900 V V O O O O V V 7 V O V V O V O V V CO V V V V N N CV V V 40 O. l0 I CO V V O V V U) 6 V Cr V m V N (O V V V CV r V CO V V V (O V V V V V 0 7 p V V V a_o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o _o 00 _o _o _o m o o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ o_ _ o_ o_ o 0 0 0 V N M M V V V M M M M Cl) Cl) Cl) M> Z M >> > M M M M FJ J J J J J J J J J J 0 J J J J J J-j J J J J J J J O J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J co J J J J J J Q LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLZO LL LL LL LL LLLL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL Z LLO LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LLLLLLLL LL JLLLL LLLL LLLL U U U¢ z_ U U U U U U O U m (n Cn U (n U¢ U (,� U U m U U w U 0 U U 0 U N w U U (n z U u- (n U U U U (n wwwwN J J J J JI JI J JI J J J F= JI J JI JI J J W J J J J J J J F J Q J J J J J J J J J J J J, J J J J J OF J— J, J J W W W raaaLLLLLLLLaaaawoaaaaaaFaLLdLLaddWavaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaZa<aaaaaa �¢¢¢¢¢¢Q¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢(n¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢x¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢a¢¢¢¢¢¢ UZZZZZZZzzzzx3:zzzzzzwzzzzzzzxzozzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzoz�zzzzzz (o co M co (n co co to W ~ O O 0 m m 0 O O Q LL a U) rn D z O w ¢ � m z ¢ o ¢ rn H ❑ J W Z a 0 Q ¢ ¢w ai LL Q ¢ O } ¢ ¢ ¢ N(° M ❑ O } } cn � w o Z Of W X O W ¢ U LL co O W 2 Of W W W w O ❑ ❑ G m W ~ ❑ V N Z O N O D O O ((0 N O O ❑ M h O V (n V ¢ U7 (0 00 Q LL N N w S Cl) Cl) N N (n N N Cl) � O U w � 0 Q ❑ z04 U O Z J Z O Q O M OU JJ ❑Q' Z i NU) >Z Z (� ❑ Z d N� Of W U ❑ U Y g J U ce) 'IT¢ ¢ a' m J J No U)" U)0 CL FY z� w� g W ww00 ¢� LL�❑LL, LL JLL ❑Q ❑ O aWam a} LL (mi)wv) O W U W Q J U U a' O W Q Q W Z w¢❑¢¢ ❑ W O W W W O O U❑ W Q W W W� O 0¢0 w W OfY Q ¢O > U> afZ J W W❑ m} m,> � > O of❑ > Z m> > W> U U❑ Z W Z > >>> Z J J>> ¢ U ¢w wm W =Qoo° H❑wwmwot Y¢ m-'gLL ❑ ¢ OmHUH (�„ U YYLULUm(nm— M W J ❑22 HJ W W O m=W (- Om Oao 2 Noc~~c~¢2�2wwa�U�Jp(~U¢�i>��=azQ¢z�ai�x(~i��(~i�w�¢two=xv~iW(~i�v~i(~i�Zz�v~i(~i�a�Qo w z¢ w W w (_,, z Q a a a¢ o w~ 0 w Y x w N z m� d= p a o W Z O W O W m O (D = a Z o O w¢ w w w v z m w w x O x LL p ;: gN r� r--o U �OOOf M0,(0 JCDr-- w Hrnwo a Owm o W (n o G (% O N Z r` r` O O F Cl) O lf) O aD O Q r` O O W O N N U) U O N Q N LL n O M CO CO 7 N CO M U7 7 W h O O_ Qo NafNNJ W NCAO�Mo IDul NN�NNNN�MUN(OD�MN�LLN>N V V JCANHLLNNLO NNNNo �NNN�NU L Z O U Q Z U Z O O aj F ¢ Q g U D 202 _ ❑ C Z ¢ O r ❑ Cl) ❑ Y J O O w 0 Q Cl) = J ¢ Q = U) U ¢= Z Z Z U ❑ m H Y J Z U F H a' z U Z Cn U F 0' } U O J z�w� �Wz �_ w� �r z❑ ¢OfQ )-_ Of ¢ ¢WLL W Z w¢J W >ZZ d'�d'¢W' W U¢ J �Q H F X¢ J J O Z Z}_ W Z W F 0 w N H ?> > ��� U U Z� Of O z O Z otS J W❑ OW— ¢J } 02 it Ui W❑ J J J d U Q J~ CO J¢ ¢ H❑ 0' ¢ ❑❑ ❑xza OfY� U=�� C)(D20 wzJ(nw �� ODw mzowowxs W o ?❑(n�¢ H W z O5- af 0-PO YZZ¢0�g�Wco <w Z w ���x(n �J r¢��Y¢❑zu)z U) WLL2Oz FOF W SZZJU W V>>J� W ¢C�2YYJ W mlyowo W �w W UQm�FO�U W Q02QZOJ(nYU¢� W¢ JDd' VU�WQUZ�oo¢(noLLj�aLL ��Z}Of3:QLLJJmoY�ZaiQ W Of OZOfZZZLU viz0a W< of0zU) w W�oWzzz�2��LLQOWM2WYF-W�zU�zaO��wz�Jaw�o»>W�z��W�WQ~2Q=Owa aLLz Q (n(noFXz=w❑U) ❑❑ U)OYwzz¢N ogO0fQ WWWJ>LU O❑ N W- w g w af w¢ m 2 2 O d W g 0 0¢¢¢ O m� W Z 0 0 2 Q¢¢ U U N O O O Q Of D U W co Z H N 02 w J >¢_ arnQmmmmUUUUUUU❑ W LLC�(722222z���� `LYJmmmmmmm2ZmmEU) n(n(nFF3:3:3:EZH N a Y U m a 9.A.1.e 912 PREACHER COURT LAND TRUST ALANDER, CHERYL D BLUMERT, JANET %SANDRA J MOGELVANG 2511 ESTEY AVE #E-2 ROBERT WEISSENBORN JR PO BOX 3316 NAPLES, FL 34104-4349 2885 ESTEY AVE NAPLES, FL 34106-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-4303 BRAWNER, ENA Y BROWN FAMILY TRUST BROWN, CHRISTOPHER H 2511 ESTEY AVE #4 2323 HARBOR RD LYNN L MILLER _ N p NAPLES, FL 34104-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-0 1171 14TH AVE N D R- NAPLES, FL 34102-0 a o: CASAGRANDE IV, ANDREW BRANDY CHIP HARRIS 401 K PLAN & TRUST CHRIS MOGELVANG LLC EMMA JOHANNA CASAGRANDE 2172 PICCADILLY CIRCUS 917 PREACHER CT 2264 CARTER ST NAPLES, FL 34112-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-4278 r w NAPLES, FL 34112-0 a� L U CHRIS MOGELVANG LLC CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT ATHRTY COTTAGES AT ROCK CREEK LLC Y 917 PREACHER CT 160 AVIATION DR N 31076 WEST THOMPSON LN w NAPLES, FL 34104-4278 NAPLES, FL 34104-3568 HARTLAND, WI 53029-0 rn ti ti r O O CPI ROCK CREEK OWNER LLC DIEKNEITE, DAN M ELAH HOLDINGS LLC O N THE CARLYLE GROUP LLC 5637 TURTLE BAY DR #25 2590 GOLDEN GATE PKWY N 1001 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34108-0 SUITE 106 a WASHINGTON, DC 20004-0 NAPLES, FL 34105-0 ti 00 v N FREEMAN, JAMIE SHANE GONDER TR, KIMBERLY A M GORSKI, JACK A & KATHLEEN A 2551 ESTEY AVE #C-1 ROCK CREEK LAND TRUST 2471 HARBOR RD T NAPLES, FL 34104-0 UTD 08/20/10 NAPLES, FL 34104-0 PO BOX 3316 NAPLES, FL 34106-3316 a HAMILTON, WILLIAM BRENT HARDESTY, DEBRA HARDING, ROBERT C & VIRGINIA K 2511 ESTEY AVE APT E3 21802 RAINBOW LAKE CT 2300 NORTH RD m NAPLES, FL 34104-4329 ESTERO, FL 33928-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-0 0 HOLLINGSWORTH, GLEN HUBSCHMAN, CONNIANNE INTEGRITY FIRST HOME WATCH Q MARSHA KENDALL 3478 MALAGA WAY CORP INC p 373 DOVER PL APT 904 NAPLES, FL 34105-0 3048 MANDALAY COURT NAPLES, FL 34104-4759 NAPLES, FL 34105-0 E t JENKINS, LENORE M JN TRIPLE LLC JOHN ORSCHELL REV TRUST Q 2396 HARBOR RD 60 LOGAN BLVD S 1196 PINE LANE NAPLES, FL 34104-4251 NAPLES, FL 34119-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-0 t �a r w Q JOHN R & CAROL L NAGY TRUST KAMARCHIK JR, WALTER KHAZEI, BRENT H & SUZANNA 31076 THOMPSON LN 2521 ESTEY AVE APT D2 1728 N WOOD ST HARTLAND, WI 53029-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-4330 CHICAGO, IL 60622-0 Packet Pg. 153 9.A.1.e KIRK N SANDERS REV TRUST LAND, JUSTIN S MACMILLAN, ARTHUR W PO BOX 2481 2551 ESTEY AVENUE #C2 VICTORIA A LEONARD NAPLES, FL 34106-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-0 2541 ESTEY AVE APT B2 NAPLES, FL 34104-4325 MARGARET S BAILEY LIV TRUST MCGREGOR, QUY MCLAUGHLIN, TAYLOR JEAN 2509 ESTEY AVE 4428 BEECHWOOD LAKE DR MAKOTUNDA COLUM MORNINGSTA NAPLES, FL 34104-4301 NAPLES, FL 34112-0 2424 HARBOR ROAD NAPLES, FL 34104-0 MIZRACHI REVOCABLE TRUST MOGELVANG TR, SANDRA J G MOGELVANG, CHRIS 4620 GAIL BLVD L P CHRISTIAN MOGELVANG TR 917 PREACHER CT NAPLES, FL 34104-0 SANDRA JOY MOGELVANG TRUST NAPLES, FL 34104-4278 PO BOX 3316 NAPLES, FL 34106-0 MOGELVANG, ERIK E & CYNTHIA L NAPLES 1ST ALLIANCE CHURCH OF PROVIDENCE HOUSE INC 2100 NORTH RD THE CHRISTIAN & MISS'RY ALL PO BOX 128 NAPLES, FL 34104-4381 2504 ESTEY AVE NAPLES, FL 34106-128 NAPLES, FL 34104-4301 PULLEN, RONALD N & MARILYN RICH, ROSALIND SIEBOLD, THOMAS E 2531 ESTEY AVE APT A3 2531-A1 ESTEY AVE 2831 ESTEY AVE APT A4 NAPLES, FL 34104-4353 NAPLES, FL 34104-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-4365 SNYDER, MELVIN & CARLA STEIMLE, CASSIE SZCZEPANIAK, REGINA 2841 ESTEY AVE # B3 2521 ESTEY AVE 2230 42ND ST NW NAPLES, FL 34104-4366 NAPLES, FL 34104-0 CANTON, OH 44708-0 THOMAS JR EST, PAUL TRNKA, TODD JAMES WESEMAN, GREGORY R JENNY KHALIQ PR 1111 BRICKELL BAY DR #2112 2551 ESTEY AVE 2625 ESTEY AVE MIAMI, FL 33131-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-0 NAPLES, FL 34104-4393 WILLIAMS, STEVEN A WRIGHT, KARA A RIVER OAK PLANTATION A 2541 ESTEY AVE APT B4 2495 HARBOR RD CONDOMINIUM NAPLES, FL 34104-4325 NAPLES, FL 34104-4288 187 FOREST LAKES BLVD NAPLES, FL 34105 NAPLES BROOKSIDE HOMEOWNERS THE WATERFRONT IN NAPLES ASSOCIATION, INC. CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. 2000 HARBOR LANE FLORIDA COASTAL ASSOC NAPLES, FL 31404 3806 EXCHANGE AVE NAPLES, FL 31404 Packet Pg. 154 sa}e}s9 AGOJO )ooN - ULWOOZZOZ-1d : L8ti9Z) sleiaa;ew dnj3e8-uoi}e3ijddV - Q;uGwLl3e};d :}uGwL43elIV Q + 2 C N C -6 C = ttl d J �J M 0 N� N n w z O N w • 0 z w w CV N O N N� LLJ 5W L w O z � Q y— �6 Q� coCu � 0 —> Q 0� l T 0 Q 0 CD)a--�4-1 0 Q) V � z o p °0 0 O 0 cn Q) u) CT DC =O = 0 co m a> V) \L- � 0 Q) 4-1 0 Q0O 4— (z T O Q) O Q) Ln - Q 0 0 N ki O O N 0 4 4Fa H C am Z q C Q v C J C Iw vQ// O O clr . 00 r a m Y V m a w > _0 o Q m 0 L D O z •0) N E 0 Q a� 0Ln L N a--+ C O V N C N Q w0 ❑ 0 0 71 ❑ s i q N wa aQ rc LL�p m� 6 p R Z O VK b6 9a N aLX ¢S ZQ QS W ry avua fW u ; i/HMKil I T ¢ �.w m _ � W z�xWW W i W y¢ O S W�lzN N cn (n Q) Q) O +' E O Q O >, `�' Ol + Ln \ (AE Q cn O k O QT N Q) D E O O N O ❑ m ❑ Q) Q) ::3 K�J OCI — O ^ IL 4--) L O a� O dS �: .> .V 41 O + � Q (6 O V n , rl N L a-) O O Q) ME v O 4-1 cn Q) x Q) E m ( O nO \JW U Q) C�1 Ln W cl E Ln O ( O m l/) un N a m Y a 0 0 w C— ca O L N c O . N cn O U +-j C- D O U L O m I L O l� r"1 Q 66 c- O m U ^r"1 L L O E Q _O v v Ln_ E L 1_1 Q) . M 0) ZV oz aV) wz a~ J IAM ZLf) Q z w0 HU FE Rq 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL FENCE USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A EXISTING — WAREHOUSE PROPERTY BOUNDARY USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A 10' TYPE "A" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL FENCE BOAT RAMP PARKING GENERAL LOCATION OF PRIVATE DOCK AREA USE: NAPLES MUNICIPAL 10' WIDE TYPE "D" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL AIRG: PORT MAX. COMBINED FENCE/WALL/BERM HEIGHT o ZONINAIRPORT OF 10' AND MIN. OF 6' w NORTH ROAD TRACT A (RESIDENTIAL / PRIVATE :ECREATIONAI AMENITY) 7.5' TYPE "B" BUFFER p M WITH OPTIONAL FENCE / WALL R 7.5' TYPE "B" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL FENCE / WALL 0 OPEN SPACE SUMMARY REQUIRED OPEN SPACE 6.82 AC 60 PROVIDED OPEN SPACE 6.82 AC 60 r � LAND USE SUMMARY RESIDENTIAL TRACT 6.45 AC 57 PRIVATE RECREATIONAL AMENITY .78 AC 7% PRESERVE .51 AC 4% BUFFER .60AC 5% RECREATION STORMWATER .65 AC 6% RIGHT-OF-WAY 2.37 AC 21 `TOTAL PROJECT AREA 11.36 AC 1009/J PLAN REVISIONS �R=EV1 2022-10-24 REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENT 2810O B—L, Grande C stale 305 8 ,'' Springs, Fonda Tel. 239.405.7777 _""pla _ - R R OPEN SPACE/ STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA (0.65 AC) R (0.51 AC) IAPPRpX\MP'(E�OCA�\ONl RACK C USE: MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: RMF-6 9.A.1.e USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A 10' TYPE "A" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL FENCE APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: RMF-6 PROPERTY BOUNDARY r LEGEND 1 INGRESS/EGRESS R RESIDENTIAL ® DEVIATION LOCATION OPEN SPACE/ ® STORMWATER MANAGEMENTAREA 0 PRESERVE (0.51 AC) NOTES 1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATIONS DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. 2. ALL ACREAGES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION AT THE TIME OF SDP OR PLAT APPROVAL. 3. THE LOCATION OF THE ONSITE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND RESIDENTIAL TRACTS IS PRELIMINARY AND MAY BE ADJUSTED AT SITE PLAN APPROVAL. 4. NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVE REQUIRED: 25% OF NATIVE VEGETATION (0.52 AC X 0.25 = 0.13 AC). NATIVE PRESERVATION PROVIDED 0.51 AC. 5. MAXIMUM PERMITTED UNITS/DENSITY CALCULATION: 11.36t ACRES x 1.33 UNITS / / ACRE = 15 UNITS. ROCK CREEK ESTATES • RPUD MASTER PLAN (EXHIBIT C) COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA MAY 2, 2022 PROJECT# 22001262 a ELAH HOLDINGS, LLC 0 71 1 150' 3 1 1 1 1 SCALE: 1" = 150'-0" Packet Pg. 166 9.A.1.e From: Josephine Medina To: "fred-922(alhotmail.com"; "fdenaplesCayahoo.com"; "chip(abnaplesrealestate.com"; "kathie.gorski(ftmail.com"; "iulia(abbrownbc.com"; "catamulis(abaol.com"; ;Dkullen(ajdslegal.com"; "troy_ pingree('0getac.com" Cc: Noel Davies; erik(alfloridagrime.com; Alexis Cresgo; FinnTimothv Subject: Rock Creek Estates RPUD - Follow Up Information Date: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 4:02:00 PM Attachments: image0OLDnna Master Plan 02.23.2023 RPUD MASTER PLAN.Ddf Good afternoon, This email is a follow up to the Neighborhood Information Meeting held on Monday, November 12, 2022, for the proposed development located at 2250 North Road known as Rock Creek Estates Residential Planned Unit Development. Attached is the latest version of the proposed Master Plan for the development. The project remains a low -density single-family community containing a maximum of 15 homes. Following up on the comments made regarding the proposed boat docks associated with the development, the proposed boat docks will be in compliance with the governing Collier County Land Development Code, including Section 5.03.06 which states in part that for canal or waterways less than 100 feet in width, dock facilities may occupy no more than 25 percent of the width of the waterway or protrude greater than 20 feet into the waterway, whichever is less. The PUD rezone application has been found sufficient by County Staff and is tentatively scheduled for public hearings in October and November. Notification of the finalized dates will be provided via mail for those living within 500 feet of the property, advertised in the Naples Daily News, and posted on the subject property. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239-908-3421 or Jmedina(@rviplanning.com. Thanks, Josephine Medina, AICP, LEED Green Assoc. Project Manager 13vi Opening the Outdoors for 40 Years RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 28100 Bonita Grande Dr, Suite 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 954.376.0378 Mobile • 239.908.3421 Direct • 239.405.7777 Main www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 167 9.A.1.e llv Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Packet Pg. 168 9.A.1.e 2726 OAK RIDGE COURT, SUITE 503 TRANSPORTATION FORT MYERS, FL 3356 OFFICE 239.278.3.278.3090 FAX 239.278.1906 7ATRCONSULTANTS, I N C TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION PLANNING SIGNAL SYSTEMS/DESIGN TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT FOR ROCK CREEK ESTATES RPD COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (SMALL SCALE STUDY - NO ADDITIONAL FEE) (METHODOLOGY REVIEW FEE - $500) PROJECT NO. F2111.14 PREPARED BY: TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. Certificate of Authorization Number: 27003 2726 Oak Ridge Court, Suite 503 Fort Myers, Florida 33901-9356 (239) 278-3090 Revised: June 8, 2022 Packet Pg. 169 9.A.1.e TRANSPORTATION 7ATRCONSULTANTS, INC CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION II. EXISTING CONDITIONS III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IV. TRIP GENERATION & DISTRIBUTION V. PROJECTED CONCURRENCY VI. CONCLUSION Packet Pg. 170 9.A.1.e 7A TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC I. INTRODUCTION TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. has conducted a traffic impact statement for the rezoning application for the proposed residential development to be located at 2250 North Road in Collier County, Florida. This report has been completed in compliance with the guidelines established by the Collier County Transportation Planning Division for developments seeking rezoning approval. The approximate location of the subject site is illustrated on Figure 1. The applicant is seeking to rezone the approximate 11.36 acre subject site from Agricultural (A) to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to permit a development of up to 15 single-family dwelling units. Access to the site is proposed to North Road via two connections. Methodology notes were exchanged with Collier County Staff via email to discuss the proposed rezoning traffic study. The initial meeting checklist and the latest methodology notes are attached to this report for reference. This report examines the impact of the development on the surrounding roadways. Trip generation and assignments to the site access drive will be completed and analysis conducted to determine the impacts of the development on the surrounding roadways. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject site is currently occupied by an approximately 6,000 square foot warehouse building. The subject site is bordered by Rock Creek canal to the south, North Road to the north, and by residential uses to the west and east. Page 2 Packet Pg. 171 k' ■ .� ,!• .: - � -� � .y a }� !;' �- t ! a ;- Q 1 ; Fly r , . •*. Iva 'M - _ILI- { ,�- OCT- Nr rl �,�. _ d Hirr"'' is '�, - �l� '►, R i—�-�'�f�S< � � �'' �i �,��' w !) r t !a; r 1 AL �:�� `� it -.I..t ��� �- i,:�. L.•. 9.A.1.e TRANSPORTATION ' CONSULTANTS, INC North Road is a two-lane undivided local roadway that borders the site to the north. North Road has a posted speed limit of 30 mph and is under the jurisdiction of the Collier County Department of Transportation. Airport -Pulling Road is a six -lane divided arterial roadway within the vicinity of the subject site. The Level of Service Standard on Airport -Pulling Road between Radio Road and David Boulevard (Roadway Link ID #5.0) is LOS "E", or 2,800 vehicles in the peak hour, peak direction. Airport -Pulling Road has a posted speed limit of 45 mph and is under the jurisdiction of Collier County Department of Transportation. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The applicant is seeking to rezone the approximate 11.36 acre subject site from Agricultural (A) to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to permit a development of up to 15 single-family dwelling units. The proposed request also includes boat slips and a boat ramp as well as repurposing the existing approximate 6,000 square foot structure on site for recreation/garage use only. These uses are for private uses only and will not be open to the general public. The intent for these uses is to serve the residential lot owners only and therefore were not included in the trip generation conducted as part of this report. Table 1 summarizes the proposed land use utilized for trip generation purposes for the subject site. Table 1 Land Use Rock Creek Estates RPD Land Use Size Single -Family Detached Housing 15 Units (LUC 210) Page 4 Packet Pg. 173 9.A.1.e 7A TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC Access to the site is currently proposed to North Road via two connections. The existing western connection is opposite of Terminal Drive and will primarily serve as access to the private recreation/garage facility only. The proposed eastern access to North River Road will serve as the main access to the proposed residential community. IV. TRIP GENERATION & DISTRIBUTION The trip generation for the proposed development was determined by referencing the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) report, titled Trip Generation Manual, 11tn Edition. Land Use Code 210 (Single -Family Detached Housing) was utilized for the trip generation purposes of the proposed development. The equations used from this land use are contained in the Appendix of this report for reference. Table 2 outlines the anticipated weekday A.M. and P.M. peak hour and daily trip generation based on the proposed rezoning request. Table 2 Trip Generation Rock Creek F,states RPD Land Use Wee A.M. Peak Hour Weekda P.M. Peak Hour Daily (2-wa ) In Out Total In OutI Total Single -Family Detached Housing 3 10 13 11 6 17 176 05 Units) The trips the proposed development is anticipated to generate were assigned to the site access drives and the surrounding roadway network. The anticipated project traffic distribution is illustrated on Figure 2. Figure 2 also illustrates the assignment of the project trips to the site access drive and surrounding intersections based upon the project traffic distribution as shown in the attached methodology meeting notes. Page 5 Packet Pg. 174 I 9.A.1.e I n 11 F, 11 LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR SITE TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR SITE TRAFFIC 4-20%♦ PERCENT TRIP DISTRIBUTION N.T.S. TRANSPORTATION TRIP DISTRIBUTION & 7ATRCONSUILTANT� INC SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ROCK CREEK ESTATES RPD Packet Pg. 175 9.A.1.e TRANSPORTATION 7ATRCONSULTANTS, INC V. PROJECTED CONCURRENCY In order to determine which roadway segments surrounding the site will be significantly impacted, Table 1A, contained in the Appendix, was created. This table indicates which roadway links will accommodate an amount of project traffic greater than the 2%-2%-3% Significance Test. The trips generated as a result of the proposed rezoning on the subject site as shown in Table 2 were compared with the Capacity for Peak Hour — Peak Direction traffic conditions as defined by the 2021 Collier County Annual Update Inventory Report (AUIR). Based on the information contained within Table IA, no roadway segments were shown to be significantly impacted as a result of the development traffic being added to the roadway network. In addition to the significant impact criteria, Table 2A includes the concurrency analysis on the Collier County Roadway network. The current remaining capacity and Level of Service Standard for each roadway segment analyzed was obtained from the 2021 Collier County Annual Inventory Update Report (AUIR). A four-year planning analysis was also conducted. In order to estimate the projected 2025 background traffic volumes, the existing 2021 peak hour peak direction traffic volumes from the 2021 AUIR were adjusted by the appropriate growth rate. The growth rate calculations are shown in Table 3A of the Appendix. These projected volumes were then compared with the 2021 existing plus trip bank volumes from the 2021 AUIR. The more conservative of the two volumes was then utilized as the 2025 background traffic volume. The concurrency analysis was then performed by subtracting the project traffic volumes that will result with the proposed development from the 2025 background remaining capacity in order to determine whether or not sufficient capacity will be available after the addition of the net new traffic associated with the proposed approval. Based on the information contained within Table 2A, there will be sufficient capacity on all analyzed roadways to support the proposed development. Figure 3 was created to indicate the results of the concurrency analysis on the adjacent roadway network. As can be seen Page 7 Packet Pg. 176 I 9.A.1.e I LEGEND 000 2025 CURRENT REMAINING CAPACITY (000) 2025 REMAINING CAPACITY W/ AM PROJECT TRAFFIC [0001 2025 REMAINING CAPACITY W/ PM PROJECT TRAFFIC 0.0% PROJECT IMPACT PERCENTAGE N.T.S. TRANSPORTATION 2025 REMAINING CAPACITY ON // TRCONSULTANTS, INC SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED LINKS ROCK CREEK ESTATES RPD Packet Pg. 177 9.A.1.e 7A TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC within Figure 3, the proposed development does not cause any roadways links to operate below capacity. Turn lane improvements at the proposed site access drive to North Road will be evaluated at the time the project seeks a Site Development Plan (SDP) application approval. VI. CONCLUSION The proposed rezoning of the subject site to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning designation is to allow a development of up to 15 single-family dwelling units. The site, located at 2250 North Road, meets Collier County Consistency and Concurrency requirements. The surrounding roadway network was analyzed based on the 2021 Collier County Annual Update Inventory Report (AUIR) and future 2025 build - out traffic conditions. As a result, sufficient capacity is indicated along all surrounding roadways in 2025 both with and without the proposed development. KA2021\1 I November\14 2250 North Road - Collier County Rezone\Sufficiency\6-8-2022 Report doc Page 9 Packet Pg. 178 9.A.1.e APPENDIX ti O O O N N O N J d r a Packet Pg. 179 9.A.1.e METHODOLOGY MEETING NOTES Packet Pg. 180 9.A.1.e APPENDIX A INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply. Location: via e-mail People Attending: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1) Yury Bykau, TR Transportation Consultants, Inc., (239) 278-3090 2) Michael Sawyer, Transportation Planning (239) 252-2926 Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title: Yury Bykau Organization: TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. Address & Telephone Number: 2726 Oak Ridge Court, Suite 503 Fort Myers, FL 33901 (239) 278-3090 Reviewer(s): Reviewer's Name & Title: Michael Sawyer, Transportation Collier County Transportation Planning Department Organization & Telephone Number: (239) 252-2613 Applicant: Applicant's Name: Address: Telephone Number: Proposed Development: Name: 2250 North Road Rezone - PL20210001724 Location: 2250 North Road Land Use Type: Single -Family Residential ITE Code #: LUC 210 — Single -Family Detached Housing Proposed number of development units: 15 Dwelling Units Other: N/A Description: Residential Existing: Agricultural Requested: RPUD KA2021\1 1 November\14 2250 North Road -Collier County Rezone\March Update\Methodology\Methodology Meeting Notes 3-17-2022,doc Packet Pg. 181 9.A.1.e Findings of the Preliminary Study: Project is anticipated to generate approximately 17 net new PM peak hour trips. See the attached trip generation table. Study Type: Small Scale TIS ® Minor TIS ❑ Major TIS ❑ Studv Area: Boundaries: Airport -Pulling Road between Radio Road and Davis Boulevard (Link ID#5.0) based upon the Collier County 2%-2%-3% Significant Impact Criteria. Additional intersections to be analyzed: None Horizon Year(s): 2025 Analysis Time Period(s): AM & PM peak hour Future Off -Site Developments: None Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE Trip Generation, 11 th Edition Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None: Pass -by trips: None Internal trips (PUD): None Transmit use: n/a Other: n/a Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements: None Methodology & Assumptions: Non -site traffic estimates: 2021 AUIR Site -trip generation: ITE Trip Generation 1 I th Edition — LUC 210 (Single -Family Detached Housing). Trip distribution method: By Hand — 60% to/from the south on Airport-Pulting Road and 40% to/from the north on Airport -Pulling Road. See attached Figure 2. Traffic assignment method: By Hand Traffic growth rate: From comparison of the 2011 & 2021 AUIR's Special Features: (from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations: Sight distance: Queuing: Access location & configuration: Two site access connections to North Road. KA2021\1 1 November\14 2250 North Road -Collier County Rezone\March Update\Methodology\Methodology Meeting Notes 3-17-2022 doc Packet Pg. 182 9.A.1.e Traffic control: Signal system location & progression needs: On -site parking needs: Data Sources: ITE Trip Generation Report. 1 I i1t Edition Base maps: Prior study reports: Access policy and jurisdiction: Review process: Requirements: _ Miscellaneous: SIGNATURES Study Preparer Reviewers Applicant K:\2021\11 November\14 2250 North Road -Collier County Rezone\March Update\Methodology\Methodology Meeting Notes 3-17-2022.doe Packet Pg. 183 I 9.A.1.e I N n r� LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR SITE TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR SITE TRAFFIC 4-20%-No- PERCENT TRIP DISTRIBUTION N.T.S. TRANSPORTATION TRIP DISTRIBUTION & // TRCONSULTANTS, INC SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 2250 NORTH ROAD REZONE Packet Pg. 184 9.A.1.e TRIP GENERATION 2250 NORTH ROAD REZONE Trip Generation 2250 North Road Rezone Land Use Weekda A.M. Peak Hour WeekdayP.M. Peak Hour Daily (2-way) In Out I Total In Out I Total Single -Family Detached Housing 3 10 13 11 6 17 176 (15 Units) Packet Pg. 185 9.A.1.e TABLES IA, 2A & 3A Packet Pg. 186 @ z 0 Li � IL Lw �L� _jgw 0. LLJ w Q k � lz 2 0 m ( ( 0 0 k # % 2 \% 2 y mo k § \ z 0 m % % B § k U 2 § W S ( } W z ° 2 8 8 0 CM � k / § / � d © � � w © o 2 2 * § UJ C� § § ; � ■ z g g ( ( ) ! B 8 z % a. LU ■ z z § 2 % k k _ _ 2 § 7 & § C CL / / § 2 $ / / co a \ a LU w � = e § ) m q 2 2 x » / � § t \ U- % § § ( k § © S 0 $ ■ 2 u � w z LL co co § k § § § \ & m z « j o \ \ ) § LU � k § « ) o g � m D 2 - 2) a § 0& R w � & ' � m LU ƒ ) § § K � o 0 u LU ■ o 04 ) ] § § j w LU Q w � Y � o a § b 0 % U K o M z o § } ) ^ n } § 2 a 2 2 i f § 0 k k S � o o w { { w g g k k 7 0 @ 3 2 3 z « + z # E E � t § § U) z w ? 2 § § � k CL § / / 0 0 2 k cc cn f \ j } f m m e § k m ui k / 0 > c k § k ) k IL \ IL 9.A.1.e TABLE M ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULATIONS BASED UPON HISTORICAL AUIR DATA 2011 2021 CURRENT AUIR AUIR YRS OF ROADWAY SEGMENT ID# VOLUME VOLUME GROWTH Airport Pulling Rd Radio Rd to Davis Blvd 5.0 2,138 2,130 10 All traffic volumes were obtained from the 2011 & 2021 Annual Update Inventory Reports (AUIR) In instances where the historical data indicates a reduction in traffic or insufficient data was available to calculate • a growth rate due to construction, a minimum annual growth rate of 2.0% was assumed. SAMPLE GROWTH RATE CALCULATION 2021 AUIR 4(1/Yrs of Growth) Annual Growth Rate (AGR) _ -1 2011 AUIR 2,130 "(1i1o) AGR (Airport Pulling Rd = -1 2,138 AGR (Airport Pulling Rd) = -0.04% ANNUAL ACTUAL GROWTH GROWTH RATE RATE 2.00% -0.04% Packet Pg. 189 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 190 s8lels3 NOGJO NOOM - 6MOOOZZOZ-ld : L8V9Z) slepajeW dn)joeq-uoijeoijddv - a ju9wq3ejjv:juawq3ejjv Q Li r + E4 41 u 7 7 7 7 Eo �E L- 7 z A 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A - - - - - - - - - - - 7 I A ^fix—�y_r,NME -i A F. 74 -Vi X, ri iF "s I! n M.nnMNrvnnr.rrr,rrrvry S t Z z Z Z Z Z w w W ta-d —.=�W z z Z. 7- 2 z ve z z z 2 z z z 7 z V. V. V. UL w 9 p P Ld A2 =a 3 J., 3 3 F. -2 F, i2 -6' .12 E F, tz L iE �D L�l 7, E 7S :5 7E 4 72 -�i - I E- > ir 0 m x Z) 2 0 > D Q u E is D 72 -,-2 -2-2 -2 z z ea to .59 = —1 Z! 11 —1 '2 '2 '2 '2 J, Id A.! E E g y. u u u L) U Li U Ll U U �j Ll U Ll U U Ll Ll Ll Ll Ll I u W, L) U U u U L, UNZ L, L, < < < < < < < < < < < < < 2 :; 2 2 2 2 122222 2 7. E u u L� '�'7 IU7 17 17 17 1- L, 17 17 i 17 u u Ll �j L� L, U _ �:: L' U Ld Ll z z z L- _zzz wz w w w w w z z z z z z It � It — I! : N 11 11 11 ; Y 4 L" EE E 9.A.1.e TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS Packet Pg. 192 9.A.1.e Single -Family Detached Housing (210) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 174 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 246 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting venicie i rip veneration per uweiiing unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.43 4.45 - 22.61 2.13 Data Plot and Equation 1 20,000 15.000 H r C W Q 1- II 10,000 5,000 0f X X X X ,X X X 500 1, 2.000 2.500 3.00t X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve - - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.92 Ln(X) + 2.68 R'= 0.96 Trip Gen Manual, 11th Edition • Institute of Transportation Engineers l M .y a� M 2 IZ 3 Y V t4 m C M 0 Q a Q C d E t 0 ca .r r.+ Q C d E s 0 ca Q Packet Pg. 193 9.A.1.e Single -Family Detached Housing (210) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 192 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 226 Directional Distribution: 26% entering, 74% exiting Vehicle i rip Generation per luwening unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.70 0.27 - 2.27 0.24 Data Plot and Equation 2,000 1,500 W c W a H H 1,000 500 01 x x X X ,- X tI X x 1 ono 1 5no 9 nnn 9 5nn a nnr X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve - - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.91 Ln(X) + 0.12 R'= 0.90 Trip Gen Manual, 11th Edition * Institute of Transportation Engineers M d r M 2 Q 3 Y V R m c O M Q a Q C d E t 0 ct: w w Q c d E s 0 ca Q Packet Pg. 194 9.A.1.e Single -Family Detached Housing (210) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 208 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 248 Directional Distribution: 63% entering, 37% exiting venicile i rip Generation per uweilling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.94 0.35 - 2.98 0.31 Data Plot and Equation 2.50 2,00 N v c W a f' 1,50 n H 1,00 50 x X X X XX X x x X X X X X )0 500 1,000 1,500 2.000 2.500 3.00( X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve - - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.94 Ln(X) + 0.27 R'= 0.92 Trip Gen Manual, 11th Edition • Institute of Transportation Engineers M M 2 Q 3 Y t� ca m c 0 Q a Q c t 0 c� w Q c d E t 0 ca Q Packet Pg. 195 9.A.1.e N Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA Packet Pg. 196 9.A.1.e ENVIRONMENTAL DATA ROCK CREEK ESTATES Collier County, Florida MAY 2022 UPDATED JULY 2022 UPDATED OCTOBER 2022 Prepared By: Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc. 3211 68`h Street SW Naples, Florida 34105 (239) 263 - 2687 marcoe@prodigy.net Packet Pg. 197 9.A.1.e 3.08.00 Environmental Data Purpose As per requirements in LDC Sections 3.08.00 and questions in the CU Checklist Preparation Of Environmental Data Preparation of Environmental Data, Environmental Data Submittal Requirement shall be prepared by an individual with academic credentials and experience in the area of environmental science or natural resource management. Academic credentials and experience shall be a bachelor's or higher degree in one of the biological sciences with at least two years of ecological or biological professional experience in the State of Florida Qualifications of Environmental Consultant Collier Environmental Consultants Inc. 2/96 - Present 3211 68"' Street SW Naples, Florida 34105 Marco A. Espinar- Biologist Environmental Data. The following shall be submitted where applicable to evaluate projects. A) Wetlands i) Identify on Current Aerial / the location of all Collier County / SFWMD Jurisdictional wetlands according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System FLUCFCS A FLUCFCS map and vegetation inventory has been included. The site consists of approximately 11.36 acres. This project is located at 2250 North Road and encompasses approximately 11.36 acres. This project is in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County Florida. This site is located across from Naples Airport on the south side of North Road. The area is approximately 11.36 acres in size. The dominant forest types on these parcels are Mixed Exotic Hardwoods and Mangroves. The parcel has Rock Creek along its southern boundary. The availability of good functional habitat is very limited. This parcel is located in the urban area across from the local airport. To the east and west are single family lots. The parcel is bordered by an 8 foot chain link fence. The site has a home and a warehouse on the premises. The remaining vegetated areas are infested with a variety of exotic and Packet Pg. 198 9.A.1.e nuisance plants. The area does have some scattered native trees such as Slash pines and Live oaks. The site has evidence of some animal husbandry. The site has some remanent fencing and cross fencing. The site lacks good native habitat. The only native habitat would be a small mangrove fringe along Rock creek. This request is to rezone the Property from Agricultural (A) to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to allow for the development of a 15 unit single family residential subdivision. i) Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the guidelines or recommendations of the FFWCC and the USFWS. Survey times may be reduced or waived where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low as determined by the FFWCC and USFWS. Where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low, the survey time may be reduced or waived by the County Manager or designee. Wildlife Listed Species Study (LDC 10.02.3 . A.2. m) An examination of the parcel was conducted. While no listed animals were identified on site the general area is known to support several listed species. No eagle nests were near this site. This parcel offers very little functional habitat for vertebrates. This site is located in the urban area with no native habitat, surrounded by residential homes. This project meets the Objective of CCME Objective 7.1. CCME OBJECTIVE 7.1: Direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their habitats. (The County relies on the listing process of State and Federal agencies to identify species that require special protection because of their endangered, threatened, or species of special concern status. Listed animal species are those species that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has designated as endangered. ii) Provide Listed Plants identified in LDC Section 3.04.03 See Attached Vegetation List / FLUCCS Code Map No other listed plants were found. Most of the site has been previously cleared and/or consist of exotic vegetation. If a listed plant species is encountered the developer will follow the criteria as outlined in 3.04.03 Requirements for Protected Plants, Packet Pg. 199 9.A.1.e 3.04.03 - Requirements for Protected Plants When habitat containing the following listed plants is proposed to be impacted, plants listed as Rare and Less Rare (below) shall be relocated to on -site preserves if the on -site preserves are able to support the species of plants. Relocation of epiphytic species of plants listed as Rare and Less Rare (below) shall only be required for plants located within eight feet of the ground. Plants listed as Less Rare shall be relocated to the on - site preserves only if the preserves do not already contain these species. When available, only two plants per species per acre of plants listed as Less Rare are required to be relocated, up to a maximum of ten plants per species per preserve. When available, seed from Tillandsia may be transferred to trees in lieu of relocation of plants. Other than for Tillandsia, the species of plants listed below may be planted within preserves from nursery gown stock in lieu of relocation. Sites infested with exotic species of Metamasius weevil which feed on Tillandsia, shall not be allowed to relocate Tillandsia species. iii) Wildlife Management Plans in accordance with LDC Section 3.04.00 See Attached Listed Species Study, Black bear management plan may be required at the time of SDP. C) Native Vegetation Preservation i) For Sites or Portions of Sites Cleared of Native Vegetation or in Agricultural Use: Not Applicable ii) Identify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the FLUCFCS system and provide a legend foe each of the FLUCFS codes identified. Aerials and overlay information must be legible at the scale provided. Provide calculations for the acreage of native vegetation required to be retained on site. Include the above referenced calculations and aerials on the SDP or PPL. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve criteria pursuant to LDC section 3.05.07 have been meet. Location Maps / Aerials (LDC 10.02.3.A.2.m) Aerials and location maps have been provided. A FLUCFCS map and vegetation inventory has been included. The site consists of approximately 11.36 acres. Packet Pg. 200 9.A.1.e The Estates at Rock Creek is located at 2250 North Road in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County Florida. The site is located along North Road south of the municipal airport. The parcel is directly across from Terminal Drive. The parcel is bordered by North Road along its northern boundary. Single family homes towards the east and west of the parcel. And Rock Creek along its southern boundary. See Attached Location Maps, Vegetation Maps / FLUCCS Maps Native Vegetation Calculation (LDC3.05.07.A.) 3.05.07 Preservation Standards This site is totally void of any native habitat except for the mangrove fringe along Rock Creek. Along the shoreline are some mangroves leather ferns and buttonwood. This shoreline consists of approximately 0.52 acres. The mangrove area is the only native habitat on site. As such as per LDC 3.05.07 (I) iv. - while the mangrove area may not meet the minimum dimension it is the only existing native habitat on site. Docks will be built waterward of the mangrove area impacting approximately 0.01 acres. Approximately 0.51 acres will be set aside as preserve. After exotics are removed any areas void of vegetation should be planted with mangroves. 3.05.07 - Preservation Standards Hj Preservation Standards b. Minimum dimensions. Thin linear and perimeter "picture frame -shaped" preserves are discouraged, unless such preserve shapes are dictated by environmental or environmental regulatory considerations. Connections to other preserves, conservation areas, natural flowways, natural water bodies, water management lakes, estuaries, government owned or targeted lances for preservation purposes or existing listed wildlife habitat, when present, are encouraged to establish the largest contiguous natural area possible. The following minimum widths shall apply: i. Twenty feet, for property less than 10 acres. ii. An average of 30 feet in width but not less than 20 feet in width, for property equal to 10 acres and less than twenty acres. iii. An average of 50 feet in width but not less than 20 feet for property of twenty acres and greater. iv. If the existing native vegetation does not meet the minimum dimensions specified above and is required to be preserved pursuant to the preserve Packet Pg. 201 9.A.1.e selection criteria in section 3.05.07, then the existing native vegetation may be used to satisfy the preservation requirement This will be consistent with Goal 6 of Collier County GW's Objective 6.1 Protect native communities through the application of minimum preservation requirements. Clearly identify the location of all preserves: The site lacks native vegetation as such no preserve will be provided. Soil Ground Water Sampling Natural Site Sea Level Rise LDC Section 3.03.05 - Sea Level Rise An analysis shall be required demonstrating the impact of a six (6) inch rise in sea level for development projects on a shoreline. This requirement shall be met by inclusion of this analysis in an environmental impact statement (EIS). This requirement shall be waived when an EIS is not required. This analysis shall demonstrate that the development will remain fully functional for its intended use after a 6 inch rise in sea level. In the event that the applicant cannot meet this requirement, a list shall be provided by the applicant of the changes necessary in order for the development to meet the standard. Attached as an exhibit is a sea rise simulation of 1 foot_ Twice the required sea level rise. The exhibit shows the project fully functioning. In fact, a 12 inch sea level rise has little affect and demonstrates that the project will remain fully functional. In addition, a professional engineer has demonstrated such a rise as having little to no effect on this proj ect. Packet Pg. 202 9.A.1.e QUALIFICATIONS I Yi r O O O N N O N J d Packet Pg. 203 9.A.1.e Marco A. Espinar 3211 68"' St SW Naples, Fl 34105 Ila W6 I EDUCATION Bilingual: English & Spanish Office: 239-263-2687 Home 239-263-2747 Cardinal Mooney High School Diploma 1980 Sarasota, Florida Manatee Junior College AA Degree 1982 Bradenton, Florida Biology University of South Florida BS Degree 1990 Tampa, Florida Biology Completed USF Cooperative Education Program April 1988 USF Undergraduate Research - USF 1985 Apalachicola Archaeological Expedition & Research - Lab Coordinator of Fauna Identification from Archeological Sites - Studies of Seagrass Beds (Thalassia testudinum) in Upper Tampa Bay, Florida - Growth Rates of Marine Algae ( Gracilaria tikvahiae, G. verrucosa, G. deblis } Port Manatee, Florida EMPLOYMENT HISTORY & EXPERIENCE Collier Environmental Consultants Inc. Owner & Environmental Planning Naples, Florida 2/96 - Present Biologist Environmental Permitting, Planning Vegetation Inventory Mitigation & Monitoring Plans Threatened and Endangered Species Survey Licensed Agent Gopher Tortoise Permitting, Testing, Relocation Exotic Plant Removal / Poisoning Mitigation Plantings Jurisdictional Determination Environmental Impact Statements Red Cockaded Woodpecker Survey UMAM Analysis BP- Natural Resource Advisor - Deepwater Horizon MS Canyon 252 Oil Spill Gulfport, Mississippi - Dauphin Island, Alabama - Pensacola, Florida Packet Pg. 204 9.A.1.e Turrell & Associates, Inc. Naples, Florida 2/94 - 12/95 Environmental Permitting, Planning Threatened and Endangered Species Survey Environmental Impact Statements Senior Environmental Planner Supervision of Staff Review Staff Reports South Florida Water Management District Environmental Analyst Fort Myers, Florida 2/93 - 8/93 Dredge & Fill Pen -nit Review Surface Water Permit Review Collier County Government, Development Services Environmental Specialist 11 Naples, Florida 10/90 — 2/93 Site Development Plan Compliance Planned Unit Development Compliance Site Drainage Inspections Southwest Florida Water Management District Tampa, Florida 9/87 —10/90 Landscape Inspections Environmental Enforcement Field Services Technician As -Built Inspections of Storm Water System - Engineering, Survey Surface and Ground Water Permit Compliance Well Construction & Abandonment Inspections Southwest Florida Water Management District (CO-OP) Environmental Scientists 1 Brooksville, Florida 1/86 - 9/87 Wetland Vegetation Studies At Major Well Fields Water Quality Sampling & Testing PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS Southwest Florida Association of Environmental Professionals, Member Elected to very First Governing Board and served 2 terms, served on founding association — Bylaws Committee Appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Served on the Collier County Environmental Advisory Board Appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Currently Serving on the Development Services Advisory Committee Packet Pg. 205 9.A.1.e Currently Serving on the Land Development Code Sub -Committee Appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Served on Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee 6 years Served as Chairman of the Conservation Collier Lands Evaluation and Management Sub- committee, Awarded for Ten (10) years of my Voluntary Service to Collier County By the Board of County Commissioners - January 2010 Awarded Outstanding Advisory Board Member Award - February 2009 by Collier County Board of County Commissioners Gopher Tortoise Management and Mitigation Professional Training Program Successful Completion 9/01 REFERENCES UPON REQUEST Packet Pg. 206 9.A.1.e LOCATION MAPS rn ti ti r O O O N N O N J d Packet Pg. 207 9.A.1.e N d d N N r R r W Y d N L U Y O w O ti ti O O O N N O N J d a Packet Pg. 208 STH AVE •. >- - F 2BTH AVE N a COUR JASMIN - A j 1 1 " ISLA VISTA LNCOUR t j _ - r� P "BOW LINE DR �OIANA AVE e. _ r i� - �.• Y.t [["3 �'• r- y _ - _ 'm r GOLDEN GATE 93 IYr4 Z �r •� '2 IQ GATE ;KWY�� i�L177LE �,y .' r ' • Y' ��'^'63RD ST S"N q^^"o : ;}I `•_ = _ COLLINGTREE CT It a ao.a w y 2 G'- O - VINLANO WAY - < jARNOLD-AVE�......r 1�1 O - CLIPPER WAY 0....•e O-• m � J�MERCANTILE AYE 4'yt1E}' 7po iATH AVE z. ta'��i�.�.iawst+ear r J _' U •o �� 13THAVEN p asr r PROGRESS'AVE z - ..+ g2YN AVE N �� >R��► � ., i z A► .tatl� u0t _ 5 HORSESHQE DR l DOMESTIC AYE I YLI�CA + tOTH AVEK ' r �tl1�1�'41ar ` ": J� VINTAGE LN �� ENTERPRISfAVE �ia1� n ~� .�.ar{� ail 4 K-yar !. Imo._ rr- �► .: r (•' a '� ��EXCHANGE'AYE .m- - "•�I La - - P'l ,�='�ri�. -... - Ion 7p NIMITZ ST -� ' E RR* 71 •v rt A , a- i;1a - �V� 1' PROS�PE+CTLA E '�l�A� D {�S y z � �- r czt m ? k o' _ m" s, �.r c YNTAYEH�•�'' >v.- -�l;eWE fFtlp `K�� .z p mA "5TH'AVEN AIRWAY OR . RADiORD•i •e LLo- i�ab N ATHAVEK. 14'w ■ilim ^ s a W AVUITIOK DR S' KATHY.AN O Lu RM RD IL•BLVDii? RALriv" t; ;� • m m_ GENT FUEL FA _ d �. Y X. 1 1•! 15TrAVE S �r ,din Y a+'"{• .•.,N?,=r.RDAVE3SHRy JANS'LN m j' 4TN p AVES N i FLAMINGO.DR �' m N` STK r S. D. �• ur ]'3 7ESTEY AVF, 1 O O N �10XFIRE to mi�eR . •'•?fr•.: LN--DAVIS BLYD .. IT �'PINES.LN ap WAY n +Lm.. - R7YAR i07H'AYE 5 `' - r• �, pfuGAei q LINWOOD AVE Q __ GDU x p r IITHAVE3'pVES to W • ti ��MANORCAAVEI yyr' PAYNECT`- BROlrD 12TH•AYES CHURCH'AVE. *m b y v - " AVEm m EYERGREENLAKE GI ■13TH'AVESt, ; JACKSONE _ ,. S �' . , - `im _, n r: i4TK'AYE S._, a •.,� _ �3 m a_ . . ue OR , ` �� 2 v AVES"" r.,.c DOLPHIN RD.- -;mow A m r4 n S ( G p i6TN' * j m m I p 17TH'AWr- MARLIN DR z O i r.IBECCAAVE o ieTHAYES - n I rI �`�m. E.�f�p S8 C t�• �. J WAHOO = tY,1 tn• - Ip�'c�t - (`O '''Y'�C ���R 21BTAVES °'+l ml + b •' �QiL l.�r M._ '•'-" `� TROUTCi '•/m :x ARECA�AYE• } p �, ' tiF• 1: �_ L- i :t• s� 4� : A-ENCHANTING'BLYD' m m J x . SHORT LNG • :y _� O GWLFORD RD c v !r T i L •gin . t O�—,JEEPERS OR MOONLIT IRIS DR�- �_' LAKE VE _ _ I i MOHAWK1P?� H15Gi " 1 , I 1��1.. I I - THOMASSON DR ., AYNE OR } oil Y Ma` Wise 20z0-r:2_ LOCATION Selected Custom Parcels / Streets Mapwlse A� County Boundaries Parcel Outlines G II IF-1 c " 0 480 960 144011 Copyright 2020 MapWise, Inc. All rights reserved, w,w,mapwise.com. This map is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. MapWise and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any losses resulting from such use. Q Packet Pg. 210 9.A.1.e 1w NMI 1 �io�tlr,.I�ld11 LOCATIONSelected Custom Parcels Streets MapWise N /� / County Boonclaries Y Parcel Outlines 0 120 240 3&0 ft Copyright 2020 Miapwlse, Inc, All rights reserved. www.mopwise.COM. This map IS Informational Only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. MapWise and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any losses resulting from such use. T M C Q Packet Pg. 211 Collier County Property Appraiser Property Summary Site 2250 Parcel No 00386760404 Address NORTH RD Site City NAPLES *Disclaimer Name / Address ELAH HOLDINGS LLC 2590 GOLDEN GATE PKWY SUITE 106 9.A.1.e Site Zone to 134104 City NAPLES State ' FL Zip 34105 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 5A02 000100 024 SA02 2 50 25 10.25 2 50 25 COM CEN SEC 2, S 30FT TO POB E 664.90FT, S641.80FT, S20FT+-FT TO Legal APPROXIMATE MHWL OF ROCK CREEK, THENCE MEANDER ALG MHWL SWLY, WLY, NWLY AND SLY TO N & S 1/4 LI, N 184FT, N 645.56FT TO POB Millage Area a S1 Mil age Rates *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 -ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code O 2 - MOBILE HOMES 4.889 6.5335 11.4225 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book -Page Amount 02/01/21 5901-3946 $ 1,105,000 11/21/14 5098-.3074 $ 77S.200 09/03/10 4601-1510 $ 0 04/29/04 3552-2476 $ 0 04/29/04 3552-2475 $ 0 12/11/02 3172-3031 $ 0 08/23/02 3096-2204 $ 0 12/11 /01 2941-2168 $ 0 09/13/01 2892-302 $ 0 12/10/00 2761- 036 $ 0 09/07/99 2589-1519 _ $ 0 07/13/98 2439-3455 $ 500,000 01/25/95 2024-1335 _ $ 0 01/24/95 2024-50 $ 0 2021 Preliminary Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value _ $ 871,250 {+) Improved Value _ $ 205,786 (_) Market Value $ 1,077,036 {_) Assessed Value $ 1,077,036 {=� School Taxable Value_ $ 1,077,036 (=) Taxable Value $ 1,077,036 If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Packet Pg. 212 Collier County Property Appraiser Property Detail Site 2250 -F_ Parcel No 00386760404 Address NORTH RD Site City NAPLES *Disclaimer Name / Address ELAH HOLDINGS LLC 2590 GOLDEN GATE PKWY SUITE 106 9.A.1.e Site Zone 34104 *Note City NAPLES State FL Zip 3410S _Permits (Provided for reference purposes only. *Full Disclaimer. ) Tax Yr Issuer Permit # CO Date Tmp CO Final Bldg Type 2001 COUNTY 0009-0733 GARAGE Land Building/Extra Features # Calc Code Units # Year Description Area Ad1 10 ACREAGE 10.2S Built _ Area 10 2000 MOBILE HOME 2108 2108 20 2000 W DECK 480 480 30 2001 GARAGE 6000 6000 40 1965 CARPORT 646 646 Packet Pg. 213 Collier County Property Appraiser Property Summary Site 2250 Parcel No 00386760404 Address NORTH RD Site City NAPLES *Disclaimer Name / Address ELAH HOLDINGS LLC 2590 GOLDEN GATE PKWY SUITE 106 City NAPLES Map No. Strap No. 5A02 000100 024 5A02 State F L Section Township Range 2 1 50 25 9.A.1.e Site Zone 34104 *Note Zip 34105 Acres *Estimated 10.25 2 50 25 COM CEN SEC 2, S 30FT TO POB E 664.90FT, S641.80FT, S20FT+-FT TO Legal APPROXIMATE MHWL OF ROCK CREEK, THENCE MEANDER ALG MHWL SWLY, WLY, NWLY AND SLY TO N & S 1/4 LI, N 184FT, N 645.56FT TO POB Millage Area O 51 Sub./Condo 100 -ACREAGE HEADER Use Code o 2 - MOBILE HOMES Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book -Page Amount 02/01/21 5901-3946 $ 1,105,000 11/21/14 5098-3074 $ 775,200 09/03/10 4601-1510 $ 0 04/29/04 3552-2476 $ 0 04/29/04 3552-2475 $ 0 12/11/02 3172-3031 $ 0 08/23/02 3096-2204 $ 0 12/11 /01 2941-2168 $ 0 09/13/01 2892-302 $ 0 12/10/00 2761-3036 $ 0 09/07/99 2589-1519 $ 0 07/13/98 2439-3455 $ 500,000 01/25/95 2024-1335 $ 0 01/24/95 2024-50 $ 0 Millage Rates* *Calculations School Other Total 4.889 6.5335 11.4225 2021 Preliminary Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value $ 871,250 +� Improved Value $ 205,786 (_) Market Value - $ 1,077,036 (_) Assessed Value - $ 1,077,036 {_) School Taxable Value $ 1,077,036 {_) Taxable Value $ 1,077,036 If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Packet Pg. 214 9.A.1.e Collier County Property Appraiser Property Detail Site 2250 Parcel No 00386760404 Address NORTH RD Site City NAPLES *Disclaimer Name / Address ELAH HOLDINGS LLC 2590 GOLDEN GATE PKWY SUITE 106 Site Zone 34104 *Note City NAPLES State FL Zip 3410S Permits (Provided for reference purposes only. *Full Disclaimer. ) Tax Yr Issuer Permit # CO Date Tmp CO Final Bldg Type 2001 COUNTY 0009-0733 GARAGE Land Building/Extra Features # Calc Code Units # Year Description Area Adj 10 ACREAGE 10.25 Built Area 10 2000 MOBILE HOME 2108 2108 20 2000 W DECK 480 480 30 2001 GARAGE 6000 6000 40 196S CARPORT 646 646 Packet Pg. 215 9.A.1.e Owner and Property Description Owner Name: ELAH HOLDINGS LLC 2590 GOLDEN GATE PKWY Mailing Address: NAPLES FL 34105 USA Site Address: 2250 NORTH RD NAPLES FL 34104 Subdivision: ACREAGE HEADER County: COLLIER Land Use Code: 02 Land Use Desc: Mobile Homes Land Use FDOR Code: 02 Land Use FDOR Mobile Homes Desc: Zoning: Acres: 11 24 PIN: 00386760404 PIN2: 386760404 ALTKEY: 000100 024 5A02 Last Data Update: 09/16/2021 Legal Description (not official) Parcel Map 2 50 25 COM CEN SEC 2. S 30FT TO POB E 664.90FT, S641.80FT, S20FT+-FT TO APPROXIMATE MHWL OF ROCK CREEK, THENCE MEANDER ALG MHWL SWLY, WLY, NWLY AND Building Summary 2020 Certified Values Actual Year Built: 2000 Land: $871,250 Effect. Year Built: Land Agricultural: $0 Living SgFt: 2108 Building: $0 Total SgFt: Misc: $0 Adjusted SgFt: 2108 Just Value: $1.077,036 Beds: Assessed Value: S1.077,036 Baths: Stories: 0 Num, of Buildings: Sale Date BooklPage 2021-02-01 5901 / 3946 2014-11-21 5098/3074 2010-09-03 4601/1510 2004-04-29 3552/2476 2004-04-29 3552/2475 Title Name MGR MOGELVANG ERIK Recent Sales Docnum Price Instrument $1.105.000 $775,200 $0 $0 $0 Sunbiz Corporate Data Addressl 2590 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY Qualified NAPLES city Vac. or Impr. State FL Grantor Zip Cocle 341(1„ Q Packet Pg. 216 9.A.1.e Map Layer Stats Soils MUID Map Unit Name Component Component Hydric Hydric Percent Name Pct Grp of Total DURBIN AND WULFERT 40 MUCKS, FREQUENTLY DURBIN 45 YES AID 15.6 FLOODED 7 IMMOKALEE FINE SAND IMMOKALEE 94 NO BID 84.4 TOTAL ACRES Land Cover 2017 (includes wetlands) LUCODE Description WMD YEAR Percent Of Total 1180 Residential, rural - one unit on 2 or more acres SFWMD 2014- 100 2016 6120 Mangrove Swamps SFWMD 2014- 0 2016 TOTAL ACRES Future Land Use FLU Code Description Jurisdiction County Percent of Total Urban Residential UNINCORPORATED COLLIER 99.6 Subdistrict TOTAL ACRES City Limits City name County Percent of Total Acres TOTAL ACRES Census Demographics Census Tract 12021010601 Acres 1.75 9.49 11.24 Acres 11.19 0.05 11.24 Acres 11.2 11.24 11.24 w Q Packet Pg. 217 9.A.1.e FLUCCS MAP / VEGETATION INVENTORY f h :y FT O w r O O O N N O N J d Packet Pg. 218 9.A.1.e • 1 7r � f tt AL 49aAL 2lil6.4ffAREE.� FLUCCS MAP Labels Drawing Points Drawing Lines Drawing Polygons Drawing Selected custom Parcels Streets OSM Hybrid County Boundaries IV Parcel Outlines i Q 0 120 240 360 tt Copyright 2022 Mapwise, Inc. All rights reserved. www.mapwlse.com. This map is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as 1p ii content. User assumes all risk of use. MapWise and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any losses resulting from such use. Packet Pg. 219 9.A.1.e FLUCCS CODE AND VEGETATION INVENTORY FLUCCS CODE (Description) Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Status 612 Mangroves - Shorebank This habitat is the interface between the project site and Rock Creek. The area is vegetated with Black mangroves and Australian pine. There are pockets of with mangroves the pockets of exotics along the shoreline. Black mangroves Avicennia germinana OBL Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Exotic Cabbage palm Sabal palmetto FAC Shoebutton ardisia Ardisia elliptica Exotic Wedelia Wedelia trilobata Nuisance Red Mangroves Rhizophora mangle OBL Leather ferns Acrostichum aureum OBL Mangrove rubber Rhabdadenia biflora Vine Australian pine Casuarina equisetifolia Exotic 438 Mixed Hardwoods Exotics Dominated Portions of this area have been previously cleared. The site has a home and a warehouse on the premises. The site is disturbed by dense exotics as canopy, midstory and ground cover. The canopy does have some native trees such as Slash pines and live oaks. There are some areas with soil disturbance. Remnant fencing and cross fencing from some past animal husbandry can be seen. The entire site has been impacted by homesteading and exotic vegetation. At times these exotics form impenetrable strands. Slash pine Pinus elliotti FACW Cabbage palm Sabal palmetto FAC laurel oak Quercus laurifolia FACW Live oak Quercus virginiana FACU Australian pine Casuarina equisetifolia Exotic Strangler fig Ficus aurea FAC Ear leaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis Exotic Banyan Ficus benghalensis Exotic Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Exotic java plum Syzygium cumin Exotic Woman tongue Albizia lebbeck Exotic cocoplum Chrysobalanus icaco FACW wax myrtle Myrica cerifera FAC+ Broom sedge Andropogon virginicus FAC- Flat sedge Cyperus ligularis FACW Packet Pg. 220 9.A.1.e SOILS rn ti ti r O O O N N O N J d Packet Pg. 221 9.A.1.e COLLIER COUNTY SOIL LEGEND REVISED 1190 H. YAMATAKI EMRIC H 2 3 HOLOPAW FS, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM ULABAR FS CMOBEE, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM AND DANIA MUCKS DEPRESSIONAL u 6 .7 RIVIERA, LIMESTONE SIIHSTRATUM- COPELAND FS IMMOKALEE FS 8 MYAKKA FS 10 11 OT DSMAR FS, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUItij HALLANDALE n 14 15 FS PINEDA FS, LIMESTONE SUSSTRAT�7M POMELLO FS ?o OLDSMAR FS 17 BASINGER FS H 18 RIVIERA FS, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM FT. DR%JI- .20 2? AND -MALABAR. _HIGH. FS BOCA FS H 22 23 CROBEE, WINDER AND GATOR SOILS, DEPRESSIONA. HOLOPAW AND OKEELANT 2S SOILS IAL BOCA, RIVIERA, LIMESTONESUBSE�TUM A N COPELAND FS DEPRESSION.IL 27 HOLOPAW FS 28 29 PINEDA AND RIVIERA FS WABASSO FS K 31 HILOLO LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM MARGATE SOILS JUPITER ANL 32 URBAN LAND 33 34 URBAN LAND HOLOPAW BASINGER COMPLEX URBAN LAND IMMOKALEB OLDSMAR LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM COMPLEX 3 5 36 URBANL,AN,D AQUENTS COMPLEX ORGANIC SUBSTRATU IIDOP,THENTS SHAPED M 37 TLFSCAWILLA FS 38 UR]3AN L<�ND MATLACHA. LIMESTONE, SUBSTRATUM BOCA COMPLEX H 39 SATELLITE FS 40 4 DURBIN AND WULFERT MUCKS URBAN LAND :. 42 SATELLITE COMPLEX C_ANA:VERAL BEACHES H a3 S ASOCI?�, WINDER, RIVIERA. 'TION LIMESTONE CHOBEE SOILS DEPRESSIONAL SUBSTRATA p, H 45 a 8 PAOLA FS (1-8 Percent slopes) t= PENNSUCCO SOIL (Marl _ 49 50 r (slate OHOADALE AND BOCA Fp_airie}��i) EE • - H 51 = SL, PRAIRIE ( OCHOPEE (marl } F'5L H H 52 53 KESSON MUCK FRr-!¢UENTLY FLO ESTERO Hc ri ' AjNT PECKISH SOILS FRODED ��N ITER BOCA COMPLEX QUENTLY FLOODED 55 BASINGER FS, OCCASIO -ALLY FLOODED . Packet Pg. 222 9.A.1.e r s' •rE i�1 �IJ a SOILS - H Y D R I C SOILS Selected Custom Parcels Streets MapWise N County Boundaries Parcel Outlines Soils Boundaries Soils - Nydnc W 'rf C d t V Ia r Q 0 120 240 360 fl Copyright 2020 MapWise. Inc. All rights reserved. www.mapwise.com. This map is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. Mapwise and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any losses resulting rrnm such use. Packet Pg. 223 9.A.1.e HISTORICAL AERIALS rn ti ti r O O O N N O N J d Packet Pg. 224 j� 0.� a � Vie. 9.A.1.e N d d N N r R r W Y d N L U Y O w O ti ti O O O N N O N J d a Packet Pg. 226 9.A.1.e SITE PLAN rn ti ti r O O O N N O N J d Packet Pg. 227 USE: NAPLES MUNICIPAL 10' WIDE TYPE "D" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL 9 AIRPORT MAX. COMBINED FENCE/WALL/BERM HEIGHT o\ ZONING: AIRPORT OF 10' AND MIN. OF 6' Lu - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------------------- NORTH ROAD --------------- 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL FENCE USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A EXISTING PRIVATE RECREATION BUILDING PROPERTY BOUNDARY USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A 10' TYPE "A" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL FENCE BOAT RAMP 1 ►OOOi ►000 '000 ►i�i�i� ►i�i� 7 OPEN SPACE/ STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA (0.65 AC) i 6'LANDSCAPE R / BUFFER RESERVATION PRESERVE- (0.51 AC) MANGROVE LINE R -- 9.A.1.e USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A 10' TYPE "A" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL FENCE APPROXIMATE MEAN !.. •'• • pNl HIGH WATER LINE / / • � EK IPPPRpX\�,pj� Vpp P'C\ OCK C? Ft OPEN SPACE SUMMARY REQUIRED OPEN SPACE 6.82 AC 60 % PROVIDED OPEN SPACE 6.82 AC 60 % r LAND USE SUMMARY I RESIDENTIAL TRACT 6.45 AC 57% RESIDENTIAL / PRIVATE RECREATIONAL AMENITY .78 AC 7 % PRESERVE .51 AC 4% BUFFER .60AC 5% OPEN SPACE / STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA .65 AC 6 % RIGHT-OF-WAY 2.37 AC 21 % TOTAL PROJECT AREA 11.36 AC 100%J PLAN REVISIONS REV 1 2022-06-07 REV 2 2022-10-24 REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENTS REV 3 2022-11-17 REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENTS REV 4 2023-01-11 REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENTS n REV 5 2023-02-23 REVISED PER COUNTY COMMENTS 28100 Bmbt Grande Drive Suite 305 Bonita Springs, Florid. 341, T.I. 239.405,7777 viww.rvipl—ing.— !NERAL LOCATION OF PRIVATE DOCK AREA USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: RMF-6 USE: MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: RMF-6 PROPERTY BOUNDARY LEGEND INGRESS/EGRESS R RESIDENTIAL ® DEVIATION LOCATION OPEN SPACE / ® STORMWATER MANAGEMENTAREA PRESERVE (0.51 AC) NOTES 1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATIONS DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. 2. ALL ACREAGES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION AT THE TIME OF SDP OR PLAT APPROVAL. 3. THE LOCATION OF THE ONSITE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND RESIDENTIAL TRACTS IS PRELIMINARY AND MAY BE ADJUSTED AT SITE PLAN APPROVAL. 4. NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVE REQUIRED: 25 % OF NATIVE VEGETATION (0.52 AC X 0.25 = 0.13 AC). NATIVE PRESERVATION PROVIDED 0.51 AC. 5. MAXIMUM PERMITTED UNITS / DENSITY CALCULATION: 11.36± ACRES x 1.33 UNITS / ACRE = 15 UNITS. ® 1 75' 1 i0' 31 SCALE: 1"= 150'-0" ROCK CREEK ESTATES • RPUD MASTER PLAN (EXHIBIT C) V COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 23, 2023 PROJECT#22001262 8 ELAH HOLDINGS, LLC Packet Pg. 228 9.A.1.e ROCK CREEK ESTATES LISTED SPECIES SURVEY Collier County, Florida NOVEMBER 2021 Prepared By: Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc. 3211 68t` Street SW Naples, Florida 34105 (239) 263 — 2687 marcoe@prodigy.net Packet Pg. 229 9.A.1.e I Introduction / Purpose This report is an account of a Listed wildlife and plants species survey, recently performed at 2250 North Road. subject project encompasses 11.26 acres and is located in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County Florida. The purpose of this study is to identify and describe key habitats and report any listed species using the site that may be at risk due to possible future development. This survey and report are based on fieldwork performed during October 2 02 1. See Location Map II Site Description This site is located across from Naples Airport on the south side of North Road. The area is approximately 11.26 acres in size. The dominant forest types on these parcels are Mixed Exotic Hardwoods and Mangrove. The availability of good functional habitat is very limited. This parcel is located in the urban area across from the local airport. To the east and west are single family lots. The parcel is bordered by a 8 foot chain link fence. The site has a home and a warehouse on the premises. The remaining vegetated areas are infested with a variety of exotic and nuisance plants. The area does have some native trees such as Slash pines and Live oaks. The site has evidence of some animal husbandry. The site has some remanent fencing and cross fencing. The site lacks good native habitat. HABITAT TYPE FLUCCS CODE Mixed Exotic Hardwoods 438 Mangroves 612 See Exhibit #2 - FLUCCS Map / Vegetation Inventory III Listed Species Survey The required survey for a Listed Species Survey calls for a survey covering 100 % of the site, at prescribed transect distances per site acreage. Such a survey was conducted in October 1-15, 2021. Established transects were oriented north - south and east - west and superimposed on an aerial map of the site. These transects were ground - located and walked by compass bearing. Early morning (0730 - 1000 ), mid -day (1100 - 1500) and late -day (1500 - 1800) time periods were chosen to survey these transects.. In addition, field work was conducted over the span of a few months. All possible species of plants and animals listed by state and federal agencies were noted. Packet Pg. 230 9.A.1.e IV Results & Discussions Listed Flora Refer to Exhibit # 2 - Vegetation Inventory Listed Fauna Refer to Exhibit # 3 - Wildlife Species Observed Bald Eagle This general area has several bald eagle nests. These have been active bald eagle nest for a several years. There is nest number, # CO 901, # CO 064 and # CO 027A. None of these nests will be affected by this project. An exhibit showing the locations of these nests has been provided. Florida Black Bear No individuals were observed during this survey even though Black bears are known to inhabit the general area. Special attention was given for signs such as scraps, tracks and scat. This mammal has a large home range and is known to inhabit the area. Bonneted Bat The Florida bonneted bat is the largest species of bat in Florida. Previously known as the Florida (Wagner's) mastiff bats these bats were reclassified as a separate species unique to Florida. The species can grow to a length of 6.5 inches with a wingspan of 20 inches. This is a flying mammal free to traverse great distances. This parcel has some canopy trees and/or cabbage palms_ Examination of all trees with potential cavities was conducted. The site does have a few dead pines trees. Special examination of all these trees were conducted. Specifically, these trees were examined for any cavities and/or snags. The density of Brazilian pepper and other midstory plants would impede flight patterns. No individuals and/or guano were found. This project is not anticipated to negatively impact the species. Conclusions Our survey found no listed species on this site. Transects were walked on straight compass bearings along a grid spaced at approximately 40 yards apart for the entire parcel. Other transects were primarily meandering transects through areas of prime habitat. All transects were walked at varying times from post -dawn & mid -day to pre - Packet Pg. 231 9.A.1.e sunset hours. Some days were abruptly halted due to heavy storm events. Signs of small mammals such as raccoons were readily visible in these areas. Several species of wading and songbirds were seen. The number of exotics throughout the site has greatly affected the site. Another factor contributing to the decline of quality habitat is the surrounding development. The best habitat is the water, mangrove shoreline interface. During this survey no threatened and/or endangered species were identified vertebrates Vertebrates - Threatened Endan eyed and Species of S ecial Concern Species Black bear Florida panther Everglades mink Big Cypress Fox squirrel Bonneted Bat Indigo snake American alligator Gopher tortoise Gopher Frog Present Absent Southeastern American kestrel Red -Cockaded woodpecker Florida Scrub Jay Wood stork Snail kite Bald eagle Limpkin Osprey White ibis Tricolored heron Snowy egret Reddish egret Little blue heron Listed Ve etation Tillandsia spp. x x x x X X X X X Not on this site Packet Pg. 232 RADIO 9.A.1.e Naples Municipal Airport r'�k� � 'QO FUEL FAR_ WFi D N 71 -i 'a L>r` zti��' ESTEY AVE m ESTEY.AVE �9LIID1AIV L•N�..... o A lYYii� RBOR LN p z Z t=. 41 Wise 2020 ! ` LOCATION JR5 ST �r � �� � �� � r JANS LN I! �uT Fit I `TERRACE AVET a.= I g DAWS BLVD_ > r I ITiIM oar r -T I lit mlgrl 11 w MIA KIRKWOOD-AVE-rn I I Ii III l I WIILD.PINES Selected Custom Parcels iOV Streets MapWise Streets OSM Streets MapWise ' County Boundaries IV V Parcel Outlines - V F- �WESWEW DR n it � 111 7 HAZEL- T NORTH RD }rD, C7 Z f rT a IMv F Pal- rDAVIS BLVD— c :II�11i1111■illlll� a 0 480 9W 1440 It Copyright 2020 MapWise, Inc. All rights reserved. www.mapwise.com. This map is Informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. MapWise and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any losses resulting From such use. Packet Pg. 233 28TH AVE N p �• �ir MM AVE N � � • �• - O COUR AS IN . � LA,VISTA LN I r x y ,Y :. • %, e� ,_ d COUR DU PARC - Q•: - _DIANA AVE ► Q• 6OW LINE DR - u ' '� a 1 cn • 2P 4 'en i - I z �t. G%iTE PKYYY�� -� + -LITTLE �Y GOLDEN GATE PKMYY # . 0`O _ w + S 65R11 ST S+N It -�` y COLUNGTRI CT 1 o y.9 .. O iz'�-• " VINLAND WAY may ARNOLD AVE++ /tea , S.LIP� PER-W��x% Q �Y��i�1t .!iiF . -• i � r 0 !M1yRE7�.'.'�4THAVEN. - a- ,�p7-.oar+, 1aI�yMjR"Ffi'��^YE 13TH AVE N �p .I X T F6! GMI S5'AVE z. -- 1 R.: •F� Z4 RD VE Iy -- S HORSESHOE DR ' DOMESTIC AVE YUC 7• v, 14TH'A-yo +t _ �tl1�R1V_1 # YINTAGELNJ ° 4 E� TE RPRISE AYE mac. y�.aasyi !s- w' .� s s - 1� ••� EXCHANGE-AVE i ?iM - m NIMITZ ST _ Z `�_• S GOLF. , •- w _ �,. ', �� Nr 4 •�i1l��• n_ rn w r -« G �► pRDBPECT+AVE z a m z .. r<•' ' ' •.-STH'!►YEN ._ �AIRWAYDR* .RADIORD•z •-r �- Lo- i�p uci .v i -:y.� p-1�• '-4TNi3RDAYe��� .,-� - % y� �`� ��io± n; p' r" ' vdi w "` 2Mp AVE H ,•' AVU1710N DRxATHY AVE - zO �"LBLVD u s -•• y Z = CENTRAL AYEST AVE•5 - FUE1 ARM R13 , . - - ^ I jm �µ •m ANS'LN n . 0 NORA Ca i+•. T Y p• .r m�' F13RD 8VE S SC. DC A Z�n' T y l 1 D aT44 AVS S: - A C i z _FLAMINGO DR 11I w,'gTH AVE 9y —. 0 ES7EY AVE aOc n I. �4t ,� 1 �J,'_ . z N • . ';� I • t x s Y�,c ( - � � �, . qV+ d r.-BTH AYES _ l•'- Le m�z 't. �'P'. its..-'�OXFIRIF ITVDAVIS BIND +J1H AVE 5 " .« tr x:r .WILD PIN ES.LN �o� S - Ste, In Le COURT3'ARD 14TN"AVE I_ 4',_ UNWOODAVIE O � 1iTH AVE S `_' PELICAN AVE S _�.� _ �� BROAD w _ MANOR AYE . PAYNE CT c A I A fjAAy 11TH•AYE S� GHURCH'AVE . ffi O r •. r $rI� y `„ EVERGREEN LAKE CT p - p 13TH'A Cv JACKSON AVE - Z .z • T14AVESf „_"- '.�'•� �3m `■ V' ARC'iti`++� m -.a.. DOLPHIN RD_.: p ° 76TNTTA�VES�jI MARLM DR • O s IeECCAAYE !� yF, ys f. pp 16THAYES ' !. �' I � P O C °z b • - WAHOO'cT _ _ y �. �� • �' 4Q qp� 1 ;p m' 21STAVE 3 n I;�rn •�_ t� ` ✓ a p y 1 +, -I TROUT CT N AREGA AY i, > `G co S 4D '^ m •ENCHANTING BLYD- .' ,- �.' L.• }s - 7CD� p N.�.;y j` .. -.• C D z LSI{fLLE UR TT ti "'^=yam p/ sJ mX • ; Z�•i, �.f . + V �- �'P i EPERS UR ` +.f� '•MOONLIT IRIS DR • `• c a o Ilx +� { LA ltf AYE _ I ' 1 _� 11 • l ! I * -- I ! THnYASSON pA .S]SCA� Y _.'NE OR - 1 wA �x 1 � R #, } r, + EUEL FARM RD O zz LU NORTH RDNOW �Oat�Rp rt�- S ,.r►_N�ANSLN' e _ o OR �o„ Rama � DES fEY.AVE � _ �r - i•' Ift � w. • .A a .m � fry: �� � w � MOt.IDAY.LN Rye f i N I # � _ >• 8~ 411, m HARBOR LN C TERR AGE AVE-a Off! Amo Rn a ftS.-I AVIAT40N DR V—8TVIE1 A O � I _ `, HAiEL•ItD y ' . x� � a i'ii4 POINSE T TIA'AVE r f _ 1 � 1� Qp -Hal � 9.A.1.e NORThiRD� V. R• y71t 1 t ' 7sii . LOCATION iu.yr.e� raw r ca�iMir. Selected Custorn Parcels t Streets MapWise County Boundaries Parcel Outlines v Q 0 120 240 360 ft Copyright 2020 MapWise, Inc. All rights reserved. www.mapwlse.com. This reap is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. MapWise and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any losses resulting from such use. Packet Pg. 236 9.A.1.e FLUCCS CODE AND VEGETATION INVENTORY FLUCCS CODE (Description) Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Status 612 Mangroves - Shorebank This habitat is the interface between the project site and Rock Creek. The area is vegetated with Black mangroves and Australian pine. There are pockets of with mangroves the pockets of exotics along the shoreline. Black mangroves Brazilian pepper Cabbage palm Shoebutton ardisia Wedelia Red Mangroves Leather ferns Avicennia germinana Schinus terebinthifolius Sabal palmetto Ardisia elliptica Wedelia trilobata Rhizophora mangle Acrostichum aureum Mangrove rubber Rhabdadenia biflora Australian pine Casuarina equisetifolia 438 Mixed Hardwoods Exotics Dominated OBL Exotic FAC Exotic Nuisance OBL OBL Vine Exotic Portions of this area have been previously cleared. The site has a home and a warehouse on the premises. The site is disturbed by dense exotics as canopy, midstory and ground cover. The canopy does have some native trees such as Slash pines and live oaks. There are some areas with soil disturbance. Remnant fencing and cross fencing from some past animal husbandry can be seen. The entire site has been impacted by homesteading and exotic vegetation. At times these exotics form impenetrable strands. Slash pine Pinus elliotti FACW Cabbage palm Sabal palmetto FAC laurel oak Quercus laurifolia FACW Live oak Quercus virginiana FACU Australian pine Casuarina equisetifolia Exotic Strangler fig Ficus aurea FAC Ear leaf acacia Acacia auriculiformis Exotic Banyan Ficus benghalensis Exotic Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Exotic Java plum Syzygium cumini Exotic Woman tongue Albizia lebbeck Exotic cocoplum Chrysobalanus icaco FACW wax myrtle Myrica cerifera FAC+ Broom sedge Andropogon virginicus FAC- Flat sedge Cyperus ligularis FACW Packet Pg. 237 9.A.1.e Castor bean Ricinus communis FAC Spanish bayonet Yucca aloifolia UPL Surinam cherry Eugenia uniflora Exotic Pokeweed Phytolacca americana FACU Wild coffee Psychotria nervosa FAC Glorybower Clerodendrum speciosissimum Exotic Salt bush Baccharis halimifolia FACW Guineagrass Panicum maximum FAC- Sandspur Cenchrus echinatus FAC Broom sedge Andropogon glomeratus FACW Swamp fern Blechnum serrulatum FACW+ Torpedo grass Panicum repens Nuisance Bahiagrass Paspalum notatum FACU Bowstring hemp Sansevieria hyacinthoides Exotic Oyster plant Rhoeo spathacea Exotic Wedelia Wedelia trilobata Nuisance Air potato Dioscorea bulbifera Exotic Arrowhead vine ' ymgonium podophyllum Exotic Wandering jew Zebrina pendula Exotic INDICATOR STATUS - Obligate (OBL), Facultative wet plants (FACW), Facultative plants (FAC), Upland (UPL) NEIGHBORING PARCELS Ill Single Family Home 8112 Small Regional Airport Packet Pg. 238 9.A.1.e i FLUCCS MAP N -;-ft'�i Labels Drawing Points Drawing MLines Drawing Polygons Drawing Selected Custom Parcels Streets OSM Hybrid County Boundaries v Parcel Outlines L- 6 Q 0 120 240 360 tt Copyright 2022 MapWise, Inc. All rights reserved. www.mapwise.com. This map is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its conkenl. User assumes all risk of use MapWise and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any losses resulting from such Use. Packet Pg. 239 9.A.1.e WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED Common Name Amphibian & Reptiles: Brown anole Birds: Dove- mourning Mockingbird Boat -tailed Grackle Vultue, Black Pileated woodpecker Osprey Green heron Bluejay Gray catbird Cardinal Mammals: Raccoon Nine -banded armadillo Species Aeolis sagrei Zenaida m.acroura Mimus poly logttos_ uiscalus major Coragyl2s atratus Dryocopus pileatus Pandion haliaetus Butorides striatus Cyanocitta cristata Dumetella carolinensis Richmondena cardinalis Procyon lotor Dasypus novemcinctus Status Packet Pg. 240 z ale �d Blvd, -A F4 > am*" t5 Puuaq- 10 -am C do M.0 uj ID ),.%San,RfMb1Avv It .% ! I IL IF pb builind-4.&L-dAV pki u"ej jani, Ar k } G QRR1aI CE � eta # P, r am- I ■r will � Kv Ilk tits a 44 �� ; �tf • t r{r f ; f � + ♦ W[��IVirwv ���•� f �. � f�lA to ; r� •` ll� r• +.N� .� 'i' Mrs r I T t ��•. r' tbpnngw _ ■ _ It -� Y s Winter 4AAPark arth w �� �a.�� 1N rater PrrF eI , r.� .I Flu P �r/Ilia .,�.. �" ,ka _. 16 rA ! ttrtl � t . L.&OLi�� VaV t' ,.. + #iiyir_ fir• 10 � r. • sUIY� a .�j• i • r S �. _ r ►w1 _ 1 t 9.A.1.e .A i r rL � Y V m t� I sk �r CL Ma Wlse 2022 TRANSECTS WALKED Labels Drawing Points Drawing nJ j E Lines Drawing Polygons Drawing Selected Custom Parcels y r � Q Streets 4SM Hybrid � County Boundaries r I Parcel Outlines r O E V Q 0 120 240 3160 It Copyright 2022 MapWise, Inc. All rights reserved. www.mapwise.com, This map is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use MapWise and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any losses resulting from such use. Packet Pg. 243 9.A.1.e SEA LEVEL RISE rn ti ti r O O O N N O N J d Packet Pg. 244 9.A.1.e (3ATWELL CONSULTING. ENGINEERING, CONSTRUCTION. June 23, 2022 Craig Brown Collier County Growth Management Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Estates at Rock Creek RPUD (PUDZ) PL20220000830- Sea Level Rise Analysis Mr. Craig Brown. The Atwell, LLC has completed an analysis to demonstrate that the development will remain fully functional after a 6-in rise in sea level per LDC Section 3.03.05. The Mean High Water Line Elevation of Rock Creek at the project Jocation is approximately 0.4' NAVD. The proposed elevation of the site varies between 2.5'-4.8' NAVD for the Estates at Rock Creek project. Tf 6" of sea level rise were to occur, the MHWL would be increased to 1.00' NAVD. Even with the 6" rise in sea level, the proposed project would still be approximately 1.5' higher than the MHWL at the lowest location, therefore the site is at a sWricient elevation for redevelopment. Additionally, a stormwater management system has sufficient storage capacity during the 72hr, 25yr storm event and will not be adversely affected by the tidal increase. Below are project specific elevations showing the difference in elevation assuming a 6" rise in the sea level based on FEMA BFE of AE7.0 (NAVD) tar the project site -- Location Proposed Elevation Elevation Difference Single Family Homes 8.0 Lowest Stormwater Inlet (est.) 5.0 7.0 4.0 If you have any other questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.405.7777 or electronically at jink(r!atwell-group.com. Sincerely, James Ink, P.E. rN�r Iy d-rw by Janes N N on -Jeers M N�k. FL Reg. # 44706James M l n k �n e�'S'°°°°°°�`""�°'�F3 Team Leader halt : n.'l,Dfi.18 �8-ti.3404'Gh' Atwell, LLC — Fort Myers James M. Ink State of Florida Professional Engineer, License No. 44706 This item has been digitally signed and sealed by James M. Ink, P.E., on 6/23/2022_ Q Printed copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed and the signature must be verified on any electronic copies_ the signature must be verified on any electronic copies. 1�,'a Broad -nay Su t? 20' Fnrt Myors FL 33911 Tel 239.344.0000 www.alwell-group.com Packet Pg. 245 safe;s3 Aaaa3 )ooU - 6LL WOOZZOZld : L8b9Z) slepejew dnj3e8-uoijeoijddV - a luawyoeuV :;uawy3L'IIV P1 E C7 O N O K Li W r o LO V n o O c 'o M Ln � O m O p n o O Q LL 0 o c V U O O o N O 'A rQ C F fn v L a q LL V O C O N r C a a u m d e Cn co a m � o m o r v cyi 0 a as N U 0 v 0 N_ r C O U a, a � Q U 0 c [V V CV h O N C' — CV t L rn L dU 9.A.1.e Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 SEA LEVEL ANAYLYSIS Packet Pg. 248 9.A.1.e OATWELL CONSULTING. ENGINEERING. CONSTRUCTION. June 23, 2022 Craig Brown Collier County Growth Management Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Estates at Rock Creek RPUD (PUDZ) PL20220000830- Sea Level Rise Analysis Mr. Craig Brown, The Atwell, LLC has completed an analysis to demonstrate that the development will remain fully functional after a 6-in rise in sea level per LDC Section 3.03.05. The Mean High Water Line Elevation of Rock Creek at the project location is approximately 0.4' NAVD. The proposed elevation of the site varies between 2.5'-4.8' NAVD for the Estates at Rock Creek project. If 6" of sea level rise were to occur, the MHWL would be increased to 1.00' NAVD. Even with the 6" rise in sea level, the proposed project would still be approximately 1.5' higher than the MHWL at the lowest location, therefore the site is at a sufficient elevation for redevelopment. Additionally, a stormwater management system has sufficient storage capacity during the 72hr, 25yr storm event and will not be adversely affected by the tidal increase. Below are project specific elevations showing the difference in elevation assuming a 6" rise in the sea level based on FEMA BFE of AE7.0 (NAVD) for the project site: Location Proposed Elevation Elevation Difference Single Family Homes 8.0 7.0 Lowest Stormwater Inlet (est.) 5.0 4.0 If you have any other questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.405.7777 or electronically at jink(c�r�,atwell-group.com. Sincerely, James Ink, P.E. FL Reg. # 44706 Team Leader Atwell, LLC — Fort Myers James M. Ink State of Florida Professional Engineer, License No. 44706 Q This item has been digitally signed and sealed by James M. Ink, P.E., on 6/23/2022. Printed copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed and the signature must be verified on any electronic copies. the signature must be verified on any electronic copies. 1514 Broadway, Suite 201, Fort Myers, FL 33901 Tel: 239.344.0000 www.atwell-group.com Packet Pg. 249 9.A.1.e UTILITY LETTER Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 Packet Pg. 250 9.A.1.e UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 380 RIVERSIDE CIRCLE • NAPLES, FLORIDA 34102 TELEPHONE (239) 213-5051 • UTILITIESFORMS@NAPLESGOV.COM March 3, 2022 Ms. Josephine Medina, AICP 28100 Bonita Grande Dr, Suite 305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 4medina@rviplanning.com Subject: Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Service Availability for 2250 North Rd, Naples, FL 34104. Single family home project with up to 15 homes, private boat slips and recreation structure. Folio # 00386760404 Dear Ms. Medina: In response to the request for a Letter of Availability for potable water (domestic and/or irrigation use) and sanitary sewer service for the proposed project, received via email on March 3, 2022. This office has reviewed the subject site for available potable water and sanitary sewer service. Based on the referenced information and review, this office confirms the following: 1. The subject property is located within the City of Naples potable water and sanitary sewer service area. 2. The City of Naples has adequate treatment plant capacity for the proposed project. 3. The proposed improvements must meet current City of Naples Utilities Standards and must be submitted to the Utilities Department for review and approval. 4. Should the scope of proposed project change to impact City utility services, the project's engineer of record shall remain responsible to contact the City for appropriate reviews and analysis. This letter does not imply or guarantee that adequate potable water distribution main or sanitary sewer collection facilities of sufficient size and capacity exist at the property; such utilities as may be needed for new site development shall remain the developer's responsibility to design, permit and construct. Based on the above, this office has no objections to this project subject to appropriate reviews by all utility service providers (including the City of Naples), Collier County, and the Fire District. Should you have any questions or require any additional information or action from this office, please do not hesitate to call this office at (239) 213-5051 or e-mail dmking@naplesgov.com. Page 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 251 9.A.1.e Sincerely, Denise King Utilities Permit Coordinator Cc: Bob Middleton, Utilities Director Michelle Baines, P.E., Deputy Utilities Director David Banter, Utilities Inspector Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 252 9.A.1.e Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 DEVIATION JUSTIFICATIONS Packet Pg. 253 9.A.1.e 11 V ROCK CREEK ESTATES RPUD LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC Deviation 1: Deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02.C, which requires a 15-foot-wide Type "B" buffer between single-family dwelling units and amenity centers, to instead allow for a 7.5-foot- wide Type "B" buffer between single family dwelling units and on -site recreation/amenity uses. The buffer will contain 3-gallon muhly grass, planted 3-feet off -center on the single-family residential side of the 7.5' buffer, in addition to all required Type "B' plant materials. No buffer is required between the single-family dwelling unit on Tract A and the recreational uses on Tract A. JUSTIFICATION: The proposed Residential/Private Recreation Amenity tract located on the northwest corner of the site which contains an existing 6,100 +/- structure which is intended for private uses similar to an accessory structure and uses permitted within a residential lot. This would allow for private recreational uses not open to the public of indoor basketball/shuffle courts, walking paths, picnic areas, and a private garage. Furthermore, the Tract is not intended to serve as the amenity center for the residential tracts to the east. Unlike typical on -site recreation/amenity centers no outdoor active recreational uses are allowed within this tract to produce the noise typically associated with pickleball, swimming pools, volleyball or other active outdoor recreational uses. Furthermore, the Applicant is only proposing a reduction to the buffer width from 15 feet to 7.5 feet. The buffer itself will provide the code minimum number of plantings within the 7.5-foot-wide buffer strip required for the 15-foot buffer. This will ensure the deviation does not result in a net loss of vegetation within the project and provide appropriate screening and noise abatement between uses. The Applicant will provide a buffer that will contain 3-gallon muhly Grass spaced 3' on center on the residential side of the Type B buffer plantings in the buffer. This proposed planting will provide additional vegetative coverage and screening, as well as visual interest in the buffer area. Control of the permitted uses within Tract A will correspond to the single-family dwelling unit within Tract A. As previously mentioned above under Deviation 1, the non-residential uses permitted within this tract are intended for private use of the property owner similar to accessory buildings and structures permitted within a residential lot, are non-commercial uses and used by the resident and/or property owner (should no dwelling unit be developed) and their guest. Therefore, no compatibility issue would exist between the uses within Tract A. Deviation 2: Deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.2, which permits a maximum fence/wall height of 6 feet for certain lots in residential zoning districts, to allow for a maximum fence/wall/berm height of 10 feet along the northern PUD perimeter boundary, abutting North Road. JUSTIFICATION: The proposed wall height will mitigate the noise impact and appropriately screen the site from the surrounding residential and municipal airport uses. This is particularly beneficial to ensure the mitigation of light and RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Sutie 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239. • www.rviplanning.com Packet Pg. 254 9.A.1.e noise pollution from the Naples Municipal Airport to the north which also contains the airport's commercial terminal and parking area facilities. The proposed deviation will allow for additional visual screening between the proposed uses, utility sites, and adjacent roadways while ensuring a quality design aesthetic via screening of the wall by required perimeter plantings. The design will serve to enhance public health, safety and welfare. Deviation 3: Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.01.1\1 which establishes the minimum right- of-way width of 60 feet to be utilized, to allow for a 40-foot right-of-way internal private right-of-way. JUSTIFICATION: The reduced roadway width will provide for traffic calming and increased lot sizes, while accommodating standard 10' wide travel lanes and appropriate infrastructure for this relatively small residential project. The community will be developed with a maximum of 15 homes, thus larger roadways to accommodate high traffic volumes and higher design speeds is not necessary. The interior road has been designed in a curvilinear shape to help reduce speeds. The additional land area gained by the right-of-way reduction will allow for more expansive green areas/yard space and reduced impervious surfaces and runoff. The demand for larger yards and the maximization of "outdoor living" is a continuing factor that influences a community's quality of life that the applicant is seeking to accommodate in this small, infill community. Studies have determined that reduced right-of- way widths act as a traffic calming feature and will assist in maintaining public health, safety, and welfare within the community. Please also refer to PUD master plan's cross-section, the which demonstrates that the proposed right-of-way width can accommodate a sidewalk, utilities, and drainage. Deviation 4: Deviation from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Table 17, which requires boat ramps to provide a minimum of 10 spaces per ramp with dimensions of 10 feet wide by 40 feet long and vehicular parking shall be provided at 4 spaces per ramp, to allow for no boat trailer or vehicular parking spaces to be required. JUSTIFICATION: The LDC parking requirement has been generally written for commercial/public boat ramps. The use of the boat ramp on this site shall be limited to the residents living within this small residential community of 15 dwelling units or less. Furthermore, private entry signs shall be posted at the Rock Creek Estates development identifying this is a private community. The purpose of the boat ramp is to provide residents of this small single-family development the ease of access to their boats for travel or maintenance purposes. Each lot will have access to a boat slip and will be able to unload their boat and go on to park at their private residence near the boat ramp removing the need for any parking for the boat ramp. The distance from the furthers residential lot from the boat ramp will be approximately 1,000 feet (less than 1/4 mile) from the boat ramp entrance. This will function similarly to Riverbend Mobile Home Park which has a private boat ramp and boat slips for the sole use of the community but no vehicular or boat trailer parking for the use of the boat RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 2 of 3 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Deviation Justification Packet Pg. 255 9.A.1.e ramp. Additionally, this request will further serve to deter any members of the public from trying to access this private boat ramp as no parking will be available for use. The deviation will help to reduce impervious paved areas on - site which is of environmental benefit, particularly due to proximity to the Rock Creek waterbody. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 3 of 3 Rock Creek Estates RPUD Deviation Justification Packet Pg. 256 9.A.1.e Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 BOUNDARY SURVEY Packet Pg. 257 sa;e;s3188JO )ooM - 6LL OOZZOZld : LOV96 slepejew dnl3e8-uoi;eoilddV - a ;uawyoe;;d :;uawyoe;;br VUIdU Id AlNI IUJ dzll I IUJ - Jd IdVN avcavuv l L7bl •y IMUna - JNi JUV I wvaa]1 UVUd H.LdUN UV66 (gA& s A&VONnoa AJNVhl3AJow Nla3 N=3iE i2.— GVMJ AVG HDJON 09ZZ 80=1 a3ava3aa E� Z N ZO a 3 flE Flo iie � � a sg OLL O a z BASIS OF BEARING: NORTH AND SOUTH %LINE OF S—ION 2 NO 355tW 6A6.00'(MJ NO 263OW 6O5.56'I god e 85H BoYc a49 zs2 \ €36888�9�>4449 iie 22sHE! 18H a 2 t 2� Faso G U356odoe=�C �FMaW: SW o Sao a izgEa:ss6�s3i 'a ��'P�„=i ° H M°gMea3 ^arymaasoon 3 P s m...... - -aa=s �o�:wy3e�3� �acis°�'a i.g 7`o5�86 S �xg¢�p�3e z o8o°�am:9�� z � <��83ee°s°sso a Hp � Q W R G c O2�v RIO wg �ov, Ica Jjp�U. U 02v �QW Om� •• 9.A.1.e I IV PUD EXHIBIT A-F Rock Creek Estates RPUD PUDZ-PL20220001779 Packet Pg. 259 9.A.1.e EXHIBIT "A" LIST OF PERMITTED USES Rock Creek Estates RPUD Regulations for development of this PUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this document and all applicable sections of the Growth Management Plan (GMD), the Land Development Code (LDC), and the Administrative Code in effect at the time of approval of the subdivision plat (PPL). Where the PUD ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provision of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. PERMITTED USES: A maximum of 15 dwelling units (1.3 du/acre) shall be permitted in this PUD. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: RESIDENTIAL TRACTS A. Principal Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwelling units. Any other principal use and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, or Hearing Examiner, pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). B. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses customarily associated with Permitted Principal Uses, including but not limited to: 1. Customary accessory uses and structures including carports, garages, and utility buildings. 2. Temporary sales trailers and model units. Any other accessory use and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, or Hearing Examiner, pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). II. RESIDENTIAL/PRIVATE RECREATION AMENITY TRACT A A. Principal Uses: 1. Maximum of one (1) Single-family detached dwelling unit. 2. Private recreational uses and facilities including, up to 6,100 +/- square foot recreational building, indoor basketball/shuffle courts, and private garage. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Customary accessory uses and structures including carports, garages, and utility buildings. 2. Outdoor recreational uses shall not be permitted. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 1 of 11 Packet Pg. 260 9.A.1.e Any other accessory use and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, or Hearing Examiner, pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). III. PRIVATE DOCK AREA A. Principal Uses: 1. A golf cart path, parking, private recreational single-family boat docks, private boat ramp, mooring pilings, boat lifts /davits, picnic areas, and kayak launches to serve residents and their guests. All docks are reserved for the exclusive use of the owners of dwelling units within this RPUD. No more than fifteen (15) slips may be constructed within this project. IV. PRESERVE A. Principal Uses: 1. Preserve B. Accessory Uses: 1. Allowable uses within County required preserves as set forth in the LDC Section 3.05.07. H V. GENERAL The following structures and uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the RPUD: 1. Essential services, including interim and permanent utility and maintenance facilities 2. Water management facilities. 3. Walls, berms and signs. 4. Passive open space uses and structures, including, but not limited to landscaped areas, gazebos, playgrounds, park benches, and walking trails. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 2 of 11 Packet Pg. 261 9.A.1.e EXHIBIT "B" DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Rock Creek Estates RPUD The standards for land uses within the development shall be as stated in these development standard tables. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the subdivision plat (PPL). Guardhouses, gatehouses, access control structures, clock towers, columns, decorative hardscaping or architectural embellishments associated with the project's entrance are permitted and shall have no required setbacks; however, such structures cannot be located where they create sight distance issues for motorists and pedestrians, and cannot exceed 35 feet in actual height. PERMITTED USES AND STANDARDS Single -Family Detached Recreational Buildings and Structures Min. Lot Area 7,500 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft Min. Lot Width 50' 80' Min. Lot Depth 150' 150' PUD Setback (Principal) 15' 20' Front Yard') 20' (2)(3) 25' Side Yard (Principal) Side Yard (Accessory)(') 7.5' 5' 15' 10, Rear Yard (Principal)(') Rear Yard (Accessory) 15' 5' 15' 10, Preserve (Principal) Setback Preserve (Accessory) Setback 25' 10, 25' 10, Min. Distance Between Principal Structures 15' 20' Maximum Height Actual Zoned Height 45' 35' 35' 25' (1) Front setback is measured from the property line, right-of-way line or road easement. (2) Front-loading/front-entry garages shall be setback a minimum of 23' from the back of sidewalk. Units with side -loaded garages shall have a minimum 10' setback from the front property line/right-of-way. No structures will overhang into the utility easement. (3) Corner lots shall provide one (1) front yard setback within the yard that contains the driveway/vehicular access to the dwelling unit. The secondary front yard that does not contain the driveway/vehicular access to the dwelling unit shall provide a minimum 10-foot setback measured from the right-of-way and will have no overhang into the utility easement if there are any buildings adjacent to that side setback. (4) 0' principal and accessory setbacks are permitted from lake maintenance easements and landscape buffer easements, which will be separate platted tracts on the PPL. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 3 of 11 Packet Pg. 262 9.A.1.e GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Homeowners' association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. Landscape buffers and lake maintenance easements shall be platted as separate tracts at time of subdivision plat approval, or shown as separate tracts on the SDP. Note: Nothing in this PUD document shall be deemed to approve a deviation from the LDC unless it is expressly stated in a list of deviations. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 4 of 11 Packet Pg. 263 9.A.1.e EXHIBIT "C" RPUD Master Plan Rock Creek Estates I USE; NAPLE.$ MUNICIPAL 16' WIDE TYPE M' SUFFER WITH OPTIONAL AIRPORT MAX. COMBINED FENCOINALLI ERM HEIGHT f!! ❑ ti-l—ZONING AIRPORT ,__----OF ITAND MIN. OF9 ---` - - - --- NORTHROAO- - - - - - - - - - -------------- ----- I T,5' TYPE 'B' BUFFER l 1V TYPE'H" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL WITH OPTIONAL FENCE TRACT A FENCE I WALL + RE$IDENTIA •1 R PRIVATE x I MCREA.TIONAI USE: SINGLE-FAMILY AMENITY) r---� R USE: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL I I RESIDENTIAL ZONING:A i[}NIN4;A U r' I i . I 1 EXISTING PRIVATE" I I IfJ RECREATION BUILDINC // U 1 W TYPE "A' BUFFS R 75TYPE'B' BUFFER f I WITH OPTIONAL FENCE PROPERTY WITH OPTIONAL' B aU N ❑A RY FENCE I WALL USE; SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZON ING: A 10' TYPE "A" BUFFER WITH OPTIONAL FENCE BOAT W N;&S i &LANDSCAPE f BLF�ER RESERVATION MA}JGROVE I LINE R -OPEN SPACE STORMATER MANAGEMENTARCA 14,65 AC) f R I` (D. 51 AC) APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LIME T —GENERAL LOCATIGN OF PRIVATE DOCKAREA OPEN SPACE SUMP ARY REQUIREDOPEHSPAOE 642AG IV% PROVIDED OPEN SPACE 5A2 AC 60% USE; SNGLE-FA1:1L' iEt'I':C`I'I- ZONING: RMF& LAND USE SUMMARY RESIDEH71AL TRAL7 GAS AC 57% RESIDENTAL+ PRIVATE RECREATIONAL AMENITY .71 AC 7% PRESERVE .51 AC a% BUFFER .w AC 5% OPEN SPACE + STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA .65 AC .8% U&E; MUILTI.FAMILY REVOENI H11 RIGHT-OF-WAY 2J7AC 21% ZONING: RMF6 TOTAL PROJECT AREA 11.9E AC (— PLAN REVISIONS REV i M022-0&07 REV 2 2w2-10-V REV15ED PER COU TYCOMME TS REV 9 2022-T1-17 RE SED PER CDU TY CCkiME TS REV< 2D2;-P1-1� RE'3ED PER CDU TY CCMME TS I REV 5 2022- -29 PER COUNTY COMPAE TS BOUNDARY r LEGEND 1 INCH-ESSiEGRESS R RESIDENTIAL ❑EVIATION LOCATION OPEN SPACE+ ® STORWAIATER MANAGEMENT AREA 0 PRESERVE M.5' AC) NOTES 1, TFI% -N Is CONCEPTUAL I'I I;,I .IRE !.T ' I. ':'JOJECT TC NGDIrr:� I As DUE T:1 1:.,, ,-r,1'-I$I ':. I 2. A... I .I 1 A. AND OF SOPItiJVAL. ilFlr:::.11 'F F r]NSITe ... I:3CMENTANO RI :II I I I = 19 PRELIMINARY AIDE MMA'.' DC A J' - AT SDE PLAN APPIiRVAL, 9. NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVE REQUIRE L1; M%OF NATNE VEGETATION M.52 AC X d,25 - A 19 A% NATIVE PRESERVATION PRGVMQ 0LT AG, & MAXIMUM PERMI--EO UNITS+DENSiTY CALCULATION: I .40L ACRES. 1.2a UNITS+ ACRE =15 UH MS. ROCK CREEK ESTATES - RPUD MASTER PLAN (EXHIBIT C) (:(:I II R COUNTY, FLORIDA ra»M'•na. M,. 'I i1,.F RYn lw_,l --- JkF ., --'LA-1 •iCLC14GS, LLO o rN® .: . T., A �L m r CL 7 Y V m t,1 CL Q. Q C d E m 0 r c E t V m ++ Q Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 5 of 11 Packet Pg. 264 9.A.1.e EXHIBIT "C" RPUD Master Plan Rock Creek Estates 2'p NORTH VARIESPVARIES ROAD PROPERTY 90L1NDARY MAX. COMBINED MATCH EXISTING PERIMETER6ERM FENCEAVALUBERM GRACE HEIGHT OF 1IY AND MIN. OF 5' WALL CROSS SECTION (TYP.) N•T,S, f 6 1 4V 10' PUBLIC �, 16, RIGHTOFWAY 1a PUBLIC UTILITY UTILITY EASEMENT S6, TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL IANF $� EASEMENT 2' 2 1161", 2% MIN 2% MAX SIDEWALK SIDEWALK VALLEY GUTTER (TYP.) TYPICAL 40' ROW CROSS SECTION fn 2 �L r Y V m C O tt CL Q. Q IO C N E t I IE ROCK CREEK ESTATES • RPUD MASTER PLAN (EXHIBIT C) � COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIPA r FEBRVAAY 27. 2@.a Q F •i,�.:#;. I�k:-,> � m9JEC�Ti�2eO0�267 � ELANHOLDNW.LLC Q1 E t V Q Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 6 of 11 Packet Pg. 265 9.A.1.e EXHIBIT "D" LEGAL DESCRIPTION Rock Creek Estates RPUD PARCEL 1 PARCEL ID #00386760404 A CERTAIN LOT OR PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FURTHER BOUNDED AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CENTER OF SAID SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH 1/4 LINE OF SAID SECTION 2, S 0 DEGREES 26'20" E 30.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH ROAD AND A CONCRETE MONUMENT FOR A PLACE OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY N89 DEGREES 38'10"E 664.90 FEET, TO THE EAST LINE OF WEST 1/2 LOT 21, NAPLES GROVE AND TRUCK COMPANY'S LITTLE FARMS NUMBER 2, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 27A OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE AND ITS EXTENSION S 0 DEGREES 32'15"E 641.80 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT; THENCE CONTINUING S 0 DEGREES 32'15"E 20 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE OF ROCK CREEK; THENCE MEANDERING ALONG SAID APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE SOUTHWESTERLY, WESTERLY, NORTHWESTERLY AND SOUTHEASTERLY TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH 1/4 LINE OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH AND SOUTH 1/4 LINE N 0 DEGREES 26'20"W 184.00 MORE OR LESS TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT; THENCE CONTINUING N 0 DEGREES 26'20"W 645.56 FEET TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING. LYING IN THE WEST 1/2 OF LOT 21, THE WEST 1/2 OF LOT 22, AND THAT PART OF THE WEST 1/2 OF LOT 23 LYING NORTH OF ROCK CREEK OF SAID NAPLES GROVE AND TRUCK COMPANY'S LITTLE FARMS NO. 2. A/K/A 2250 NORTH ROAD, NAPLES FL 34104 PARCEL CONTAINS 11.36 ACRES, MORE OR LESS Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 7 of 11 Packet Pg. 266 9.A.1.e EXHIBIT "E" LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC Rock Creek Estates RPUD Deviation 1: Deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02.C, which requires a 15-foot-wide Type "B" buffer between single-family dwelling units and amenity centers, to instead allow for a 7.5-foot-wide Type "B" buffer between single family dwelling units and on -site recreation/amenity uses. The buffer will contain 3-gallon muhly grass, planted 3-feet off - center on the single-family residential side of the 7.5' buffer, in addition to all required Type "B' plant materials. No buffer is required between the single-family dwelling unit on Tract A and the recreational uses on Tract A. Deviation 2: Deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.2, which permits a maximum fence/wall height of 6 feet for certain lots in residential zoning districts, to allow for a maximum fence/wall/berm height of 10 feet along the northern PUD perimeter boundary, abutting North Road. Deviation 3: Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.01.N which establishes the minimum right-of-way width of 60 feet to be utilized, to allow for a 40-foot right-of-way internal private right-of-way. Deviation 4: Deviation from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Table 17, which requires boat ramps to provide a minimum of 10 spaces per ramp with dimensions of 10 feet wide by 40 feet long and vehicular parking shall be provided at 4 spaces per ramp, to allow for no boat trailer or vehicular parking spaces to be required. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 8 of 11 Packet Pg. 267 9.A.1.e EXHIBIT "F" DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS Rock Creek Estates RPUD 1. GENERAL A. One entity (ELAN Holdings, LLC) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD approval, the Managing Entity is ELAH Holdings, LLC. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgment of the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. B. Pursuant to Section 125.022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. C. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before the commencement of the development. 2. TRANSPORTATION A. The maximum total daily trip generation for the PUD shall not exceed 17 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL A. The subject site contains approximately 0.52 acres of native vegetation of which 25% (0.13 acres) is required to be preserved. The subject site shall provide 98% (0.51 acres) of native vegetation preservation. The native preservation requirement will be satisfied on - site in accordance with the Land Development Code. Any replanting of native vegetation to meet preserve standards shall comply with all requirements set forth in the LDC Section 3.05.07.H. B. Preserves may be used to satisfy the landscape buffer requirements after exotic removal in accordance with LDC Sections 4.06.02 and 4.06.05.E.1. Supplemental plantings with native plant materials shall be in accordance with LDC Section 3.05.07. In order to meet the requirements of a Type 'B' buffer along the southern boundaries of the RPUD; a 6- foot-wide landscape buffer reservation located outside of the preserve will be conveyed by owner to a homeowner's association or condominium association at time of SDP or plat approval. In the event that the preserve does not meet buffer requirements after removal of exotics and supplemental planting within the preserve, plantings will be Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 9 of 11 Packet Pg. 268 9.A.1.e provided in the 6' wide reservation to meet the buffer requirements. The type, size, and number of such plantings, if necessary, will be determined at time of initial SDP or plat and included on the landscape plans for the SDP or plat. 4. UTILITIES A. At the time of application for subdivision Plans and Plat (PPL) approval, offsite improvements and/or upgrades to the wastewater collection/transmission system may be required to adequately handle the total estimated peak hour flow from the project. Whether or not such improvements are necessary, and if so, the exact nature of such improvements and/or upgrades shall be determined by County, during PPL or SDP review. Such improvement and/or upgrades as may be necessary shall be permitted and installed at the developer's expense and may be required to be in place prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any portion or phase of the development that triggers the need for such improvements and/or upgrades. 5. CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY ("NAA") A. As a condition precedent to the County approving this PUD, and prior to encumbering, selling, leasing or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD, the Owner and Developer shall execute and record in the Public Records of Collier County avigation easements and declaration of restrictive covenants titled "Naples Municipal Airport Avigation Easements And Declaration Of Height Restrictions And Covenants," that stipulates the following: The Owner and Developer shall grant unto the NAA and its successors and assigns, and impose upon and bind Owner and Developer and their successors, successors -in -title and assigns, for the use and benefit of the public, for so long as the Naples Municipal Airport is used as an airport, perpetual avigation, aircraft operations and aircraft noise easements and rights of way appurtenant to the NAA and the Naples Municipal Airport for the unobstructed use and passage of all types of aircraft in and through any and all of the airspace above the subject property. The maximum height of any residence, building or other structure (including rooftop appurtenances) shall not exceed fifty (50) feet above the established elevation of the Naples Municipal Airport, which is a total height of fifty eight and two hundredths (58.20) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). iii. The Owner and Developer shall provide in any and all declarations of restrictive covenants, sales contracts, leases and other instruments encumbering, selling, leasing or transferring any interests in the land within this PUD the following disclosure: "NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. THE NAPLES MUNICPAL AIRPORT IS LOCATED LESS THAN EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY FIVE (855) FEET FROM THE [PROPERTY] [PREMISES], IN CLOSE PROXIMITY THERETO. [PURCHASERS][OWNERS][TENANTS] CAN EXPECT ALL OF THE USUAL AND COMMON NOISES AND DISTURBANCES CREATED BY, AND INCIDENT TO, THE OPERATION OF AN AIRPORT." Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 10 of 11 Packet Pg. 269 9.A.1.e iv. The Owner and Developer shall comply with all stipulations of any FAA Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued with respect to the land within this PUD (including any crane used for construction and/or maintenance therein). 6. MISCELLANOUS A. Should any significantly historical cultural materials or human remains be found during excavation process, the developer shall contact a certified archeologist. Rock Creek Estates RPUD Last Revised: July 24, 2023 Page 11 of 11 Packet Pg. 270 9.A.1.f (CHAPTER 8, COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT) A zoning sign(s) must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen (15) calendar days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s) must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent through the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be construed to supersede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to the Administrative Code, Chapter 8 E. 1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street right-of-way or easement. 2. The sign(s) must be securely affixed by nails, staples, or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened securely to a post, or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage. 3. The petitioner or the petitioner's agent must maintain the sign(s) in place, and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost, or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the petitioner's agent must replace the sign(s NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE ASSIGNED PLANNER. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, PERSONALLY APPEARED J35ePh Ine Me:(;nq WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE OLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER \ALNAT F APPLICANT OR AGENT STREET OR P.O. BOX NAM (TYPED OR PRINTED) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF)OMMERPINELLAS bm;lwk SW;, "S 3LA \''SS CITY, STATE ZIP - - The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 12TH day ofsEPTEMBER , 2023 _) by Josephine Medina , personally known to me or who produced Personally known as identification and who did/didmot take an oath. SANDRA KAY FABRIM Signature of Notary Public +Q • Notary Public - State of Florida ® Commisslon I NN 37W63 ar My Comm. Eaplr�s Aar 6, I027 Bonded through National Notary Assn. My Commission Expires: (Stamp with serial number) Sandra K. Fabrizio Printed Name of Notary Public Rev. 3/4/2015 Packet Pg. 271 SWIS3188JO 130H - ULWOOZZOZld : MIR) uBIS Buisi;aenpd BuiaeeH - 3 4ueuay3elly :4u8w43e}}d W N Z N r N E 0 W J N a.�r-CD NN fcn �Wo�� �M U fl. QaNN=�ZN 0 C N = L NJCDN E04 'er Wj�•Ln L i � � C wwooZ�,�°•E �o.aC7.ma — c U w L E UZ 00 �T m Y M }' O UQ uOZ O N > 0Wp,-a ..0 = IX Z U V W O Z Um T r- 9.A.2 10/05/2023 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.2 Doc ID: 26460 Item Summary: PL20220003791 - Marco Shores Golf Course CPUD - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 81-6, as amended, the Marco Shores Golf Course Community (Marco Shores) Planned Unit Development (PUD), to increase the maximum number of residential multi -family dwelling units from 1,580 units to 1,670, adjust off-street parking standards, and add an Airport Disclosure and Permitting Commitment, by providing for amendment to the Master Plan; and by providing an effective date. The subject 4.04+/- acre property is a portion of the 314.7+/- acre Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD and is located near the Marco Island Executive Airport in Section 26, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, CSM, Planner lI1] Meeting Date: 10/05/2023 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Principal — Zoning Name: Nancy Gundlach 09/05/2023 3:35 PM Submitted by: Title: Zoning Director — Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 09/05/2023 3:35 PM Approved By: Review: Planning Commission Diane Lynch Review item Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Zoning Mike Bosi Review Item Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Zoning Mike Bosi Division Director Growth Management Community Development Department James C French Planning Commission Ray Bellows Meeting Pending Completed 09/12/2023 11:22 AM Completed 09/14/2023 12:31 PM Skipped 09/14/2023 8:47 AM Completed 09/15/2023 10:57 AM Completed 09/15/2023 12:25 PM GMD Deputy Dept Head Completed 09/21/2023 10:44 PM 10/05/2023 9:00 AM Packet Pg. 273 9.A.2.a Co -ier County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION — ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT - PLANNING & REGULATION HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 5, 2023 SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20220003791, MARCO SHORES GOLF COURSE COMMUNITY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT AND AGENTS: Property Owner/Applicant: SK Holdings Real Estates LLC 6646 Willow Park Drive, # 1 Naples, FL 34109 Agents: Christopher O. Scott, AICP Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34105 REQUESTED ACTION: Noel Davies, Esquire Davies Duke, PLLC 1415 Panther Lane, Suite 442 Naples, FL 34109 The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 81- 6, as amended, the Marco Shores Golf Course Community (Marco Shores) Planned Unit Development (PUD), to increase the maximum number of residential multi -family dwelling units from 1,580 units to 1,670, adjust off-street parking standards, and add an Airport Disclosure and Permitting Commitment, by providing for amendment to the Master Plan; and by providing an effective date. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject 4.04± acre property is a portion of the 314.7± acre Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD. It is near the Marco Island Executive Airport in Section 26, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the Location Map on page 2 of this Staff Report.) PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 1 of 15 Packet Pg. 274 asinoa jjoE) saao4S ooaeW `46L£000ZZOZ-1d : 09b9Z) £Z-£Z-9 and sajoyS oojeW -podall jjejS :juewyoejjV � Z LU O w H E M m Cc 0 m +tr r - I F OLIDO L I OAI PUDA-PI-20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD CL a3 0 N CL J August 23, 2023 LO ti N 6 a Y V M a Page 2 of 15 asino:D jjoE) saaot4S ooaeW `L61£OOOZZOZld : o9b9Z) £Z-£Z-9 and saaoyS ooaew-:aodeN jje}S :;uewt4oe;;d M CURRENT MASTER PLAN PUDA-PI-20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD Page 3 of 15 August 23, 2023 asinoa jIoE) saao4S ooaeW `46LE000ZZOZ-1d : 09b9Z) £Z-EZ-8 and sajoyS oojeW -podall jjejS :juewyoejjV ti N ti N Q � � a Y 3 �Xa 0'i� OWFW ii O 5y (/) Q Q m W P• s6 d gg 3} Z7 - a " 0 U o U) a s. 18' i€ is a49fla i 4QQ<<ab M U a M a � m y CO) j w it g J � a �rw2 U Q OwH W N H R ffa zWJ_ r-wpaiz o4 oza ~ow w a�av,a cpi" rcHs °mam w rcy yaz Q wv,pm wF �pm z ary rcFQ�a� 3> mm zw w J� 0❑ O T O a N 2 2 �UFZc'22 FU H _ aF. W wim�f<=O az =pk U F 3 J O� F n pi j W A N D U Z O¢ 5 N w Z p G G pLLW55rc_ o� am'm rrc °a mu 5So 0 z U U U r` f5 z a a 0: w c 9V Zi E If 1\II ,� f5 0= v ® ` N pf �" mW ® x p 4_0 �6 (L6a 119) a8VA31n0E1 U311103 PROPOSED MASTER PLAN PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD Page 4 of 15 August 23, 2023 V a 9.A.2.a PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: As previously stated, the subject 4.04± acre site is a portion of the 314.7± acre Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD, specifically Ordinance 81-6, recorded on February 10, 1981, as amended. (See Attachment A-1-Ordinance 81-6.) The PUD is vested for 1,980 dwelling units under the provisions of Chapter 380 of the Florid Statutes. The PUD is currently approved for 1,580 dwelling units. (Ordinance 16-37.) The petitioner proposes an additional 90 dwelling units or 1,670 dwelling units, which is less than the 1,980 vested units. The PUD density will increase from 5.0 dwelling units per acre (DUAs) to 5.3 DUAs. (See Attachment A -Proposed PUD Ordinance.) The Master Plan will be amended to show the conversion of the Utility and Park sites to a 4.04± acre Residential parcel. Their respective municipal authorities abandoned the Utility and Park sites, and the developer deeded the property. Because this PUD is partially developed, the petitioner cannot prepare a new PUD document using the latest format, e.g., Exhibits A-F rather than sections. To do so could create non -conformities in the existing development. Instead, the petitioner is providing the proposed changes in a strike- thru/underlined format, showing the new information in underlined text and the text to be removed in a strike-thru format. There are no deviations proposed. See Attachment A Proposed PUD Ordinance. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING (of Subiect Parcel): North: Drainage easement, then farther north is conservation land with a Conservation Special Treatment (CON-ST) zoning designation. East: Marco Island Airport with a Public Use (P) zoning designation. South: Mainsail Drive, then farther south, is a golf course with a zoning designation of Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD. West: Multi -family residential with a Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD zoning designation. PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 5 of 15 Packet Pg. 278 9.A.2.a AERIAL PHOTO -CLOSE UP AERIAL PHOTO -FAR AWAY PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 6 of 15 Packet Pg. 279 9.A.2.a GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed PUD Amendment and found it consistent with the GMP's Future Land Use Element (FLUE). Please see Attachment B-Comprehensive Planning Memorandum. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition and recommends the following: Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: "The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity ofpermissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occurs: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links, the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project's significant impacts on all roadways. " Staff finding: In evaluating the Marco Shores PUDA, staff reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) dated May 25, 2023, for consistency using the applicable 2022 Annual Update and Inventory Report) AUIR). According to the TIS and PUD document, the applicant proposes the development of 90 multi -family dwelling units within the Marco Shores PUD. The TIS projects an additional +/- 35 PM peak hour Two -Way trips on the adjacent roadway network. Further, the project overview correctly notes that the additional 90 units proposed with this Amendment increase the total number of units within the PUD to 1,670 units, which is less than the 1,980 units vested for this development. PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 7 of 15 Packet Pg. 280 9.A.2.a According to the TIS, the project impacts the following County roadways: Existing_ Roadway Conditions: Roadway/ Link 2021 P.M. Peak 2021 AUIR Projected 2022 2022 Link # Location AUIR Hour Peak Remaining P.M. Peak AUIR AUIR LOS Direction Capacity Hour/Peak LOS Remaining Service Direction Capacity Volume/Peak Project Direction Traffic M Collier Manatee D 2,200/North 249 7/NB D 169 Blvd Road to (2) 37.0 Mainsail Drive Collier Mainsail D 2,200/North 426 9/NB D 329 Blvd Drive to (2) 38.0 Marco Island Bridge 1. Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is from the petitioner's May 25, 2023, Traffic Impact Statement. 2. Projected deficiencies for these segments are due to background traffic from the trip bank not caused by this development. Network improvements north of the impact area are anticipated to potentially address the deficiencies. The deficiency currently exists and is not caused by this development. See applicable portions of Florida Statute 163.3180 below. Existing deficiencies. 6-lane improvement FDOT funding for ROW within the 5-year planning period and continue monitoring. Staff further notes that this PUD is vested for more dwelling units than proposed with this petition. Florida Statutes Section 163.3180: ■ Must allow an applicant to enter into a binding agreement to pay or construct their proportionate fair share. ■ Facilities determined to be deficient with existing, committed, and vested trips plus projected background traffic from any source other than the development shall be removed from the proportionate share calculation. ■ The improvement necessary to correct this type of deficiency is the funding responsibility of the maintaining entity. ■ Applicant must receive credit for the anticipated road impact fees. Policy 7.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: "Collier County shall apply the standards and criteria of the Access Management Policy as adopted by Resolution and as may be amended to ensure the protection of the arterial and collector system's capacity and integrity. " Staff finding: This development proposes access on Mainsail Drive, which is signalized at the intersection of Collier Boulevard and Mainsail Drive. Staff recommends approval of the proposed access shown on the master plan for this petition. Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 8 of 15 Packet Pg. 281 9.A.2.a "The County shall require, wherever feasible, the interconnection of local streets between developments to facilitate convenient movement throughout the road network. The LDC shall identify the circumstances and conditions that would require the interconnection of neighboring developments and shall also develop standards and criteria for the safe interconnection of such local streets. " Staff finding: The proposed development is interconnected with the residential development to the west. Staff recommends approval of the proposed interconnection shown on the master plan. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project consistent with the CCME. The project site is 4.04 acres and has been partially cleared; no preservation is required. GMP Conclusion: The proposed PUD Amendment may be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC) Section 10.02.13 B.S., Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Section 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria for their recommendation to the Board of Collier County Commissioners (BCC), who use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the headings "Rezone Findings" and "PUD Findings." In addition, staff offers the following analysis: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the PUD petition to address environmental concerns. The property has been partially cleared. There is vegetation on -site containing a mixture of invasive exotic plants and mangroves; however, since the original Master Plan (Ordinance 81-6) does not show a preserve, no minimum preservation is required. No listed animal species were observed on the property. This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval. Utility Review: The project lies within the City of Marco Island's potable, reclaimed, and wastewater service areas. The City of Marco Island provided a service availability letter for the project. PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 9 of 15 Packet Pg. 282 9.A.2.a School Board Review: Currently, there is existing or planned capacity for the proposed development at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. At the time of SDP or Plans and Plat (PPL), the development will be reviewed to ensure capacity. The Development of Regional Impact (DRI) within which the proposed project is located was approved before 2000 and, therefore, is not subject to concurrency. Zoning and Land Development Review: FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with and complementary to the surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses and intensity on the subject site, the compatibility analysis included a review of the subject proposal comparing it to surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location. Staff believes the proposed development will be compatible with and complementary to the surrounding land uses. Staff offers the following analysis of this project: As previously stated, the petitioner proposes to convert a utility parcel and a park parcel totaling 4.04 ± acres to a multifamily parcel. The petitioner also proposes to increase the number of dwelling units from 1,580 to 1,670 units in the 314.7± acre Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD. The proposed 1,670 units are less than the 1,980 vested units. The density will increase from 5.0 DUAs to 5.3 DUAs. The subject site is surrounded by a conservation water body to the north, the Marco Island Executive Airport to the east, Mainsail Drive to the south, and multi -family to the west. The proposed multi- family project is compatible with the adjacent development to the south and west and the conservation water body to the north. To mitigate the impact of the potential incompatibility with the adjacent Airport, the following commitments, A and B, have been added to the PUD Document: A. The developer, its successors or assigns of Marco Shores Unit One, Tracts N and P, acknowledges the property's proximity to the Marco Island Executive Airport and the potential for noises created by and incidental to the operation of the airport. Notice shall be provided to potential homeowners and/or residents through the provision of the following disclosure statement on any plat and in association documents for condominium, property owner and homeowner associations, or lease documents: "The Marco Island Executive Airport is located less than one mile to the east of (insert plat/condominium/development, as appropriate). Owners and/or residents can expect recurrent noises and disturbances created by, and incidental to, the airport's operation." B. The developer, its successors, or assigns of Marco Shores Unit One, Tracts N and P shall provide a copy of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Obstruction Evaluation/Airport Airspace Analysis (OE/AAA) at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP) submittal, in accordance with LDC Section 4.02.06. There are no proposed revisions to the currently approved residential development standards. PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 10 of 15 Packet Pg. 283 9.A.2.a REZONE FINDINGS: Staff offers the following analysis: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, future land use map, and the elements of the GMP. The Comprehensive Planning staff has indicated that the proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. As described in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report and discussed in the zoning review analysis, the neighborhood's existing land use pattern can be characterized as developed public use, residential conservation, and golf course. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The subject parcel is of sufficient size and will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also comparable with expected land uses by its consistency with the FLUE of the GMP. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The district boundaries are logically drawn, as discussed in Items 2 and 3. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezone necessary. The proposed change is not necessary, but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to develop the property with residential land uses. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed change from utility and park development to multi -family residential development will not change the overall intensity of land uses allowed by the current PUD. The proposed change from utilities and park development to residential development should be more compatible with the adjacent residential development than utility development. Therefore, the proposed change should not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 11 of 15 Packet Pg. 284 9.A.2.a 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time, i.e., the GMP is consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at the time of the first development order (SDP or PPL). The project's development must also comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed development will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore, the project is subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed PUD Amendment is anticipated to not reduce light and air to adjacent areas inside or outside the PUD. 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. This is a subjective determination based on anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by various factors, including zoning; however, zoning by itself may or may not affect values since value determination is driven by market value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that their sound application, when combined with the SDP and PPL approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to the improvement or development of the adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The development complies with the GMP, a public policy statement supporting zoning actions consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed Rezone does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 12 of 15 Packet Pg. 285 9.A.2.a The subject property can be used in accordance with existing zoning; however, the proposed uses cannot be achieved without rezoning the property. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the neighborhood's or the county's needs. The proposed PUD Amendment is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or County. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed. However, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or PPL processes and as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services is consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. The activity proposed by this amendment will not adversely impact public utilities facility adequacy. 18. Other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in protecting public health, safety, and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. PUD FINDINGS: LDC Section 10.02.13.13.5 states that "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria:" 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to the physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. The project lies within the City of Marco Island's potable, reclaimed, and wastewater service areas. The City of Marco Island provided a service availability letter for the project. PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 13 of 15 Packet Pg. 286 9.A.2.a 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for Rezones in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application provided satisfactory evidence of unified control of the property. Additionally, the development will be required to gain SDP approval. These processes will ensure that the developer will provide appropriate stipulations for the provision of, continuing operation of, and maintenance of infrastructure. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the GMP's goals, objectives, and policies. County staff has reviewed this petition and has found this petition consistent with the overall GMP 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The landscaping and buffering standards are compatible with the adjacent uses. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The project lies within the City of Marco Island's potable, reclaimed, and wastewater service areas. The City of Marco Island provided a service availability letter for the project. 7. The ability of the subject property and surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including adjacent City of Marco Island potable water and wastewater mains, to accommodate this project. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on a determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to the literal application of such regulations. This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The petitioner is not seeking any new deviations. PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 14 of 15 Packet Pg. 287 9.A.2.a NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM meeting on July 18, 2023, at the South Regional Library at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida. Approximately ten residents attended the meeting in person, and approximately 15 persons attended remotely along with the Agent's team and Applicant. For further information, see Attachment C-NIM Synopsis. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office reviewed the Staff Report for this petition on August 22, 2023. RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUDA- PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD, to the BCC with a recommendation of approval. Attachments: Attachment A -Proposed PUD Ordinance Attachment A- 1 -Ordinance 81-6 Attachment B-Comprehensive Planning Memorandum Attachment C-NIM Synopsis Attachment D-Application PUDA-PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD August 23, 2023 Page 15 of 15 Packet Pg. 288 9.A.2.b ORDINANCE NO. 2023- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 81-6, AS AMENDED, THE MARCO SHORES GOLF COURSE COMMUNITY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENT TO THE PUD DOCUMENT TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY DWELLING UNITS FROM 1,580 TO 1,670, ADJUST OFF-STREET PARKING STANDARDS, AND ADD AN AIRPORT DISCLOSURE AND PERMITTING COMMITMENT; BY PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER PLAN; FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT, IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20220003791] WHEREAS, on February 10, 1981, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance No. 81-6, which established the Marco Shores Golf Course Community Planned Unit Development (PUD); and WHEREAS, the Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD was subsequently amended on October 8, 1985 by Ordinance No. 85-56; on September 13, 1994 by Ordinance No. 94-41; on October 4, 2001 by CCPC Resolution No. 01-29; on November 15, 2016 by Ordinances No. 16- 37 and 16-38; and on April 24, 2018 by Ordinance No. 18-20; and WHEREAS, Christopher O. Scott, AICP, of Peninsula Improvement Corporation d/b/a Peninsula Engineering, and Noel J. Davies, Esq., of Davies Duke, PLLC, representing SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to further amend the Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: [23-CPS-02336/1802526/1] 19 Marco Shores PUDA PL20220003791 Page 1 of 2 7/19/2023 Packet Pg. 289 9.A.2.b SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) DOCUMENT, CONTAINED WITHIN SECTION ONE OF ORDINANCE NO. 81-6, AS AMENDED The PUD Document contained within Section One of Ordinance No. 81-6, as amended, is hereby amended in accordance with the attached Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION TWO: AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER PLAN Exhibit E, Site Plan, also known as the Master Plan, of Ordinance No. 81-6, as amended, is hereby amended and replaced with the attached Master Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit "E" and incorporated by reference herein, to consolidate the northeastern Utility Site and Park into Residential Parcel Two A. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super -majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: 3 Derek D. Perry Assistant County Attorney 2023 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA IM Rick LoCastro, Chairman Attachments: Exhibit "A" — Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD Amendment Exhibit "E" — Master Plan [23-CPS-02336/1802526/11 19 Marco Shores PUDA PL20220003791 Page 2 of 2 7/19/2023 Packet Pg. 290 9.A.2.b Exhibit "A" Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD Amendment Packet Pg. 291 9.A.2.b SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2.05 PROJECT DENSITY The total acreage of the Marco Shores property is approximately 314.7 acres. The maximum number of dwelling units to be built on the total acreage is 4-540 1,670. The number of dwelling units per gross acres is approximately 5-9 5_3. The density on individual parcels of land throughout the project will vary according to the type of dwelling units placed on each parcel of land. * * * * * * * * * * * * * SECTION IV MULTI -FAMILY 4.01 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulation for the area designated on Exhibit E, Site Plan, as Multi -Family. 4.02 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS A maximum number of 4-5-54 1,670 dwelling units may be constructed subject to stipulations in attached Exhibit .1. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4.07 REGULATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL PARCEL TWO A * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4.07.07 OFF-STREET PARKING Pr-ineipal uses shall pfevide a fninimtim of twe par -king spaees pef dwelling eflit fe multi family use. Parking for- ^ p housing f r- seni shall be in accordance with the LDC. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Words underlined are additions; words stpuek threugh are deletions Marco Shores PUDA, PL20220003791 Last Revised 7111112023 Page 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 292 9.A.2.b SECTION VII DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 7.09 AIRPORT DISCLOSURE AND PERMITTING A. The developer, its successors or assigns of Marco Shores Unit One, Tracts N and P acknowledges the property's proximity to the Marco Island Executive Airport and the potential for noises created by and incidental to the operation of the airport. Notice shall be provided to potential homeowners and/or residents through the provision of the following disclosure statement on any plat, and in association documents for condominium property owner and homeowner associations, or lease documents: "The Marco Island Executive Airport is located less than one mile to the east of (insert plat/condominium/development as appropriate) Owners and/or residents can expect recurrent noises and disturbances created by, and incidental to, the operation of the airport." B. The developer, its successors or assigns of Marco Shores Unit One, Tracts N and P shall provide a copy of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Obstruction Evaluation/Airport Airspace Analysis (OE/AAA) at time of Site Development Plan (SDP) submittal in accordance with LDC Section 4.02.06. Words underlined are additions; words smuekc hr-emgh are deletions Marco Shores PUDA, PL20220003791 Last Revised 7111112023 Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 293 9.A.2.b Exhibit "E" Master Plan 0 fu 10 E 13 c z :5 ul 6 D 2at w a 1I C, IL, o 2ucirt taw1 WT 0 U, xr 10, -701-11 Il- I<r grZOW ern UO Os V,-,g L > 0dUQ—y0 T CL -,j W.lJ U- ui CZL z U, uj C., ix 0 I-r ?max ui X w 0 D ULj 0 t-- > Lu CD z z w 00< cu Xu -,Z &n zo On cr 0� oo� -j uj a 0 = 2: : , u x 00 z w 0 '� m to m (L I m 0 V), w 81 (�-) � ci � z I 1 it I � rlfafl-i�l tow (M-3-moe HamoD a. IN' E co = m z L.Li z < I'D gal' 0 L) U-V) V) LLJ D w a- 0 0 o LL } W Z R Q Q ¢ ¢ ¢ Q (V N N N N e0 (O M M LIJ U a a 0 0 m L) g u.i N Z W D LU O Q O Q N K J Z (� Q O W Z J Y O Z C7 O N H a LL w i CU7 W ~ Z Ln J Z1'0 O �2 �F W�Wp� i :D0 WpW -taw 7 aF .OwWOZOJO U' zFF 04 Mw 2 a LLy�W�-WaF oLL 0~ Oaa wgyz zo -jz oWWowa�3 oW Qom w�`Ufpw WLL m W a NJ Eu�F- WF-mZULL�m Q i >f-W W mym(gU W �h 4wjw W W O W O} 3 W} 40 W= W 4 W Q W LL'LLI 1 }(7 LL3�zC Z H W N m W FQ.' J m Q Q Q:aOF W mZ WW U qF- fzoZgwFFozmwWwr a3� F g LL LL O Z y z 0 J LLz���zz� Fa QZ� =OfgOWQ�Q ssU O Jb) mJmO�aZui 0 Q? LLZZ Q W J W Z y 2 p h m Z O O Uh3�o�~n LLJ LU O U Ujujw O m m W% m U O m m Z 0LLU75yR'W OLL pU) a J LL w 0 0 0= J J Z Z~ O Jw�=waO0 0 00� Q mml- d'a UQ mU' JUHa dal w; �^� 0. t J � J ZI (M 21S) 02ddn31f108 L1311100 a W t— co Q A A y . ORDINANCE 81 - 6 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 76-30, THE COMPAZHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COASTAL AREA PLANNING DISTRICT BY AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS MAP NUMBER 51-26 BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM "A" AGRICULTURE TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELQPMENT ON THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: PART OF SECTIONS 26, 27, AND 28, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE..26 EAST; AND PROVIC.LNG AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the Deltona Corporation has petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida to change the Zoning Classification of -the herein described real property; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida: d �/ SECTION ONE: C The Zoning Classification of the hereinafter describe ti Q real property in Collier County, Florida, is changed from iA", yj Agriculture to "PUD" Planned Unit Development and the Offic l Zoning Atlas Map Number 51-26 as described in Ordinance 76-30 is hereby amended accordingly: r � � mr�,, r•�+ r�r1 rn • T ! � {Li Boat • w • t� ' • 9.A.2.c do IV; ' MARCO SHORES ' A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL COM14UNITY 0 rn �r rn ., ., rn rT� r Lo �_ 70 O , a • �e4 THE DELTONA CORPORATION. � S BOOK � � a'F�4" , ti e ,�iYL� " '7` • �'s°1'iAYb_ '` " v a 1 f *.xe�r t ` g•� Jp� � P � +,SFr w� '' ay�� ':� ;ry, ik F .. • 1` i •wlll. � . •+ � . � ' ••`q,f i • r.* ll fltt t>g" W`�G` i` �,N� �'fy"1 ryr 4 iz... 4� y Ny`+`.'. Packet Pg. 298 • N • PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT FOR MARCO SNORES A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY BY THE DELTONA CORPORATION JUNE 18, 1979 REVISED OCTOBER 2. 1980 REVISED JANUARY 19, 1981 REVISED FEBRUARY 12, 1981 cn ' r a�� V i • 0 .e � • . . ' ` BOOK � ��. e� . i' e i �L : '�!7•' tiT °' � } ( lr i�. s�� x �•{ r..5 • *.' anti �'i' .:41 J a r e (.i t w4} +� ,µa T�•y i�,•3 a �i.•+i +. • •; S gKv� .1., .f .. xr9 Y� r xi itt . x • .. y et , • e. � ` 1.. ks.� meow litir l 9.A.2.c •. •gip, �ii4,.•` • INDEX fl° PAGEo LIST OF EXHIBITS ii v STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE iii L PROPERTY OWNERSHIP & DESCRIPTION SECTION I 1-1 ° ° U PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SECTION II 2-1 0 • C9 UTILITY SERVICES SECTION III 3-1 L MULTIFAMILY SECTION IV 4-1 z GOLF COURSE SECTION V 5-1 ° L NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SECTION VI 6-1 UTILITY AREA SECTION VII 7-1 as ti M DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS SECTION VIII 8-1 c • 0 N N • Q L.i E 1 ' WWA P • lly `fi"f�'". ,��+�R e,. .�?�'��'„'F��.a ��.; iiVx•c ns �z +,z !,�' �. +' •�'�°,. :i. •: �; 'S�r17� ,;�� 1 Packet Pg. 300 y • . '. r2 •y. y.. r.f..k� v! EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT C EXHIBIT D EXHIBIT E EXHIBIT F EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT H EXHIBIT I EXHIBIT J • LIST OF EXHIBITS Evidence of Control of Property Vicinity Map Aerial Photograph Boundary Map Site Plan Estimrted Unit Absorption Schedule and Population Projection Legal Description (See Exhibit D) E.I.S. Waiver LAND USE BREAKDOWN STATEMENT OF CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL 9.A.2.c ice, • • STATEMENT OF CO14PLIANCE Ti* development of approximately 321 acres of property in Sections 26, 27 and 28, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, as a Planned Unit Development to be known as Flarco Shores will comply with the planning and devel- opment objectives of Collier County. These objectives are set forth in the Comprehensive Plan which includes the Growth Policy and Official Land Use Guide, all of which were adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on October 14, 1974. Marco Shores will meet the planning and development objectives for the following reasons: (1) The project is vested under the provisions of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes.' The determination of vesting provided for in Chapter 380.06 (4)(a) has been completed. The project is vested for 1980 residential units. (2) The project is in compliance with Collier County Ordinance Number 77-66 requiring an Environmental Impact Statement (E.I.S.) prior to rezoning. An E.I.S. Waiver, Exhibit H, has been approved in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance Number 77-66. (3) The project is in compliance with the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and Official Land Use Guide. (4) The project has adequate community facilities and services as defined in Section 48, Paragraph 5 of the Collier County Zoning Ordinance as provided by existing services and facilities or to be provided by the developer as indicated within this PUD Document. (5) The project shall comply with the applicable zoning and subdivision regulations and all other County and State laws dealing with platting and subdividing of property at the time improvements and plat approvals are sought. c m E m r r �•l�`•�'ryi ' }1 1r . Packet Pg. 302 SECTION I • o PROPERTY OWNERSHIP S GENERAL DESCRIPTION IL U 1.01 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE L It is the intent of The Deltona Corporation (hereinafter called "applicant" ° or "developer") to establish and develop a planned unit development on approximately 321 acres of property located in the Marco Island community, o Collier County, Florida. It is the purpose of this document to provide 0 the required detail and data concerning the development of the property. v, m 1.02 NMTE t The development will be known as Marco Shores. 0 U 3, 1.03 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The legal description is as described in Exhibit G, Legal Description. Cn M 1.04 TITLE TO PROPERTY 0 o The property is owned by The Deltona Corporation as described in 0 N Exhibit A, Evidence of Control of Property. N J 1.05 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA a The general location of Marco Shores is illustrated by Exhibit B, 0 o Vicinity Map. N The project site contains approximately 321 acres of property. It is co bordered on the west by State Road 951. At the time of this application, o the property was zoned A. A portion of the property at the western boundary includes approximately 0.5 acres of tidally influenced wetlands composed of both excavated drainage canals and mangrove areas. _ CU c Within the boundary of the project site, there presently exists a golf =a course with supporting clubhouse and maintenance facilities and a road p providing access to the golf course and the Marco Island Airport located to the east of the subject area. Q 1.06 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION c a� The entire site, except for a small portion of the wetland area (mangroves) adjacent to SR-951, has been subject to previous construction alterations. 0 Development of man-made lakes outside and along the northern limits of r Q the site, as well as several lakes within the property boundary, were the source for fill material used to bring the site to its present elevational setting. Elevations within the site range from a maximum m of +15' N.G.V.D. to approximately +5' N.G.V.D. along the top of bank t adjacent to both the unnamed lake to the north and the mangrove area m Q • .71_ ' '• Packet Pg. 303 bordering Mtacilivane Bay to the south. Loner elevations al•e found '` ' immediately adjacent to and within the internal lake areas. The topography generally slopes gently towards the internal lakes or the boundaries of the site. The soils of the site are composed of the sands, ihells and crushed limerock deposited as the spoil fill material from lake construction -s.. within and adjacent to the project area. Aside from the landscaped and grassed areas of the golf course and support facility, the vegetation of the site is characterized by scrub ground cover which normally establishes itself on disturbed fill areas. • • ••• ,. a:i logs `� ;�_,•�.�. •., •. ;t;�,, w�,. a r"' ••.�r���.�•; - �; 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. !2 ®owl IA.SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2.01 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to describe the general plan of the development and delineate the conditions that will apply to the project. 2.02 GENERAL PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT The general plan of development of Marco Shores is for a planned residential community of multi -family dwelling units and golf course. 2.03 SITE PLAN APPROVAL When site plan approval is required by this document, a written request for site plan approval shall be submitted to the Community Development Administrator for approval. The request shall include materials necessary to demonstrate that the approval of the site plan will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this document, will rat be injurious to the neighborhood or to adjoining properties, or otherwise detrimental to the public selfare. Such material may include, but is not limited to the following, where applicable: A. Site plans at an appropriate scale showing proposed placement of structures on the property; provisions for ingress and egress, offstreet parking and offstreet loading areas, refuse and service areas; and required yards and other open spaces. B. Plans showing proposed locations for utilities honk -up; C. Plans for screening and buffering with references as to type, dimensions and character; D. Pror)sed landscaping and provisions for trees protected by County regulations; and E. Proposed signs and lighting, including type, dimensions and character. 2.04 LAND USE Unless otherwise stated, what is discussed in this Section is the 320 acres of uplands depicted in Exhibit E. This in turn is a part of Unit 30 for purposes of planning and land management. For purposes of this Ordinance, Unit 30 shall mean that area which is more specifically described on that joint permit application of Applicant filed on May 3, 1977 with the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. A schedule of the intended land use types subject to this Section, with approximate acreages and total dwelling units, is shown on Exhibit E, Site Plan. Minor variations in acreages, not to exceed 3% of the total 320 upland acres, shall be permitted at final design to accommodate final development plans. The specific location and size o' the individual tracts and the assignment of dwelling units on the 320 acre uplands site shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Administrator at the time of 2.1 • Packet Pg. 305 • � um+.�s+ , � 9.A.2.c �1 Site Plan approval of each development phase. Approval is hereby given to construct up to 500 dwelling units on the 320- acre Marco Shores site. Beyond the initial 500 units, construction of additions' units requires approval by the Board of Countv Commissioners in accordance with the standards set forth below. While 500 units are hereby approved, It has been determined that the Marco Shores site will accommodate construction of the number of units allowed by the Land Use Element of the Collier Count Comprehensive Plan dated May 8, 1979 (the Collier County Comprehensive Plan subject, however, to the following: 1. Traffic improvements as required to alleviate congestion and improve safety on Route 951, such as widening to accommodate additional traffic lanes, traffic signals, turn lanes, reduced speed limits, or alternatives as may be required in accordance with Section 8.048 of this Ordinance; 2. Reduction of wetlands now proposed by applicant for development in Unit 30. Such efforts may include clustering, more intensive use of uplands, and land trades that would shift development to uplands. In determining the maximum number of allowable dwelling units on the 320- acre Marco Shores site, consideration shall be given to Applicant's overall development plans for the Marco Beach Subdivision, including a review of: A. The status of permitting as it affects property in the Marco area which is owned or being acquired by Applicant, including,Unit 30; B. The status of any completed or pending land exchanges through which Applicant has obtained, or has the prospect of obtaining, developable property located 'n the Marco area; C. Combined density for the 320-acre Marco Shores site, the rest of the Unit 30 site, and any contiguous land which Applicant has acquired or may acquire through exchange; and 0. Based upon proper land management considerations, principally involving a preference for upland as opposed to wetland development, the most suitable distribution of density over the property Applicant may develop as part of the Marco Beach Subdivision. If, as a result of the foregoing review, it is determined that the maximum number of dwelling units on the 320-acre Marco Shores development should be other than the number allowed by the Collier County Comprehensive Plan. this Ordinance shall be amended with respect to the maximum number of dwelling units to be permitted on the Marco Shores site. In order to afford flexibility to the County in determining the maximum number and distribution of dwelling units on the 320-acre Marco Shores site, Applicant shall not make irrevocable commitments to purchasers with respect to land uses on the unsold portions of that 320-acre site, or any other portion of the Unit 30 planning site. 2-2 r-M� r � ` Packet Pg. 306 t 2.OS PROJECT DENSITY The total acreage of the Marco Shores property is approximately 321 acres. The maximum number of dwelling units to be built on the total acre:?g: is 1980. The number of dwelling units per gross acres is approx 4; imately 6.15. The density on individual parcels of land throughout the project will vary according to the type of dwelling units placed on each parcel of land. 2.06 DEVELOPMENT SEQUENCE AND SCHEDULING . Exhibit F indicates, by year, the estimated absorption of units and the approximate population of the project for the estimated development period. 2.07 AMENDMENT OF ORDINANCE Both the County and the developer. with knowledge that the long range development plan permitted by the ordinance will not be complete for a period of 3 to 1D years, recognize that exceptions, variances oramendments to this ordinance may be necessary in the future. There may be changes in planning techniques, engineering techniques, trans- portation methods, and other factors that would warrant this ordinance being amended to meet standards of the time. All petitions or requests for exceptions, variances and amendments shall conform with the pro- cedures existing at the time of the application for the exception or amendments. 2.08 TREE REMOVAL All clearing, grading, earthwork, and site drainage work shall be performed in accordance with the approved PUD site plan and all applicable codes. 2.09 DEFINITIONS Definitions shall be as contained in the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County. 9.A.2.c a SECTION III UTILITY SERVICES TO MARCO SHORES 3.01 WATER SUPPLY AND TREATMENT FACILITIES Marco Island Utilities, Inc. will provide water supply and treatment facilities to the project. Untreated water is available from 12" and 14" Parco Island Utilities, Inc. water mains adjacent to State Road 951. on the west boundary of the property. Location of the water treatment facility is indicated on Exhibit E, Site Plan. .3.02 SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES Marco Island Utilities, Inc. will provide sewage treatment facilities to the project. Location of the sewage treatment facility is indicated on Exhibit E, Site Plan. 3.03 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION - Solid waste collection for the Marco Shores project will be handled by the company holding the franchise for solid waste collection for the county. 3.04 ELECTRIC POWER SERVICE Florida Power A Light Corporation will provide electric service to the entire project. 3.05 TELEPHONE SERVICE Telephone service will be supplied to the Marco Shores project by United Telephone Company of Florida. 3.06 TELEVISION CABLE SERVICE Television cable service will be provided by Gulf -Coast Cable -Vision, Inc. of Naples. Jz U 3-1 A. WX FACEM A Packet Pg. t3081 EASEMENTS FOR UNDERGROUNDUTILITIES On-site utilities such as telephone, electric power, TV cable service, wastewater collection, water distribution, etc. shall be Installed underground. Except that electrical feeder lines serving commercial and other high use areas, water pumping station lift stations, transformer banks, etc. shall be permitted above ground. Easements shall be provided for all utility purposes. Said easements and improvements shall be done in accordance with subdivision regulations. 4 :1 I Is 3-2 Pnt-Irof P 'Ana W, SECTION IV MJLTI-FAMILY •• 4.01 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations for the ' area designated on Exhibit E, Site Plan. as Multi -Family. 4.02 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS A maximum number of 1980 dwelling units may be constructed,subject to stipulations in attached Exhibit J. 4.03 USES PERMITTED No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whale or part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: (1) Multi -family residential buildings. (2) Parks, playgrounds. playfields and commonly owned open spsce. (3) Water management facilities. B. Principal Uses Requiring Site Plan Approval: (1) Non-commercial boat launching facilities and multiple docking areas with a maximum extension into the waterway of 20 feet, (2) Recreational clubs, intended to serve Lhe surrounding residential area. C. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: (1) Customary accessory uses and structures, including parking structures. (2) Signs as permitted by the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County. (3) Model apartments and sales offices shall be permitted in con- junction with the promotion of the development. Such model apartments shall be permitted for a period of two (2) years from the initial use as a model. The Director may authorize the extension of such use upon written request and justification. 4.04 REGULATIONS 4.04.01 MINIMUM LOT AREA: One (1) net acre.` • d' s 4-1 BOOK w2w ki ....�wiM..•��� •.�v.-..sn—...� .r .yam.. +...�� n... a... �.w. P 4.04.02 MINIKA YARDS: A. From right-of-way lines of public and private roads, thirty (30) feet or one-half (1/2) the height of the structure, whichever is • greater. 0. From tract boundary lines, twenty (20) feet or one-half (1/2) the height of the structure, whichever is greater. C. Distance between any two principal structures, one-half (1/2) the sum of their heights but not less than twenty (20) feetion the same tract. D. In the case of clustered buildings with a common architectural theme, these distances may be less provided that a site plan is approved in accordance with Section II. 4.04.04 MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF PRINCIPAL AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: A. Seven (7) stories above the finished grade with option of having one (1) floor of parking beneath the allowable seven (7) stories. B. Accessory structures shall be limited to a maximum of thirty (30) feet above finished grade of the lot. 4.04.05 MINIMUM LIVING AREA OF PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES: Principal use structures shall contain a minimum of seven hundred and fifty (750) gross square feet of living area per dwelling unit within principal structure. 4.04.06 OFF-STREET PARKING: Principal uses shall provide a minimum of 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. An additional one-half (,5) space per unit must be reserved for future parking if needed, This reserve area shall be grassed or landscaped. 4.04.07 OFF-STREET PARKING LANDSCAPING: Landscaping shall be provided as required by the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County. , 4.04.08 USEABLE OPEN SPACE: For each dwelling unit, a minimum of one -hundred (100) square feet of usable open space, exclusive of the golf course area, shall be provided on the site. This space may be provided as swimming pools, pool decks, tennis courts, landscaped areas or other common recreational facilities. Packet Pg. 311 • :.y... 9.A.2.c • SECTION V GOIf COURSE p a 5.01 PURPOSE V The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations for the area designated on Exhibit E. Site Plan, as Golf Course. 5.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: (1) Golf Course (2) Golf Clubhouse (3) Tennis Courts (4) Tennis Clubhouses (5) Transient lodging facilities not to exceed 50 units. (6) Water management facilities. B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: (1) Pro -shop, practice driving range and other customary accessory uses of golf courses, tennis clubs or other recreational facilities. (2) Small commercial establishments, including gift shops, golf and tennis equipment sales, restaurants, cocktail lounges, and similar uses, intended to exclusively serve patrons of the golf course or tennis club or other permitted recreational facilities, subject to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County. (3). Shuffleboard courts, swimming pools, and other types of facilities intended for recreation. (4) Signs as permitted in the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County. (5) Maintenance shops and equipment storage. (6) Non-commercial plant nursery. 5-1 Packet Pg. 312 �. mop ' . •5.03 PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS ' Plans for all principal and all accessory uses shall be submitted to the Director who will review these plans and approve their construction. All construction shall be in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. The perimeter boundary of the overall golf course tract shall be recorded in the same manner as a subdivision plat. A. General Requirements: (1) Overall site design shall be harmonious in terms of landscaping, enclosure of structures, location of access streets and parking areas and location and treatment of buffer areas. (2) Buildings shall be setback a minimum of fifty (50) feet from abutting residential districts and the setback area shall be landscaped and maintained to act as a buffer zone. (3) Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner which will protect roadways and neighboring properties from direct glare or other interference. (4) A site plan shall be provided showing pertinent structure locations and landscaping. 5.04 MAXIMUM HEIGHT Forty-five (45) feet above the finished grade of the lot. 5.05 MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING As required by the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County. 5.06 OFF-STREET PARKING LANDSCAPING Landscaping shall be provided as required by the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County. a w sal;. 5-2 ' E� 808ft; . • `JU • t , ' a'•� . ' ;, Packet Pg. 313 SECTION YI NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 6.01 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations for the area designated on Exhibit E, Site Plan, as Neighborhood Commercial. The Neighborhood Commercial area is intended to meet the local neighborhood shopping and personal service needs of the surrounding residential area. Retail stores permitted are intended to include primarily convenience goods which are usually a daily necessity for the residential neighborhood. 6.02 MAXIMUM ACREAGE ,r Maximum area is limited to 3,2 acres. 6.03 USES PERMITTED No building or structure, or part :hereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole or in part, fcr other than the following: A. Principal Uses: (1) Automobile service stations without repairs in accordance with applicable zoning regulations. (2) Baker shops - including baking only when incidental to retail sales from the premises. (3) Banks and financial institutions. (4) Barber and beauty shops. (5) Bicycle sales and'service. (6) Bookstores. (7) Churches. (8) Delicatessens. (9) Drug stores. (10) Dry cleaning. (11) Family apparel shops. (12) Florist shops. 4 (13) Food markets. (14) Gift shops. Packet F ''•^n (15) Hardware stores. (16) Ice cream shops.. • (17) Laundries, self-service only. (18) Liquor stores. (19) Meat markets. (20) Medical and dental clinics. (21) Music stores. (22) Post offices. (23) Professional offices (24) Repair shops - radio, TV, small appliances, shoe. (25) Restaurants - not including drive-ins. (26) Any other commercial use or professional service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Director determines to be compatible in the district. (27) Water management facilities. B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: (1) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the uses permitted in this district. (2) Signs as permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. 6.04 MINIMUM LOT AREA None. 6.05 MINIMUM LOT WIDTH None. 6.06 MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS A. From right-of-way lines of public and private roads, thirty (30) feet. B. From residential tract boundary lines, thirty (30) feet. C. From all other tract boundary lines, none. 6-2 • 600K PA;E Packet) -- 0 I x 6.07• BUILDING SEPARATION All buildings shall be separated twenty-five (2S) feet or one-half (1/2) ' the -sum of their heights whichever is greater except that in the case of -' clustered buildings with a common architectural theme these distances may be less provided that a site plan is approved in accordance with Section II. 6.08 MINIMUM FLOOR AREA OF PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE 10DO square feet per building on the ground floor, 6.09 MAXIMM HEIGHT Thirty-five (35) feet above the finished grade of the lot. 6.10 MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING AND OFF-STREET LOADING REQUIREMENTS As required by the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County at time of building permit application. 6.11 MINIMUM LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS As required by the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County at time of building permit application. 6.12 LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS As permitted in the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County at time of building permit application. 6.13 LIGHTING Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner which will protect roadways and neighboring properties from direct light. 6.14 STORAGE There shall be no outside storage or display of merchandise. MS UTILITY AREAS Utility areas, including trash receptacles. shall be completely screened from the view of customers and adjacent property owners to a height of six (6) feet above ground level. 6-3 r.: a: top h i I. SECTION YII UTILITY AREA 7.01 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations for the area designated on Exhibit E. Site Plan, as Utility Area. 7.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered, or usee, or land or water used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: (1) Potable water treatment and distribution facilities. (2) Sanitary waste water collection treatment and disposal facilities. (3) Utility services equipment, storage and maintenance. (4) Utility services offices. (5) Lawn or golf course maintenance shops and equipment storage. (6) Any other use associated with maintenance or utility services when approved by the Director. (7) Water management facilities. B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: (1) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the uses permitted in this district. (2) Signs as permitted in the zoning ordinance. 7.03 MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS A. From right-of-way lines of public and private roads, thirty (30) feet. B. All other, none. 7.04 MAXIMUM HEIGHT Thirty-five (35) feet above the finished grade of the lot. 7.05 MINIMUM FLOOR AREA None. �•. 7-1 .a • ` ,, 1 Packe J_ _ SECTION VIII DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS i 8.01 NATURAL RESOURCES Prior to undertaking any alterations within or effecting the tidally - influenced wetland included in the site, the applicant shall: i A. Obtain all necessary permits, approvals or waivers from county, state and federal agencies; and, B. Limit the extent of alterations within the wetlands areas to reduce short and long term environmental impacts; and, C. Insure that no alteration or filling within the wetland area shall be conducted except as required to improve the access road at its intersection with State Road 951 unless otherwise approved by the Director for work required by the future development of Unit 30, Marco Shores. 8.02 DRAINAGE i c A. Upland Areas < (1) The applicant shall provide all necessary detailed drainage plans, studies and specifications to the State of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, the South Florida Water Management District and Collier County for approval prior . to issuance of permits by Collier County. The detailed drainage plans shall include the data requested by South Florida Water Management District in their letter of August 29, 1980 and which c is made a part of this PUD Document. (2) The minimum building floor elevation shall be as indicated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map for Collier County. B. Wetland Area c The applicant shall provide necessary detailed drainage plans, studies and specifications to the Environmental Advisory Council, Water Management Advisory Board, Coastal Area Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, the State of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation and the South Florida Water Management District for approval prior to the issuance of any construction/development permits by Collier County. 8.03 PUBLIC FACILITIES A. Sewage Treatment Facility Marco Island Utilities, Inc. will provide sewage treatment facilities for the project. Marco Island Utilities, Inc. will provide necessary detailed plans and specifications for the collection, treatment and disposal of sewage from this development to the Department of Environmental..,' Regulation and Collier County for approval prior to the issuance ofx development permits. w'= 1 ! b0,71< rug , • • r }tF� •�..�• • • • '�.•1 •,' • '. N Packet Pg. 318 8. Water Treatment Facilities Water treatment facilities will be provided by Marco Island Utilities, Inc. Marco Island Utilities, Inc. will provide necessary detailed plans and specifications to the Department of Environmental Regulation and Collier County for approval prior to the issuance cf development permits. Deltona Corporation will construct additional raw water transmission facilities from the rock pit southward along SR 951 and to the Marco Island Water Treatment Plant by 1984. 8.04 TRANSPORTATION A. Internal The project will be served internally by a system of public and private roads. Public roads will be located within public rights of way as indicated in Exhibit E. Site Plan. Private roads will serve the individual multi -family tracts. B. External Subject to the approval of the Florida Department of Transportation, the developers shall provide improvements as indicated in the attached Exhibit J. 8.05 FIRE PROTECTION The applicant shall provide for the strategic placement of fire hydrants as required in the Collier County Subdivision Regulations. A fire station shall be constructed in accordance with the Southern Standard Building Code and as approved by the East Naples Fire Department on a site approved by the East Naples Fire Department. 8.06 MOSQUITO CONTROL Through proper engineering design and closely coordinated construction activities, a positively graded drainage s stem without numerous or extensive isolated depressions (stagnant water areas will be created. Those assurances, in conjunction with appropriate lake maintenance operation, will reduce the potential for increasing mosquito breeding areas within the property. 8-2 • 1 .. 9.A.2.c • EXHIBIT "J" , 8.04 TRANSPORTATION a EXTERNAL • ,a B. In order to mitigate against any adverse impacts on State Road 951 L � 0 from construction traffic and residents' traffic as a result of the development 0 activities being herein authorized, Applicant agrees as follows: m 1. Applicant shall not apply for building permits nor shall Collier 0 County issue building permits to construct in excess of 500 dwelling units t N 0 within the PUD area until such time as a proposal presented by Applicant for improving traffic facilities is reviewed by the Coastal Area Planning Commission r ° and reviewed and approved by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County. 0 M 2. As provided in paragraph 1 above, no building permits will be issued 0 N N for in excess of 500 dwelling units in the PUD area until Applicant presents a N y' k proposal to Collier County for improving the intersection of State Road 951, and J a Club House Boulevard, and for any additional improvements to SR 951, as appropriate o r,: cfl to mitigate any adverse impacts to traffic conditions wh;ch may result from the construction of additional dwelling units within the PUD area. Such proposal r 0 shall be in addition to the improvements provided fv paragraph 3 below and may incorporatd those improvements as specified in the PUD application or such al- c ternative or additional improvements as will best facilitate the movement of �a 0 traffic along State Road 951 and from the PUD area unto State Road 951. Q 3. At such time as Applicant commences land development or other con- c struction within the PUD area, Applicant shall (I) install a yellow flashing t traffic signal at the point of intersection of State Road 951 and Club House w a Boulevard; (ii) erect or cause to be erected at its expense, signage to identify the intersection as State Road 951 and Club House Boulevard; (III) erect, or c cause to be erected at its expense, signage to provide speed reduction along . t r r Q •4'd'R Packet Pg. 320 State Road 9M in the vicinity•of the intersection of State Road 951 and Club House Boulevard; (iv) lengthen the left turn storage lane for southbound traffic turning from State Road 951 unto Club House Boulevard, from Its existing 150 feet to 300 feet. 4. At such time as Applicant obtains all necessary approvals from the Florida Department of Transportation or other appropriate governmental authority, Applicant shall install, or cause to be installed at its expense, a full operating traffic signal at the intersection of State Road 951 and Club House Boulevard. Applicant shall use its best efforts to obtain the necessary governmental approvals for installation of the traffic signal. 5. At such time as State Road 951 is to be expanded to four lanes, Applicant shall donate the necessary additional right-of-way from within its ownership along State Road 951. In the event Applicant sells or otherwise transfers title to any land lying contiguous to State Road 951, Applicant shall include in the Instrument of conveyance a covenant to run with the land which transfers to its successors in title its obligation to donate necessary right-of-way to expand State Road 951 to four lanes. . `.. M r •• .r � • Packet Pg. 321 • �Mrrr/. irlrrMrl "'"":. 9.A.2.c • i i �. HEMORAIIDUM o August 29, 1980 a U '10: Files d FROM: Richard A. Rogers, P.E., Director, Resource Control Department v SUBJECT: Review of Marco Shores PUD Application Information Submission of . August 25, 1980 m Considerable information was submitted on subject date with a portion be'ii.g o relevant to consideration of the site. when considered as a complete self- N contained unit. for rezoning. Basic information on which a decision will be o made are as follows: i ' 1. 321 acre project, m 2. 35% impervious, - - 3. 138 acre golf course, x„ 4. 18 acres lakes, M 4 S. additional unkno.an amount of )rater r.•r iagement area to serve perimeter c tracts, CIA 6. 3..5 feet or more ground storage 7. post development discharge equal to pre development discharge, N S. sewage effluert disposal on golf course. a Since no construction plans were submitted it appears that the applicant possesses CD the capability during design, if rezoning is obtained, to include the following necessary deign features: N 1. Discharge storm water from the entire "island" by overflow of to perimeter berns in a shectflow mode, as the site is, or should be, 00 presently discharging, rather than through point discharges. W 2. Route all storm runoff through the internal lake system prior to CU transmission to the perimeter dispersal system. � L 3. Probably increase the open surface storage to'kcap pre and post O discharges equivalent (maximum 10 year event peak discharge of 4 0.75 inches per day 20 csm). Q 4. Include any necessary safeguards to prevent unnatural degradation of stornxrater by golf course fertilizers or pesticides or effluent, E such as by piping stornr,rlter from swale areas directly to the lake system and not overland through the golf course, construction of r low berms around lakes to discourage direct runoff of stoHlwater/ Q effluent mix from golf course areas, etc. • c m E Q • ..N , _� ..► - _ _ Packet Pg. 322 . .. I.errWl `""•;j 9.A.2.c _,e t« Therefore, if the applicant accepts the rezoning knowing theso limitations, the staff has no technical objection to rezoning. • o D a ' U m � KIchard A. Kugcrs,�: Director G U Resource Control Department ' Y o U RAR/j N cc: Mr. John E. Price z Mr. Jerry Cutlip N Mrs. Betty Van Arsdale C Mr. Joseph Donnes U ' Mr. Bernard Yokel Mr. Steve Mitchell Mr. Cliff Barksdale a, Mr. Robert Motchkavitz ti Fir. John kodraska o o • N N O N ._. .. • J d • O t0 N • .. to O C • 0 •••'•. ' • E • • 1 • . • a -2- c U r two �' .. . •• , • .1.1 .mow, Packet Pg. 323 (andO asinoo jjoE) sa.loyS oa.leW `66L£000ZZOZ-1d 09'P9Z) 9-6O aaueuipJp -VV 1UaWL13L' V :;uauayae11V • REWRDER'S HEMOt 1A010tf of wad s$. T "S er Prlu de[ Imewaawrr this docwwm Whom t'rcet" k, 1 3 xx "" { t tip � j 1..�•I� ' i. • . � '•y .' •, , ft !+!I•;.�it# l.�.+ ,•.. ti • •t •. / s J ' 4•• v.`>.r� rr• •„•tr t', •t'/ •!`I•^• ,1:•r r: •�... I!. v, •t •� ws•.V.}...s., r ►77 a S!f�•r f.17�-,Jr s ,<: i(t�:;•. �:� R •,J .••.. ..r:• 'I'�• ,".,4 .'�.t.. t4:f;S•. r�jJt.Y :} 1i's�r• :�'vK't irt: vj �J "!'' . t •;} :, s', r.. �'f • !t:•! : ' • , 1i .? r ! •,1-• ,.:'� j: .• nt ,t'' ' .••. •' , % .,1•ay,�, tom,/. •'•+ L r `. �,• !•. . 3: ,!. ,t•!-•:.. i rtrt •i�r,• ,• r•. '•• � :.�.rt'�.=<< '' 4•.•y'�j t�'•t. i 1; r itrs .. ' •r.1 •ry. �i:ud .: •it J '2 :. :'t•t t 4 •,�1.! .. �t, ;t t�7 1t ! ,2;• ' ��, :1''i'r':Z�N•3� 4\74if't .+. t,• :i °•. .N..• r i• (�•i�• :�1: •1!• .. �ytt, �'ji,+fi M w!i•�Gr. .••.', a.t'.,i.r}',� '�rri•� H.. ',; 1., r.•.. �.: ''� ,:71F {t •. �• •::K''.it r •���}y���. it ,.r• ::..•,y«a" f�•i�Isw7 • ( .,2 ,�' 't'�'• •!�• '':':: i.; .:'+,\, r•'4'i +''�• JV •'i.i:��,�'�;' •S'1SF•'"v.'f\. r7ii 1) ; :1r,.1� i t�ti� C'r, r•t,. • r• • :. i• R � 3;. ,� •,� 1'y�t• '4.?•Y•�� �+t' 1q`Lr,T'' .• � ,1. � •,'• !''=�°'Iy:i.�J''Si::i' •• �•.. ' . ','• :^•'.;: .:...i3 ttN•rsifi:f•o'. ..�;�d i / .-wit }�,t 1: i .t,,i v ; ut i,•i �:�•• 4.i • rt't.!'•..�:i" a.+':!' 'r ,V/ }:.'Y.1 1 • �'a.: i �.ii �J '!• : :t•.,+•}i,,.. ).:{t�''»f�':t..,•?' ;.�,;'•••`:.: fit'.....:` ,:'�• 21.5'.R' ,:C' pt�"7.4 )yt� ::� J `•�•; � •,:�•,. (!i•R t,•? +� ., ,i;r �y., � t.'=15i .J�•�•''• rf ) �' iJ ' �h��//.9: N� %� { {•.]1 �'�'.: i. •.'•.i� .- � �.• :tiff . .,. , y.., y ,�•rh� ,t•; . t�3r, i t-: ..f3{ .• Yi i• 't'i �: •, fl,'i•+.tit`\'�! �•''�.' ��,A r•1 `: r...,•w '.'•-'^' •� `•�:ilii1, i MI#: , •,:{ .tali ..a',t.a<t :�, ... ti'.�! 4•fE`�'� ' •. • rx. ' �y •_•,�•�+�" 3.. •.��. +t••'h r t: * t t- Sri t:' • aF! F•.,`+ t•.t • {, q t ,, �• s J�' �,,,, �!� '� , fit•.; �t... t , f r,: ;�; ` p , �•.���:+ � ''`„ ,� 1•,� 1j' ' � : �' •. ,' :..w''�: ' iI s..'. ,1rt, , �t••��i��1, 9'W'•,' •• t7v�„ v, �+•� 1 +'�/�/4. v'a••:;''� •jt: �•: �'`` Lt Jj, SK \ .�,� 3 �''• .1• ; � +• .'. �;�+.•.•,:';'.,,,.'s:;y:;T�. t"rt. jq;,, ��ts }} .: �.i .. • . .:' is / .!••� N q �..,•�r�''. r:1 ttli� 4 d� • r N. ti.`:':,� t•r. S r.` ;�' t«. �•�f` �•'' `,• • :..#. \�. ; lt;ra.� is ,;..0 •t, !„! c t•t�� r,{ `f;t :7s'l� +� t � /\ � .t' i�.. :S •t } ♦r':, i :: 'i j• "'� :!'�, 1;: • i•!'�i�Y �•T /..r �' t'tf4Y.•N,J' \ 1 tci^t�yi•�x. ti. �lr 1•;• •1, jj11t:..✓ ±•,t.•s:+ b r:v: <<;: t 3 •''y� +r= Sp. ; N '}. :+ • R?� t• {'.I f f T'.-t : r. f' "f.:..!1,:. , r.. n. rA a, ..1��4 „ 4' .i•'�i�••?:4l ti'. / „'. �;i. ,l/.. t. /-si• 'w I� :�st•;%r• .r. f. .:; :+1. y• t�.':., �s ;„• ,tom,•, 1';„.+4�i� t►::;1 at;• i''y�tw }{�;. (ter +/.3!.:i .. ,r . j:•' �. �: ,♦ •v.�r �,v, 74S.r�\ !r►tt't` '� it.r *.t ±i :.� '.r �,.+ �' „t:y.�: J••i�'', "�4�: v,:.ii ��jv`•t..r r�:i'�':a •:5 w:�.•Atl 1q;��•'•'.il ••+,�1; ; i•;Y.��j r�, .r �. r ♦• tt i /wi.s•it a:.` v :?', {:�yv,.r t. 'fr.:i;fi,$ `t f:••. �_t ,... r, r':, Ji+.l �.i'':. '1.�.�•:S •.� '��•. i :l' •r:i: +ri��it �.,i:� -�i•t. .. art'•^!ti\.��r 5S171:Y:i:V�� i �' :+tj'i WA_ 7;�: �itit + 'fai; t.! 4 J. (y1, lh':t "t:t::•: t .���.w( 1T 'r}p <r i L_ . �•�; 3: %a yy 1♦.�w'• �• i 1 ,•.t 1 s...,� 77�I{1 d •�y`•��� is 'T.I?.,.Z.^,' w . v. �Y+.+. iiyK73T;, ya''�. 7• .;,. it;�l'•�.''.,'. •' • `d.! S i+''.i.,.,'•,.1;'..l., L.;1� tf .r.t r,'1��; r fr..t 1 - ..;j/• is�.+ i� i7 :�i.L,i~,fi!� • .J . •/:'•( M,�+• •3• •.`SroY•';'•:,ff� .t�:i�'c: t.' •J„Rt: Y��'itf.l t. 1si�rhi: -r`.t� :"i,.� #p!;'!:�... •o, e�'t:.r1•',t;tq'f)r,',tf,.•r•� o""•'•�t''=:•;.�5:.•',: r.••Isr.'!?•: r,ta.��'••� :e;r,, t...'iVffrrl, •a`':;': .tl ••�t4',fjl •''y ¢•' `•�c: i�f�: t;' ..+1.;, fj »:•. , kt!, :.1 -s. wjs�wi j�l'i �'' it "+ t•? •,•�,4rw.y �. .. t' :• (�.:• R. .T . ate t I ;}4/ ,i j'�� �fWip y • R='•K ...rJ.. r.1:t:.Y 1rrM ' �:'v '/,;�! �,; r y }; •.•, •': •'�: •:1 ••y,• . %�• ! r t., y•.t. �..+; d':�jff ft� 3�L7f j� L y.{v �fL,'+ f;l.r:`, sri~ors• �«,,5.,ttiif 5„`r :icy SIP:�!eL�+ih:�3{�:A �•• ¢x�:C: L'�'�s l'•!• '�[,X% vvis�l2': a•., ! . v, w:a• ti " '�h.%^C.r.`.. I .; 'y„1• .1••t•r. i�+ , a ;x: :�4�',. �',�' S•' •' . , .•�`, fro'! :�>' "�"%,, ;�;, . d , 1 ! ?? S i:v1.f;1 s+fi��:• f �• 'f:t'; iwyti ifr..ti _ .v,�.t "!:�`ft' '';e:•rii..ti-.'_ivr f:���j,,, ?•:.••1:. •'•� � � j ��`'•�•,�+: �,•...;r:-•. �' t,:l�: tJ4r� . ,,,. .�•� � .. :•' s � I �:.ii:: ,.i' ti �' t' ��'�i t1�=. •� .• 1' ..1 , .r ::74 wi•Y �•� ... t.":._T •....:jj .,: -ni, il.r 2''R iti. !•r :. •:�.r'r •/; r 'jrr:. ;t. •4 i••r, .i .,•:.t ';:;.;.L':',•!1'•!.i. ":�.: .y. r _!cd 1 'i�? :i' .aY;,a/.../rtiC.ti.e•};s:' � x�� ,� : �'` ,., ,,..� a..�?;`'f :�:�•• f t;a:,u-t'':. �� , • •t r 11 aa..1:,� w ,:,s..i,M« I;i. r"..N; .tr.r v*`/I• 3 + 't is '�t t S �t�;i !;f, F,.q�:•�lw•.' I. •''ti: �r. ♦•r .y'•. .•.;#�:, (. �a r�;•- /�-�.;,.:; ; ,:•.;ems. .;;;.: iw i'%: 2:;•ji i�. 1;, ')+2 '.: �4i''J: M�'1'1'c'! a�:❑�O.O'a' �- _ t, •'w r•� ••i t��#. .}�ar:.w..:•6��.'•tr''� y. ;:.if,7}:S!„J•�r •.t•. O N.�•' :•. fr'`i�r.: •i, _s.r .L��t.t ..� ..,;. "1.• 4 3.+ •% f�:*t•;tva:�.F{':�,:, t•. i' ;i} �l!! {'}t •}s: .•�, •r' S y',','�`•",..^..•.%.;ity .: 1�{,.:-�:;?5:.,}f:.J•��Jfi�i:�}h,it��•t-i't+y"".L. 1• �'�j1, :ti4 fits '2: .•.rtr� ti: is ;y::� 'r'r•:rf; ✓, ,n; t- ,:+ ti .:a'i• + et' • i,'!i'1 ;ti'� ,y':*Sri:ab�� K� ,,n a,, • {,lt.�.,: ; , r•. • 4-••J t' It : ''�C {��i` '%.1: y�'A.4.'v i:•�'''�lJ,v �; ;r {;1� �•,t C.�• i::yy-� �•ll i7 v.'r'i•t!T'S N+��•.!�TV •! f! '�,'+� ;i tt� • :yi'�'Y1':. ;� y.`I � r r*t Jf,. y + �:',: ,r .I;' • ' I.e.:r i'4 .Y:{:M;. IT t t ;} iwf,'' .•ti't�!+�'.:�f., •i%+',rty;.�y2.... t, .•:'. .,...,�'�,}'!Si.'.,rt:! !tr!a't;��'2�c}'?;;•k�t:����j�: . ti+; . Ai. ^. 'r i Sit.•." / i,, t•'•�'''K r '\: .{t!•�i•rl � ,• 1 �: ,•ti. .+.i,!• a• w.;.:.,':i.{ �•Y';'•: A'J..�;'ja�t.•'�'% !i}t. * 1,y ;.�'t;.�•'fi•; 'r �`'� •: �•'•,i�wt'���+'i: 'f"�.���, j,i «� �lt:;.t',•'•• ^':.•t .v'I P•10^•�, i,t �*' .ti: t:,t'},'�n,r��3j:irl�i� v.r'�•� •�T} ,�,, •�'J{i •''r •i'` .A�•�' r/ •' !{, ;,y 'i„ 1sti,•3.. 4.::Jyi:s,,;4+�:f}:tl '� ►�1,7'3s;Y�.�,�•,•�� �;7D -� r li• "� \• +.IJ+: •vJ f R' s r..itii•J.ty •: •irck!.+3, f! } t tj.`ti f't r r _��•:•��. t •• r ' 'a•:.::�;:!• • '�:4,:•+���:':.:..r� �t,•'.,.R.!tylY.�;ltwt' t�; �[;Z•t' :7�.1 {1 k, //�.�, •'. � '..tfl' _ , . ¢i; � .r:.S,,, •. �r�!"/•1•T?S 7r �•?�,',(�trryw,�•.�ir tt•V":.. �: f•-•.S r. 1 w• .a , .•'.` • •. i'1:�.� . r • 'Y': ;y is '�,. 'r��:. 1.• M..: r.. rf�'r�; jr�.1 t:a5' ts,� t •,. �;t�.�. "i�tS,•" � '3X5, '¢«t-xni"c+ �`s�j�jn• r J<. 7:C!1t.A.wt,�: ,i?t� '}rna:+%fi r. ) 'F lr:y ' j •;s , r. .,.:.ry: !F ,/ r' c r�• y. •. .t : , r.4 •;• Ail � •. .!,• � • �•.' .�; ;;'r !rt i.. i:'x, t �`: • f.. �„ x • trrtl • i ,r .. .•..._ , . '�• >..: !- r; ;.' .� ;•rt S• a� ;��S!!..j. 'i ;l:' ! `2, � •r' •j,••',':..i '.tv .'{A. f: 7 }it lit.r;: �'�l•S '•'i v.}•X�{{q t!� +:• 3�.J v.•'! I•.�, :�•:'... r:.i . �,�;., 4. •;+•'.:}v,.t4`',. irs+...,.•,i:;�R;•'�"•:�•t w.t• 7i tli .V 7;t•�iy 'n. t r.tit'3 ':",".•p,•' ••';t j.o.-Vteary .c`+••, y h:`''•t.�R.+C• fi ;' �;eta};;�,'r:'�rtti;:;�•.s,yS:t;f•�._R� � ,�'; �: y;C . j •.: ems... t•�:is, ,'r:�•vJt',t�fi�'lSty�.': �v�?`. i. �w`�trl�..•...�h,:'rpa~''i� •�''^?••�"r,�w,,•1s'••',f�' ,,t,:rye•�.iii'.{^1r.t>Fr;ri�?>''�Fi•j7t,Jsti.�i,:ra �.• �,.vb.,•: �• t • • � .• �: .{.•'A'.• ' .. ,r•� ;r'. w,:.t••r 1•iti.; . ' �.'";.ttt :ti,eTa'�tl.! s.,lx:i •�. � t,+.tS ` S'pc's:,•,���„.ti•:t; �,t��ir.;;.t.i�r .'#.�:,jr.'�r. : s".ti�•�,,,;wi'�f:•:t�-. `,t. ;;�t�,�K�I�;�;,�,.rF�i; •1�!�ate�} 2isr, ',y . rw .da.• f' ' i• . .. ,� ,. .•R:' � f+:�t. ,i; :+,7.. �} .1`.! isY•'• �* •• .� � t�' ss %, , f7 •I: •R••tt •',, •r�yt � t`'••Y I ,rM r• / •h�+II '� tt�'s�i%;�i�t7'ai�•'{'}S d� .s ¢¢'1 .. ...J., 1.Cti: �,: �.� ,}??\r JI .%:' 1t• 11i:.�+¢'a(''�,.rt ,",•.:r�iv'4i,.'t�v �� },ir. i .� '1• ti ! t! ,• . • t � \riyC h >, t�:'l r r �.• +i r. t (:' r i•i.• L.►'^ ��:..� �1'���s '�i r••),,�'r�• }`C� +1�I �tj'e ,=�L`\il�ti�,•�:::t r��l..t't.�i', :'� .'�:.` R ti'i•F��v,ti.� 1•r..�tl,.i%•' ` •.. P1',rri"v�►•`;,`I\ttY:. �'}'tt7Jtftf-i i4 •:.' ' ''• .•'i "i'\ .'Sir4 >L v.�r yS,l.•t,, �v ljr}: l S.ijv.1R ;•. •3 rli '71'1.� i1:::' .• �' 4�`.tt t: r•t:li•it + r, •. i i(. C ��' + t�j}:..?t�•t. i'iftttl .!' ;::�. •�+�.l ;� `• .. i•1 1• �;•ti iv►I:. �y'!ir:Rr rlRf j+ia•'�r�{�•{• ,�':•�i't;f ,' FA •tsir'i j�'.lt,! l,i..VA'.•N'••1'l' +r��.ry. '.kv ',yt.��,i, • ' ,p s� r\'' , #, .v ir. S �~•�rj'iir •S�t :�}� W1�aY {1 t�•� p ••-+:it••»•si•. ~'' '' ..,l.r• �1trl'.li • 1` �. I } !Li e• ,1,r' 1;Q1.. }�7 •i4 ';'iii••,(Y 1tY/•'f.:s7't�..1 ''lam• •.'. •r' �.•,n"'^'..... "��+y:..w ._i•:.iRt��., �,.1�•! ,,'�•r. (.�=r� Iti!.. 4�,( �•/ rr�.`(�.',r (Lt�';•jij••"/p�y�yy ••r. „• '<.S•rV•.-.. •3.�•rq�.-•'•".;�t•1Fri]rIF„>Ki�l••T%^t.".�ya4��; • EG:,It � PACE ' t ►• Jtays.saa uctouvr !, iyeu Revised Soptemocr 18. :079 August 8. 1979 MARCO SHORES Proposed Condominiurm Sitca Surrounding and Includinq M r= SHORES GOLF COURSE • Legal Description '.'hat certain parcel of land lying in and being part of SECTIO14S 26, 27. and 22. TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH. RANCE 26 EAST, Collier County, Florida, Being more particularly described as follows: ' Co=ence at the Northeast corner of the Southeast one -quarter of said Section 231 run thence S07044'34"E 356.87 feet; thence S82.15126 295.5i feet to the Easter'} Right -of -Way Lino of State Road 951 and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel of land hereinafter described; thence S89017119"E 385.50 feet; thence X64'45122"E 142.11 feet; thence S260.50'57"E 114.05 feet; thence 6167.35'05"5 68.55 feet; thence N77.22'18"E 64.25 feet; thence S83609149"E 143.37 feats thence H86058115'a 10G.46 feet; thence =0.02'32 62.OG feats thence 1475.21'11"E 220.97 feet; thence V559110 02'S 303.29 feats thence N46•39'41"E 127.82 feet; thence :t41':5'55"E 328.G5 feats thence N27.49'01"E 181.41 feet; thence W50010'31'S 148.65 feet; thcncq N45150118"E 254.29 feet; thence N59038'47"E 310.03 foot; thence 1169150'53"S 25.16 feet;; thence W77.42137 195.S2 feats thence N87':2107"E 204.00 feet; thence 986055156'E 146.77 feet; thence S83120109"E 66.91 fact; `.1•.snce W81'25'07"S 73..10 feet; thiince S85115157"E 123.04 feet; thence S78.52133"S 118.09 feet; the..nco SS9'12'28."E 180.18 feet; thence S73"25'40'E 86.66 feet; thence S79.23'58"E 452.00 feet; thence S74'05'17 213.33 feats thence S56.51'30"E 194.45 foett thence W64.17'40 370.15 feats thence N75'17'32"E 76.02 rests thence W57.03'581E 37.97 feats thence N69'27111"E 121.75 feet; thence W78'44129'S 256.53'feet; thence N82.10'19"E 221.01 feett thence W85944120"E 322.82 feet; thence N64'27'O1"4. 646.89`feet; thence S74'58'24"E 91.06 feet; thence N61.47'24"E 229.63 foots thence W87.56'41"E 114.11 feet; thence S55'11'31"E 212.12 feet; thence N81643'S2"E 42.52 facts thence S20.41'55"E 47.20 feet; thence ,556138'44"E 2G2.01 feet; thence S75.09'05"E 148.31 feet; thence S41008'09"E 124.82 feats thence S71010'58"E 213.00 foot; thence S59.52'22"E 76.49 feet; thence S89.54'31"E 18.6.89 feet; thence S27'09113"S 41.73 feett thence S71.10'58"E 40.00 facts thence.' N87'06'S8'E 65.19 feet; thence N78'43'22"E 131.00 feet; thence N66.49'23"E 109.49 feet; thence S84.17'48"E 53.45 feet; thence N53.43'05"E 38.48 feet; thence N24.45'16"E 57.20 feet; thence N69.14'17"E 129.11 feet to a point which lies 1488.44'06"S1 1728.3B feet and S31.15'54"W 1505.12 feat iron the Northeast corner of aforesaid Section 26; thence S12'00'00"E 562.93 fact; thcnc4 $79048'17"'l 435.12 fee•ts thence S20'41'20"11 116.'40 feett thence S10'00'41*11 95.32 feet; thence S22'10'40"1.-. 100.84 foot; thence 543'04'49*W 51.42 feet; thence S53120'03"1: 54.63 facts thence Sie'S7.49":1 42.61 feet; thence S72.15'18"11 1U0.41 feats thence S85.22102":1 $0.49 feet; thence S77'23'52"19 50.00 foots thence SG7'11'30":4 50.80 feet; thence S81'50'10"19 50.16 facts thence S75.06126*W 100.03 feat; thence N75.07'41"14 56.3G feet; thence S62.27'56":i 31.05 feet; thence NG9*34'42*W 23.85 feet; thence 563'06'30'W 100.50 fact: thence S64*04'57"'. 127.37 feats thence S54609'S9"h 50.3G feats thence S71012147"14 50.00 foots thenca 547630'40'1: 51.42 font: thence S28'23'23"14 59.36 feats thence S41.28'21'14 32.99 foots thence U09057154"11 60.44 feat: thenca 561000133':: 91.00 feet: thence 1162.40'52"53 90.14 feats thence N01945122.W 92.80 foots thence 973141'22'^ 62.00 foots thence . S22'20'57*W 25.61 feats thence 541'12137"1-; 53.11 foot; thenco- ROOK �. PACF� • 9.A.2.c 474';2•:;"14 31.4: ;oats thenca !S4.51'�S"::•50.91 feats 'thenco f:7'lS•II .0 $4.13 :oats thenca S27.75.0:" . 1-3.01 faits :.'.vi%ca i33.2i'QR"n 100.3, feats t.anco G36•1!':;•:7 $5.04 feats th:nco . b54.09'S1W $0.24 :avts thenca 565.24•S9':: $0.16 (Ceti :hence 576.33'I2 l 68.21 :cats %hence S74•45.47"W 152.07 fears the:+ca S50.43'35':y 51.14 :cats :hence S3G"_5'54"-: 56.12 fc%t: tnunco S,6!•S2.2!':t 50.16 facts thence S43.27'S7":1 32.31 'cots thence �45•:3•:i'W 56.43 !Ceti thancv K61•1WO6.1•: 57.79 facts thence X20•25'Wlf 730.00 facts thence S33.26154":7 8nO.00 foots thence 1±7;•1;'OG'» 312.57 :acts thence 1.1.09.44'28"E 470.09 facts thenca 250.15 :eats thence NGO'07'25"t1 73.30 feet: thence S90.46'15'14 306.03 feet: thence S76005'07"R 548.79 feet: thenca 271012029'4 274.00 feats thence 566.40157"W 240.07 foots ttiance f2;02?':7'S 97.:S feats thence 509.43.41"E 251.56 feet: thonco 52I.1213: 101.27 feats thence S00.28'35"E 51.12 fact: thence S11.32'41"S 150.4E feats thence S19.23121"S 350.57 foot: thence Sol•48625"F. Sq.91 :eats thence S29.06'28":7 79.59 feet; thence 537.23'04':1 104.69 feats thence S31.59132*0 54.23 fact; thence E33•376A4'-. $0.01 feats thence S33.58104"R 53.49 feet: thence 352.46'43'17 100.24 feet; thence S54046128"1•:'50.00 feet; thence Sf9.53.03"7 103.5E feet: thence S84•O1'24"11 57.31 feats thence S36.21'39':i 53.!9 feats thence SE1•34121".i 72.07 feet; thence �II6•S6'3<":7 103.53 feat: thence N76.2412S"11 50.16 feet: thence :161.27'45"7 50.20 feats thonca NG7915133 351.12 feats thence ::33•31'Sd`:i 304.40 :Cots tnanco U79.48.10":1 50.49 feet; thence :33.51'451W 100.93 tact; thence 525.31157":d 17.75 fee:; thence S33.33'33"W 50.04 feet: thence S;3.17'S6'W 50.49 feet: thenca S24.02'5i":c 151.20 feet; thence S17.46122"1.1 51.42 feet: thence 510.27142":7 53.49 feet; thence S27.5010•6":1 50.09 feet; thenco 532.24152•:7 50.01 feet; thence S39014'17":; 50.49 feet: thence S51.04.03.11 53.14 feet: thence S26.41141":t 100.32 feet; thenca 1'i7!•58'30'17 264.10 feet; thence 85.80 fact; thence 535.44'28`:i 94.26 feet: thence 1160.55118":•1.234.57 feet; thence P25.44110"E 162.49 fast: thence N07.07.42":1 276.85 feet; t�snce 3;00.34.20'E 426.78 feet; thence s109.10'OG"E 211.04 foati thence X39.24'58'E 4G9.08 facts thence U366011511M 50.80 feet; thence W30.46'28•E 52.52 fact: thence NO2.39'38"14 56.14 feere thence. H12955102"If 300.01 feet; thenca 1115.50139"14 102.1E fact; thonca 580.02.32"14 41.92 faet;'thenco S8G658015"11 185.20 feet; thence 908•"8125"1.1 99.29 feet; thence S46•01101"h, 50.64 feet; thence S15.46'35'W 21.67 ieat; thcnco S38.41144"W 41.42 fact:,thonce N$6•13'08'11 250.16 :ea_; thence S72.56'29"14 52.81 foots thence 1182.51112"W 200.89 feet, thenca N87.32:25"W 263.83 feet to aforesaid Easterly Right -Of -Way Line of Stnto Road 951; thence, NO2.27'35"E along said Easterly Itight-Of-Way Line 120.00 feet to the Point Of Beginping. Containing 321.46 acres; more or lass. i REWltDJM!S JMdOs LedbtUh t1 a ei *chief, or, prtadaf emetDf-1-T in we iooaa Whom reoehe& p s a S 4 .VI '* Packet Pg. 326 9.A.2.c ., SECTION TWOt This ordinance shall become effective upon receipt of notice that it has been filed with the Secretary of State. DATE: February 10, 1981 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Vice,/ CPairma�n J `` r- ATTEST; WIL J REAGAN, `x," rr- �j •r; !— rn n '' I 'A. p p A C A STATE OF FLORIDA a• COUNTY OF COLLIER ) I, WILLIAM J. REAGAN, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true original of: Ordinance 81-6 which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners during Regular Session February 10, 1981. WITNESS my hand and the official seal.of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 17th day of February, 1981. WILLIAM J. REAGAN 0 Clerk of Courts and Clerk. , Ex officio to BoardVbf�;,",'�f County Commissions•''' •, Y By Virgirj aA ii-grij.. De�, yC, l,'e. Q , This ordinance filed with the Secretary of State's OffiC�e'y,�,•' c the 18th day of February, 1981 and acknowledgement of that m filing received this 23rd day of February, 1981. BY: eputy CjerK� l Q Q12 FACE DG( „ ... • 1d.1 r� Packet Pg. 327 9.A.2.d Growth Management Community Development Department Zoning Division Comprehensive Planning Section MEMORANDUM To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, ASLA, Principal Planner, Zoning Services From: Kathy Eastley, AICP, Planner III, Comprehensive Planning Date: July 13, 2023 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review PETITION NUMBER: PUDA-PL20220003791 PETITION NAME: Marco Shores Country Club Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment REQUEST: To amend the Marco Shores Country Club PUD, originally approved via Ordinance #81-06, to increase the maximum number of dwelling units from 1,580 to 1,670 dwelling units. LOCATION: The f314.7-acre site is on the east side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), approximately 4.5 miles south of US 41 in 26, 27, and 28, Township 51 South, Range 26 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is located within the Urban Designation, Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, and Coastal High Hazard Area as identified on the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Ordinance 81-06 approved the rezone from Agriculture (A) to Marco Shores Country Club PUD. The development was approved for a maximum of 1,980 dwelling units. The most recent Monitoring Report states that 1,580 dwelling units have been approved to be built. The current PUDA requests an additional 90 dwelling units, which will increase the number of approved units to 1,670 dwelling units within the maximum allowances in the PUD. Relevant FLUE Objectives and policies are stated below (in italics); each policy is followed by staff analysis [in bold] . FLUE Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004, and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). [Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to Zoning staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety to perform the compatibility analysis. However, staff would note that in reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses/intensities on the subject site, the compatibility analysis might include a review of both the subject proposal and surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location, traffic generation/attraction, etc.] 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 Pagel of 2 Packet Pg. 328 9.A.2.d FLUE Objective 7 and Relevant Policies Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting connector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirement of the Land Development Code. Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities, and a range of housing prices and types. [Marco Shores County Club PUD existing access is from Collier Boulevard. The PUD is an isolated development adjacent to the Marco Island Airport. Therefore, interconnection to other developments is not applicable. The community includes sidewalks and a golf cart path for walkability.] CONCLUSION: The additional 90 dwelling units are within the maximum thresholds permitted in the PUD; therefore, based on the above analysis, the proposed PUDA may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. PETITION ON CITYVIEW cc: Mike Bosi, AICP, Director, Zoning Division James Sabo, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section Ray Bellows, Manager, Zoning Services Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 329 9.A.2.e PENINSULA``./ ENGINEERING 1% Memorandum Date: July 21, 2023 To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, CSM From: Christopher Scott, AICP RE: Marco Shores PUDA (PL20220003799) NIM Summary A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was conducted for the above referenced project on Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 5:30 pm at the South Regional Library Meeting Room, located at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway. Approximately nine (9) individuals from the public attended the meeting (see attached sign -in sheet). The meeting was simultaneously conducted through Zoom, which had approximately fifteen (12) connections. Individuals associated with the project team that were in attendance included the following: • Christopher Scott, Peninsula Engineering • John English, Peninsula Engineering • Norm Trebilcock, Trebilcock Consulting Solutions • Noel J. Davies, Esq., Davies Duke LLLC • Jonathon Kassolis, SK Land Holdings, LLC • Giselle Chaar-Johnson, Mainsail Apartments Manager Chris Scott opened the meeting at 5:31 pm and provided a PowerPoint presentation outlining the details of the proposed Planned Unit Development Amendment. Following the presentation, the meeting was opened to attendees for comments and questions. The following is a summary of the questions asked, and comments made, by the attendees and responses given by the project team. Question/Comment 1: (David Wuellner, 1528 Mainsail Dr). I have noticed in the past week some utility work at the parcel closest to the airport; specifically appears they are doing work under the road from a holding pond on the south side to the north side. I'm wondering what that was. Second question is I know they purchased the property from City of Marco last year at a lower price because it does not have any density credits. I'm wondering what the status of those density credits is. Response: (Chris Scott) In regards to the density, the property is currently designated as a utility and park site on the Master Concept Plan so it does not allow for residential development. This amendment seeks to change those designations to Residential Parcel Two -A and add ninety (90) dwelling units to the PUD to be used on this property. P1_20220003799, Marco Shores MPUDA NIM Summary Page 1 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Packet Pg. 330 9.A.2.e PENINSULA,, ENGINEERING 4 Currently, the PUD has some available density that is held by a third party for the existing undeveloped sites near Collier Boulevard. In regards to the utility improvements being made, I'm not aware of anything. It sounds like it may be a drainage easement related. I know the water service utilities were owned by the City of Marco and there are existing easements within the right-of-way, so any work being done there is likely from a utility provider. (Jon Kassolis) I can say it is nothing to do with anything we are doing. If there is work going on there it is from a utility provider and we have not done it. Question/Comment 2: (Marlene Mahoney, 1425 Mainsail Dr) I was wondering when the rest of the hearings were? Response: (Chris Scott) Nancy Gundlach with Collier County is here with us this evening. Once the application is found sufficient, it usually takes 45-60 days to get the hearing scheduled or to get on the agenda. I would expect it would be scheduled sometime in the next three months. Again, there would be notices sent out to adjacent property owners, so if you received a letter for this meeting, you would get a new letter from the County, and there would be another legal advertisement, prior to the hearing. Those letters go out 15 days prior to the hearing. Questions/Comment 3: (Unintelligible) (Chris Scott) The question is whether we have plans of the buildings or schematic of the what the site will look like. At this time, this is just for zoning approval. There has been some preliminary site layouts done to make sure the unit count would fit on the property, but nothing is finalized. MHK will be the architect, and they did the existing buildings so any new structures will have the same look, feel and size as the existing buildings. Question/Comment 3: (TA Woodson, 1042 Mainsail Dr) How was it determined that 90 units would fit on the property, is it a financial thing or what? It seems like a lot to fit on 4-acres. Response: (Chris Scott) We did a preliminary fit study utilizing the same architectural design as the existing buildings — a four-story apartment complex, and ninety units could fit on the site with the associated parking, stomwater, buffers and setbacks that are required by the County. For those people coming in, there is a sign -in sheet. If there are no more questions from the audience, then I'm going to go to the Zoom participants. Give me one second. My apologies... I'll run through those screens again. Apparently, I forgot to share my screen when the meeting started. My apologies. (At this time, Chris Scott went through the PowerPoint presentation again for those that arrived late and Zoom attendees) PL20220003799, Marco Shores PUDA NIM Summary Page 2 Packet Pg. 331 9.A.2.e PENINSULA,, ENGINEERING 4 Question/Comment 4: (Rus Watson, Mainsail Dr) What's wrong with the idea of a park? Isn't that what it is zoned for? Response: (Chris Scott) The Master Concept designates area as a Park, but it has historically been used as a utility site and open storage. The intent is to use the site as additional multifamily residential Whose intent? The developer who bought it? Why would they buy it if it is supposed to be a park — its already zoned The question is "who's intent is it to redesignate the property for residential," and that would be the applicant who is also the developer of this project. The original PUD was approved in 1982 and it was designated as a park by the Deltona Corporation. It was never developed. It was sold and utilized as a utility site since that time. Once the utilities were removed, the property was sold to a private developer who is looking to develop it for residential use. So currently, you have the correct zoning on one parcel but not the other, is that correct? One area is zoned for development and one area is zoned for park? Let me go back a few slides. The parcel with the water tank, is currently designated as a utility site on the PUD Master Plan. The parcel to the right, which was used for a water treatment facility and open storage by one utility provider and then by the City of Marco Island Utilities is designated as a park on the Master Concept Plan. Both of these are being requested to be changed to Residential Parcel Two -A. Question/Comment 5: (Rus Watson, Mainsail Dr) Is this one of those railroad jobs that the Isle of Capris people had to go through? Its all done and the appropriate people have been greased and now you have to have all these meetings to satisfy the environmental people ... I mean, isn't that how things are done in Naples, Florida? Response: (Chris Scott) I can't speak to the other application you are referring to. Again, this is a Planned Unit Development Amendment so there are certain requirements so there are certain requirements to amend the zoning. An application is made to the County, which is reviewed by staff. As part of the application we are required to have a NIM to advise residents within the area what the application is. Once it is found sufficient there will be an advertised public hearing before the Planning Commission, where the public can come in and speak in favor or opposition or to express concerns. Like the Isle of Capris people did. The Planning Commission will make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. I personally haven't had any discussions with public officials other than staff regarding this application. That is the process for this application. Question/Comment 6: (Nicky) Unintelligible PL20220003799, Marco Shores PUDA NIM Summary Page 3 Packet Pg. 332 9.A.2.e PENINSULA,, ENGINEERING 4 Response: (Chris Scott) Question from Nicky is whether this is for low income people. The intent is this will be a second phase of the existing Mainsail apartments. I think the existing average rent is around $2,400. Question/Comment 7: (Romana Brodak, 1356 Mainsail Dr) All of those meetings are when nobody is around. Why are they not when people are here? Response: (Chris Scott) In regards to timing of meetings, it just works out as to when the County finds the application sufficient. Usually about 45-60 days after it is found sufficient. I will note that Collier County does simulcast their meetings through Zoom, similar to this NIM. All notices are mailed to addresses listed with the Appraiser's office. Most people that don't live here full time utilize their out-of-state mailing address. I've had many conversations with people who are not in town asking to participate on this NIM through Zoom. Collier County allows people to participate through Zoom even if they are not here locally. I also believe the County is not holding any land use hearings that are of great public concern during summer months when most people vacation, in July and August. This wouldn't be heard until September at the earliest or October. (unintelligible) The question is whether we (the applicant) or the public can request the meeting be postponed. It is not the intent of the application to request the Amendment hearings be postponed. As a resident, it is a public process, could certainly reach out to their Commissioners if they have concerns. Question/Comment 8: (Marlene Mahoney) Just a couple comments. When the other ninety units went up, we were told after they were approved. We're not the type of people who don't want this in my yard; that's not the reason we're here. It's traffic, fire engines, we have a lot of people that walk and bike in the street. We have seen increase in speeding. I just want to say one other thing. When WCI approached Tropic Schooner and Mainsail when they wanted to add another level onto their building, we were promised that we would have some beautification down the median. They put trees but stopped it early. Then WCI sold and nothing else was done. We can't stop progress; we know that. For us to do something, I think it would be nice if you did something. (Chris Scott) Thank you for your comments. I will note when the first phase, the existing 100 units, went up the property was already zoned for residential so it was an administrative decision and there was no requirement for public notification. Questions/Comment 9: (Connie Wuellner, 1528 Mainsail) If they are going to add ninety units, are they going to better maintain and monitor that street? Because, like she said, it's not just that people walk and bicycle on the street, its that on a regular basis that speed limit is 30 mph and people are going 55 mph. Like she said, there are areas that need to be maintained and beautified. Every year the County marks the sidewalks for improvements and then the rain and weather wash it away. Finally, this year it was improved, but only beautify in some areas where they did damage to the lawns and shoulders and median strip. So I know when the first set of buildings went up there were lots of contractors and PL20220003799, Marco Shores PUDA NIM Summary Page 4 Packet Pg. 333 9.A.2.e PENINSULA,, ENGINEERING 4 equipment going back and forth things were really ugly on parts of the street and parts of it still remain really ugly. I just want to know what the County is going to do to make sure that speed limits are going to be enforced and the park strips and shoulders are maintained because it feels like were forgotten because we're the last stop before Marco. My concern ... and the reason people use the road is because the sidewalks are in disrepair for so many years. And we walk and drive that road and there is a contractor sign up and I believe it is the same contractor who did the first units and it is in a different spot but in a new spot... (cross talk — unintelligible) Response: (Chris Scott) There was an additional comment regarding construction workers being some of the worst offenders when it comes to speeding through the neighborhood. I will note that again this is a zoning amendment application to add 90 units, so some of the comments that you are making I certainly sympathize with but it is not entirely germane to this request. The County does have what is known as a Neighborhood Transportation Improvement Program (NTIP) that communities such as Marco Shores could initiate to implement traffic calming measures. I don't know if you have a Master Association; I know there are lot of individual condo associations, but you could certainly reach out to Collier County Transportation Department for that process. That would identify ways you could do traffic calming along Mainsail. I believe Mainsail is a public road; I'm not sure if it is maintained by the public or is it maintained by the property owners association? County? OK. If you notice disrepair then you would probably want to reach out to the County Transportation Department. Question/Comment 10: (unintelligible) But I think it would behoove people who are going to develop this to have us with them. What was done to us before, and I've been here 21 years and I've seen changes, and we would like to do it in keeping with our properties. And now that whole area is going to be apartments. Once we found out it was going to be $2500 apartments we were happier because what we heard was I don't want to say what we heard. So if your people could show us renderings when they get them. I don't think we are trying to kill the deal. I think we are trying to work with you and make it acceptable to us so our properties and values are upheld. (unintelligible crosstalk) (Chris Scott) Thank you. Again this is a public information meeting. The public hearings take place before the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. Question/Comment 11: So this is an Information Meeting and you said you have to submit a recording of this so the County will hear what our concerns are correct? Response: (Chris Scott) Yes, it's part of our summary of the NIM. We provide an audio recording of what was said and I'll also prepare a summary of the questions, comments and concerns expressed at the meeting. We provide that to staff. I know the Planning Commission is looking at those summaries and listening to the meetings and the Board of County Commissioners also take those into account. PL20220003799, Marco Shores PUDA NIM Summary Page 5 Packet Pg. 334 9.A.2.e PENINSULA,, ENGINEERING 4 (Giselle Chaar-Johnson) Hi everyone, I'm Giselle Chaar-Johnson, the property manager of Mainsail. I've been here almost two years and am very proud of my community. I do respect and understand your concerns. We are trying so hard to build a community. We don't present ourselves as just another apartment community like everyone else. We really push the community factor. Our owner, Jon, is here; that's one of the reasons took this position. They're here to develop, not to do what others have done. And we're not here to deceive. We just know there is really a need for this. I can tell you personally as a renter myself, I hear your concerns and can promise you tomorrow I will send out a notice to my residents. If we are culprits in that to let them know to be more cautious. don't want to hinder you guys; we just want to improve. Our rents as you can see are a decent amount. I've personally leased the units myself ... I'm sort of a one -woman show. So every person who rents in that community have rented through me. You can blame me. You are all welcome to come into the clubhouse, talk to me, I'll give you a tour, show you a unit, you can go to my resident functions. I want us all to work together and work together. And I'm sorry for the past or whats happened, it has nothing to do with us, but we want to be different. I'm so proud of this community. And if the next one happens, God willing, I'm going to be even more proud of. So I want us to work together; I value everyone's concerns. If I can take care of it I will do my best. Question/Comment 12: (unintelligible) Response: (Giselle Chaar-Johnson) What would you like? I don't have any pull, but I can pretend. (unintelligible — asking about landscaping in median) That's out of my hands but I'm right there with you. That area is absolutely beautiful and peaceful and that's why we get people that want to rent there and want to live there. It does feel more like a home and not an apartment complex. It's quiet. And I want to maintain that as well, I promise you. I'm actually going to be moving on site in spring, so their going to have an on -site security — me! So, you guys, I'm always in the office and I can give you my personal cell. Concerns that I can handle. Anything you're seeing, please come tell me. Question/Comment 13: (unintelligible — concerns about lanai with excessive plantings — looks like a "jungle.") Response: (Giselle Chaar-Johnson) Because of the hurricane we had to take down screens for cleaning. It's people's discretion (as to what to have on their lanai). There are certain things I don't want them to have out their, but it is ok for plants. (Chris Scott) I just want to make sure that we are getting all comments recorded and the microphone wasn't going back and forth on your two-way conversation. There was concerns about people putting a lot of plants on their lanais on the apartments. I'm going to take a couple more questions and I do have to get to the Zoom questions. PL20220003799, Marco Shores PUDA NIM Summary Page 6 Packet Pg. 335 9.A.2.e PENINSULA,, ENGINEERING 4 Question/Comment 14: 1 think that everyone can agree that Mainsail Drive after you get by Hammock Bay could really use some improvement and can look at this development as an opportunity to petition or influence the county pay more attention to the eastern end of Mainsail Drive. This area is hardly maintained; this time of year it is hardly ever mowed. When they developed the first 100 units here they would cut through the median to get to the far east parking lot — people drove across the grass into the median. So maybe with this addition to your community you can influence the county to work with you — it only enhances your value to get the County to spend more time and effort maintaining Mainsail Drive. Its like we're the red-headed step child street of Collier County. They're responsible for it and it looks terrible especially this time of year. Question/Comment 15: (TA Whitsitt) Question for Giselle. What's the average age of the renters? Response: (Giselle Chaar-Johnson) I can't answer that due to Fair Housing. I welcome you to come visit and come to our events. Question/Comment 16: (unintelligible) Question about background checks 100% absolutely. I wouldn't have a job if I didn't. Income verification and we do backgrounds, absolutely. Even if someone is just an occupant, meaning they're staying there but are not on the lease, I do criminal check. (Chris Scott) The question was whether residents at the existing apartments go through background checks, both financial and criminal. Before we take any additional questions from those attending in person, I want to go through the Zoom chats real fast. Question/Comment 17: Are the apartments similar to the existing apartments and is the rent going to be similar Response: (Chris Scott) I believe this was addressed earlier in the presentation, but the answer is yes. These will similar products, the same design team as the existing apartments and rents will be the same or comparable to the first phase. (cross talk — question about dog sizes) (Giselle Chaar-Johnson) We do have weight restrictions but that would not apply to documented support animals. (cross talk — unintelligible) (Chris Scott) Again, I just want to go on record that this meeting has to be recorded and submitted to the Planning Commission. If we get to a point where we can't be heard or voices can't be heard due to cross talk in the background then that reflects poorly on the Neighborhood Meeting so I would politely ask that you be recognized to speak and then speak into the microphone from here on out. (Jon Kassolis) I wanted to address the question regarding the quality of the ninety additional units. I guess the best way to answer that is to say if you feel the existing PL20220003799, Marco Shores PUDA NIM Summary Page 7 Packet Pg. 336 9.A.2.e PENINSULA,, ENGINEERING 4 development is quality of design and quality of construction, then what I can say is if we are granted this PUD Amendment with the additional density credits added then these new units will be built by the same general contractor, designed by the same architect, with site work done by the same engineers so it will be much of the same as what already exists. Question/Comment 18: Are you going to be maintaining those units 25 years from now? Response: (Jon Kassolis) I have trouble committing to my wife what I'm going to be doing in six months let alone 25 years. In this case I will say that we are not a merchant developer. We are what's called a legacy developer. That is not a promise that I will not sell these in the next 25 years, but what I can say is that out company and our philosophy on building — this is not the only building that we have; we do retail and office construction — and when we start the building process, much like we did at Mainsail 1, our intention is to never go into it with an exit strategy. Our intention is to go into it to leave it to our grandchildren and that's what I mean by legacy developers. My opinion about the difference between a merchant and a legacy developer is quality of workmanship as opposed to someone who is looking to quickly flip it and sell it; they're not going to be interested in the workmanship or maintaining it as well as someone who, again, has every intention — not a promise, but intention, to stay in that property for a very long time. Question/Comment 19: (Marlene Mahoney) We all know that we're only as good as the inmates that are running it. So what you choose to allow, with trees on lanais and screens (crosstalk). I want to know how much responsibility your going to take in maintaining it because you have people coming and going. Response: (Jon Kassolis) We are absolutely committed to maintaining the property. Giselle is our enforcer. I'm a little confused about your comment about after the hurricane. We had a process where we had a lot of dirty lanais — I think we all did. The process we had to do in order to power wash them; we actually had to unseal all of the lanais because we couldn't go into each apartment but access it from the outside. We had to detach the lanai and power wash from the outside. So that may be a bit of what you saw. In terms of the jungle that you saw. This was in the last month or two. OK (Giselle Chaar-Johnson) I know which one they are referring to. (Jon Kassolis) It is our intention to have a beautiful building and tenants who are a good member of the community. It's not our intention to have out -of -control plants and I'm sure we can address that. PL20220003799, Marco Shores PUDA NIM Summary Page 8 Packet Pg. 337 9.A.2.e PENINSULA,, ENGINEERING 4 (Giselle Chaar-Johnson) I know exactly who they mean. I know all my residents. It's the first floor, 101, and she tends to have a lot of plants. She's very clean otherwise, she just has a lot of plants. I can address that. If you are noticing that, it matters to me. (cross talk) (Chris Scott) Let me get through these Zoom comments and questions because they have been waiting patiently. And I will note, Giselle, I don't want to speak for you — but a lot of these issues seem to be more specific to the existing community, so if you want to stay around after the meeting you can discuss with Giselle and she can provide her contact information to you as well. I'm going to go through these quickly. Question/Comment 20: It appears the existing apartments are nowhere near capacity, why is the developer wanting to build more when the existing building appears to be mostly unsold? Response: (Jon Kassolis) As of today we are 99% occupied. Question/Comment 21: Please explain why density needs to increase for this project when there are 418 units still available. Did the first apartment building have to petition for an increase and if not why? Response: (Chris Scott) There are units available within the PUD that are owned by another developer who has the controlling interest in the vacant parcels adjacent to Collier Boulevard. The first phase did not have to go through a rezone. It was already zoned residential. That is it for questions... there are a lot of comments. If there are any more questions in the audience... (Jon Kassolis) Just to clarify. The first phase was not only designated and zoned residential, but we purchased it with the 100 density credits so not only did we not have to amend the PUD to change it to residential, there was also no requirement to add additional density credits. For the first phase. The question was whether the first phase had to go through a rezoning. Question/Comment 22: (Name not provided) The only thing I want to add and it doesn't have to be on the record is that whatever they've done down there..... their certainly not an asset to the community; their just down there at the end of the road and its more traffic, more cars and so on, but its not monumental to this point. But I don't see that as justification for doubling it. Question/Comment 23: (Unintelligible) Response: (Chris Scott) The question was whether or not the developer will fix the road for damage from construction already done or with continuation of the second phase. I'm not aware of any damage. PL20220003799, Marco Shores PUDA NIM Summary Page 9 Packet Pg. 338 9.A.2.e PENINSULA,, ENGINEERING 4 (Jon Kassolis) Specifically, you are asking about damage we did during construction? Yes (unintelligible) (comment about trash) (Jon Kassolis) Right, I believe we've already remedied the median situation. The trash situation we had a final cleanup before we opened. If you can think of other damage that was done, then... (crosstalk) To my knowledge it has. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm not aware of any damage that is still existing. (Chris Scott) If I may, should this be approved and the second phase is being done. This is a County right-of-way, there will be a county right-of-way permit required to access the site. Prior to any Certificate of Occupancy, Collier County Development Review staff will come out and do an inspection, including that any damage would be cleaned up before they issue a CO. So, my assumption based on the fact that the first phase is open, that they have satisfied all of Collier County's requirements. Again, it is a public road so if there are issues that you see, those should be reported to Collier County Transportation. Let me see if anything else popped up on Zoom ... one other question. Question/Comment 24: Please ask the developer if they are interested in returning to the community a median landscape from the airport to Hammock Bay? Response: (Chris Scott) This project has its own landscape requirements and they are required to put in landscape buffers including along the frontage. I'm not aware of any requirements to provide landscaping within the buffers. Question/Comment 25: (TA Whisitt) With these 90 units in Phase 2 and the two towers that can go up, is that it? You just mentioned something about another developer and a parcel on Collier. Response: (Chris Scott) I know there are two existing parcels up near Collier Boulevard. On Mainsail? (Jon Kassolis) what you are referring to is the two tower sites. The two tower sites is the remaining units and that will be it. If the PUDA is approved, then it would be that ninety plus the two towers. (Chris Scott) I will just clarify that unless someone else comes forward in the future to amend the PUD. End of Neighborhood Meeting. PL20220003799, Marco Shores PUDA NIM Summary Page 10 Packet Pg. 339 9.A.2.e 17:36:12 From Maria Rizzuti to Chris Scott(Direct Message) : can you share your screen? 17:38:53 From Lisa's iPad : We don't see the shared screen 17:39:16 From johnf : Me too 17:39:25 From Feeneys : no one can see the items you are talking about 17:41:23 From johnf : Now we can't hear either 17:42:57 From Lisa's iPad : Can you please;unmute us so we can ask questions 17:47:04 From Kerry VanderVelde : We can hear, just can't see slides 17:47:05 From Gary Broad : Yes 17:47:35 From Kerry VanderVelde : no screen 17:47:38 From Feeneys : no 17:47:43 From johnf: Nope 17:50:23 From Gary Ceremuga : Are the apartments similar to the existing apartments? And is the rent $$ also going to be similar? 17:54:16 From Lisa's iPad : GREAT QUESTION 17:55:03 From johnf : Wish I could hear the questions 17:56:28 From Lisa's iPad : GREAT POINT 17:59:28 From Gary Ceremuga : We have seen a substantial increase in traffic since the completion of the existing 100 unit complex and have serious safety concerns. Another 90 units brings the potential 180 cars. Mainsail Dr is very popular for walkers joggers and bikers. 18:00:10 From johnf : YES YES YES 18:01:07 From Maria Rizzuti : Agree and most drive over the speed limit. 18:01:55 From Kerry VanderVelde : My main concern is lack of enforcement of speed limits. This issue will need to be brought up at the county commissioners meeting. 18:05:02 From Gary Ceremuga : We are losing our quiet dead end street. The developer is asking a LOT to have this property re -zoned. I think we as the Marco Shores Community should get something in return... landscaping the median strip from the airport to Hammock Bay 18:05:18 From Kerry VanderVelde : Reacted to "We are losing our qu..." with 18:05:30 From Lisa's iPad : Agreed 18:05:47 From Gary Ceremuga : No master association... 18:06:31 From Gary Ceremuga : landscaping the median would help to slow traffic 18:08:45 From Gary Ceremuga : We are also concerned about our market values and how increased traffic from another 180 cars would affect that... 18:10:23 From Lisa's iPad : I would like to see the traffic flow study 18:12:08 From Gary Ceremuga : Me too... 18:12:49 From Joseph Hoffman : It appears that the current apartments are no where near capacity. Why is the developer wanting to build more before the current building appears to be mostly unsold? 18:14:17 From Lisa's iPad : I believe these are just rentals 18:15:37 From Gary Ceremuga : great question, but we all know the migration to Florida is immense and will only get greater in the future 18:17:33 From Maria Rizzuti : Concern if renters elect to rent and then turn into an Airbnb Packet Pg. 340 9.A.2.e 18:21:31 From Pat Thurston to Chris Scott(Direct Message) : Please explain why density needs to increase for this project? Why would the 90 units not come from the 418 units still available. Did the first apartment building have to petition for an increase? If not why not? What is different. 18:23:55 From Gary Ceremuga : With regard to traffic, please keep in mind there will be another 240 homes once Hammock Bay completes the pre -approved 2 more towers... 18:25:34 From Lisa's iPad : This is sounding like a traffic nightmare 18:29:41 From Gary Ceremuga : We are losing our quiet dead end street. The developer is asking a LOT to have this property re -zoned. I think we as the Marco Shores Community should get something in return... landscaping the median strip from the airport to Hammock Bay... Please ask the developer if they are interested in returning to the community a median landscape from airport to Hammock Bay?? 18:30:42 From Lisa's iPad : I agree with Gary 18:31:57 From Lisa's iPad : Traffic flow study 18:32:34 From Gary Ceremuga : Palm trees in the median from the developer would go a long way to get support from the community for their re -zone request Packet Pg. 341 (andO asinoo IloJ saaoyS ooaeW `661£OOOZZOZ-ld : 091V9Z) slsdouAS WIN-0;uauay3e;4d :;uauayoejjv N N M N d CY) ti O O O N CV O N J n 0 N a) L O O ca WE Z W CL 0 0 o� (•7 cm c� o c? N Lo C) NO N � pp J m _0 M� 70 min � n Kj (D a �r �, r,"t r-� V. i Lo ) •' 0 )`J <r y 1 O O O m 0 w z I c O 4--d m 4--) c Q) Q Q) w 5; O N I�1 0 C�0 .U) O CT 0 0 L- n I z 0 u 0 O H z w 3; u J W Q W F— F— z Q J D V) z O U z a _U J CL CL Q U J 4A C w L I a Q 0. .E c E E O CJ � N � O p `U + 0.7 EL O p a 0 7 J L_; .'1 2. _ Y. d • 0 S H LL � oav �V� x 3f ca ` m 2 ru"]a ir ¢r � r � i r s � + i J: i t M dv } I a w u z O u Hi 2 E oa s. N z Z) W�•�$i8 pSWokIn 8 p Al t 3: ow = 7 0.gig £FF'p1g Yam, 0�9 w wi or.,a.n. rams E I � � � r LU u z 0 u re LU � V) � � LU V) 0 n 0 ne n I 8 W N I N W cr DC (D z z O N Q O '7 4--+ F- E '� z Q N aN-+ O N O Z3 w 4-j � _ > Q _ O v LO O ' - U •� Ul E O N Ln ' c6 'p O Q r%4 > _ ' N , p Q ca m p cdn� N '� O N M 4-5 O can can + C6 C6 C6 V O u _0 Tj = m m I (a buo W O U = i � U — =3 U � � O V) O N ._� �> .� Ucu buO F- CAA O c U Z >- c6 O O +- U = O _v O Q U _0 Q �o O a m 0 w z I N z O w WA I bn c L LU l a E O . 9.A.2.f PEN INSULA�j ENGINEERING April 14, 2023 Collier County Growth Management Department Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Marco Shores Golf Course Community MPUD PUD Amendment — PL20220003791 1' Review To Whom It May Concern, The below have been included for your review and approval: 1. Cover Letter 2. PUDA Application 3. Pre -Application Meeting Notes 4. Affidavit of Authorization 5. Property Ownership Disclosure Forms 6. Covenant of Unified Control 7. Recorded Warranty Deed 8. rco Shores Unit One Subdivision Plat (PB 14; PGs 33-38) 9. Survey 10. Current Aerial/Location Map 11. Zoning Map 12. Statement of Utility Provisions 13. Traffic Impact Statement 14. School Impact Analysis 15. Narrative and Evaluation Criteria 16. Revised PUD Document (Completed Exhibits A-F) 17. Revised MCP 18. Current PUD (Ord 1982-06, as amended) Please feel free to contact me at (239) 403-6727 or by email at cscott@pen-eng.com should you have any questions or require additional information. *istopher Scott, AICP Planning Manager 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Packet Pg. 355 colflear county Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov Application for a Public Hearing for PUD Rezone, Amendment to PUD or PUD to PUD Rezone (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) ❑ PUD Rezone (PUDZ): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F., Ch. 3 G.1 of the Administrative Code ❑✓ Amendment to PUD (PUDA): LDC subsections 10.02.13 E; and 10.03.06.13; and Ch. 3 G.2 of the Administrative ❑ Code PUD to PUD Rezone (PUDR): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F. APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): SK Holdings Real Estate LLC Name of Applicant if different than owner: Address: 6646 Willow Park Drive, #1 City: Naples Telephone: 239-330-3758 E-Mail Address: lon.k(@cci-tdc.com Name of Agent: Noel J. Davies / Christopher Scott Firm: Davies Duke, PLLC / Peninsula Enqineerinq Cell: Address: 1415 Panther Lane, Suite 442 City: Naples Telephone: 239-216-2792 / 239-403-6727 Cell: E-Mail Address: Noel.Davies@DaviesDuke.com / CScott@pen-eng.com If Property is under contract to be sold: Name of Property Buyer(s): Name of Applicant if different than buyer: Address: Telephone: E-Mail Address: Name of Agent: Firm: Address: Telephone: E-Mail Address: City: City: Cell: Cell: State: FL Zip: 34109 State: FL ZIP:34109 State: ZIP: State: ZIP: M N N V_ a6 c 0 M Q a a c m E z 0 M Q a) E z n: Q 07/2022 Pag Packet Pg. 356 L of Fier C014YIty Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov REZONE REQUEST This application is requesting a rezone from: Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD Zoning district(s) to the Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD zoning district(s). Present Use of the Property: vacant Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Multifamily Residential Original PUD Name: Marco Shores Ordinance No.: Ord 81-6, as amended by Ordinances 85-56, 94-41, 16-37, 16-38, and 18-20 PROPERTY INFORMATION On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: • If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include a separate legal description for property involved in each district; • If required to do so at the pre -application meeting, the applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six (6) months, maximum 1" to 400' scale), and • The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Section/Township/Range: 26 Lot: P, N Block: 51 / 26 Subdivision: Marco Shores Unit One Metes & Bounds Description: Plat Book: 14 Page #: 33-38 Size of Property: +/-790 ft. x See Boundary Survey Property I.D. Number: 59430520004, 59430560006 +/-235 ft. = 175,980 Total Sq. Ft. Acres: 4.04-acres +/- Address/ General Location of Subject Property: North side of Mainsail Drive, approximately 1.5 miles east of Collier Blvd PUD District (refer to LDC subsection 2.03.06 Q ❑ Commercial ❑ Mixed Use ❑✓ Residential ❑ Other: ❑ Community Facilities ❑ Industrial 07/2022 Pag Packet Pg. 357 collier county Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning Land Use N CON-ST Preserve S Marco Shores PUD Mainsail Drive / Golf Course / Golf Maintenance E P Airport W Marco Shores PUD Multi -family Residential If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal description of the entire contiguous property on a separate sheet attached to the application. Section/Township/Range: 26 / 51 / 26 Lot: B Block: Plat Book: 14 Subdivision: Marco Shores Unit 1 Page #: 33-38 Property I.D. Number: 59430080007 Metes & Bounds Description: 1771 Mainsail Drive ASSOCIATION' Complete the following for all registered Home Owner / Civic Association(s) that could be affected by this petition and located within 1,000 feet of the subject property. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Civic Associations and Communities page on the Board of County Commissioner's website. Applicant is responsible for and shall confirm the current mailing addresses for each association as registered by the Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations. Name of Homeowner / Civic Association: Marco Shores Country Club Mailing Address: 1450 Mainsail Drive City: Naples State: FL ZIP: 34114 Name of Homeowner / Civic Association: Mailing Address: Name of Homeowner / Civic Association: Mailing Address: Name of Homeowner / Civic Association: Mailing Address: Name of Homeowner / Civic Association: Mailing Address: City: City: City: City: State: ZIP: State: ZIP: State: ZIP: State: ZIP: r Q 07/2022 Pag Packet Pg. 358 Collier County Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov EVALUATION CRITERIA 9.A.2.f Pursuant to LDC subsections 10.02.13 B, 10.02.08 F and Chapter 3 G. of the Administrative Code, staffs analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria. On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. a. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. b. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. C. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan. (This is to include identifying what subdistrict, policy, or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that subdistrict, policy, or other provision.) d. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. h. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. M N N a6 c 0 Q Q. a 0 c a� E �a a r c m E U r a 07/2022 Pag Packet Pg. 359 collier county Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? N/A Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? ❑ Yes �✓ No If so, please provide copies. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS This land use petition requires a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), pursuant to Chapter 8 B of the Administrative Code and LDC section 10.03.05. Following the NIM, the applicant will submit a written summary and any commitments that have been made at the meeting. Refer to Chapter 8 B of the Administrative Code for the NIM procedural requirements. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately. RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer (specify name) at their expense shall record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the recording requirements of Chapter 695, FS. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the Collier County Planned Unit Development Monitoring staff within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. LDC subsection 10.02.08 D This application will be considered "open" when the determination of "sufficiency" has been made and the application is assigned a petition processing number. The application will be considered "closed" when the petitioner withdraws the application through written notice or ceases to supply necessary information to continue processing or otherwise actively pursue the rezoning, amendment, or change, for a period of six (6) months. An application deemed "closed" will not receive further processing, and an application "closed" through inactivity shall be deemed withdrawn. An application deemed "closed" may be re -opened by submission of a new application, repayment of all application fees, and the grant of a determination of "sufficiency". Further review of the request will be subject to the then current code. M N N_ c 0 Q Q. Q 0 a� E V �a Q c m E U 2 w r Q 07/2022 Pag Packet Pg. 360 Collier County 9.A.2.f Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: ❑ PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G.1 of the Administrative Code ❑✓ Amendment to PUD- Ch. 3 G.2 of the Administrative Code ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G.1 of the Administrative Code The following submittal requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre -Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with an up-to-date application. Please upload the submittal items with cover sheets attached to each section via the GMD Portal Incomplete submittals will not be accepted, or processed. View sample PUD document. REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Cover Letter with narrative statement including a detailed description of why amendment is necessary Ri ❑ Completed application with required attachments (download latest version) ✓ Pre -application meeting notes ✓ Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized ✓ Property Ownership Disclosure Form ✓ Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control ✓ Completed Addressing Checklist ✓ Warranty Deed(s) ✓ List identifying owner and all parties of corporation ✓ Signed and sealed Boundary Survey ✓ Architectural rendering of proposed structures t/ Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. ✓❑ ❑ Statement of utility provisions ✓ Environmental data requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 El Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner at time of public hearings. ❑ ❑✓ Listed or protected species survey, less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys. ❑ ❑✓ Traffic Impact Study (TIS) ✓ Historical Survey ✓ School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable ✓ Electronic copy of all required documents ✓ Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional information)+ ✓❑ List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each (this document is separate from Exhibit E) ❑ *Checklist continues on next page 07/2022 Pag Packet Pg. 361 collier county Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x 36"and one (1) 8 %" x 11" copy ✓Ll Original PUD document/ordinance, and Master Plan 24" x 36" — Only if Amending the PUD ❑ Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru & underlined ✓ Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification ✓ +The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet: • Exhibit A: List of Permitted Uses • Exhibit B: Development Standards • Exhibit C: Master Plan- See Chapter 3 G.1 of the Administrative Code • Exhibit D: Legal Description • Exhibit E: List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each • Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239-690-3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan." PLANNERS — INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: 0 School District (Residential Components) ❑ Conservancy of SWFL Utilities Engineering Parks and Recreation Director Emergency Management Immokalee Water/Sewer District City of Naples Planning Director Other: City of Naples Utilities Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS ❑✓ Pre -Application Meeting: $500.00 ❑ PUD Rezone: $10,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone: $8,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre ❑✓ PUD Amendment: $6,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre Comprehensive Planning ❑✓ Consistency Review: $2,250.00 ❑✓ Environmental Data Requirements -EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre -application meeting): $2,500.00 ❑✓ Listed or Protected Species Review (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00 0 Transportation Review Fees: • Methodology Review: $500.00 (Methodology by Email to Staff) *Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting. • Minor Study Review: $750.00 • Major Study Review $1,500.00 ❑✓ Fire Planning Review Fee: ($150 PUDZ) ($125 PUDA, PUDR) M N N_ c 0 r Q Q. Q 0 c a� E R Q r c m E U 2 w Q 07/2022 Page Packet Pg. 362 Collier County 9.A.2.f Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov ❑✓ Estimated Legal Advertising fee: • CCPC: $1,125.00 • BCC: $500.00 �✓ If applicable, an additional fee for Property Owner Notifications will be billed to the applicant after Hearing Examiner hearing date. (Variable) ❑ School Concurrency Fee, if applicable: • Mitigation Fees, if application, to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County All fees are collected at the time of application. Property Notification Letters, if required by The Land Development Code, will be invoiced after the petition is heard by the Board of County Commissioners. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. *Additional fee for the 5th and subsequent re -submittal will be accessed at 20% of the original fee. *The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to Growth Management Community Development Department I GMD Portal: https://cvportal.colliercountyfl.gov/cityviewweb Questions? Email: GMDclientservices@colliercountyfl.gov Digitally signed by Christopher Scott Christopher S Cott DIN: cn=Christopher Scott, c=US, o=Peninsula Engineering, email=CScott@pen-eng.com Date: 2023.08.17 10:49:43-04'00' March 31, 2020 Signature of Petitioner or Agent Date Christopher O. Scott Printed named of signing party 07/2022 Page Packet Pg. 363 Coder County 9.A.2.f COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercouityfl.gov (239) 252-2400 Pre -Application Meeting Notes Petition Type: PUD Amendment (PUDA) Date and Time: Wednesday 7/27/22 at 9 : OOAM - Zoom Assigned Planner: _ Nancy Gundlach Engineering Manager (for PPL's and FP's): Project Information Project Name: Marco Shores Country Club (PUDA) PL#: 20220003791 59430520004,59430560006 Property ID #: Current Zoning: PUD Project Address: Mainsail Dr. City: Naples State: Applicant. Noel J- Davies, Esq. Davies Duke, PLLC FL Zip: 34114 Duke, PLLC Agent Name: Noel J. Davies, Esq. , Davies Phone: 239-216-2792 1415 Panther Lane Ste 442, Naples FL 34103 Agent/Firm Address: City: State: Zip: PropertyOwner: City of Marco Island o City Manager City Hall Please provide the following, if applicable: L Total Acreage: 4.04 ii. Proposed # of Residential Units: 92 multi family iii. Proposed Commercial Square Footage: iv. For Amendments, indicate the original petition number: V. If there is an Ordinance or Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the type and number: Vi. If the project is within a Plat, provide the name and AR#/PL#: Updated 1/12/2021 Page 1 1 of 5 Packet Pg. 364 9.A.2.f Coder County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercountyfl.gov (239) 252-2400 Meeting Notes As of 10/16/2017 all Zoning applications have remised applications, and your associated Application is included in your notes; additionally a *new Property Ownership Disclosure Form is required for all applications. A copy of this new form is included in your pre-app Note -link is https:llwww.colliercountvfl.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=75093 w A.►n't_ - ;�L olLe' OF' Ate- El FFr�-e_I) Ar_b b6c4,,t 1 P44 D Iw v N 1 _1 4.1 a-1 CV 6 - .4Gk (1j, v_ q - 5 e,,, -eq% ai tr D ti A 6 �>-, $. eomP I 1-fdn/N1yV6 r . oZ, 1. IL PV-e . r _� �--.e.. IN d {�'QS U r,) rA-6.Q r C.1, ` -1 (-.. If Site is within the City of Naples Water Service Area please send to Naples utilities and Planning Departments. Then, if the petition is submitted, we are to send it (by email) to the four persons below in their utilities and Planning Depts. - along with a request that they send us a letter or email of "no objection" to the petition. Bob Middleton RMiddletonCc)naolesooy.com Allyson Holland AMHo!land na Ies ov.com Robin Singer RSin er na les ov.com Erica Martin emartinanaplesaov. corn Disclaimer: Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre -Application Meeting is based on the best available data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the applicant of issues that could arise during the process. The Administrative Code and LDC dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided of required data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to provide all required data. Updated 1/12/2021 Page 1 2 of 5 Packet Pg. 365 9.A.2.f ThomasClarkeVEN From: SawyerMichael Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2022 9:25 AM To: ThomasClarkeVFN; GundlachNancy Subject: Marco Shores Pre App Meeting Notes Thomas, Please check the TIS required box on the pre app checklist as well as methodology on the next page with a note that methodology will be by email to staff. Please also add the following notes: Transportation Planning: Methodology meeting by email required and provide note on TI5 cover sheet that fee will be collected at time of PUDA submittal. Address all transportation elements of the GMP. Provide trip limit based on TI5 using standard language: 'The maximum total daily trip generation for the PUD shall not exceed two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval." Please provide interconnection commitment using standard language: "Vehicular and Pedestrian N interconnection will be provided to the to allow access to all connection points with o consistent with the conceptual PUD Master Plan, The final location of the access point will be a coordinated with the adjacent property owner and a cross -access easement, or an access easement to the public o for public use without responsibility of maintenance by Collier County, will be provided at time of the first Site 0q Development Plan or Plat. The connection and supporting infrastructure will be constructed to the property line by the developer or successors or assigns prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy. The interconnections N shall remain open to the public." r Also provide Developer Commitment regarding Airport location disclosure for unit purchasers/owners/renters 2 r as discussed for review by staff and CAO. .Q Q. Respectfully a 0 r c Michael Sa«-•er E Project Manager U Transportation Management Services Department Q Transportation Planning 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 E 239-252-2926 michael.sa«ver(izcolliercountyfl.gov Q Linder Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to F. public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. A - Packet Pg. 366 9.A.2.f 1 ThomasClarkeVEN From: Beard Laurie Sent: Monday, June 13, 2022 3:41 PM To: GundlachNancy Cc: ThomasClarkeVEN Subject: Pre Application Meeting - PL20220003791 - Marco Shores Country Club (PUDA) I have nothing for this pre-app for PUD Monitoring Laurie Beard Project Manager Please note new address: PUD Monitoring, GMD 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Laurie. Beard 0)Col fierCountvFL.aov Phone:(239)-252-5782 Under Florida Law. e-mail addresses are public records. if you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request. do not send electronic rnaiI to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. ?ice Gam-- "13 Packet Pg. 367 9.A.2.f Marco Shores PUDA (PL20220003791) Pre-App PL20220003791 (PUDA) — xxxxx, agent; Nancy Gundlach, planner. Thursday, June 27, 2022 9:100 AM-10:00 AM. Requested by: xxx of xxxxx Phone: xxxxx; Email: xxx Representing: XXXXX [per PAG GIS, owner: NM Marco Shores LLC] Folio #: 59430560006 and 59430520004; Zoning: PUD, Marco Shores Country Club Location: PUD is ❑n E. side of Collier Blvd. (SR951), N. sides of Mainsail Drive, in 26, 51, 26 Project Description: Rezone two parcels for residential. Existing Application Name: xxx Marco Shores Country Club PU❑ (developed with residential and golf course). COMP PLANNING PRE-APP COMMENTS: [FLUM designation is Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict and within Coastal High Hazard Area. PU❑ is vested for 1980 ❑Us, as stated in PUD Ordinance statement of compliance.] Noel J Davies is head consultant. Stated they originally had Ordinance 81-6 in 1980. Owned 321 acres zoned A. Property included golf course and Marco Island Airport. entitled to build MF DUs and golf course for the Deltona Corporation. Applicant/developer would like to expand the Mainsail Apartment community, by adding Phase 11 consisting of 92 units, including 48-213R and 44-1 BR units. Total acreage is 2.63 A + 1.41 A = 4.04 A. Density is 92/4.04 = 22.77 DU/A 59430560006 Packet Pg. 368 9.A.2.f lit, 59430520004 My apologies for missing the pre-app meeting. I was home sick. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Comprehensive Planning 8-11-22 239-252-5715 Sue.faulkner@colliercountvfl.aov M N N_ o6 c 0 �a Q 0. a 0 c a� E c� Q r c m E M U 2 r a 7, 6.1e. a,�4-,a. Packet Pg. 369 COIIIeY County 9.A.2.f COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercountyfl.gov (239) 252-2400 Meeting Notes L'ee- emttiL rvCIT'-,S qw at$ fin. AGe 34.1. 3.f1"i 4- s 6 L./ r- r.. -o-s ft'Nr 7,p . S I oL.-c5 Cm r,, OP L, ,TfFG, 60 v 213 �1—ZS`z -S 5 - 0&ArricT 4,,i , �ce"7,6A;f ,J f o x'1+r wr�-i c.� - n.r-tL , J d �.r �,•• a1 C'eLG. ��e.Cau.t T r L, GAY Other required documentation for submittal (not listed on application): Disclaimer., Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre -Application Meeting is based on the best available data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the applicant of issues that could arise during the process. The Administrative Code and LDC dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided of required data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to provide all required data. Updated 1/12/2021 Page J 3 of 5 Packet Pg. 370 9.A.2.f ThomasClarkeVEN From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Thomas, BrownCraig Thursday, August 11, 2022 5:30 PM ThomasClarkeVEN; Faulkner5ue GundlachNancy RE: Comp Planning notes for Marco Shores Country Club (PUDA) - PL20220003791 PUD2-PUDA checklist FOR REVIEWERS 2-2017.doc Follow up Flagged Please provide a FLUCCS map and indicate how the preservation requirements have been met. — 5--- 4fTi9v,.ev ['fjtaGci S i A listed species survey may be required, Staff will decide in the first review. Craig Brown Principal Environmental Specialist Development Review Division (239) 252-2548. How are we doing? Please CLICK HERE to fill out a Customer Survey. We appreciate your Feedback! From: ThomasClarkeVEN rThomas.Clarke@ coIIiercountyfLgov> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2022 11:21 AM To: Faulkner5ue <Sue.Faulkner@ coIIiercountyfl.gov>; Brow nCraig <Craig.8rown@coIIiercountyfl.gov> Cc: GundlachNancy <Nancy.Gundiach@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Comp Planning notes for Marco 5hores Country Club (PUDA) - PL20220003791 Hi Sue & Craig, Do you have Camp Planning Notes for Marco Shores, I attached the research for you. Thanks Tom 7 &44e operatlons Analyst - Zoning Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 Phone. 239-252-2526 Tell us how we ore doing by taking our Zoning orvision Survey of http:/lbit.ly/ColIierZoninl; Cg1Ve,r Couvtt~y Exceeding Expectations Everyday Packet Pg. 371 9.A.2.f Environmental PUDZ-PUDA Checklist (non-RFMU) Project Name M4oey Shva,.Cl-,f,3 I. Is the project is in compliance with the overlays, districts and/or zoning on the subject site and/or the surrounding properties? (CON, ST, PUD, RLSA, RFMU, etc.) (LDC 2.03.05-2.03.08; 4.08.00) Not in CV Library 2. Submit a current aerial photograph (available from the Property Appraiser's office) and clearly delineate the subject site boundary lines. If the site is vegetated, provide FLUCFCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland, wetland and exotic vegetation (Admin. Code Ch. 3 G.1. Application Contents #24). FLUCFCS Overlay -P627 3. Clearly identify the location of all preserves and label each as "Preserve" on all plans. (LDC 3.05.07.H.1). Preserve Label- P546 4. Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained, the max. amount and ratios permitted to be created on -site or mitigated off site. Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculations (LDC 3.05.07.E-13; 3.05.07.F; 3.05.07.H. Ld-e). Preserve Calculation - P547 5. Created and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.H.1.b. Preserve Width - P603 6. Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off -site preservation areas or wildlife corridors. (LDC 3.05.07.A.14) Preserve Selection- P550 7. Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25' from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory � structures and other site alterations, fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be a permitted within 10' of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve (i.e. to stem wall or berm around wetland preserve). Provide cross -sections for each preserve boundary identifying all W site alterations within 25'. (LDC 3.05.07.H.3; 6.01.02.C.) Preserve Setback — New N M N 8. Wildlife survey required for sites where an EIS is not required, when so warranted. {LDC 10.02.02.A.2.0 N Listed Species - P522 a, c 0 9. Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials, consistency determination with the GMPs, off -site preserves, seasonal and historic high water levels, and analysis of water quality. For land previously used for farm fields or golf course, provide soil samplingigroundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination. Q (LDC 3.08.00) Environmental Data Required — P 522 0 c 10. PUD Document and Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved. (LDC 10.02.13.A.2) Master Plan Contents-P626 z 11. If the PUD includes a Preserve Tract section UP FOR DISCUSSION — DISCUSS WITH CAD Q c When listing preserve uses, the following is suggested: E A. Principal Use: Preserve; B. Accessory Uses: All other uses (list as applicable or refer to the LDC -- see 1-3 below as typical uses listed by agents) (ensure the text states "subject to LDC section related to Alloh,ahle uses within County required preserves" Q Alternate format: A. Uses subject to LDC section Allowable uses within County required preserves: 1. Nature trails that do not reduce the amount of required preserve, 2. Passive Recreation uses, as per LDC requirements. 3. Stormwater only when in accordance with the LDC. fFG Packet Pg. 372 9.A.2.f PUD Commitments and Site Plan notes Where preserves occur adjacent to development off site and will be used in lieu of landscape buffers, include the following condition in the environmental commitments section of the PUD document or master plan: Preserves may be used to satisfy the landscape buffer requirements after exotic vegetation removal in accordance with LDC sections 4.06.02 and 4.06.05.E.1. Supplemental plantings with native plant materials shall be in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07. 12. PUD Document shall identify any listed species found on site and/or describe any unique vegetative features that will be preserved on the site. (LDC 10.02.13.A.2.) Unique Features- P628 Example: A management plan for the entire project shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements and procedures of the LDC for listed species including but not Iimited to Black Bear, Gopher Tortoise and listed birds. The management plan shall be submitted prior to development of the first phase of the project. 13. Review cross -sections if provided; they are not required with the PUD. However, sometimes they are provided Is there any fill proposed in the preserve? Additional Comments: �� Packet Pg. 373 Cotter County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercountyfl.gov (239) 252-2400 Pre -Application Meeting Sign -In Sheet PL# 20220003791 Collier County Contact Information: 9.A.2.f Name Review Discipline Phone Email Maggie Acevedo North Collier Fire 252-2309 macevedo@northcollierfire.com Steve Baluch Transportation Planning 252-2361 Stephen.baluch@colliercountyfl.gov _ _ Shar A.Beddow MSM/Deputy Fire Marshal - Greater Naples Fire 241-1422 sbeddow@gnfire.org Ray Bellows Zoning, Planning Manager 252-2463 raymond.bellows@colliercountyfl.gov Laurie Beard PUD Monitoring 252-5782 laurie.beard@coiliercountyfl.gov rl Craig Brown Environmental Specialist 252-2548 craig.brown@col IiercountyfLgov L Heidi Ashton Cick❑ Managing Asst. County Attorney 252-8773 heidi.ashton@colliercountyfl.gov IY Thomas Clarke Zoning Operations Analyst 252-2584 thomas.clarke@col lie rcountyfLgov L Jamie Cook Development Review Director 252-6290 Jaime.cook@colliercountyfl.gov LI Gabriela Castro Zoning Principal Planner 252-4211 gabriela.castro@colliercountyfl.gov 01 Maggie DeMeo North Collier Fire 252-2308 pdemeo@northcollierfire.com p 5;Utility Planning 252-1037 erit.fey@colliercvuntyfl.gov _ Tim Finn, AICP Zoning Principal Planner 252-4312 timothy.finn@colliercountyfl.gov Sue Faulkner GMP - Comprehensive Planning 252-5715 sue.faulkner@coiliercountyfl.gov Michael Gibbons Structural/Residential Plan Review 252-2426 michael.gibbons@colliercountyfl.gov Storm Gewirtz, P.E. Engineering Stormwater 252-2434 storm.gewirtz@colliercountyfl.gov rmac Giblin, AICP Development Review -Planning Manager 252-5095 Cormac.giblin@coil iercountyfLgov Nancy Gundlach, AICP Zoning Principal Planner 252-2484 nancy.gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov El Rachel Hansen GMP—Com prehensivePlanning 252-1142 Rachel. hansen@colliercountyfLgov L Richard Hencleriong Zoning Principal Planner 252-2464 rchard.henderlong@colliercountyfl.gov 1.1 John Houldsworth Engineering Subdivision 252-5757 John.houldsworth@colliercountyfl.gov El Alicia Humphries Right -Of -Way Permitting 252-2326 alicia.humphries@colliercountyfl.gov _i Anita Jenkins Planning & Zoning Director 252-5095 Anita.jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov L John Kelly Zoning Senior Planner 252-5719 john.kelly@colliercountyfl.gov Parker Klopf GMP — Comprehensive Planning 252-2471 Parker.klopf@colliercountyfl.gov F Troy Komarowski North Collier Fire 252-2521 tkomarowski@northcollierfire.com IJ Sean Lintz North Collier Fire 597-9227 slintz@northcollierfire.com L Diane Lynch Operations Analyst 252-8243 diane.lynch@col Iiercountyfl. ov f 1 Thomas Mastroberto Greater Na !es Fire 252-7348 thomas.mastroberto@colliercountyfl.gov I_I Jack McKenna, P.E. Engineering Services 252-2911 jack.mckenna@colIiercountyfl.gov Updated 1/12/2021 Page 1 4 of 5 Packet Pg. 374 Co*4. er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.col1iercountyfl.9GV (239) 252-2400 9.A.2.f Matt McLean, P.E. Division Director - IF, CPP & PM 252-8279 matthew.mclean@colliercountyfl.gov Michele Mosca, AICP Capital Project Planning 252-2466 michele-mosca@colliercountyfl.gov Richard Orth Stormwater Planning 252-5092 rchard.orth@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ E 'c Ortman Zoning Principal Planner 252-1032 Eric.Ortman@colliercountyfl.gov Derek Perry Assistant County Attorney 252-8066 Derek.perry@colliercountyfl.gov Brandi Pollard Utility Impact fees 252-6237 brandi.pollard@colliercountyfl.gov Todd Riggall North Collier Fire 597-9227 triggali@northcollierfire.com ❑ Brett Rosenblum, P.E. Development Review Principal Project Manager 252-2905 brett.rosenblum@colliercountyfl.gov LlrJames Sabo, AICP GMP, Comp Planning Manager 252-2708 james.sabo@colliercountyfl.gov L Michael Sawyer Transportation Planning 252-2926 rnichael.sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Corby Schmidt, AICP Comprehensive Planning 252-2944 corby.schmidt@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Linda Simmons North Collier Fire 252-2311 Linda.Simmons@colliercountyfl,gov LI Peter Shawinsky Architectural Review 252-8523 peter.shawinsky@colliercountyfl.gov J Mark Templeton Landscape Review 252-2475 mark.templeton@colliercountyfl.gov Connie Thomas Client Services Supervisor 252-6369 Consuela.thomas@colliercountyfl.gov -1 Jessica Velasco Client Services 252-2584 jessica.velasco@colliercountyfl.gov �I Jon Walsh, P.E. Building Review 252-2962 jonathan.walsh@colliercountyfl.gov —� Kirsten Wilkie Environmental Review Manager 252-5518 kirsten.wilkie@colliercountyfl.gov Christine Willoughby Development Review -Zoning 252-5748 christine.wiiloughby@colliercountyfl, ov Daniel Zunzunegui North Collier Fire 252-2310 Daniel.Zunzunegui@colliercountyfl.gov Additional Attendee Contact Information: %iil W ► 0 AR , ' l! ��' [ Ifr� urmWA ff, M! 1116E,MIAII Tv aaIIIW" NK-6 ,,� itfl~, W y"'NA !MAU 11111 A'!_I FRS A M ORS9.1"�w>�"i It RJR 1 11. AMR 0530//70 i RFrEZ►11]rMA l� Updated 1/12/2021 Page 1 5 of 5 Packet Pg. 375 9.A.2.f r44,4xzo dF'gyLts L�jl{fL�1tL l i?.IrT�J �d' �if� - �L ZOir-2-3-7q/ ------ op I,"Ili. — Q Find a participant thomas Clarke (Host. me) Matt Allen Derek D. Perry, County Attorney's Office Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner Andrew Bennett - OLV- Aj-L vfiit,- 14! IL nu;1 Y� Cather€ne Louise 64d— Cormac Giblin Craig Brown David Reitz _ 17m,p�c r` cl, 5 1 Duke Kassolis - 0 JEnglish 0 jon _7 f �.oDr�TY vww�r-..-L'ir.ewr�; Mark McLean Matthew Kragh - I�uKrT��h michael sawyer Noel Davies —��-{- U 71 Z']]x 1 r Q Packet Pg. 376 9.A.2.f Applicant/Agent may also send site plans or conceptual plans for review in advance if desired. PL20220003791— Marco Shares Country Club PUDA - Planner: Nancy Gundlach Assigned Ops Staff: Thomas Clarke STAFF FORM FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRE -APPLICATION MEETING INFORMATION ■ Name and Number of who submitted pre-app request Noel J. Davies, Esq., Davies Duke, PLLC — 239.2 16.279 2 ■ Agent to list for PL# Noel J. Davies, Esq., Davies Duke, PLLC ■ Owner of property (all owners for all parcels) Parcel ID: 59430560006 — SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC Parcel ID: 59430520004 - SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC 0 Confirm Purpose of Pre-App: (Rezone, etc.) Amend Marco Shores Country Club PU❑ by rezoning parcels for residential use ■ Please list the density request of the project if applicable and number of homes/units/offices/docks (any that apply): Applicant proposes to add 92 multi -family units to the subject parcels. N M N N_ • Details about Project: d6 0 Applicant/developer would like to expand the MainSaiI Apartment community, by adding Phase II consisting r c� 'Q of 92 units, including 48-2BR and 44-1BR units. a 0 c m E REQUIRED Supplemental Information provided by: U Name: Noel J. Davies, Esq. Q Title: Attorney/Agent Email: Noel. Davies@DaviesDuke.com Phone: 239-216-2792 E c� Cancellation/Reschedule Requests: Contact Danny Condomina-Client Services Supervisor a Bann .condomina colliercount I Phone: 239-252-6866 Created April S, 2017 Location: K:�CDES Planning Services%Current\Zoning 5taff Information Packet Pg. 377 9.A.2.f Co*ler County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.col I ie rcounty.gov Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: ❑ PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code ❑ Amendment to PUD- Ch. 3 G. 2 of the Administrative Code ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre -Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with an up-to-date application. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section, Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. A Model PUD Document is available online at http://www.co[liercountyfl.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=76983. REQUIREMENTS C#PIES REQUIRED RE NOT RED Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of why amendment is necessary 1 L� ❑ Completed Application with required attachments (download latest version) 1 Pre -application meeting notes 1 ❑ Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 1 ❑ Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Warranty Deeds) 1 ❑ List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation 1 ❑ Signed and sealed Boundary Survey 1 ❑ Architectural Rendering of proposed structures 1 ❑ Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. 1 ❑ Statement of Utility Provisions 1 ❑ Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 1 ❑ Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner at time of public hearings. ❑ ❑ [v� Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys. ^ q 9 D '50,4t- OUpT4 r, 1 ❑ ❑ Traffic Impact Study - Fe-e-5 C&t6e_cTet3 Ar +,M;774-C 1 ❑ Historical Survey 1 FLY School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable 1 ❑ Electronic copy of all required documents 1 ❑ Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional Information)' ❑ ❑ List of requested deviations from the LDC.#ith justificat' n far each (this document is separate from Exhibit E) ' ❑ �' ❑ t Checklist continues on next page March 4, 2020 Page 9 of 11 Packet Pg. 378 Coder Courts 9.A.2.f COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.col l iercou nty.gou 2900 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 t Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x 36"and One 8 %" x 11" copy ❑ Iff ❑ Original PUD document ordinance, and Master Plan 24" x 36" -Only if the PUD ❑ L��dd E% ElAmending Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru & underlined 1 log ❑ Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification 1 ❑ *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal requirement +The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet Exhibit A: List of Permitted Uses Exhibit B: Development Standards Exhibit C: Master Plan- See Chapter 3 E. 1. of the Administrative Code Exhibit D: Legal Description _ Exhibit E: List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239- 690-3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan." PLANNERS- INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: School District (Residential Components): Amy ockheart ❑ Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson tiIities En ineering:ZFie� Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams (Director) Emergency Management: Dan Summers ❑ Immokalee Water/Sewer District: City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Other: a4L.p W4-T-9+- - A4t&.. A0AJfAJ City of Naples Utilities Other: /Lf/;/Le& F,a-,_ ASSOCIATED FEES FOR APPLICATION VPre-Application Meeting: $500.00 PUD Rezone: $10,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre PUD to PUD Rezone: $8,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre tAPUD Amendment: $6,000.00* plus $2S.00 an acre or fraction of an acre pComprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $2,250.00 Environmental Data Requirements -EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre -application meeting): $2,500.00 /Listed or Protected Species Review (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00 Y Transportation Review Fees: o Methodology Review: $500.00 *Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting. ❑ Minor Study Review: $750.00 ❑ Major Study Review $1,500.00 March 4, 2020 Page 10 of 11 Packet Pg. 379 9.A.2.f Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercounty.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Legal Adyertising Fees: GCPC: $1,125.00 Q,.' BCC: $500.00 School Concurrency Fee, if applicable: o Mitigation Fees, if application, to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County Fire Code Plans Review Fees are not listed, but are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers far Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. *Additional fee for the 5", and subsequent re-submittol will be accessed at 20% of the original fee Signature of Petitioner or Agent Printed named of signing party Date March 4. 2020 Page 11 of 11 Packet Pg. 380 9.A.2.f FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION PL20220003791 1 JONATHANKASSOLIS (print name), as PRESMENT (title, If applicable) of SK HOLDINGS REAL ESTATE, LLC (company, If applicable), swear or affirm under oath, that I am the (choose one) owner=applicant ❑contract purchaser and that: 1. I have full authority to secure the approval(s) requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on the referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this application and the Land Development Code; 2. All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches, data or other supplementary matter attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true; 3. 1 have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application; and that 4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and restrictions imposed by the approved action. 5. Well authorize Noel Davies and Chris Scot]]Davies Duke and Peninsula Engineering to act as ourlmy representative in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above. *Notes: • If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the carp, pres. or v. pres. • If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L.C.) or Limited Company (L.C.), then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member. " • If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. • If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the general partner" of the named partnership. • If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee". • In each instance, first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then use the appropriate format for that ownership. Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that the fa tated in i retrue. 0311712023 Z U Signature Date STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowleged before me by means of A iysical resence !o_r ❑ online notarization this day of ('� ('e 20� by (printed name of owner or qualifier) �(�ab +yAd h J, U SS 0 � ► Such person(s) Notary Public must check applicable box: 're personally known to me ❑ Has produced a current drivers license ❑ Has produced Notary Signature: W U C I'108-CO A-00115\ 155 REV 3/4/2020 as identification. A�"�'�% TARI L- WESTON MYM\1\11SMON a 1114616.9 F.\PIRI S: Mcco11k7 112021 Packet Pg. 381 2/8/23, 10:36 AM Detail by Entity Name 9.A.2.f DIVISION OF CORP y ..org 102���r� i�f�� mt uj/7rlrtl Stw� U/'It�rri!!u svdbsit? Department of State / Division of Corporations / Search Records / Search by Entity Name / Detail by Entity Name Florida Limited Liability Company SK HOLDINGS REAL ESTATE, LLC Filing Information Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Last Event Event Date Filed Event Effective Date Principal Address 6646 Willow Park Drive Suite 1 NAPLES, FL 34109 Changed: 06/08/2020 Mailing Address 6646 Willow Park Drive Suite 1 NAPLES, FL 34109 Changed: 06/08/2020 L12000091653 46-1560047 07/13/2012 FL ACTIVE LC AMENDMENT AND NAME CHANGE 12/07/2012 NONE Registered Agent Name & Address KASSOLIS, JONATHAN D, ESQ. LLM. 6646 Willow Park Drive Suite 1 NAPLES, FL 34109 Name Changed: 03/11/2013 Address Changed: 06/08/2020 Authorized Persons) Detail Name & Address CO) N N_ D7 c 0 tv Q a Q c a� E c� ca Q r c m E t U 2 .r r a Title MGR search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=Sd Packet Pg. 382 2/8/23, 10:36 AM Detail by Entity Name SCAVO, ALTON J 3140 OCEAN DRIVE CORPUS CHRISTI, TX 78404 Title MGR KASSOLIS, DUKE S 363 Neptunes Bight NAPLES, FL 34103 Title President Kassolis, Jonathan D, ESQ. LLM 8050 TRAIL BLVD NAPLES, FL 34108 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2020 06/08/2020 2021 03/15/2021 2022 04/14/2022 Document Images 04/14/2022 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/15/2021 --ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 06/08/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/14/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/30/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/19/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/11/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/17/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/23/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/11/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 12/07/2012 -- LC Amendment and Name Change View image in PDF format 07/13/2012 -- Florida Limited Liability View image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations a search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=S Packet Pg. 383 CO�ler County Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov 'ROPFRTY n%AiKirR-,miD nlSCLOc-1 iRF FnRn/1 This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest: Name and Address I % of Ownership If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each: Name and Address I % of Ownership If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and Address I % of Ownership 01/2023 Pa Packet Pg. 384 CO�ler County 0 e f E* Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners: Name and Address % of Ownership SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC 100% - The Kassolis Investment Trust 50% - The Irrevocable Futures Trust 50% ***See attached*** If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the �I I IL.CI J, a L U L.RI IUIUIn J, UCI ICI luau ICJ, UI i.Jdl LI ICI J. Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust: Name and Address Date subject property acquired 05/05/2022 ❑ Leased: Term of lease years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: 01/2023 Pa Packet Pg. 385 Coder Count y Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov Date of option: Date option terminates: , or Anticipated closing date: AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest -holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition's final public hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. *The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Community Development Department I GMD Portal: https://cvportal.colliercountyfl.gov/cityviewweb Questions? Email: GMDclientservices@colliercountyfl.gov Digitally signed by Christopher Scott Christopher Scott Engineering, Scott, c@penenPeninsula Engineering, email=CScott@pen-eng.com Date: 2023.08.17 10:50:29-04'00' Agent/Owner Signature Christopher O. Scott, Agent Agent/Owner Name (please print) 5/26/2023 Date 01/2023 Pa ac et Pg. 386 9.A.2.f OWNERSHIP DETAIL NAME % BENEFICIARY OF TRUST SK Holdings Real Estate 100% The Kassolis Investment Trust 50% Jonathon (Trustee), Duke, Jane, and Kristina Kassolis The Irrevocable Futures Trust 50% Alton Scavo (Trustee) and familial relatives and descendants Packet Pg. 387 CO�ler County Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov 'ROPFRTY n%AiKirR-,miD nlSCLOc-1 iRF FnRn/1 This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest: Name and Address I % of Ownership If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each: Name and Address I % of Ownership If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and Address I % of Ownership 01/2023 Pa Packet Pg. 388 CO�ler County 0 e f E* Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners: Name and Address % of Ownership SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC 100% - The Kassolis Investment Trust 50% - The Irrevocable Futures Trust 50% ***See attached*** If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the 'I I IL.CI J, a L U L.RI IUIUIn J, UCI ICI luau ICJ, UI i.Jdl LI ICI J. Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust: Name and Address Date subject property acquired 05/05/2022 ❑ Leased: Term of lease years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: 01/2023 Pa Packet Pg. 389 Coder Count y Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov Date of option: Date option terminates: , or Anticipated closing date: AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest -holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition's final public hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. *The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Community Development Department I GMD Portal: https://cvportal.colliercountyfl.gov/cityviewweb Questions? Email: GMDclientservices@colliercountyfl.gov Digitally signed by Christopher Scott Christopher Scott Engineering, Scott, c@penenPeninsula Engineering, email=CScott@pen-eng.com Date: 2023.08.17 10:50:29-04'00' Agent/Owner Signature Christopher O. Scott, Agent Agent/Owner Name (please print) 5/26/2023 Date 01/2023 Pa ac et Pg. 390 9.A.2.f OWNERSHIP DETAIL NAME % BENEFICIARY OF TRUST SK Holdings Real Estate 100% The Kassolis Investment Trust 50% Jonathon (Trustee), Duke, Jane, and Kristina Kassolis The Irrevocable Futures Trust 50% Alton Scavo (Trustee) and familial relatives and descendants Packet Pg. 391 9.A.2.f 00LL76V C014nty Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov ,p The undersigned do hereby swear or affirm that we are the fee simple titleholders and owners of record of property commonly known as Marco Shores Unit 9, Tracts N and P (Street address and City, State and Zip Code) and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. The property described herein is the subject of an application for Amendment to planned unit development ( PUD) zoning. We hereby designate Noel Davies/Chris Scott , legal representative thereof, as the legal representatives of the property and as such, these individuals are authorized to legally bind all owners of the property in the course of seeking the necessary approvals to develop. This authority includes, but is not limited to, the hiring and authorization of agents to assist in the preparation of applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain zoning approval on the site. These representatives will remain the only entity to authorize development activity on the property until such time as a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to Collier County. The undersigned recognize the following and will be guided accordingly in the pursuit of development of the project: I. The property will be developed and used in conformity with the approved master plan including all conditions placed on the development and all commitments agreed to by the applicant in connection with the planned unit development rezoning. 2. The legal representative identified herein is responsible for compliance with all terms, conditions, safeguards, and stipulations made at the time of approval of the master plan, even if the property is subsequently sold in whole or in part, unless and until a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to and recorded by Collier County. 3. A departure from the provisions of the approved plans or a failure to comply with any requirements, conditions, or safeguards provided for in the planned unit development process will constitute a violation of the land Development Code. 4. All terms and conditions of the planned unit development approval will be incorporated into covenants and restrictions which run with the land so as to provide notice to subsequent owners that all development activity within the planned unit development must be consistent with those terms and conditions. 5. So long as this covenant is in force, Collier County can, upon the discovery of noncompliance with the terms, safeguards, and conditions of the planned unit development, seek equitable relief as necessary to compel compliance. The County will not issue permits, certificates, or licenses to occupy or use any part of the planned unit development and the County may stop ongoing construction activity until the project is brought into compliance with all ms, on itions and safeguards of the planned unit development. S gn ure of Owner Signature of Owner JONATHAN KASSOLIS Printed Name of Owner Printed Name of Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged b fore me by means of hysical presence or nonline registration this day of Q CCU- , 2 by c _aoal' a t kussol %S who ispersonally known to me or Flhas produced as identification. TAR] L. WLSTON MYC( NNISSION N 1111461(,-r o.n F.K14RUS:Ikt�7��lkt1i.T�i:4 07/2022 Signature of Notary Public Print Name of Notary Public Page 8 of 11 Packet Pg. 392 INSTR 6253169 OR 6127 PG 2238 E—RECORDED 5/16/2022 2:23 PM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC@.70 $3,409.70 REC $18.50 CONS $487,100.00 9.A.2.f This instrument was prepared by and return to: Joel A. Threlkeld, Esq. Threlkeld Law, P.A. 3003 Tamiami Tr. N., Ste. 400 Naples, FL 34103 Parcel Identification hio.:, , Consideration: $48710600 Above This Line For Recording Isla] QUIT -CLAIM DEED THIS QUIT -CLAIM DEED made Offs `> day of May 2022, by City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation organized under the laws ofhe State of Florida, whose address is 50 Bald Eagle Drive, Marco Island, Florida 34145, hereinafter refe#red,sto as-V'Grantor" ), and SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose address 6b4� Willow Park Drive, Suite 1, Naples, Florida 34109, hereinafter referred to as ("Grantee"). (wherever used herein the terms "Grantor" representatives, and assigns of individuals and admits or requires.) WITNESSETH, that the Grantor, for and in consider valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby a sells unto the Grantee, and Grantee's successors, heirs, Collier County, State of Florida, to wit: shall include singular and plural, heirs, legal td assigns corporations, wherever the context so sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other L hereby grants, bargains, conveys, and forever, all that certain parcel of land in All of Tract P, Marco Shores Unit One, according to the plattberegf recorded in Plat Book %14, Pages 33 through 38, of the Public Records of Collier Counity,�t+lorda. a/k/a 1955 Mainsail Drive, Naples, Florida 34114 TOGETHER, with all of the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances ther04 belonging or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same together with all and singular the appurtenances h ereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest, lien, ei(uty.x.ad`claim whatsoever of the said grantor, either in law or equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of tfiie said grantee forever. F� File No. 22-4014 *** OR 6127 PG 2239 *** 9.A.2.f IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has signed and sealed these presents the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of- Nat,1" .Lf f1 7 Witness #1 Print NameOx-tvLU Witness #2 Signature Print Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida UfBy:' \"", Michael A. McNees, City Manager I EREBY CERTIFY, that the foregoing instrument was acknow1 physical presence or ❑ online notarization this �- di McNees, City Manager of City of Marco Island, a municipal ( known to me or ❑ who has produced as i oath. (Affix Notary Stamp) LESLIE R SMFORD jL S W COMMISSION 5 00 315J04 x EXPIRES: M" X 2023 ."d,n„�"� BoldedilwltNderyF�NcUndenMNen me by means of 2�022, by Michael A. t, who is personally and who did take an U Notary Signature 1-16251/2 a] Printed Notary Name � My Commission Expires:63 b� 0��3 File No. 22-4014 INSTR 6253183 OR 6127 PG 2285 E-RECORDED 5/16/2022 2:31 PM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA Doc@.70 $1,827.70 REC $18.50 CONS $261,100.00 9.A.2.f This instrument was prepared by and return to: Joel A. Threlkeld, Esq. Threlkeld Law, P.A. 3003 Tamiami Tr. N., Ste. 400 Naples, FT, 34103 Parcel Identification No.: 5990052 Consideration: $261,100* Above This Line For Recording Data] QUIT -CLAIM DEED THIS QUIT -CLAIM DEED madpAbis day of May 2022, by City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida, whose address is 50 Bald Eagle Drive, Marco Island, Florida 34145, hereinafter referrd to as (" grantor"), and SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose address i0646" Willow Park Drive, Suite 1, Naples, Florida 34109, hereinafter referred to as ("Grantee"). (Wherever used herein the terms "Grantor" anc representatives, and assigns of individuals and the admits or requires.) WITNESSETH, that the Grantor, for and in consideralio valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby ackr sells unto the Grantee, and Grantee's successors, heirs, and Collier County, State of Florida, to wit: All of Tract N, Marco Shores Unit One, according to the 1 14, Pages 33 through 38, of the Public Records of Collier a/k/a 1825 Mainsail Drive, Naples, Florida 34114 include singular and plural, heirs, legal gns corporations, wherever the context so of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other eby grants, bargains, conveys, and er, all that certain parcel of land in in Plat Book TOGETHER, with all of the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto be`A' or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same together with all and singular the appurt6hancei belonging or in anywise appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest, lien, equity whatsoever of the said grantor, either in law or equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof grantee forever. File No. 22-4013 *** OR 6127 PG 2286 *** 9.A.2.f IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has signed and sealed these presents the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: Witness #1 Print Name SGl l3-s Witness 42 Signature Print Name —� STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida By: i ` 4% Michael A. McNees, City Manager I HEREBY CERTIFY, that the foregoing instrument w physical presence or ❑ online notarization this J—y"*) City Manager of City of Marco Island, a municipal corl or ❑ who has produced as identii (Affix Notary Stamp) LESLIE W. SANFORD :�; MY COMMISSION # 00 315704 �= EXPIRES: March 25, 2023 • ,o,►;,,,•' BondedThru4bmiyPubgCtN�derw�Nan ged before me by means of, 2022, by Michael A. McNees, who is personally known to me who did take an oath. Notary Signature" u �--ems/ie Printed Notary Name - My Commission Expires: C3 a5 a�2 File No. 22-4013 INSTR 6253169 OR 6127 PG 2238 E—RECORDED 5/16/2022 2:23 PM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC@.70 $3,409.70 REC $18.50 CONS $487,100.00 9.A.2.f This instrument was prepared by and return to: Joel A. Threlkeld, Esq. Threlkeld Law, P.A. 3003 Tamiami Tr. N., Ste. 400 Naples, FL 34103 Parcel Identification hio.:, , Consideration: $48710600 Above This Line For Recording Isla] QUIT -CLAIM DEED THIS QUIT -CLAIM DEED made Offs `> day of May 2022, by City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation organized under the laws ofhe State of Florida, whose address is 50 Bald Eagle Drive, Marco Island, Florida 34145, hereinafter refe#red,sto as-V'Grantor" ), and SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose address 6b4� Willow Park Drive, Suite 1, Naples, Florida 34109, hereinafter referred to as ("Grantee"). (wherever used herein the terms "Grantor" representatives, and assigns of individuals and admits or requires.) WITNESSETH, that the Grantor, for and in consider valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby a sells unto the Grantee, and Grantee's successors, heirs, Collier County, State of Florida, to wit: shall include singular and plural, heirs, legal td assigns corporations, wherever the context so sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other L hereby grants, bargains, conveys, and forever, all that certain parcel of land in All of Tract P, Marco Shores Unit One, according to the plattberegf recorded in Plat Book %14, Pages 33 through 38, of the Public Records of Collier Counity,�t+lorda. a/k/a 1955 Mainsail Drive, Naples, Florida 34114 TOGETHER, with all of the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances ther04 belonging or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same together with all and singular the appurtenances h ereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest, lien, ei(uty.x.ad`claim whatsoever of the said grantor, either in law or equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of tfiie said grantee forever. F� File No. 22-4014 *** OR 6127 PG 2239 *** 9.A.2.f IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has signed and sealed these presents the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of- Nat,1" .Lf f1 7 Witness #1 Print NameOx-tvLU Witness #2 Signature Print Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida UfBy:' \"", Michael A. McNees, City Manager I EREBY CERTIFY, that the foregoing instrument was acknow1 physical presence or ❑ online notarization this �- di McNees, City Manager of City of Marco Island, a municipal ( known to me or ❑ who has produced as i oath. (Affix Notary Stamp) LESLIE R SMFORD jL S W COMMISSION 5 00 315J04 x EXPIRES: M" X 2023 ."d,n„�"� BoldedilwltNderyF�NcUndenMNen me by means of 2�022, by Michael A. t, who is personally and who did take an U Notary Signature 1-16251/2 a] Printed Notary Name � My Commission Expires:63 b� 0��3 File No. 22-4014 INSTR 6253183 OR 6127 PG 2285 E-RECORDED 5/16/2022 2:31 PM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA Doc@.70 $1,827.70 REC $18.50 CONS $261,100.00 9.A.2.f This instrument was prepared by and return to: Joel A. Threlkeld, Esq. Threlkeld Law, P.A. 3003 Tamiami Tr. N., Ste. 400 Naples, FT, 34103 Parcel Identification No.: 5990052 Consideration: $261,100* Above This Line For Recording Data] QUIT -CLAIM DEED THIS QUIT -CLAIM DEED madpAbis day of May 2022, by City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida, whose address is 50 Bald Eagle Drive, Marco Island, Florida 34145, hereinafter referrd to as (" grantor"), and SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose address i0646" Willow Park Drive, Suite 1, Naples, Florida 34109, hereinafter referred to as ("Grantee"). (Wherever used herein the terms "Grantor" anc representatives, and assigns of individuals and the admits or requires.) WITNESSETH, that the Grantor, for and in consideralio valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby ackr sells unto the Grantee, and Grantee's successors, heirs, and Collier County, State of Florida, to wit: All of Tract N, Marco Shores Unit One, according to the 1 14, Pages 33 through 38, of the Public Records of Collier a/k/a 1825 Mainsail Drive, Naples, Florida 34114 include singular and plural, heirs, legal gns corporations, wherever the context so of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other eby grants, bargains, conveys, and er, all that certain parcel of land in in Plat Book TOGETHER, with all of the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto be`A' or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same together with all and singular the appurt6hancei belonging or in anywise appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest, lien, equity whatsoever of the said grantor, either in law or equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof grantee forever. File No. 22-4013 *** OR 6127 PG 2286 *** 9.A.2.f IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has signed and sealed these presents the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: Witness #1 Print Name SGl l3-s Witness 42 Signature Print Name —� STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida By: i ` 4% Michael A. McNees, City Manager I HEREBY CERTIFY, that the foregoing instrument w physical presence or ❑ online notarization this J—y"*) City Manager of City of Marco Island, a municipal corl or ❑ who has produced as identii (Affix Notary Stamp) LESLIE W. SANFORD :�; MY COMMISSION # 00 315704 �= EXPIRES: March 25, 2023 • ,o,►;,,,•' BondedThru4bmiyPubgCtN�derw�Nan ged before me by means of, 2022, by Michael A. McNees, who is personally known to me who did take an oath. Notary Signature" u �--ems/ie Printed Notary Name - My Commission Expires: C3 a5 a�2 File No. 22-4013 ■ � ua a YINUO-JIIYO aNIA1I IVOLVu01WOO OICH NYli N"0 is 3 V c L.0 u c r-i u c h u r (A Lc) r' u 0 V V %ct V u M tJ i- CT 4- 4- = - 4- = - 4- N O N Q µ- 4-3 LO i-) CT i-) N Z r 4- O : h C r4 C)LL. 3 4-)^h M ^lp ^h '— +3 h kC L4.0 0) tj uZp V Z� w U cV r u u ri ai r4 V -- N L� `4- V 4- V w U I.L. �� _�� cw c= to � c= OCR �� i-��tal -CC) s`LC +� L cN4.3 4�CT����0) LC I, (A 4 � ' ^CT ^N ^LC S_ V V '* 4- N 4 � 4 • .4-3 fl.r Uw O U• Lu Vh u4-3 l«tr O (A tT CM W 4- 00 4- Z = 4- cU V 4 r Zr4 U-)ZM� b .c C:) 4) N N c l�Q N Z _ O �4 rC~�3�d c*cY')LO LO LnO V X w• .-i u p c) 41tr) 00 4. �w N4V- unrnr♦=r0M 410 z ^ w cn u u L L- 4) w w .4-1 Z= 4- 3 �htO = ^ N O 4-)S0+' h+3 V N V 4) Li q c OZdiu U :N V cO4- aC) cw� 4Q- 4- Ln 4-3 c � 4- V --4 L o qL) Lo C CY)O '- Ln 'c r-i ko i • C Cl. � • L o '4-J 0 a--) CT �-IY tv S_w V 4L Q�N LO Ltiq ZC >s �-41 UZ�4ZM+3 n " u L CoM u V 4) U-1 u V 11 Fz- o�t-'a'ouUwuU- uU= �= r Ud-00 c U c= 4- aLo4- cr Li)-C C ti U L O rN V c�iLhOON 4-)_ dk',�Na� C` Iv N Ul) N N r' r--1 V w Q1 w N ^. ^. L O - • a i .-i 40 +-1 r O u� ^ Vhp u�4�r Ve a s � �,4 0 OU uz--+�2 o UNVwLLI h VM I S-z U • K Vr4 UNC71 cep I rzf 3 r u CT Q N c� V �) I s3O ��W�q*-Cpp�_ O4 S- u r-j 4-3 LO N r--4O M 4-3 ^ K ^ U tV �Lw koLLI+3pw a � c4J + I i (ANZVZ - V � CV 4) .4 4- q U 4- /o - 4- c 0 O c Ltd u .-q 40 V b c cn r ^ "-�i U) UNs0 UM4 4-3 4J V 4) • LC) c • c • ti r U V c &-d1 VLnh uCTL u u r- Vk.Dso=hNtLnC 1-- CV C U VI 4. -J -C = tD 4-3 = r-i 4-3 Z r YIIVS031IV0 3NI1 SWl NI YVSLG H: o O � O ® q L t N C7 iA L O m 0 Cif -Q G '� O r- L 0. o o a o c U m S U Q m E a z o > o E ` tz 0 O W ra u m 0 CL c _ U C a t + O fli h L >' � v W C N C p c-j C7 O 0 O G Q 0 o W Cq v x m 0 a Q ED o m w e z a. D Q m m - CC Wt ES •v O a O L a a m d F- Lts Z 0 uZ CL E 1- 3 _O Q + G 0 3 y w E� w F Y@ a H a J a C cr O 0 o 0 b W rn o dLL- m •` N ii O 'a � a � C � �• G O o L h + a a a C m Z ID L CP q 4) C+ L a p 0 C m Q v' 0 o o x a r`a a ��� m E O .c V O C Q CL 0 -0 N— C + v 0 C m 0 m a en cp C a r L o m r _o L + :2 E CL o �s o '~ o m m U� a a a CL a a a Z g o v m N 0 cm-0 c 3 cr ttE d 0 a a y, 0 h 0 a C = = 2 N Z~ a) a p w O a c y c CL O m L 0 L - Q L o a a a o Q m cr O o o O a a c con 10 E U o C? f1 cs ®QD en w fD a U a •a o cos o f o 3 0 O U m m + Q cr w a z O i ¢ ::5 �-- fa y �, v-- T � a`) E, z =•r a)t C (0--C-0 uJ (u >, L N a) +•) r S.->. U a) m -C-0 .0 O S_ a) r r O 4- Q C 0 L LI +-) W r CJP al r "c O In N r0 U- •a L L- U r* C +-) a) r-- 'D a) 4- O C C G +3 -3 T r N O +-) 4- •r T7 -0 c1•r C 4' C E C a) LLl 7 0 C L C r0 O S-- O fY (0 S- -j VI U 0') b O •r +-• Va a) O LLJ Q. �c a) ?,LC) U Y C L V7 U m Qr Rf X fa LO C a) ra O a) N U LU C C Z r- a) a — r S_ E U d. r0 r0 LL to 3 G O r0 L fU C C +•) r. r- O C L V) •r ro 9) fn U O O () C cn (3) O --4- L +-3 90 r• L C 4-+-3 O C = r = u '- }� •r C O c0 ^ 4- O -W fa 4-) +-) O_ rd O r• U 4- O U X �- +-) •r (TL to •r O 6!7 Ln Y a3 O a) Q) S- +-) •r '0 a) al C O Z E U p a) ro U L a L t O •r L Q lit N C U S_•r OZJ W+j•r+) OM a)+J•r O O 4- U J= +-+ S- C S_ C +-) 0.4- a) a) 4J 0) M (0 z M a) ^ -p C L C)ML C U 0. "Q E10 C= O +-) M-- CO •r J 3 a O al a) -C W O +� r a o S- �a �F►� me E N M a) O Q) O 4- a) >> E �L C •r •r L 3: -0 0_ a) U O L -0 7 .r C a ro L L a) +j (n Z Y k I S- -0 r O a) ET S- aJ -0 V) Q c0 •r O c)r• a) U = rC 0 O a) (0 f0_ +-) C L O jM. a) 4-)W O 4-)() S- +-) '0 o= L a= fZ S- Ln -0 a) a) (0 4- C 41 L.+-+ 0)Ln 0C C ro Q.0)ro>,CO C V)= a •r ro Z ro (U C C C.'O +--) S- +.� CO > •r ro () Vs C •r- +JJ - O 0- to L .-a mr t O to en 4J C X r- a) }- 0 V! C +, L r C C a) U CQO) to L r♦ r-- O to S. r- O r- to C O L to O o U ." r- O r- O Ln M 0)aJ [� >> C D 4- r0 +J C ro > to a w S- $A O O () +-) = Oro 'A 'a C S- 0. a) U .0 •r tM 4-3 C C, S- C) S- C to "0 "0QU J0 " a) Q) �L roZ a)I t "U 7 O O 3 >> C U p Li- C C a) r- U •r +J ro •r I. - = to r •r•) >) ro i- +) R .r 1] L -.J 4- c) O a) -0 r- C O la r- Q) W O O Z7 L=3 cn 0 4- +-) Q r ro EGs �0-0 cs `" ai sue.. aCi aZ R ¢ LLJ fa = - •r +-) -0 L Eat Ln r 4- = T) t► ro fa C C. C. L () r- ¢ Or mO+-)•v ro X O Lac = Co •r C a) cu S- C-Z r- Z Vt A +J M L O w a) 0-0 a) Q etS W.CrnLO O U 0 4J N (D Len CC +� CV'" r a) (a •r >) 4-)0 ]L ro -0 Li. Vi S- C 4- L >, Z rn (n Z +-) a) al Vf S. C-— +-) — a) C aC S-• (0 -%-- a " a) X -0 r' r- V) rot) (3) aJ p0 +-) Qi A C. a) L r of f f C L r- G U ro+s O O ^10 ro4-G' ^J Z a) N (V G. C r LA .a •L-) f0 O LJ = S- -CC +-) X +•W O a) a) 7 ro •r a) U (•,� •r (1) fa -0 > LA VI r- r-- .O +) O -0 r+ C 13 C) V a) O Q C LA C Q_ = a) Qa •c C. a) '-- a) O Z fa LAJ ET ET EO L L rn ul to E O Q >> 6J ro C r f a) Q) :3 fa •r C 'r UCl. C + J +-) L Y '•- 4J +j +j LA ro 10 > r� •r C 4- O O O O >y = O C a) C C r0 C r0 Q- 0 E .a CO U .M +•s E •r Cl ra 0 0 ra 3 Q z Y z Q m z Q U cc w Q z Q d r� m m' WlEi9 eaN ID �lccD �N l N12°55 p2 W��6o coN 0 a Nr N. c+s r ` - - 4 z I m z _ U 1 Sco lames co0 [ j 0 o t6p .0 0 of J �OZ 33 T— Lti ., \\ ' 10 cry__ �' cq a ,n t 5 zBY 1 ao55Q =i Co z - tt °50 I �r W W QO c:� 0 O" InQc'� N coO cr,(D Y ClJ 0 O I L IN O cD L7 O (Z;N- LLIO !n O u ° a)O) - ° L uo — I i+ OD Z U roj O Z G F ¢a in- CO F-O Z O o'mz ro 0 z W co NOt z F- r 2! 0 o� j p- - c0 �` cB O � N L J 0) O J LL Ls.[ c Q ul m rn O J' O O p D to OV N It o= Q = LiJ Z F- `� In Cal '. "m Odd_ mat ;.`�`i C 3 S: 6lJe t 0 LO � m r m W 0 O lL O a o m- �'I r� ct - M, �Z gg°8pg I Q 0 I FF-- z O o � " ` u' r. - ''S166 Z O tL F- CO 'til r O - Z �Q I - a CJ - - : _ Q C) C7 _ • — La t N a: g_ at �r 0 en a 44 QF- E[l Qc Z Li -if Z=t C7 P�7 %E I C z I p ". \ O ,a\ ray i b vJ !� F-- W _ y) J W zz ' d J � �y i0 0 � a I `_is d O I.L LLr IN Z La kole\ X O Q _ V' -o o r � Q Co Q LL. Q -T- �, 't I N � CO a N ODz z i©'b. d I U N �- 2 Z -r fi /1 U- fn at uF- cN.r� �' �/ ��N O 1 F- N d ° n Q �a m (� < r in — .. CO CID cu OD tD N to mO` r a 1 — N 0 z _ 2 O 3 -J W -1 r" ciW W �N QI O Z Z �L O TO N" � fo — W� .. Vw�N a Nv2 co DU H Nr J ~ mot ° �m v "' 5 `Z`.-51-2 F- � °4434`. cI I p[ S —Z 0 60T ac z _ 356.87` Li.. Q -1 � — w CD QS ,06 _� tL z0 t0 _ W �0 3 N N C J cd o ^LU a 3 0 2 >_ W Est Z o Lr �s as c`rD � N ` N LL LL LLJ0 m Z 0 '� II L`1 e I 1-c\j Cl) o - (0 K7 LL > (= O Ll..LO �_� �tU CO w c O< p ~ Q l U) z ` w a- a co c i o W, ze z z i F- Q U) 3„6E,6ZaZOH Q I F- zLLI o , �^ ~ Z © °0 U Z Z�- - o,U ° O � t9 ' %0 S 4 N 0 m \o Z O m d�� �\ Q. w M. IY \ a y 00 , 6".3Ld as �\ �4 V J 10ODsOgg c Eaii \�\ S' z m 6p0'OOyfo y2'\ �0�6`��. Zm �s O� ' �c �' \ O fi LLLJ rasa \ p ' O� ep \ A� 0. o O ti s °61 O� , °10S J \ Q 2\ W � ` sa. sue, E'0 . s OD � °< 0 Q W Q mac` N (o 0 0 '{ cv x I _ N W 0 U) O LL- .� Z LU ZO Q w w o 0 Q a F, Ob-iW 2 z Z = ¢ U ~ � O ~ >_ Z O 0 a J LL U) C) g W O 03 < LS w z _ C) N c z U)O W o V- 20 rs N 0 Z o W a z c m z u� � Q .-G< Q Z CV cr; Z \ N c 2 G Z � L 5;4�ny` Q < ui 7 t,j'. z W 'Q9 a , in `o r.LO G v 0 49 5 asF i a ,500000 -570.35 o d N o r Z m v� sC D Lei 0 O O LIJ o Q >r �� C o� 6N _jf Lt1 p CO / 0 O Qom o LLI f sr L G �7 Y d d' C a� aCC=if) 00 �n Z o-%O r O O O O \ cls -� a• ,,, 0 a Ui � 1 h �� _ ,, a "C-1 "a f`` `O h if " 1 Q Q � so 1 -O � I 1 i�1 F— Q Y,OS j Fz OS - w cc LO �N '' / �N �cr cU J { h I rn Q c0 I N w ;lJ / h LLJ I { I I a 1 Q co 0 a co/ I n 1 {o rn cv N i , L d m mco ,� I Q 1— Ys cv Z 1 z F a /-4 1 I Q 11 iF w J I Q w La f �+ / I w H t w I CD LLJ Ar)Q LU c I w a I � J 1 o J H W O y cv Q 4! L p z,£$ 1££ "£ZySo60N cV 133HS 'a, c r. O M 9 0 LO.10Sl tr) 0 \\ �� ,1� LDS ! LO to co ! \ 2 r w Oo M goLO •I OS '�' can u� - w uo • aZ ` - - do w • rr w o cn „ O W p CD a: 0y N Q h ZWW .-6)„ z N i•� LOL21 < d 2 Lv Ld to I N 3„ £ *9,S•OOS - I W ON LO _ CV O cV l • 5 }' N �\ r2 � • �I i _ \\ �ty " � !1 d Q ! Li � � t CO -r it I 49 C U 4 Q N a. w J \ E m t �O CL \ d • 'O o � - Q o w \ � O \\ 4 U) O m 0 _ F LwY ir J LL LL O to u \ o 5Q z Ol ,\ LL a 2\ o z 1-6 r Q \ WCO v W \ Q M LLI v z = J \ �� Q \� aw000 Li -- CVO —co - L1J M Ian cf7 ti M1\F`+ \2` N •��S 2299 71 11 M 10,21.906 02•4616 'E SOa• LLJ C', Q z O \ Ld 50 \ N C,Jro NLd_ z L cn 0 11 �. 0 0 C) Y ct as a zw JW0p 1- m h Q Q X>�n uvsc0 w3RAnh AW ryuru:i• UT9L0 WE YINdCO IIYO 3NMI • NOLLYbOdbOC Q10H NYld Y1N60:inY0 3N(Abl p 441 LU / BOS 6e�,8o� 3OoSL�'o CID / aLU o W o ) 0 co \L N J CL o w J 0p L tkco w - 1 J in ui EL LU p z w o ovh 0= �o .*_ N O U) n p oLn ¢o O zz �1 r. L f ' 4}` zo �9 Uw r �.. 10 , 0s' 1,101- c � L,g � - LU / d g� `• J m ram%% z - / _ o L.L k Ed zw t = z Is � LL U 20 Y,,.. J J U (Y � W 4 > o O Cn O Q o > U W z Z C) L) 0- 0- z J L_ 0 GA19 aaillo:) collier county Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): SK Holdings Real Estate LLC Address: 6646 Willow Park Drive, #1 Telephone: 239-330-3758 E-Mail Address: jon.k@cci-tdc.com City: Naples Cell: Address of Subject Property (If available): 1825-1955 Mainsail Drive City: Naples State: FL ZIP: PROPERTY INFORMATION Section/Township/Range: 26 / 51 / 26 Lot: P, N Block: Marco ; Subdivision: Marco Shores Unit 1 Metes & Bounds Description: State: FL ZIP: 34109 Plat Book: 14 Page #: 33-38 Property I.D. Number: 59430520004, 59430560006 TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System ❑ b. City Utility System ❑✓ Provide Name: City of Marco Island C. Franchised Utility System ❑ (GPD Capacity): d. Package Treatment Plant ❑ Type: e. Septic System ❑ TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System ❑ b. City Utility System ❑✓ C. Franchised Utility System ❑ d. Private System (Well) ❑ Total Population to be Served: 90 dwelling units Peak and Average Daily Demands: A. Water -Peak: B. Sewer -Peak: Provide Name: City of Marco Island Average Daily: Average Daily: M N N r c 0 Q Q. Q 0 c a� E V R a c a� E U 2 w Q 07/2022 Pag Packet Pg. 410 L of Fier C;014YIty Growth Management Community Development Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov www.colliercountyfl.gov Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. Attach additional pages if necessary. Collier County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is Collier County's utility service system, a notarized statement the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the accordance with all applicable County ordinances in service boundaries of agreeing to dedicate :o the Collier County these facilities in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. located within the shall be provided the project area construction of Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre -application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. r a 07/2022 Pag Packet Pg. 411 9.A.2.fCity of Marco Island May 24, 2023 Ms. Kim Davidson Peninsula Engineering 2640 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34105 Subject: Proposed Marco Shores (Mainsail Phase II) Water, Sewer, and Reclaimed Water Service Availability Ms. Davidson, The subject property is within the City of Marco Island's potable water, reclaimed water, and sanitary sewer service areas. The potable water and reclaimed water services are available for connections in the vicinity of the proposed project. The sanitary sewer service is available for connection at the existing sanitary lift station in Mainsail Apartments Phase I. However, the engineer must confirm within the engineering report that the existing sanitary lift station will not be affected by this new development. Please note that the following items are required: 1. The engineer shall submit the proposed site development plans (SDP) depicting all potable water, fire suppression water, irrigation water, and sanitary sewer improvements to the City's Water and Sewer Department concurrently with its submittal to Collier County. The City's Water and Sewer Department will review the SDP upon receipt of the $500 review fee, signed and sealed plans, and signed and a sealed engineering report including the following calculations: • wastewater generation • potable water demands • fire suppression water demands using ISO formulas • update the City's water hydraulic model with domestic and fire demands for the proposed project • reclaimed irrigation water demands • water and sewer impact fee calculations • grease trap calculations (if applicable) 2. Ownership documentation of the property shall be submitted with the SDP. 3. Water and sewer impact fees must be paid prior to connection to the City's potable water, reclaimed water, and sanitary sewer collection system. 4. If any food service facilities are proposed, then a sanitary sewer collection system and grease traps will be required, and the Engineer will be required to include grease trap calculations as part of the signed and sealed engineering report and depict the grease traps on the SDP. A grease trap maintenance permit is required for any grease trap that is constructed. Grease traps shall be pumped out periodically by a licensed grease handling contractor certified as required 50 Bald Eagle Dr., Marco Island, Florida 34145 Tel (239) 389-5000 www.cityofmarcoisland.com Packet Pg. 412 9.A.2.f by the permit. The City will conduct periodic inspections of the grease trap to ensure compliance with the permit. 5. Portable temporary food dispensing such as food trucks or special event food kiosks or booths shall not wash or clean food or beverage containers, cooking equipment, utensils, etc. on this site unless the appropriate washing facilities are designed and depicted on the SDP. Washing facilities will require waste collection plumbing and corresponding grease traps. 6. No structures, buildings, light poles, landscaping other than ground cover shall be designed, constructed, installed, or planted over any of the existing mains which cross this property. 7. This project shall have a master meter for the potable water domestic consumption and a fire suppression service main master meter in accordance with the City of Marco Island Technical Standard Manual. 8. Connections to existing mains and lift stations wet well shall be in accordance with the City of Marco Island Technical Standard Manual and FDEP rules. 9. Connections and temporary water main outage requests shall be coordinated with the City's Water and Sewer Department at least two weeks in advance. 10. Water meters and appropriate backflow prevention will be required for each connection to the City's mains. 11. The property owner will be required to convey the improvements constructed within the public right-of-way and the proposed easement to the City in accordance with the City's conveyance and acceptance procedures. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Kind Regards, Soda 1 Manager of Engineering and Operations Water and Sewer Department Cc: Jeff Poteet, Bart Bradshaw 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 413 9.A.2.f TREBILCOCK CONSULTING 50LUTIONS Traffic Impact Statement Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD Rezone Application Prepared for: Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34105 Phone: 239-403-6700 Collier County, Florida 5/25/2023 Prepared by: Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee* — $500.00 Fee Collier County Transportation Review Fee* — Minor Study — $750.00 Fee Note — *to be collected at time of first submittal Packet Pg. 414 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Christopher Scott Digitally signed by Christopher Scott DN: cn=Christopher Scott, c=US, o=Peninsula Engineering, email=CScott@pen-eng.com Date: 2023.08.17 10:49:43 - 04'00' Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, PE, PTOE FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 PRINTED COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT ARE NOT CONSIDERED SIGNED AND SEALED AND THE SIGNATURE MUST BE VERIFIED ON ANY ELECTRONIC COPIES. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a R F 1 2 Packet Pg. 415 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f Table of Contents ProjectDescription......................................................................................................................... 4 TripGeneration............................................................................................................................... 5 Trip Distribution and Assignment................................................................................................... 6 Future Background Traffic Volumes............................................................................................... 9 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Without Project.......................................................... 10 Future Conditions With Project.................................................................................................... 10 Site Access Management.............................................................................................................. 12 ImprovementAnalysis.................................................................................................................. 12 Mitigationof Impact..................................................................................................................... 12 Appendices Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan.......................................................................................... 13 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) .................................................. 17 Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation.................................................................................................. 24 AppendixD: D1RPM Inputs.......................................................................................................... 29 Appendix E: FDOT Generalized Level of Service Tables............................................................... 32 Q Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1 3 Packet Pg. 416 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Project Description The application is to amend the Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD (Ord. 81-6, as amended) by amending the Master Concept Plan to convert areas identified as Utility Site and Park to Residential Parcel Two A and increase the total number of residential dwelling units from 1,580 to 1,670 in order to develop the 4.04-acres known as Marco Shores Unit 1, Tracts N and P with 90 multi -family dwelling units. The property is located on the north side of Mainsail Drive in Collier County, just west of the Marco Island Executive Airport. Refer to Figure 1— Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Figure 1 — Project Location Map Projector %'19 Island Location Executive 00 itgort �, Mainsail Dr M_ o 99 Hamm(::: cc ck Bay Golf & Country Club A methodology memorandum was transmitted via email to the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on March 15, 2023 (ref. Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting)). The project access connection to the surrounding roadway network is proposed as two direct connections onto Mainsail Dr. A detailed evaluation of them will be performed at the time of site development permitting. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA " 1 4 Packet Pg. 417 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Trip Generation The subject of the application sits within a large mature development called Marco Shores. A PUD amendment would normally compare the net change in trip generation for all uses within the PUD before and after the amendment. The community contains a range of housing types, and it is possible that for some of them the current Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual includes an appropriate land use code that did not exist at the time of the original approval, or vice versa. The development consists of 90 multi -family dwelling units in four story structures. In the current Trip Generation Manual the appropriate Land Use Code (LUC) is 221 Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit. Because the ITE peak hour trip generation formulae for it are linear in all analysis periods, the difference in cumulative trip generation for the entire PUD before and after the proposed amendment is identical to the generation for 90 units alone, which is how the generation of net impact to total trips is presented here. This was recommended in the methodology memorandum accepted by the County (Appendix B). This is also the net impact to surrounding traffic volumes since the traffic from the remainder of the PUD is part of the background traffic. Table 1- Trip Generation DailyW PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ITE Measure- # of rug LU# ment Unit Units MquME WDaily ARM I Traffic In Out Total Multifamily Housing (Mid- 221 Dwelling 90 2 2 2 383 21 14 35 6 22 28 Rise) Not Close to Units Rail Transit Trip Generation Rates from ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th Ed. In Table 1 ITE rates or equations are used for the trip generation calculations, as applicable. The ITE formulae coefficients and 11t" edition data pages are provided in Appendix C. In agreement with the Collier County TIS guidelines, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net new total trips) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in the Collier County 2022 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for the adjacent roadway network is PM peak hour. The analysis year is 2028. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 15 Packet Pg. 418 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f Trip Distribution and Assignment Trip distribution was estimated using the District One Regional Planning Model (D1RPM). A new traffic analysis zone (TAZ)# 2969 was connected to the intersection of Collier Blvd. and Mainsail Dr. (Figure 2). The household attributes in it are the averages of three other TAZs in the vicinity including the TAZ representing the entire PUD (#2517). Tables developing the input attributes are shown in Appendix D. The project traffic distribution pattern produced by the model is shown in Figure 3. Figure 2 — DIRPM in Project Vicinity North W J U W J 0 L1 2`485,/— SPY A' C14%\ 3 rd l� 25 i F5 2969 Marco Shores Number of Lanes 2 4 � 6 S - 10 Faci liry Type Toll Facilities �® Freeways & Ramps Minor & Major Arterials r Collectors Centroid Connectors Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 6 Packet Pg. 419 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Figure 3 — Project Trip Distribution North 0.9 m O 0 0.9 0.9 1 MANATEE171) ti 5.1 3.51+2.8 2.8 rgMjgMl 28 TR o w �J w M u 1�111-4 v MITE TgMlq n� �O u 2969 Marco Shores w J O U SAMA�APRr � 4 �\ w 'Y v 0) Q 1,3 � O ## Percent of External Project Traffic Number of Lanes 2 4 6 — 8 10 Facility Type Toll Facilities -- —> Freeways & Ramps Minor & Major Arterials Collectors Centroid Connectors a Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Packet Pg. 420 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Table 2 contains the road segments on which the project impact was reviewed. Roadway configuration and minimum standard service volumes are from the 2022 AUIR. The distribution percentages are the averages at the segment endpoints. The calculations that Table 2 contains are performed with more decimal places than those displayed. Using only the displayed decimals may yield slightly different results. The project traffic does not represent a significant impact on adjacent roadway segments. Table 2 —Project Traffic Distribution and PM Peak Hour Impact Peak Direct - Peak ion Hour Project PM PM Peak Traffic Percent Peak Peak Exist- LOS Direct- Signif- as Per - of Total Hour Hour ing Mini- ion icance centage Signif- Project Project Project Config- mum Service Thres- of icant AUIR Roadway Traffic Traffic Traffic uration Stan- Volume hold Service Impact ID # Link From To (1) N/E (2) S/W (2) (3) 1 dard (3) (%) (4) Volume Y/N Collier Manatee Mainsail 37.0 47.9 7 10 41) D 2200 2 0.5 No Boulevard Road Drive Marco Collier Mainsail 38.0 Island 43.8 9 6 41) D 2200 2 0.4 No Boulevard Drive Bridge Notes: 1) Figure 3 2) Percentage times PM peak hour net new external directional project traffic totals Table 1 3) 2022 AUIR 4) Collier County TIS Guidelines Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 18 Packet Pg. 421 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Future Background Traffic Volumes Tables 3 through 5 contain existing and future traffic information forth e segment of Collier Blvd. accessed by the project. In Table 3, the annual growth rate listed is the one used in the 2022 AUIR to predict future deficiencies and is used to inflate the existing year peak hour peak direction volume from the 2022 AUIR to the analysis year 2028. The result above is compared with the 2022 AUIR volume plus the trip bank volume. The higher of the two results is used as the future background traffic volume. The calculations that Table 3 contains are performed with more decimal places than those displayed. Using only the displayed decimals may yield slightly different results. Table 3 — Future Background Traffic 2028 2028 Growth Rate Existing Based Peak Year AUIR Peak Hour Peak Annual Hour Peak Hour Percent Peak Direct - Peak Growth Direction ion Back Direct- Rate for Trip Back- AUIR + ground ion Peak First 5 Growth Bank ground Trip Traffic AUIR Roadway Existing Volume Direct- years Factor Volume Traffic Bank Volume ID # Link From To Year (1) ion (1) (1) 1 (2) (1) Volume Volume (3) Collier Manatee Mainsail 37.0 2022 1810 N 2.0% 1.126 221 2038 2031 2038 Boulevard Road Drive Marco Collier Mainsail 38.0 Island 2022 1810 N 2.0% 1.126 61 2038 1871 2038 Boulevard Drive Bridge Notes: 1) 2022 AUIR 2) Growth Factor assumes 2% annual growth after the first 5 years. 3) Greater of Growth based estimate or Existing +Trip Bank Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 19 Packet Pg. 422 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Without Project The existing roadway conditions are from the Collier County 2022 AUIR, and the future roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5-Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement Program (CIP) are considered committed improvements. No improvements to the evaluated roadways are programmed. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 4. The segments are operating at acceptable levels of service in existing conditions and under future background traffic conditions. The calculations that Table 4 contains are performed with more decimal places than those displayed. Using only the displayed decimals may yield slightly different results. Table 4 — Existing and Future Roadway Conditions 2028 2028 2028 2028 2028 Peak Existing Existing Hour Level Peak Year Level Peak Peak of Hour Peak of Hour Direction Serv- Peak Hour Service Peak Back- ice Existing Direct- Peak Exist- Defic- Future Direct- ground Back- Defic- Config- ion Sery Direct- ing iency Config- ion Serv. Traffic ground iency AUIR Roadway uration ice Vol- ion Vol- Year Yes/ uration Im- ice Vol- Volume Traffic Yes/ ID # Link From To (1) ume (1) ume (1) WC No (1) proved ume (1) (2) V/C No Collier Manatee Mainsail 37.0 4D 2200 1810 0.82 No 4D No 2200 2038 0.93 No Boulevard Road Drive Marco Collier Mainsail 38.0 Island 4D 2200 1810 0.82 No 4D No 2200 2038 0.93 No Boulevard Drive Bridge Notes: 1) 2022 AUIR or approved future roadway improvements 2) Table 3 Future Conditions With Project Table 5 adds the project traffic volumes developed in Table 2 to the 2028 background traffic volumes developed in Table 3. In the cases where the peak direction of project traffic aligns with the peak direction of background traffic, the background traffic portion of the total traffic is the peak hour peak direction volume from Table 3. In the cases where the two peak directions (background and project) are opposed, a D factor of 0.56 is assumed for the background traffic, the average of the values used for interrupted flow facilities in the FDOT Generalized Service Volume Table for Urbanized Areas (see Appendix E). This factor is used to estimate the background two-way volume, and hence to establish the two directional components of that two-way volume. Directional project traffic volumes from Table 2 are added and the maximum of the resulting two total traffic directional volumes is used as the basis of analysis. The significantly impacted Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 10 Packet Pg. 423 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 segments are operating at acceptable levels of service when project traffic is added to future background traffic. The calculations that the table contains are performed with more decimal places than those displayed. Using only the displayed decimals may yield slightly different results. The roadway segments will be operating at acceptable levels of service in the future year with the addition of project traffic. Table 5 -Future Roadway Total Traffic Conditions 00 N O U u Z O O N d a y a Z Z u 00M iE N w M \ Q1 M Ql N H 7 O O + O CU O O O O N a 2 O. •2 h d 0 u N N V T O y ill r, m 7 E O i C ,� O F F a •N V O N O N u m � � O H F i u_ Ln LU O F Z F N a u m 00 � u W CO V 3 i z O COba F N V_ i6 u 7 jE u l 0 O i GJ C CD 04 F O �n O u u m O v 0. .o O � a = a � � w Y L V w f6 O N w a � Z � V Y C •,- U 'i W W m tiq F a 0 0 Z Z Y y 00Y L Y ti (6 C :� £ 4J 0] O M 7 N N 00 M 00 M O N O GOl CL 2 0. L C OL p •..• C Ft O N O N O 7 F C a)O a C) n CO UJ —_ N � O C C W LL (c0 0 (cc0 G cc G 0 W x 3 L > L > v v v J (U v a) v _N n n fl s 0 0 0 0 0 H H Q 20 H U CO U m ti N m v Q M O Z Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 11 Packet Pg. 424 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Site Access Management No new connections are proposed on any roads to which Collier County assigns access management classifications. Improvement Analysis Based on the results illustrated within this traffic analysis, the proposed project creates no significant impacts on adjacent roadway segments. The maximum total daily trip generation due to this application shall not exceed 35 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as applicable. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 12 Packet Pg. 425 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 13 Packet Pg. 426 (andO esinoo jjoE) sajoyS oojeW UL£000ZZ0Z-1d : MIR) £Z-U-6 uoijeoijddv-Q zuawy3B41V :;uawy3L'11V N N Q Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 a m s 1 o IL 4 if LL u - CT u � u V ` 2 LL UA :)F7 �o z• 49O IM GWA31n()q MiIlIOJ ea a Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 14 (and3 asino3 jjoE) sajoyS oajeW UL£000ZZOZ-1d : 09ti9Z) £Z-U-6 uoijeaijddv-Q zuawyae41d :;uawy3L'11V Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 00 N a Y V M a Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 115 (andO esinoo jjoE) sajo4S oojeW `b6LC000ZZOZ-1d : MIR) £Z-U-6 uoijeoijddv-Q zuawy3e41d :;uawy3L'11V Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 / 0 s�� z P \ arc 2- 0 � L u,a sF 7 ZO _ ' i. L7 � \ Z _ 1 �OLa ~ �a J ' (GOD)O g+� 1 ,\ 1 '?,� QnnN � W Z Q � Cv 1 lu Y m n ,1 1111 11 W W E L "V 1 \ \1 1 l � w 1 4 11 •�� '1 � � � f1/ q zQ " U ` n5 — ,�� 0 � mo a 6 I ' � 5c� , N rn N a Y V M a Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 116 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 17 Packet Pg. 430 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply, or N/A (not applicable). Date: March 15, 2023 Time: NIA Location: N/A — Via Email People Attending: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1) Michael Sawyer, Collier County Growth Management Division 2) Norman Trebilcock. TCS 3) Gavin Jones, TCS 4) Ciprian Malaescu, TCS Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title: Norman Trebilcock, AICP, PE Organization: Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Address & Telephone Number: 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200, Naples, FL 34104= ph 239-566-9551 Reviewer(s)• Reviewer's Name & Title: Michael Sawyer Organization & Telephone Number: Collier County Transportation Development Review 239-252-2926 Applicant: Applicant's Name: Peninsula Engineering Address: 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34105 Telephone Number: 239-403-6700 Proposed Development: Name: Marco Shores PUDA Location: North side of Mainsail Drive iust west of the Marco Island Executive Airport (refer to Figure 1) Land Use Type: Multi -family dwelling units (4 stories). ITE Code #: LUC 221 Nlultifainily Housing (Mid -Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit. Description: 90 multifamily dwelling units. Page 1 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g F 1 18 Packet Pg. 431 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f Figure 1 — Project Location Map JP 4%P ► *I&V0 Project Location HammoctchBa Hartimock Bay Goff & Country Club Zoning Existing: Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD. Comprehensive plan recommendation: N/A. Requested: Amend the PUD to add 90 multifamily dwelling units. Findings of the Preliminary Study: Studv tvoe: Thoueh the Qroiceted net external AM or PM 2-wav peak hour oroiect traffic is less than 50, the project is part of a larger development, so this Study qua] ifies as a Minor Study TIS. Proposed TIS will include trip generation, traffic distribution and assignments, significance test (based on 20/o12%/3% criterion). Operational site access analysis to be performed at the time of site development plan application. The report will provide existing LOS and document the impact the proposed project will have on designated arterial and collector roads. Roadway concur encv analysis — based on estimated net external PM peak hour traffic. The TIS shall be consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures. Site access is via direct access from Mainsail Drive. No intersection analysis will be provided with this report. Page 2 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g F 1 19 Packet Pg. 432 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Internal capture and pass -by rates are not considered based on ITE and Collier County guidelines recommendations. Studv Tyne: if not net increase, operational study) Small Scale US ❑ Minor US Maior TIS ❑ Study Area: Boundaries: Arterial and Collector roads significantly impacted. Additional intersections to be analyzed: N/A Build Out Year: 2028 Planning Horizon Year: 2028 Analysis Time Period(s): PM peak hour Future Off --Site Developments: N/A Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 1 la` Edition Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None: N/A Pass -by trips: N/A Internal trips: NIA Transit use: N/A Other: NIA Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements: 2028 Methodology & Assumptions: Non -site traffic estimates: Collier County traffic counts and 2022 AUIR Site -trip generation: ITE I lch Edition LUC 221 — Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit. A PUD amendment would normally compare the net change in trip generation for all uses within the PUD before and after the amendment. Because the ITE peak hour trip generation formulae used are linear: that difference in cumulative trip generation is identical to the generation for 90 units alone, which is how the generation of net impact to total trips will be presented. Trip distribution method: District 1 Regional Planning Model - refer to Figure 2. Traffic assignment method: project trip generation with background growth Traffic growth rate: historical growth rate or 2% minimum Turning movements: Site Access: direct access onto Mainsail Drive. Details to be provided in the site development plan application. Page 3 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g r 1 20 Packet Pg. 433 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f Figure 2 — Project Trip Distribution V J N � U 2969 —7 Marco Shores ,m w v� O V A q ,WAR GpRt Y 9 CAP 4Jc m a y m a Number of Lanes 2 O a 4 � 6 i♦ 8 Pti s 10 ,9 Facility Type Toll Facilities Freeways & Ramps yam' Minor & MajorArtenals 1 4 Collectors 1 \� Centroid Connectors Special Features: from preliminary study or prior experience) Accident locations: N/A Sight distance: N/A Queuing: NIA Access location & configuration: NIA Traffic control: MUTCD Signal system location & progression needs: NIA Page 4 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g F 121 Packet Pg. 434 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f On -site parking needs: N/A Data Sources: CC 2022 AUIR, CC Traffic Counts Base maps: N/A Prior study reports: N/A Access policy and jurisdiction: N/A Review process: N/A Requirements: N/A Miscellaneous: NIA Small Scale Study — No Fee Minor Study - $750.00 X Major Study - $1,500.00 Methodology Fee $500.00 X Includes 0 intersections Additional Intersections - $500.00 each All fees will be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and must be paid to Transportation prior to our sign -off on the application. SIGNATURES Nory,wyL Trebf ryr,�, Study Preparer Norman Trebilcock Reviewer(s) Applicant Page 5 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g r 122 Packet Pg. 435 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community- PUD Amendment- Traffic Impact Statement - May 2023 Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Methodology Review, Analysis C Review, and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional meetings or other optional services are also provided below. 0 Methodology Review - $500 Fee d Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement, including review of p submitted trip generation estimate(s), distribution, assignment, and review of a "Small Scale Study" V determination, written approval/comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written !L- confirmation of a re -submitted, amended methodology statement, and one meeting in Collier County, if needed. N d L "Small Scale Studv" Review - No Additional Fee (Includes one sufficiency review) C t Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review fn includes: a concurrency determination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study v compliance with trip generation, distribution and maximum threshold compliance. "Minor Study Review" - $750 Fee (Includes one sufficiency review) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: optional field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, distribution, and assignment, concurmney determination, confirmation of committed M improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of off -site improvements O within the right-of-way, review of site access and circulation, and preparation and review of N "sufficiency" comments/questions. N O N "Maior Studv Review" - $1,500 Fee (Includes two intersection analvsis and two sufficiencv reviews d Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, p special trip generation and/or trip length study, distribution and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data to N collected/assembled, review of traffic growth analysis, review of off -site roadway operations and capacity analysis, review of site access and circulation, neighborhood traffic intrusion issues, any N necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates, and preparation and review of up N to two rounds of "sufficiency" comments/questions and/or recommended conditions of approval. V- O "Additional intersection Review" - $500 Fee C The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the `Major +. Study Review" and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the v "Major Study Review" Q. "Additional Sufficiency Reviews" - $500 Fee CL Q Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. E t U M r .r Q r-� C d Page 6 of 6 E z v Q Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g r 1 23 Packet Pg. 436 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Appendix Q ITE Trip Generation Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 24 Packet Pg. 437 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community- PUD Amendment- Traffic Impact Statement - May 2023 Land Use: 221 Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) Description Mid -rise multifamily housing includes apartments and condominiums located in a building that has between four and 10 floors of living space. Access to individual dwelling units is through an outside building entrance, a lobby, elevator, and a set of hallways. Multifamily housing (low-rise) (Land Use 220), multifamily housing (high-rise) (Land Use 222), off - campus student apartment (mid -rise) (Land Use 226), and mid -rise residential with ground -floor commercial (Land Use231) are related land uses. Land Use Subcategory Data are presented for two subcategories for this land use: (1) not close to rail transit and (2) close to rail transit. A site is considered close to rail transit if the walking distance between the residential site entrance and the closest rail transit station entrance is -V� mile or less. Additional Data For the six sites for which both the number of residents and the number of occupied dwelling units were available, there were an average of 2.5 residents per occupied dwelling unit. For the five sites for which the numbers of both total dwelling units and occupied dwelling units were available, an average of 96 percent of the total dwelling units were occupied. The technical appendices provide supporting information on time -of -day distributions for this land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripcen web app or the trip generation resource page on the ITE website (https:llwww.ite.oLgZtechnical-resources/topics/trip ... .... ..... ..... a nd.pa rking .�enerationl). It is expected that the number of bedrooms and number of residents are likely correlated to the trips generated by a residential site. To assist in future analysis, trip generation studies of an multifamily housing should attempt to obtain information on occupancy rate and on the mix of residential unit sixes (i.e., number of units by number of bedrooms at the site complex). The sites were surveyed in the 1990s, the 20DOs, the 2010s, and the 2020s in Alberta (CAN), California, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Ontario (CAN), Oregon, Utah, and Virginia. Source Numbers 168, 188, 204, 305, 306, 321, 818, 857, 862, 866, 901, 904, 910, 949, 951, 959, 963, 964, 966, 967, 969, 970, 1004, 1014, 1022, 1023, 1025, 1031, 1032, 1035, 1047, 1056, 1057, 1058, 1071, 1076 RE General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 273 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g F 1 25 Packet Pg. 438 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit (221) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 11 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 201 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 4.54 3.76 - 5.40 0.51 Data Plot and Equation 2000 x x x w P l000 x x 0 0 100 200 300 400 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve - - - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T= 4.77tXj -46.46 l 0.93 274 Trip Generation Manual 111h Edilion • Volume 3 a Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA p,T. 126 Packet Pg. 439 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit (221) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 30 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 173 Directional Distribution: 23% entering, 77% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.37 0.15 - 0.53 0.09 uata riot ana tquatlon 300 200 mg 0 0 100 200 300 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T= 0.44(X) - 11.61 400 - - - - - Average Rate l 0.91 500 General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 275 a Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P 1 27 Packet Pg. 440 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit (221) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 31 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 169 Directional Distribution: 61 % entering, 39% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.39 0.19 - 0.57 0.08 Data Plot and Equation 200 X X X X w XX F 100 --------.....-------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- X H I I I XX X X X X X X x ! x xX 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve - - - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T= 0.39tXj + 0.34 l 0.91 276 Trip Generation Manual 111h Edilion • Volume 3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA n 1 28 Packet Pg. 441 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 a c.� a� L O U 0 m L O t O :i L Appendix D: r O� ti M D1RPM Inputs o N N O N J d O to tO N M N N_ M C O O v Q 0. Q C N t v cC Q r C d E t v R r a Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 29 Packet Pg. 442 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f North o 'R Tq�9 rqM x 2654- J 0 0 u s w J J O u 2969 Marco Shores 2517 r' O u 2485 SP'W'v- CgpR7 CORI 4 ti v Number of Lanes O 2 lc 4 � � 8 � 10 Facility Type Toll Facilities Freeways & Ramps 1 Minor& Major Arterials 1 Collectors Centroid Connectors a Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g F 1 30 Packet Pg. 443 Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 9.A.2.f Q LL lD O 00 a O LL � 00 N Ol Ol o O LL ? �a O O O O O LL 00 7 � a C M � 00 ri � Ln rV .� Ln N ri LL d O M rn O o rn a o m 11 F- d Z LL > O LD 00 ro 00 M Ln V Ln V U Q rn N I� n > LL 7 0 rn I� O r, Ln O Q1 N N LL 7 N Lr1 lD lD LO lD ¢ `~ OF Ln 00 m Lr) M O v 00 m 00 m Ln a o O LA v o o LL O = N LL O � m 01 m r lO N N lO N r a a o ro rn 00 o N CL v� U > L00n ro LLn 00 00 N a � r 00 00 > 0 O m a> V N) O N n1 LA Z N O N O N O N O U N c-I N ci N ci N ci W Z r, ti Ln 00 V Lr) M LD Lrl V lO 01 N N N N N H Cr Cr o Cr cW Z C W J W J W J W J O z O O O O U U U U U u u 00 00 00 00 O ~ M lO rn N ci O1 00 00 ci O F ci c-I N Ln 00 Ln LD N M Ln N V N LO N O1 N ci a N a rn a! u W U a 3 � o C2 ai Z L ° L, N v0 > a (7 Y Z Q O O O O O a � Y O Q O O O O � a Z W F- O O O O J O r` O O o O Ln N N = Q O N O CD = u O MO CDO = 0 o v o 0 N a 0 C 00 Ln ro Ln 00O W ci N > d w g rn Lr1 ,1 Ln O 00 O LnW -1 1 c I L OLLI N V a) O N u 0 0. Z 2 — W 00 O W 1.0 LNrI rn Y z a = lD a V � Ln � 00 Ln 00 Ln 3 = o 0 0 06 0 00 N = N CD 2 c-I ci ci ci ci Z W O M 01 M O Ln Z W 00 Ln V O O = O O 00 —1-1 CD O 2 U Ln 01 Ol 00 00 a G 00 00 lD a = Oa ci M M N p a 'A 0 c» O lD M z V m 1 z a -1 -q 00 1 W a) M = = = O -1Ln l0 Q rq Q Ln 'zT LD a1 F N N N N ci N fr) Lu � a1 a1 a1 o Z N N � Ln > a a V d i 3 O U O N i O t O V O� ti M O G O N N Q N J 0 to t0 N CO) N N_ O M .Q Q a C U cC Q r C d E t (i a Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 31 Packet Pg. 444 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community— PUD Amendment— Traffic Impact Statement — May 2023 Appendix E: FDOT Generalized Level of Service Tables Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 32 Packet Pg. 445 Marco Shores Golf Course Community- PUD Amendment- Traffic Impact Statement - May 2023 9.A.2.f TABLE 7 Generalized Peak Hour Directional volumes for Florida's Urbanized Areas STATE SIGNALIZED ARTERIALS FREEWAYS Class I (40 mph or hi@<ier posted speed limit) Lanes Median B C D E 1 Urdivided * 830 880 ** 2 Divided * 1,910 2,000 ** 3 Divided * 2,940 3,020 ** 4 Divided * 3,970 4,040 ** Class II (35 mph or slower posted speedlimit) Lanes Median B C D E 1 Undivided * 370 750 800 2 Divided * 730 1,630 1,700 3 Divided * 1,170 2,520 2,560 4 Divided * 1,610 3,390 3,420 Non -State Signalized Roadway Adjustments (Altercerresponding staie wlurres bythe iniicated percent.) Non -State Signalized Roadways - 10f Median & Turn Lane Adjustments Exclusive Exclusive Adjustment Lanes Median Left Lanes Right Lanes Factors 1 Divided Yes No +5% 1 urudnnded No No -2uf NUt Undivided Yes No -5l Multi Undivided No No -25f - - - Yes +5f One -Way Facility Adjustment Multiplythe conesporvling directional vohrmes in this tab le by 1.2 BICYCLE MODE2 (Multiplyv hiclewhoresshnanbelowbyrDnl+erof directional roadway fares to detmiim two-way maximum serrire vcluxnes.) Paved Shoal derfB icycl e Lane Coverage B C D E 0-49% * 150 390 1,000 50-84% 110 340 1,000 >1,000 85-100% 470 1,000 >1,000 ** PE DE STRIAN M ODE' (Multiply velikle volumes shwfnbelwv b y runb er cf die tiomal madwaylares b detemnrm two-way nw:Lnmn serrice� vohu s) Sidewalk Coverage B C D E 0-49% * * 140 480 50-84% * 80 440 800 85-100% 200 540 880 >1,000 BUS M ODE (Scheduled Fixed Route} (Buses inpeak lawn inpeak clmctioar) Sidewalk Coverage B C D E 0-84% >5 >4 >3 >2 85-100% > 4 > 3 > 2 > 1 OUALITYALEVELOF SERVICE HANDBOOK Jan ua ru 2020 Care Urbanized Lanes B C D E 2 2,230 3,100 3,740 4,080 3 3,280 4,570 5,620 6,130 4 4,310 6,030 7,490 8,170 5 5,390 7,430 9,370 10,220 6 6,380 3,990 11,510 12,760 Urb anized Lanes B C D E 2 2,270 3,100 3,890 4,230 3 3,410 4,650 5,780 6,340 4 4,550 6,200 7,680 8,460 5 5,690 7,760 9,520 10,570 Freeway Adjustments Aux iliary Ramp Lane Metering +1,000 +5l UNINTERRUPTED FLOW HIGHWAYS Lanes Median B C D E 1 Undivided 580 890 1,200 1,610 2 Divided 1,800 2,600 3,280 3,730 3 Divided 2,700 3,900 4,920 5,600 Uninterrupted Flow Highway Adjustments Lanes Median Exclusive left lanes Adjustment factors 1 Divided Yes +5% Multi Undivided Yes -5°f Multi Undivided No -25% 'Vahps hooa+aa are presetad u peak has dire Lbralvolmes fa levels of sevice and a Forth:u&mob3hhncle mots uik ss qx cfxally staled. Tku table does nct. co¢4bme aAudazdanddcuJdbeusedord7fagexeralplummigapplidia .The compamr madek ftnm wlshflais tabs is dnived douldbe arse dfm more gpeciic phrraag applications. TYe mble and de rft c cmpatoef mode k dwildrwtbe axedfor condor a rde x cdm design vlh more refinedte drdgves exat. C akulamare are buedonplumigazplicdt of a e HCM aradit Tr i. Caw 1vuid pudtg d Service Muvml. ' Level of sevice forthe biycle u dpedesuimmodes intivs table is base d m number dvelucles.notnmber of box lists orpede6lri a usraItly faciby. ' Baxes pethnr dvrmue onlyfa&tepeakhar ratle srgle diecom cf &te hio frwffx flow. ' Camotbe acluevedumigtable hFaatvahre defmals. " Not applicabk fa tl it level d service buff grade. Fort1e u3tcmobile mode, vokmes eieal Uzn keel of servie D become F beca xitr cdon upacides lnve beenreadvd. Fort1e bicycle mode, it a level d service k4ter grade (imhidaag F) is not mbienlole becure there is no maxthtm which whm a end ddusagtable apart vahm defuhs. Saaece: Flonh Depaxmev. d Trafpatatin R5Um s lmphm a utrn offi e imp s:IRvwsuida gon Iplarrcdr�s7stem s! Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 33 Packet Pg. 446 9.A.2.f Marco Shores Golf Course Community- PUD Amendment- Traffic Impact Statement - May 2023 TABLE 7 Generalized Peak Hour Directional Volum es for Florida's (continued) U rbani zed Areas Ja n u N 2020 INPLI'T VALIIE ASSIIMPTIONS Uninterrupted Flow Facilities Interrupted Flow Facilities State Arbariab Class I Freeways H,eewwj� Highways Class I Class II Bicycle Pedestrian ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS Area t (wary rural) urban urban Numberofthroughlanes (both dir.) 4-10 4-12 2 4-6 2 4-8 2 4-3 4 4 Posted speed (mph) 70 65 50 50 45 50 30 30 45 45 Free flow speed (mph) 75 70 55 55 50 55 35 35 50 50 Auxiliary Lanes (n n n Median (d, twlt, N n; r) d n r n r r r Te rain (l,r) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l no sing zone 80 Exclusive left turn lane impact (n, l [n] Exclusive right turn lanes (n, 5� n n n n n n Facihtyle rg th (nu) 3 3 5 5 2 2 1.9 1.8 2 2 TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS Planrurlg analysis hour factor (IC) 0.090 0.095 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 Direc tional distribution facto r (D) 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.550 0.560 0.565 0.560 0.565 0.565 Peak hourfactor(PHF) 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Base saturation flow rate (pcphpl) 2,400 2,400 1,700 2,200 1,950 1,950 1,950 1,950 1,950 1,950 Heavyvehicle percent 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.5 2.0 S ed Adjustment Factor (SAF) 0.975 0.975 0.975 Capacity Adjustment Factor(CAF) 1 0.968 1 0.968 1 1 0.968 l left turns 12 1 12 1 12 1 12 1 12 12 l right turns 12 1 12 1 12 1 12 1 12 12 CONTROL CHARACTERISTICS Nurnberof sig nals 4 4 10 10 4 6 Arrival type (1-6) 3 3 4 4 4 4 Signal type (a, c, p) c c c c c c Cycle length (C) 120 150 120 120 120 120 Effective greenratio (fC) 0.44 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 MULTIMODAL CHARACTERISTICS Paved shouldenbicycle lane (N 5� n, 50f , y n Outside lane width (n, t, w) t t Pavement condition (d, t, u) t On -street parking (n, 5� Sidewalk (n n, 50f , Sidewalklroadway separator( a, t, w) t Sidewalk protective barrier (n, y) n LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLDS Le Servwice ce reewa Arterials Bicycle Ped Bus Density Two-La Multilane Class I Class II Score Score Buseslhr. l ffs Draty ats ats B < 17 > 83.3 < 17 > 31 mph > 22 mph < 2.75 < 2.75 < 6 C < 24 > 75.0 < 24 > 23 mph > 17 mph < 3.50 < 3.50 < 4 D <31 >66.7 <31 >13mph >13mph <4.25 <4.25 <3 E < 39 1 > 58.3 1 < 35 > 15 mph I > 10 mph < 5.00 < 5.00 < 2 fts = Percent free flow speed ats = Average travel speed OUALITYALEVELOF SERVICE HANDBOOK Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 34 Packet Pg. 447 9.A.2.f .�$trict School � � o Sl- Collier Coul� Collier County School District School Impact Analysis Application Instructions: Submit one copy of completed application and location map for each new residential project requiring a determination of school impact to the Planning Department of the applicable local government. This application will not be deemed complete until all applicable submittal requirements have been submitted. Please be advised that additional documentation/information may be requested during the review process. For information regarding this application process, please contact the Facilities Management Department at 239-377-0267. Please check [1 ] type of application request (one only): School Capacity Review ❑ Exemption Letter QConcurrency Determination 0 Concurrency Determination Amendment For descriptions of the types of review please see page 3, I. Project Information: Project Name: Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Municipality: N/A Parcel ID#: (attach separate sheet for multiple parcels): 59430520004 and 5943560006 Location/Address of subject property: 1825-1955 Mainsail Drive Closest Major Intersection: Mainsail Drive and Collier Boulevard Owner/Contract Purchaser Name(s) II. Ownership/Agent Information: SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC (Attach location map) Agent/Contact Person: Christopher Scott, Peninsula Engineering (Please note that if agent or contact information is completed the District will forward all information to that person) Mailing address: 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34105 Telephone#: 239-330-3758 Fax: Email cscott@pen-eng.com I hereby certify the statements and/or information contained in this application with any attachments submitted herewith are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Owner or Authorized Agent Signature III. Development Information 5/26/2023 Date Project Data (Unit Types defined on page 2 of application) Current Land Use Designation: Utility/Park Proposed Land Use Designation: MF Residential Current Zoning: Marco Shores PUD Proposed Zoning: Marco Shores PUD Project Acreage: Unit Type: SF MF MH C G Total Units Currently Allowed by Type: Total Units Proposed by T e: 90 Is this a phased project: Yes or No If yes, please complete page 2 of this application. Date/time stamp: M N N_ M c 0 Q a Q 0 c a� E ca a c as U 0 a Packet Pg. 448 N Q Ci asinoo Ilog saaoyS ooaeW `66L£000ZZOZ-1d : 091V9Z) CZ-ZV6 uoi;eoilddV-Q;uauayoejjV :;uewt43ellV O co L Q N O U U N O Q N c O C co U .Q Q Q O L O _N Q E O U O O N cn 0 IN O N O N O 01 � M � N O � N �N�zzz� H w C7 w x U L7 c E- N 9.A.2.f Types of Reviews: School Impact Analysis: This review should be divided into two categories: - School Capacity Review (land use and rezonings), and; - Concurrency Determinations (site plans and subdivisions). School Capacity Review is the review of a project in the land use and rezoning stage of development. It is a review of the impact of the development on school capacity and is considered long range planning. This may be a review resulting in mitigation being required. In situations where the applicant may be required to mitigate, capacity may be reserved dependent on the type of mitigation. Concurrency Determination is the review of residential site plans and subdivisions to determine whether there is available capacity. When capacity is determined to be available a School Capacity Determination Letter (SCADL) will be issued verifying available capacity to the applicant and the local government. If a project exceeds the adopted level of service standards, the applicant is afforded the option of a negotiation period that may or may not result in an executed/recorded mitigation agreement Mitigation at this stage is expressed as a Proportionate Share Mitigation Agreement. For those residential developments that may have an impact but are otherwise exempt from concurrency, an exemption letter will be prepared for the applicant upon request. For those residential developments that are determined to not have an impact, a letter of no impact will be prepared for the applicant upon request. Exemption Letter: An applicant may request an Exemption Letter as documentation for the local government. These are projects that would be exempt from school concurrency review or projects that do not impact the public schools. Exemptions from school concurrency are limited to existing single family or mobile home lots of record; amendments to previously approved site plans or plats that do not increase the number of dwelling units or change the dwelling unit type; age restricted communities with no permanent residents under the age of 18; or residential site plans or plats or amendments to site plans or plats that generate less than one student; or are authorized as a Development of Regional Impact (Chapter 380, F.S.) as of July 1, 2005. Concurrency Determination Amendment: An applicant may request an amendment to a previously issued School Concurrency Determination or to an application being processed. This review may require additional staff time beyond the initial concurrency determination review and results in a modified determination being issued. An amendment could result in a negotiation period and/or a mitigation agreement being issued or a previously approved determination being modified and reissued. Packet Pg. 450 9.A.2.f PENINSULA�j ENGINEERING MARCO SHORES PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT PROJECT NARRATIVE AND EVALUATION CRITERIA PROJECT OVERVIEW: The application proposes to amend the Marco Shores Golf Course Community (Marco Shores) PUD by amending the Master Concept Plan to convert areas identified as Utility Site and Park to Residential Parcel Two A and increase the total number of residential dwelling units from 1,580 to 1,670 in order to develop the 4.04- acres known as Marco Shores Unit 1, Tracts N and P with 90 multi -family dwelling units. BACKGROUND: Marco Shores PUD is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), approximately 4.5 miles south of Tamiami Trail, East (US 41). The golf course, country club and multifamily dwellings were originally developed in the early 1970s as part of the Deltona Corporation's Marco development in conjunction with the new Marco Island Executive Airport. Deltona Corporation's Marco development included nearly 25,000-acres of land on and around Marco Island. Over 15,000 acres of this land, including Rookery Bay, was placed into permanent conservation easements and transferred to the DEP as part of the 1982 Deltona Stipulation and Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement approved a total of 14,500 dwelling units to be located within 3,695-acres of designated Development Areas. The Marco Shores PUD is identified as Unit 27, an approved development area in the Settlement Agreement. The Marco Shores PUD was originally approved by Ordinance 1981-06 for 1,980 residential units and golf course on 321-acres of land. As noted in the Statement of Compliance in Ordinance 1981-06, these units are vested under the provisions of Chapter 380 of Florida Statutes. The PUD was amended by Ordinances 1994-41, 1995-56, 2016-37, 2016-38 and 2018-20 and is currently approved for a total of 1,580 dwelling units on 314.7-acres. The PUD acreage was reduced to transfer 6.5-acres to the Marco Island Executive Airport. The additional 90-units proposed with this Amendment increases the total number of units within the PUD to 1,670 dwelling units, which is less than the 1,980 vested units. PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 Page 1 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Packet Pg. 451 9.A.2.f PENINSU A- ENGINEERING The approved Master Concept Plan (MCP) identifies areas for Residential, Golf Course/Club/ Open Space, Roads, Utility Sites and Parks. The areas subject to this request include Tracts N and P of Marco Shores Unit 1, located on the north side of Mainsail Drive, west of the PUD Boundary with the Marco Island Airport. These tracts are highlighted on the MCP below and are identified as a Utility Site and Park. The parcels were historically utilized for Marco Island Wastewater Treatment Plant, Reclaimed Water Storage Tank and Pump Station, with improvements on both the Utility Site and the Park site. Park improvements were never made on Tract P. The City of Marco Island completed extensive utility improvements between 2018 and 2020, which included the relocation and demolition of the Pump Station, Storage Tank and Treatment Plant within Marco Shores PUD. In May 2022, Tracts N and P were conveyed from the City of Marco to the applicant of the subject application, SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC, who is the owner/developer of the Mainsail Apartments located immediately to the west of site and identified as Residential Parcel Two A on the MCP. The PUDA proposes to extend the Residential Parcel Two A designation to include the Utility Site and Park. The Marco Shores PUD is also located within an Airport Overlay (APO). The APO identifies permitted height limitations for structures within the various Surfaces and requires Airspace Obstruction Approval when a proposed structure exceeds height criteria. The areas being amended are located within the Horizontal Surface and the Transitional Surface. The height limitation for the proposed multifamily is 100' above runway elevation for the Transitional Surface and 150' above runway elevation for the Horizontal Surface. The maximum actual height permitted within Residential Parcel Two A is 72', as provided in Section 4.07.05 of the PUD, is less than the maximum height allowed within the Transitional Surface. PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 EL. 154.5 EL. 150 m a z 0 a 2 EL 50 y EL 4.20 Q i Z � o - z a > r r Page 2 Packet Pg. 452 _ PENINSU Ati ENGINEERING DETAILS OF REQUEST This PUDA seeks to amend the Marco Shores MCP by converting the Utility Site (Marco Shores Unit 1, Tract N) and Park (Marco Shores Unit 1, Tract P) to Residential Parcel Two A in order to develop the property with 90 multifamily dwelling units. The PUDA increases the total number of dwelling units from 1,580 to 1,670 dwelling units. The proposed number of dwelling units is less than the 1,980 units vested for the development. EVALUATION CRITERIA The PUDA meets the rezoning and PUD criteria established in the LDC and is consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Growth Management Plan. LDC and GMP references are provided below with responses in bold italics. LDC Section 10.02.13 B.S.: a. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. The PUD is within Unit 27 of the Deltona Settlement Agreement which is identified as an Approved Development Area. The property being converted from Utility and Park to Residential is located on the north side of Mainsail Drive and is immediately adjacent to an existing multifamily apartment development. With the removal of the City of Marco Island public utility facilities from the site, it is appropriate that it be developed for multifamily use. Utilities are available to the site. PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 Page 3 Packet Pg. 453 _ PENINSU Ati ENGINEERING Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. The property that is subject to this PUDA is owned by SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives, policies, and the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. The Marco Shores PUD has previously been found to be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Future Land Use Element of the GMP. The PUD is vested for 1,980 residential dwelling units. The proposed amendment to add 90 dwelling units, increasing the total permitted dwelling units in the PUD from 1,580 to 1,670 is consistent with the vested development thresholds. See also Consistency with GMP Section below. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The PUD provides a mix of residential and golf course uses that are compatible internally and with external uses. The surrounding property consists of Natural Preserve to the north and the Marco Island Executive Airport to the east. The PUDA does not proposed changes to any development standards that would affect compatibility with internal or external uses. The Amendment converts areas previously designated as Utility Site and Park to Residential, consistent with the adjacent land uses. The development will provide landscape buffers as required by the LDC. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development The PUD includes 182.2-acres (57.9%) of golf course and open space; significantly more than the 30% open space requirement. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. There is adequate infrastructure to support the proposed development. g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The 4.04-acres being converted from Utility Site and Park to Residential Parcel Two A is sufficient to accommodate the additional 90-units proposed with this amendment. There is no request to expand the boundaries of the PUD. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 Page 4 Packet Pg. 454 _ PENINSU Ati ENGINEERING The PUDA does not propose any deviations. LDC Section 10.02.08 F.: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. The PUD is vested for a total of 1,980 dwelling units. The proposed amendment proposes to convert areas on the MCP designated as Utility Site and Park to Residential and increase the permitted number of dwelling units from 1,580 to 1,670 (+90 du). The change in density is consistent with the vested number of dwelling units. See also Consistency with GMP Section below. The existing land use pattern. The proposed amendment is consistent with the land use patterns of the area. The amendment allows for the continuation of residential land uses into the the abandoned Utility Site and unimproved Park. The density proposed on this land is consistent with the surrounding multifamily development. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The amendment does not include changes to the PUD boundary, and therefore does not create an isolated district that is unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The PUD boundaries were established in 1981 by Ordinance 1981-06 to match Unit 27 of the Deltona Settlement Agreement, which is identified as an Approved Development Area. The PUD boundaries were reduced in 2018 to transfer 6.5-acres to the Marco Island Executive Airport. This PUDA application does not propose changes to the PUD boundary. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The requested revisions to the MCP are necessary to permit the development of the abandoned Utility Site and unimproved Park for a use that is compatible with the existing development within the PUD. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed change will not negatively influence living conditions in the area. Landscape buffers established in accordance with the LDC will provide appropriate screening between adjacent uses. The existing development standards contained in the PUD contains development standards including building setback and, building heights are not being revised by this amendment. The increased density proposed is consistent with the number of dwelling units vested for the development and the adjacent development. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 Page 5 Packet Pg. 455 _ PENINSU Ati ENGINEERING of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The PUD is vested for a maximum of 1,980 dwelling units. The proposed amendment will allow for a maximum of 1,670 selling units and will not not create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create traffic that is incompatible with surrounding land uses. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed amendment will not create a drainage problem. The development is designed to meet stormwater requirements of Collier County and South Florida Water Management District. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The development of Tracts N and P of the PUD will not reduce light and air to adjacent properties. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. The proposed change will not have an adverse impact on property values in the adjacent areas. The proposed change to the MCP will allow for a logical expansion of the multifamily development onto areas no longer envisioned to be utilized for public utilities. Surrounding land uses include open space preservation, golf course and the Marco Island Executive Airport. The PUD includes appropriate development standards and buffers to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The surrounding properties are developed. The proposed amendment will not create a deterrent to the improvement or redevelopment of adjacent property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The PUDA is consistent with the requirements of the LDC and the GMP and does not constitute a grant of special privilege. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The property is currently zoned PUD and includes a mix of residential and golf course uses. The Amendment seeks to convert areas previously designated for public utilities to residential uses which is consistent with the existing zoning. The property will continue to be zoned as the Marco Shores PUD. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 Page 6 Packet Pg. 456 _ PENINSU Ati ENGINEERING The proposed amendment will not result in a development that is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood and county. The additional 90 dwelling units proposed on the Utility Site and Park is of the same scale and character as the adjacent multifamily development. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The property is already zoned for residential uses and is vested for a total of 1,980 dwelling units. The PUDA allows for the logical expansion of residential uses onto property that is no longer needed for public utilities. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. The existing 4.04-acres being changed from Utility Site and Park consist primarily of previously disturbed/previously developed uplands. The site does include mangroves along the northern boundary with Lake Marco Shores and some exotic wetland hardwoods. The PUDA seeks to revise the MCP to allow for multifamily residential development on the site. Development will predominantly be located on the upland portions of the site and will avoid and be setback from the existing mangroves. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended. Public facilities are available to meet the requirements of the development. All levels of service will be maintained. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. The proposed amendment is consistent with the GMP and does not exceed the number of dwelling units vested for the project. Converting the abandoned/demolished public utility and park site to residential uses will allow for the logical expansion of compatible multifamily development. The site has been designed to meet the requirements of the LDC and will not negatively impact surrounding land uses. Goals. Obiectives and Policies of the Growth Management Plan: FLUE Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). The Marco Shores PUD is compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding land uses. The PUD provides suitable setbacks and development standards to ensure compatibility of the proposed residential development with adjacent land uses. Access is provided by Collier Boulevard via Mainsail Drive. PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 Page 7 Packet Pg. 457 PENINSULAt ENGINEERING FLUE Policy 5.7: Encourage the use of land presently designated for urban intensity uses before designating other areas for urban intensity uses. This shall occur by planning for the expansion of County owned and operated public facilities and services to existing lands designated for urban intensity uses, the Rural Settlement District (formerly known as North Golden Gate), and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, before servicing new areas. The Marco Shores PUD is located in the Urban Designation, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict and is surrounded by public conservation land to the north, south and west and the Marco Island Executive Airport to the east. The PUD is identified as an approved development area as part of the Deltona Settlement Agreement and is suitable for residential development. The PUD has been found consistent with the GMP since its initial approval in 1981. FLUE Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The Marco Shores PUD has direct access to Collier Boulevard via Mainsail Drive. Access locations are not changing as part of this PUDA. FLUE Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. The Marco Shores PUD is an isolated development that has a singular access onto Collier Boulevard. The property is limited in size and most of its land area is comprised of golf course. The golf course and residential tracts were originally developed in the early 1970's prior to the approval of the PUD zoning designation and are all accessed from the internal road network. FLUE Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. The Marco Shores PUD is an isolated development that has a singular access onto Collier Boulevard. Because the property is limited in size and is bound by conservation uses on three sides, it does not have ability to provide interconnections to adjacent properties. Mainsail Drive, which is the primary road internal to the PUD, provides connection from Collier Boulevard to the Marco Island Executive Airport, located immediately to the east of the PUD. FLUE Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. P1-20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 Page 8 Packet Pg. 458 PENINSULAt ENGINEERING The Marco Shores PUD provides a mix of multifamily residential uses surrounding an 18-hole golf course that are interconnected and walkable. FLUE Policy 7.5: The County shall encourage mixed -use development within the same buildings by allowing residential dwelling units over and/or abutting commercial development. This Policy shall be implemented through provisions in specific Subdistricts in this Growth Management Plan. Marco Shores is located within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict and is intended for residential and golf course use. Mixed -use development is not approved, proposed or appropriate within the PUD. Transportation Policy 5.1: The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project's significant impacts on all roadways. The existing PUD is vested for a total 1,980 dwelling units. The proposed amendment increases the permitted density on the site from 1,580 to 1,670 dwelling units (+90 du), which is below the vested limits. As demonstrated in the submitted Traffic Impact Statement (TIS), the additional vehicular trips associated with the small increase in density does not create a significant impact on existing road network. CCME Objective 6.1: Protect native vegetative communities through the application of minimum preservation requirements. The Marco Shores PUD was developed in the early 1970's, prior to approval of the original PUD Ordinance (Ord 1981-6) on February 2, 1981. The entire development consists of golf course and multifamily development tracts. The proposed PUDA seeks to revise the MCP to designate 4.04-acres currently designated as Utility Site and Park as Residential. The existing PUD, including the 4.04, was cleared prior to PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 Page 9 Packet Pg. 459 _ PENINSU Ati ENGINEERING the adoption of Collier County's preservation requirements. The PUD is not required, and does not provide, any preservation areas. The development includes some native areas within the golf course. These areas are designated as Drainage Retention Areas on the Marco Shores Unit 1 Plat (PB 14; PGS 33-38) and total +/- 35.53-acres. While the PUD does not provide any on -site preservation, it should be noted that the Marco Shores PUD is included as part of the Deltona Settlement Agreement. The Agreement resulted in over 15,000 acres of environmentally sensitive land and waterways to be transferred to the State and placed into permanent conservation easements while allowing development to occur within 3,695-acres designated as Development Areas. The Marco Shores PUD is identified as Unit 27, an approved 321-acre Development Area. CCME Objective 6.2: Protect and conserve wetlands and the natural functions of wetlands pursuant to the appropriate policies under Goal 6. The 4.04-acres being converted from Public Utility and Park to Residential areas on the MCP include some Exotic Wetland Hardwoods and Mangrove areas, as depicted in the Ecological Assessment Report. Should the PUDA be approved, any future residential development on this site will be oriented away from the existing mangroves and will minimize impacts to wetlands. The onsite wetlands are dominated by Brazilian Pepper with scattered buttonwood and Australian pine. Any wetland impacts will be addressed during the state and federal environmental permitting processes. CCME Objective 7.1: Direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their habitats. (The County relies on the listing process of State and Federal agencies to identify species that require special protection because of their endangered, threatened, or species of special concern status. Listed animal species are those species that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has designated as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern, in accordance with Rules 68A-27.003, 68A-27.004, and 68A- 27.005, F.A.C. and those species designated by various federal agencies as Endangered and Threatened species published in 50 CFR 17 No state or federally listed species were observed on site visits; however, the site does have community types in which protected species could reside, including the Florida Bonneted Bat and Wetland Dependent Species. An official Protected Species Survey will be provided as required with any SFWMD and USACE permitting. PPRE Objective 1: Collier County will respect judicially acknowledged and constitutionally protected private property rights by considering private property rights in local decision making. The Marco Shores PUD is included as part of the 1982 Deltona Settlement Agreement. The Agreement resulted in over 15,000 acres of environmentally sensitive land and waterways being transferred to the State and placed into permanent conservation easements while allowing development of up to 14,500 dwelling units within 3,695-acres designated as Development Areas. The Marco Shores PUD is identified as Unit 27, an approved 321-acre Development Area in the Settlement Agreement. As noted in the Marco Shores PUD Statement of Compliance, the project is vested for 1,980 residential units. The proposed amendment to modify the MCP and increase the number of permitted dwelling units from 1,580 to 1,670 dwelling units (+90 du) is consistent with judicially acknowledged and constitutionally protected property rights vested to this development. PL20220003791, Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUDA Revised: April 13, 2023 Page 10 Packet Pg. 460 9.A.2.f City Final Publication Date Naples 6/29/2023 State Ad Number FL GC11078634 ZIP Code Publication 34105-3227 Naples Daily News Your Name Market Kristi Young Naples Email Address Delivery Method kyoung2@gannett.com Both Number of Affidavits Needed 1 Customer Email KDavidson@pen-eng.com Customer Name Peninsula Engineering Customer Phone Number 29-252-5333 Customer Address 2600 Golden Gate Pkwy, Naples, FL 34105-3227 Account Number (If Known) 585101 Name Peninsula Engineering; Attn: Kim Davidson Street 2600 Golden Gate Pkwy M N N r C6 c Q a Q 0 c a) E V a c m E Q Packet Pg. 461 9.A.2.f NaVIC64:3aftil ]CWS PART OFTHE USA TODAY NETWORK Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 PENINSULA ENGINEERING 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY NAPLES, FL 34105 ATTN KIM DAVIDSON Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WISCONSIN COUNTY OF BROWN Before the undersigned authority personally appeared, who on oath says that he or she is the Legal Coordinator of the Naples Daily News, published in Collier County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a PUBLIC NOTICE, was published on the publicly accessible website of Collier and Lee Counties, Florida, or in a newspaper by print in the issues of, on: Issue(s) dated: 6/29/2023 Affiant further says that the website or newspaper complies with all legal requirements for publication in chapter 50, Florida Statutes. Subscribed and sworn to before me, by the legal clerk, who is personally Known to me, on JUNE 29th, 2023: otary, tat , C un Brown My commis .n expires: cT-j NANCY HEYRMAN Notary Public State of Wisconsin Publication Cost: $403.20 Ad No: GC11078634 Customer No: 585101 PO #: PUBLIC NOTICE — DISPLAY AD 2X6 # of Affidavits: 1 This is not an invoice Packet Pg. 462 9.A.2.f NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting hosted by Chris Scott of Peninsula Engineering and Noel Davies of Davies Duke, PLLC on Tuesday, July 18, 2023, at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library Meeting Room, 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, FL 34113. SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC is seeking to amend Ordinance No. 81-6, as amended, the Marco Shores Golf Course Community Planned Unit Development (PUD) to increase the number of dwelling units from 1,580 dwelling units to 1,670 dwelling units and to reallocate a park site and a utility site into a 4.04t acre multi -family site. The subject property consists of 4.04t acres and is located on Mainsail Drive, west of the Marco Island Executive Airport in Section 26, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County Florida. [PL202200037911. Laysnd i O)Ecr PROPERTY` --- T \ �A A If you have questions or comments, please contact: Chris Scott, Planning Manager, Peninsula Engineering, 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34105 cscott@pen-eng.com (239) 403-6727. NO.GC„0786„_0, Packet Pg. 463 Too I THURSDAY, JUNE 29, 2023 1 NAPLES DAILY NEWS Your PW Your Source r (IN Ii0r Ili ;;* WAMCM= 'ice CITY Of NAPLES REP No. 23.030 Sealed proposals will be actep ed t the OR;,., of the PVlfht- Mar,a9er, C. Nall, 735 etl, Street Sou LANDSCAPE Naples• Florida 34 02 for. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES - RFP Proposal No. 33.030 11 7;00 PM., Local Time, B/372021 t whid, Ilrne and place all bids received will be publicly opened and read aloud. Rids 11 eeived after the tine and date spedlied will not be considered. A nun-nu,d.usy Pre- EV.lifiahon c lerena nl be held 7JI1J2023 at 1(E00 A.M. local time in tl,r Purdasin9 DtWdan Jo- tired at )35 8th St ""h, Naples F.- 34102. Additional inlor- ation 's p ilable by ralliny 213.7100 or available for down- TheloadCit htf Na�lesbn anpre�0l ocrartunsil to er, Lune ]9 10131 qua 11 Y crop Y N5753442 Collier County hereby advertlus on (daa of bid posting) Bid No. 23.8138 for the construction of the Collier County Courthouse Cable Inlrastmslure Rewiring Poled Iocaud In Collier County, Florida, /ar uI Id bids to be recnvetl no later than August I5, at 3:01 P.m. local time. A nomrnandatory pre-wd meeting will be held on July 14. 2023. at 9:00 a.m. at Pro'renrem services, Confcr..a Room A located at 329S Tarnlami Trail Easl. Naples Florida 34112. A n n andatory site visit will /ollow ' m di - Italy after the Pre.bid me<lin9 at the ProleR site, for this sold. d. lotto.. Prospntive bidders must register on httpsY/vmw.bidsync t.—IdsynocaV by clicking on Vendor Re'gitmation. Once rey- " red, tnternted parties may obtain a replete set of decu- s ab hHF.Z wnMbld,ync'ndbidsyn,-caV Pub Date. Jun. 29, 2023 65753672 4102�11.-*Cmmm= IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR COLURR COUNTY, FLORIDA IN HE' ESTATE OF CASE NO.: 11-2023-CP-001709.0001-%K KAREN BROWN, PROBATE DIVISION: Deceased. O O [REie ORS The na e 1 he de .dent, hire designation of the c rt n svhlch the adminluraUan of this Ti estate Is p.1 the and the isle umber r 1East, Sol above. The address of the court 3315 5324. Tire Trail IEtt, Ste, 102, Probate Division, Naples, FL -12- 53d4thehenamlrep address. au"'s attorneypersoindicted bcloaVive an perww preen are If You have he- Bernd with a copy of this mike and emit have dairn ter demand sogainst the Jnedent'I estate, eau n I that y'yfarm 't unmaluud, c lmgo. 0N t r npquidated, Life THATd15 3 MONTHS S AFTER TATE HE DATER F OF THE IRSTOPUBLDICA- TION OF THIS NOTICE OR 30 DAYS AFTER YOU RECEIVE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE. All other creditors el the decedent and other Persons who have claims or demands against the decedent's state, mdudtain matured, nlingenl ar unliquidated daims, must foe coy 'tarn' wdh the court WITHIN 3 MONTHS AFTER THE DATE OF THE FIRST PUBLICATION OF THIS NOTICE. ALL CLAIMS NOT SO FILED WILL HE FOREVER BARRED. EVEN IF A CLAIM 15 NOT BARRED BY THE LIMITATIONS DESCRI- BED ABOVE, ALL CLAIMS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN FILED WILL BE BARRED T%VO YEARS AFTER DECEDENT'S DEATH. The date of death IT the decedent 11 May 15. 3011. The date al first oubli—rim of ,h;s notice is June 22. 2023. 'goo SF St Lulle Rid. Bldg. n, opt. 30e Stuart. FL 34996 Pub Date: June 22,29,2023 S745606 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR COLT IER COUNTY, FLORIDA IN RE: ESTATE OF MICHAEL ANTHONY ANASTASIA Deceaud. PROBATE DIVISION 31[72ilsliny#II liml1, Division Probate NOTICE TO CREDITORS inistretion ai the estate of Mkhael Anthony Anastasia, d. whose date oI death was Mar,h 2, 2022, is pending In od Court for Collin County. Florida, Probate Dili— s f which is 331S Tamil, mi Trail E.. Ste 112. Naples, 34112. The name and addrnus of the personal repr, and the personal rep—mtkei attorney are set ow hors of the tl.dem't and ether persons hevpiyng daims or s egaimt, it d to betudrvedsestatemvst Olemeir<rlaims'AE ihHhmuo- BEFORE THE LATER Of 3 MONTHS AFTER THE TIME OF " PURLICATION OF THIS NOTICE OR 30 DAYS AFTER RED. NOTWITHSTANDING THE TIME PERIODS SET FORTH ABOVE, ANY CLAIM FILED TWO (2) YEARS OR MORE. AFTER THE DECE- DENT'S DATE OF DEATH IS BARRED. The date of first publlalion of this -site is June 29, 2013. PersonalRepresentMbH- bu Anastasia Rehman 2371 Linwood Ave 4101 Naples• Florida 34112 Laura Anastasia 2140 HtvksridgDrive Unit 1703 Na Ples. FL 3415 Atlurmey for Personal Repr,entativn; Florida Bar No. 0340502 Forrylh A B,ug9er, P.20 600 Sth Ave S., Suite 207 I Naples. FL 34102 T<lephone:(239) 263-6000 Pub Dates: June 29, July 6. 2023 85754012 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA IN RE: ESTATE OF PROBATE DIVISION Damaris C Keams Me No. 13 CP 951 Deceissued. Division NOTICE TO CREDITORS ini The admstration of the .slate of Damaris C Keams, dneaud, s ,hose date of death was iebruary 19th, ]023. is pending in the Circuit Court fee COLLIER Counly, Florida. Probate Division, thee addrns of which is 3315 E. Tamrami T11", Naples. FL 3411 ]. the rid addre,., If ILE personal prnentaFle and the personal represenlattve i attorney a set /erlh below. All reFerd al IF, decedent and of tier persons Iiaviny daims ter demands a9aimt detedenl's mete an whom a'py of this no- de h regm,ed to be served must file their daims Milli this court ON OR BEFORE THE LATER OF 3 MONTHS AFTER THE TIME Of THE FIRST PUBLICATION OF 7141S NOTICE OR 30 DAYS AFTER THE DALE OF SERVICE OF A COPY OF 1HIS NO110E ON THEM. All other credit.,, M it,, decedent and other m Woos having daims r aeniand, g tl<cetlenCs a tale 1 Isle mom )aims wlih this court W�ITI TIN 3 MONTI45 SAUER THE DATE OF THE FIRST PUBLICATION OF THIS NOTICE. ALL CLAIMS NOT FILED WITHIN THE TIME PERIODS SET FORTH IN FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION 733.702. WIIL BE FOREVER BAR- RED. NOT'ATHSTAN DING THE TIME PERIODS SET FORTH ABOVE, ANY CLAIM FILED TWO (2) YEARS OR MORE AFTER THE DECE. DENT'S DATE OF DEATH IS BARRED. The date of first publleadan of Ills .111c h June 28. 2023. JOHN L. LICCIARDI. P.A. Attorneys for P<runal Remesenallve 1135 ITII AVE. S" Paul Kearm NAPLES. FL Pi 19 P.O Here Addrnu 57270rummand Way Telepliane�]39 261 6000 Naples, F1 P119 Florida Bar No,.5795 Ema11 Address,: etto,neyll tCginarl.corn CV11DLe:lune]9. e,10]3- 5I515T] sue. Collier County hereby dvn- on June ]9, 1023. Bid No. 23.8161 for the ambucfl n of the Vanderbdt Reach Road at Logan Blvd InteH 111 o Im- prov<mmU Project located far Collier County, Florida, for eased bids to be rn iv d n later than Auyhnt is, 2023 at 300 ppm, heal time. A non— dat ry pre -bid a In9 w01 be held en lot 13. 3023, It 10.00 a.m. at Colrier County Procurement Services Confer- ee Ruoni 0. Bld M 1g C2, 3295 12 to" Tail East Nap,, FL 3A 12 for this soliclatian. Pro- spenive bidd,s 'teal register hllpsV,Vmw.bidryrK.'mlb it. 8ccos/ bI disking on I dReg^tradn, ome m abt d^ termed leterties of demmunis at np h1W11,AAu. bh"Y",'r.ubidrync-aV June 29, 2021 .5752395 Public Notice Effective 7/2B/2023 KyI 0. C011e, 00, FACOS Will be leaving our Practice. yyVedreal Recordse. maybe rc- Websietde wby .I u, umPlant our r b"P".PP.ahartreyy tc IZH or by calling (139) 337- 2003 % 9245 7331 College Parkswyy. Suhe 300. Fort Myers, fl 3390] 1020 Croslpoinie Drive, Suite 110, Napples, FL 34110 Ad"" "" lure 29 July 6, 13, 2023 CITY OF NAPLES ILS_ 3-029 Sealed proposals will be accepted at the Off— of the Furcht- ing Manager, City Hall, 73S fish Street Strom, Naples, Florida 34102 fur, TIME SPECIFIC PALM PRUNING. IT. Bid No. 23,029 til 2.00 PM. Local Time, August 2, 2023, which time and place all bids received wRI be Publldy opened and read aloud. Bids r led after the time and date spe0hed will not be [o od—d. Additonal inlennalion is available by calling 213-71N es,alathibli, for download at httPHMww Plesgov m/,fPv The Cily of Naples is an equal opportunity employer. June 29. 2023 05752344 CrrV F AP_LES FEBNNo. �3-a38 Sealed proposals will be —pled at the Olfice of the Furtht- 1g Zaeage,. City Hall, 73S Ed, Street South, Naples. Florida 3n TREE REMOVAL L STUMP GRINDING -HE aid No. 23 028 u rtll 2e00 PM, Lasal Tore, Augus[ 1, 2023. at Math Irmo and Plate all bids received will be pubGdy opened and read aloud. Bids reteived after the lime and date ape ilted will not be son. ,ideud. Addaional iniormalion is v ilable by calling 213-7100 Tor he I atlfe to, Ilesfs ale ed al lootps:/Mau w,naplesyov.cmn/rtps City of p qua pp ,Hmfiy employer. lure 29, 2023 05752251 Cellto Partnership and its controlled a/liliates doing businns a1 Versa.. Wirdess (Vedzon Wireless) proposes to build a 35-font pole at the app—, vidnity of the Right of WIo/ Golf Shore Blvd. N, lust North f Banyan Blvd., Naples, Cis Her Counly, FL .101 (Lot' 26.10.3,65, Long. 43-8 3].7). Pu01k comments e mardmy potential ects from this site or hisiwle pHNun1 ay be sim-Heil Lou—30 days from the dale of m,1 puWica- iton to: Dilear Corp, UIyy Willin9/ram, I,svilli,ghamOrrileal.com, 1C" _rferley Pl., Sre. ]01, Hartland, FC 33751, 407#660-7Bd0. Pub Date: Lune 29. 2023 4S7S3S39 Public Sale C Public Sale NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to an E%ECUTION Issued Fit the COUNTY Court of Broward County, Florlda, on the 101h day of 00oher, 2022. In the taut. wherein PALM COAST RE- NIDVERY FACE LAURIENT. def-da RCORPORATION,).rateo,O]004O 137CCE, d said u,t; 1, Kevin J. Rambosk, as Sheiil/ of Collier County. Florida, have levied upon all the yyht, title and imerest / the delendant(t), BONIFACE LAUREFIT. in and to the /allowing de- ttrlbedPerunal "'perry" -wit. 2013 UNTIL RANGE ROVER SPORT VIN, SALSF2DJIOA783936 TAG 4: NBGH60 Arid on the /3ih day 111" Ii, 2023, at the Collier County Sl, ofvs Olflce 2373 HaOeshoe Drive East. Naps,, FL 341W at the hour f 10:00 AM, ar shortly lhezeafier. I will o/fen for ale all of the defr idddL(t, BONIFACE hLAURENT. riglu, true. arid tame mt—Iaftt to all prior Hens"encU.Lilantes and oil m s, i/ any, to the lu is In arid best bidder far CASH IN "'81.eThe proceeds a Ise a" Filed as Jar as may be to the IElsy_t of costs and the Lis"Hac- n of the above deuribed a orlon. Veld"' may be seen at Bald Eagle Towing 3880 Enterprise Avenue, N.PI,, Florida PIN. Kevin I. Rambosk, as Sheriff Collier County Florida by. A/April Ide. Deputy Sheriff Dates Advertiud:6 023. 6/1511023,W 2n023, 6/29nO23 In accordance with the American with Diublltties Act, reruns m&dln9 a spn�al a rN mmdL1hm "participate in this proceed. ,hould act BetLy Adams. ludi[ial Process Manager, 11 a fflce Is located at Caller Counly SherrfYs Offlce, 2373 Horseshoe Orive East, Naples, FL 3d10d, telephone: 139-252- Opve80, at least seven days prior "the pr oce<dhry' I/ 5-877lg it - flolrlda R.IayDy ieIN806955-8771, or Voke (VJ 1-800-955-B7)0, via June 8, I, 22. 29, 2023 0572837S imm�111 1''41GEMEZ= NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING The public Is invited to attend a ndghborhood hfice ation mooting hosted by Chns Scott of Peninsula Eeglnearing amid Noel Dales of Davies Duke, PLLC on Tueaday, July 18, 2023, at 5:30 p.m. at the SOWN Regional Library Medu,; Roam, 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, FL 34113. SK Holdings Real Estate. LLC is seeking to amend Ordinance No. 81-6, a mended, the Marco Shores Gdt Course Community Planned Unit Dal l.p—mt (PUD) tO Increase the umber of dv,ellmg'Nis from 1.580 d—,11mg .its to 1,670 dva184,g oohs end to rwllocte a park site and a ubIRY site into a 4.04, acre muh,-family auto. The subject property conchal, o/ 4.04z acres and I. located em M,si sail Drive, west of the Marco Islamd EKaculry Airport in Section 26, Tovmship 51 South, Rar,go 2E East, Gdber County Florida. 111L202200037911. 1 �nia4a�NeNHi �••••••••••••.• A 11 you luva questions or cummoi Please cemac17 Chess ScoN, Planning Menages, PeninsWa Engineedn➢, 2600 Golden Gate Pwkway. Naples, FI. 34105 Cacau5➢➢D-se➢SOID (239) 403-6727. Maximize your recruiting power when you advertise with us, your one -stop -shop for puslilly local and national job sites like Jobcase. ®USA TODAY NETWORK 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 464 PENINSU 9.A.2.f LA ` 6 ENGINEERING 7 July 3, 2022 Dear Property Owner: The public is invited to attend a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) to discuss a proposed amendment to the Marco Shores Golf Course Community Planned Unit Development. The NIM will be held: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 5:30 pm South Regional Library Meeting Room 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway Naples, FL 34113 TITLE SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC is seeking to amend Ordinance No. 81-6, as amended, the Marco Shores Golf Course Community Planned Unit Development (PUD) to increase the number of dwelling units from 1,580 dwelling units to 1,670 dwelling units and to reallocate a park site and a utility site into a 4.04± acre multi -family site. The subject property consists of 4.04± acres and is located on Mainsail Drive, west of the Marco Island Executive Airport in Section 26, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County Florida. [PL20220003791]. Legend Marco snares GO course Community Puo SUBJECT PROPERTY sugeotwoperry. 'r-a.w-ages a� 5AMAR On-line participation in the meeting will be available via Zoom. If you have questions related to the project or would like to participate via Zoom, please contact the individual listed below: (https://us06web.zoom.us/I/83442323392?pwd=TzlwV3RFYlFyROpFTWx6VTVydWNXdzO9). Christopher Scott, Rilh Peninsula Engineering �til1.s Phone:239.403.6727 Email: cscott@pen-eng.com❑ 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Packet Pg. 465 9.A.2.f ,14ral11�11912:1:10111*11 The City of Marco Island completed extensive utility improvements between 2018 and 2020, which included the relocation and demolition of the Pump Station, Storage Tank and Treatment Plant within Marco Shores PUD on Marco Shores Unit 1, Tracts N and P. In May 2022, Tracts N and P were acquired by the applicant, SK Holdings Real Estate, LLC who is the owner/developer of the 100-unit Mainsail Apartments located immediately to the west of the site at 1771 Mainsail Drive (Marco Shores Unit 1, Tract B). The PUD Amendment proposes to amend the PUD Master Plan by converting the property previously owned by the City of Marco Island Utilities (Marco Shores Unit 1, Tracts N and P) from Utility Site and Park to Residential Parcel Two -A. The PUDA will allow the development of ninety (90) multifamily dwelling units. a li S- �M PUD MASTER PLAN ti PREPARED ®V. WILSON MILLER - PN. 052E 014 00, FILE: 0-09M 04 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB847" Q Packet Pg. 466 W It LO i N O O O i (0 �� O (D C 0' Z Co LfM7 O CD CD i O Lo C O O O O 0 0 O O N M Ln 0 0 f� O N N O O O M O 0 aLO CD i i O O i i i i 00 O i 00 i i i i �_ O Z N N 4_ �_ O �_ H 4_ Z 4_ N O �_ �_ = LL H i Z M co co Q J U ; �} 2i � ; Z Ln - O Z Z Z N M Z coco��0d�—Z��Z� �� �`n`oUOIt� pQ� W M- O O M co O= M co M Q Q W M M Q co Lo Lo Z C9 M M (� Z Q M 0 J Q W UULLLLLL LLLL��LLLLLL00<LLLLLLLLLL JLLLLm�aLL(if0 W> N (� Cn z (� O W Cn Cn LL LL W' Cn Cn Z Q Cn c/ — CnLLJ m m 1 W' Z W z z O m W� dLLJ LU w �_ �_ Q-LL, O O O J +�+ w W J J J W W J J w W Z J J 2 J 0 0= Q J J W U Z J Z Z J O I Y r W m p H a Y W W W 1 W W W H W J J H a a J a 0 0 Q CO y Q Q Q Q p I Q Q O Q Q Q p Q Q Q W W LD Q Q Q J Q H H Q w Q y Q Q z z Q d Z J 2 Z Z w z z R z m m 2 m z z 2 z 0 cn a� L Q W L O O 0 d Q L6� is+ Cl) O O W ++ M N 2 06 a z Y It O U Z J J w' ��u w H W O Q Q UY pQ L O w J Q J Q Q W W O O = Q p Q p J U Q N U Cn Lu U) W Q Q CL 'n z U z O 1 O U m O_ W `~ LO coOCD LO =oo O co ' N I- r- O O D Lo � (D ^L V y O W H -- J D v v d Q s = Ln W N W J O o � � L +s+ — CV W' Z C 4t Z N Z Q Q O 3 M W N U Z— � W N W W W N M 0 CD Z O U N rn N g � J J U H Z Z- } M— J w M LL Z N w O L y O app��#w0it LL J�JQ�Q �� �� W Q—itU HU a 0-4 Z � 0 Q z 0 0 0 Q W w JLLJ� W p p w w Z QZ C) D z Q w w g w a 0 0 O 13O W J J I E W 2 J w J Z J Q Q Q J O Q 2 0 w0��QQpm=���=QQQcncnMQLLIQ��QODUcnQacn aY Q �� pJO ~ W 2 (n � z W QQ W� (n H (n ��� W Q Z H Q Q I O� Ln Y� O m J pp H Z H H J D Z Z Z W W 0 'aQ a Op p (D XgQ g cc Q OQ LOLU a. wN�ONrnUQ�WI����o��m�zLcnn�p����L`nn=�� r_ L O Co o N O N Ln M O O Q O M O LC') I� O O� M 0p o Q N� 00 N Ln o o N N N N J o LL - -- d7 Cn J M O N U � i L L r ` W O m U) W W (Dco — H U) U W < Z Q C) U) W D D W D 2 O�_ W J 06 O � � > W Z Q .6 Q U) I M CD ~p (n z Q U) Q W W 1 p Cn oZ5 D Q W W C— O W U U co Z z 2i Z D ~ �� Cn oZf p W °2S W Q�� d L) CD O �2 J J Z Q I a� Z U z �� W J Z O J Q O N ZJJJ}p0 06OfcrZQ' 060 1 Q}�D' W-i�U U� �� N U)U)UQQpw pYmZ J Q �UJJc_nQO�W YmzzzQ W -0 ci J ZZ111�J>Z�Q ZQJ Z z�zo0Z�pQW Q� QDC�= �� a �IZ0W >0W w�W Q �Q z U)LL 0 J0�� JQ Y�QO�pp =0QQ00WCn(nWQ2QQ00LL ~ O O N N O Q Cn O Q W 06 qZ p LU J Z Q � Q W' W W W W Q' Q z z Q Z V_ 00 00 m Fr E Q 2 Q Z 7C J<~ Z Q Z Z J W� W' � Z Q 0- J J H W Q U 0 O O O N O m Q Q 2 Y J J J J JLU LL -i O J J J pZ pZ pZ pZ Z Z Z O O Q' W' Q' 0 Z Q a -- co Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q O } M O �(D On ; Q O 6� LO O p J M i O Z LO CD co 00 W O 1 r � Z O i i W� M O Oi O r 0 0 co 0 O O pi O O co O O O f- O CO co O O r i00 "t LO M (� Lf) O p i Q i i Z O i i CO U') L!j i i i i i i= M r M= � O Z 00 It N i z CD O O U O= LJL CD� Q O r C 0 � O r r } r W� r r N 0 O r r r r r r > Z LLJ r r d7 �CY) z-rMQ-MUZMwI`)=MMrOmOMZfMMMMM>NQ}mMMO (n - co �Z z 2— �' HU�Zcn ULL z J O CO W O W LL J J LL > W LL Z J O J W LL LL W LL W z z� cl W W LL Z w0E-� Q�w0T-w XwO0wwwzoZowOwwwwwF-(D�0 ww Q d X W' 0' Z o Q w Z o a Q 00- > O Z D- D- m U J U M 0' M M M M M J J Q d a LL Z OD (a � O�� z w w z 0 m Z m 2 U Z Z Q U� U Z 2 Z Z Z Z Z Ei w� 2 LL Z Z U) r O 00 LO �* p no Q w Z J O J z J J � W W 0 O w w W J = W' = O Z 0� O Cl) 2 m Orf m 0 c0 O LO 00 O Lfl rn N O m LO O � CD CD O d r W O > *k Q' � Or LO r0 M r O W It O z� Z>- m W N NOit > 00LUz W ZQ Q O J m J > H J z Q z > O J W L u U (n Z } o } J U J J } J Q �' �cwi�w 0��< Q>-1 Jw<m�w�cwi��00 00 -j0Q>U) > oW O W H Z_ Q— p W- a o m m U m J-> W W w Q U' J O z( v= =Q zpZUO°woU°C=7zQzQ mUz�°0Q Y QU)i r WY O a OJQO QU� Q Z Q O og WQO Lj W Q U > U 2}00 < mJC) U WW00 Q m w mwOQ JLLWZ Q LnwLnCOQ Q J H O (0Q O a0QUO00 r- M LLNM N Lf) N N 00 O O LO O LO N LO N O CO C0 00 LO 0) N r N M N r J r N r Y r r r r M r r r r r r > r 00 r r r M r N r r M H J Q U)Z J Q 2i z Q ~ J U) p < Q W U) LLJ Of LU } LI Q � Z J E Z fn = J Cn Q Z Z 2 m Q U J W Z Z ot5 W Z � U z W= j o�S LL U W z—W, Q Z W w W Z LLI � p ZwULZLIQ ��°� J 06 ~00~ O �tS �°�}0 06< QQ LU 06 QLU0wJ w�_�mwv��W WLL0�LLU ���=�o JZ UC/) C) Of ZJU-U�wwLLcl Z: 0- tS co Z:��Q O=J UFO OWQw Q2zz�=O�LiWF---J 0Z �UJmLU aOQZU U= w�Oo��Y> 0 L<<z �QwQzoJcnQO=���< m0 U)ww00 Z< mW J QOLL WZ�H2d� W J} HLLw0Z � ZLL Z Of O 00 LL Q O N w Q U Z C7 a U O Q w0 > 0 J p Q LLI w� LLI w U L U Q N Z_ W' }� � J J J J J O W W Z_ Z_ J_ z— D g � Y} W 0 Y J N Z Q O Q J> Q o Q J 0 0 0 0 0� 0 > 2 2 2 H W J H W W Z W Z H H N W� m U (D J J 2 Z W0� 20� G� 0� 2O� 0� O� G� W W w w> J ZG� Of R' Q Q Q }} Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q W W W W W m 2 m m m m m m m m U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U O r �10 � o�0 0 0000 � CD ��-d i �� a � O N O O O I� O M O I� O i O I� O i f� M M O r I� 4 O O co O 00 O O O c i i N z 0 i i i 0 i M i 00 i 0 i i i C N c) 4 4 -1Lj- 4 4 4 4 4 4 Q- p p 4 N oN0 M-4 4 LJL J-4't �'t � U) r C r O Q� r r r r r O r r r a N� r r r o CO r r J r r r r r W M J M a. U) m� M CO Z CO M CO M M M N M Z M CO O M co Z M M M M M O Of CO U cn �WWZWW U) U) WWOWW O Q OWU O W W U) aW Lu 0> Z WJO =JJU H = J JUJ J J J a 0az w z a a X a a a U) a a a co a a a a� U a a a a aJ zz2E-jzz2zzzmzzzOQz2=zmzzz2imzzzzzO �u)O zw zw z CO O LO O L! ) O Lf) r O Lo H 00 r r O U Z *k J (� J m Q H J w � J U) (/) w LLJJ > 0 U) U) O F U) W 00 W_ (D J Q Q } W W W 0 z � W 0000 Ur z M O w > Y LLJW Q Z_ O J m e') � O U m Z O m C� O z m J Q O m ~p O 00 CO I M O O Lf) r W 11 Q O N LO r = LO 00 O p co N Z r O N m 00=(D � Q H U U) J � J � U) H O C7 z Lc) Q z N *k r LO O; Z r r O U) CD <'IT(� N� r O w OCj Q CDN O U W Z) *k J U) O N *k ry U)Z z# Z J O N H 2 Ln Z W O _ *k W_ *k Z Q Z Z Q O H W W Z *k *k U Z O *k J= p LU Z W w>- m a' of J J J J J m Q Q Z a' J i a' H J? a' m a' a' W Q Q �LLJ Q O> p W W W W W � J U 2 Z W W Q p U W p Z p W W J J p p p w J W W p W W W (� O O Q O O 0 U) J Z 0 J w J 2 UWOO W z�Q0pLU�U' U' z_U' U' 2Q Lj} p�pU W�_ W000pcai�-w— a'Z Z�Qw�J�UZa'a' Ja'a'a'Yr�W�j�z a' ZJZZ�a'QZQZ m Q co w> z R J w< m m w m m m w O Q w z 0 m�° O Q m" w _ _ U) U�> W m m UU Q2w U) J U Z COO N U) N Z (M > CEO LO J � COO COO N � (D COO N m a' p N U) < m ( p O COO O Q LSD < � Z Z O O Q N C0 Q O Q N Q J M O O r� 0 0 M O Q 0 Q Q O 0 w N N Ln 00 00 I Q LO Q Lo >- r r 2 r N�� p r a r r r N r r r r m 2 m r w Y of r r r r LP) N r a r Z r J _ H Q Q J U) a' Hcl ~ CQ W? � U) � � Q Q W W U Of Q U) 2 Q Q > � U Q mz Hip �DQ Q o )--jW w Y�06 2 0 p Q W J Z W m o )ZW W�a'J p o2S JZ Q�Q Q 2w U2Q zD-< Q O= O LU W z Q 02 Q Q a w 0 Z 0 m Q a Z W O E Z H J °� W�� Q� Q U Z Of ZzzO p QU~Q W Or-=QQ J�pW QwmWwW>-a'Za'�06ZHa'ryZ Q Q Q z z Q m Of J f--, J UO J W} Q O z O of z Q Q Q Of 0 0 W w J U U) o O Q O Q Q U)� O Q a 0 LU O w H Z z J z U Z> O OLL Q w U) U O w O a °� w U W U� W Q Q J W Y p p> w 2 w a H fn w mQ� z Ozz Q>OW W�O���U)zWJC�OYm�U) Q Z p U% J w W O~ O Z O H (D D J a' 2 2 J Q 0= U Z W Wwz�QaOZO<<WZZHOaOpw<zW2ILL0H2wwwwwwww a'Ua' ww w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00� D D D D D D D D p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p v N C) 0 M N 001 04 (0CY) O� O: - O V O 0 O� W C) O 0 0 O OMO O O O O O p O O p LO p� Co p O ti M 0 0 0 0 r ti M 0 0 f� (9 ' ' M O i i 0 i i i i i i _ N r 1 ' i O i ti i i O M O LO 4 i 4 4 O �_ �_ �_ �_ �_ O �_ �O p N M 4 � J �_ 00 1 � � � O CD CNM 4 4 4 � r r> r CO r� r r r r r- N r r Q p r N r r r r= J O r r r r t O� � � w M z N g 0 z — LO -i--- Z M O M p M M CO M CO M M } M M M r M Z co M Co Z X Z CO co cM Cf) Ld J—i J J p J J U J J J J J > z J J O z J>- J Q J J J~ O J J J J O LL Q W J J LL W W LL W LL LL > W LL Q O LL Z LL J LL W LL 0 Z H — W LL W LL W (6 ui > ui US Uu ui US ui US z u (if U u( Lu 0 PI u� U vi z vi uS PI O O �_ > uS cn uS U J J z U J J O J J J J J O J Y J J�-j Z J Q J O J a J J LL U) �' u) J J J w da- Wdda- dWZQZda- QQ=mmmZ dFd LL W d z Q O Q 2 Q Q Q J Q Q Q Q Q w O Q Q= w O Q J Q Q a Q a Q Q 0 0 Q D w Q Q Q 0 ZZZ�Fzz2zzzzzLL3:�-ZZUW�ZQZu)2z�-ZZU' =mwuzzz2 co N � Z k H V) Q * W z > w > z D W 0 O W J >- wLU Q U 2 Q (D z U) U Q O U J W Of Q Z Q J U' J Q Q Z Q= Q z � m 0 O N Cfl 00 Ln co z Z Q co m Cfl O O O N It r W z 2 _ U o� Q w U) c) Cl)CD Y o Y 0000 CV) � O r 0) Q u) O� U M N_ O co oCO z cnItZ �w Cco NNCN �Qm op Y*k LLJ� Q ** z Z W O H *k D m Z Q Z—~ *k *k J Q H Z W W I Z Z *k D W J ZU�0 fly- JC)Z ��<w Jw �H0Jp�zz(D> LOJZDeZ u) QW�0�WU' u)u)u)0 U)w�0F�00 �QOU) <-i-Z �cnWQJ W U U ~-- W CO W W W H-- W u) (D U W— () W U Q W u) J 2 Q W Q Q m 2 2 2 J= Q Q W Q Q z 2 W Z> 2 LLI Q z C�rnzwJcnu)�mC�C�C�Q0E- WWW0J�Q�� LU ~C�C�—u)mJO0o�(D=u)Q ZF- O X Q W Q Q Q J p 0 0 0 w Q o a Q Q 0 Qz z z— Q Q Q O D z 0 w< 0 X 0 0 Q m0LU C)QWMMMolW n022W<LLQQ200m2�w JOcnO=mm�m p m > LO Ln O Lo O J O N (D < N Q N r O N O z LLJ m r m M Ln Lo O O W O w M CC O= LO 0 C 0 LO Q N r M 0 0 M Or w N L�f) Q O N CD O= w N 0 LO fl- O O O 00 O r 0- J N0� r r N u) r r r CD N r M r r r r V1 U) N r r r co I- Q V) Q r 0- LSD r r r N z LU Q� Q W H Q u) U) W H J u) U) V) U z J O c� QW YU) z �NQ J�ofZQ Q� QH� LUJ Z W H= W Q Q of Q� Q J~~ Q Z D� Z Q H ~ J Q U) U)ZJ ~~m Uw>w�C� U> O�Z w W= Q 06zw0U W06 �QQ wcn�w�- � QWu)�Q> w0 �06 Q W~ OZf 06 Q z J Z W oZS J W' Z Q Q 0Y �JLLJ Lu=-j <0�co> �wwZp< =oW WQ��w ��<��zU)< w 2> cl z �" ) gy m = z Z> Q Z OY � (Y Q O Q Q~ J J� OY W J Q F Q� W Q J JLLLLWZ Q= QwW Y0Q =H YUaO wz J Q OQ(DU' 0g Q=H>06 ZQJYQ—�UzQU W—c��Qo- Qlai��ww� W z=QY Q YLLj~wzF-0=OLLJ oQz N w 2mU)Q Q 0g}0 Q aQ ZOtYWu)U' U' Q QX�g� Q0QQZ F-2WNOYYU)HHQ OY=V)Ww U)QzQ00�OmQW�W QW000QQW°owQc�cn000QQWLu 0�� < Q< w O O (Y m m J J Q J J J J (Y (Y lY Q Q Q w w w w Q °o O J J —' J J J J J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0G� OfG� OfG� G� of0� cr- D i -I i i 00 � l!i d O 0 M r 00 r00 0 0' r O O� O O N N O r 0 OF i 00 LO 00 O O M O O O O m O O r co 0 0 0 � O Cr0 O� 0 0 M Ch 00 O Cfl O� COO O 4 4i i i O Oi co i i i i N i N i i i O N O O i Ln i _ LJL i J co � U- O 0 J_ } N N O CO J M O = C r r r r r r J r t LO r r r r LO Z r r r� O W CO �O CD 00It 00 r r Z M M Z M M M M W M O L�f) t Z M M M M 0LL W 00 Z Y M � C O Z- CD LO J M M O _� J J J J J J J J J Z Q> Q J J J O J>~ 00 Q J Q Q J Q > Y p LL LL U) LL LL W LL LL 2 X p W LL LL W Z z W LL -- Q O� z J> Q Z LJL W LL OcncnO�UUU�UQ~=Z0ODUUz0U O-Jcn}} OOOwQ -cnYcn mww WWWWWw 0 O www w� QWWW -U) W w �dELwrlrl0-d�d=WOfZ00 ltltlz QO0rlXXZU�pp�OpJOJ w Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q} O w w Q Q Q Q D Q Q� O O Q>> Q= Q Q J a Q a Q 0' Q Z Z Z 2 Z Z Z Z U Z 2� Z LL 2 2 Z Z Z 2 Z m O m LJL Z 2 2 2 U 2 2 Y 0 d O Z m Z H O 0 r co } *k N � oLo _� W W Z � 4k p} O J J �' J O W' j J O p V O > W O = = LL=� � W=D } Y W O � � ClU z J Z W r Om2 W > �_�m � m m LO O LO 00 LO ,ItCfl O Cfl M O LO Z M LO M J 00 M a) O LO Co r- CO r- r� O r O r r O r r r LO rl- r O 00 O 00 H U) Z) W } N O U) o� Z � `� �� H W p m o� > LU U o � � W N W LLI r� CQ W p O F- p ~ r ItWClJNZ'tH p WZW �p ZOQz �� > It Z> Q k Q 4k Q� Z Q> Z Q � p p p W p O W Z J Q' d� J� J LU p F-� �_ J E J Q' J U Q� J > z F- 0 J p W p J p W p m Y� U W p W > W Y U p W m H O w p Cl) W W Z W J J W J U J w � O O Q W J W> J O 0 J Z Q W H O U' > Q� 0 F- W Q 2 Q 2 0} J W J Lf) W >_�_> W fA Y m Q (n J J 0 J d O W m U 2 W� O WQ O' =YHQwZ�-j W WZQQrnOJ(nZ�WYQ�� z O Q p Q O Q z LU J O W Q U p O Q O U (n H E Z Z Q p p X °° OU w O w F- O Lnm2z2m2OU=Jwz�rn=m2mz U UUO cn NOow=wz°° qt0(mEECD000z O�rU)Lfi� L�L�oQ Zr-U�O mN moo J Q 0 LO LO r O C0 r O O (M r 00 CO O0 CO M M O O co O � 00 U_ � Lf) 00 O M O O O O O O Q O 4 Ln co N N O N O O O co co Q O N N 0 I, (h r r W O N r r J r r r (n LO G� r r N r Z 00 r r r� LO J r r r a- N 00 LP) N r O J J r J O p LUYp J- U) p H U w W U) p H p D H Z O J w 0 fA J U J LL - Q ZQ Z W r W QW zWQZJW (nO > d W U) U) p ~> H> = O rn Z 0 �_ > W Q J� W � W H Q06 Qp p d wU WpUZMOJ 02Y J p YpQ Qp J U J Z } � �' U) od Q r H� J co 0' O Of Q J = LU J w 06 W Q Q J J w Y w�= Q' W W z W= J U O C U Z U �- - O Q Q 2 0 Y W z w C} m Q z m J 1 z W= p J O z Q z 0} W O2Qp}dZ�Q<pW20 J g0 wJJ=1 jQQ�Wzc�o U 0 LL ()f U) LL, rlQZ�wW0�<OQ=C�d J JQZ<Q<O OU~z QQU)W -NQpp Q=olOQ oeS p ��pU 0 W;2�DESLL060' U Z Q W p J < LL Q 2 Z J m (n fn Cn fn (n W Q Z W W O} Z p 06 m O' ( LL Waco U) w����02$Q,�OW W W W WOD2w wbn <Z—ZZZZZZ °� QQQQQQQOwwp p p p p p p� Qw w w Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 m 2 2- Z O —0 -) � -) � � � � -) � -3 � -) � -) � -) -3 -) -3 -) -) -) � � � � (A 00 O M w i d N r C) O O i r r� i 6) r r 0 r i fD : N O 1 M M 0 0 0 0 1[ O �� O M� 0 0 0 0 00 00 O Cl) O r O O LO 0 0 0 0 0 1 00 CO O 0 w r M N i O i i i i i i ii r N i LO i i O i ti co i i i i co i i i i i i i v"t v"t M v M z_ v N v 'coO v Q M 00 J O Z v r r r r Lf) r r Z r U) r r r r r z z N r r a r Z r rC.0 r Z M CO CO CO CO CO D LL Q W co z Cl) Z M M M M W L O Z 2 M (� M M (j M O M Z Q O I J Z 0�H Q J J J J> J (DZ J J J J J Y J J Z Z Q J Q W J W J r, J U J 0 U) LL LL LL LL Z W J Q LL LL cn LL LL () Wu- a Q C] W m J w w O w W J U Y Ww°wO w wwOwwwww O Owwww m Z Z ZJ J Q UZU www z U J JJ U W m J J J J O J W W Q 0� d 0_ d 0_ Q O_ J Y W a- W � 0_ MM W M 0_ 0� 0� U� O Z 0_ J U) 0_ J 0_ w 0_ w 0_ w= J Q Q Q Q Q 0_ Q O Q U Q Q 2 0 0 0 Q� a Q O O w Q> O Q J Q Q H Q> Q J Q w U O 2 Z Z Z Z LL Z� J- W z 0 Z 2 Z Z LL Z Z W LL Q 2 J U Z 2 Z Z w Z 0_ Z 2 Z W W U r r F- 00 N w UN z r CDLO C) CO Q W Tt ~IL Q> a D > m o w o U U) o J wQ w = J W 3 W �D J = C� Q Q Q J U)(D J Z Z Z J U O Z 0 U) J U) 00 m fn 0_ W LO r � LO (O ccr N z w (D O r LO Q (D (p I- (M (.o r O r M O O r Q O) r �t N CO Q r H W > > Q (M = (O r0 (O 0_ W Q N O N o00 Or j Y W 0_ — O r NN O U) It r > O Q w z Q� H Q it m W O LO Q W O w Q N W J O J = 0_ J 0 Q J w Q J� J Z Q J ~ J> W Q z o Q 0_ 0 �QW�}�Zdzw==U)CQcwnwcwncwi)0JZU�U_j W �(w')OQwa)��_ Q U p= w~= Q c~n = z J=___ w Q z Q> Q Q QO 2__ Q U ai DQ�c��zc����wwOc�P C�WC�C7 >(�w��cn�JO_ U O}J���� J�Q Jz��o_~�Q�O_�pJo_�QzQ�w��Qw�z�U� QCO w�m�'c~i)m=Z 0°}am2Zmmm00U)c) OLL°62z=ELOw�mQ2LZI)QQ J �OrJO UH LO �U Z w lt LO Q W N O Q� O� Q w� O N Q LO LO 0 M O O M Q N w U cM Q J M C) w O� O N O N Z- r r Y fl r N 2 Z r-, Lf) r r Z r M r r O) m 0� r r Z r� r M M Y r r 00 r r N r 5 F- F- LU Z Of 0' J Q J = H H Q_' _ _ W Z J W Q = z U Y> U Q U Q Q JQ m wW � Ww 06-1 F- LU ZJ � Y �Q °6ZU LuZ W z<J Q �2 LL W C�> QU)QEEz H 06 ~Q ofO0,5 206 O0-o- z��LLO Q LL02<W f)UFOUZQwW HaJ U� JH°S� J<WQU0OJ«W QOWWQOJ_ZQ _OOf Z nQJotW Qom=W WYWN00Q Z==Z�wQOF-Oau)>-�U LL�DClQQQ2z wWW J�_0OJQOUUof<o2 o=QJ(.D L0'z00Q_wQ�>Z00°zOC�00wcLLQ-j00wZQ Ju�jijgwQQ Q000/)<QOHF-Q>WQzYwzQQmmWQ (nQQ2QWQW(DQWO? 0_ 0_ 0_ 0 0 H H D>- U LL O O U) >>> Q Q Q Q 0 2 z J Q= U 0= Y J z z 0_ 0_ 0_ w Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q w W w w w w w W z z Z Z Z Z z O U)U) � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J O ? N C, 0 CO OCN CD N O ti N , , O ,CY) CD CD CD O o0� o O�M00OXXXXXXr� Ooo : oo r-o}c,4 o CO O M i i (D i i i NO ON � i i Lo �_ i �_ i Z i O 00 J O O Cn (n Cn (n Cn (n 4 O N O N ti i CD Z U J W Z (Y) o 0 0 0 0 0 Q O z No 0 ti J Q 0 co J Q co p co U z M M Q Q Q Q Q Q M Y Q > Z M co co =>- M M J co U M z J J w �' J J J J J 0 0 0 0 0 0 J W 0_> J J Z Z d J O J co Cn J J O J LLQO�LLz�`wLwL`OOOOOOLL-1O���`L` z�Y LL LL JLLiLLOwp� W X LL Z J W a W W p W W O O O O O O W> O= L w w O O Q O w zp w L` = w Y w m 0 W Cn J W' W W O W W W W W W W W W 0 OLLI W W Z O Q Z Q W Z W O W W a U) l' Q 0 Q Q O Q Q Q Q=____ 2 Q p O w 0 0 0 Q o J O J Q Q Q Q O Q= Q w Q z w O U z w z� 2 z z z J z z 2 z z= Q U 2 U z U z 2> z U z3: 2i _o 0 0 O LO W Z�t Z > J W W = W J N U W O w Z m J LO 00 W N � M CO O N U 0 J_ Q Cn Z_ Q _O LO co 0 LO W J_ Q Cn Z_ Q LO Lf) co J W m W_ Y w_ U Q W' O Ln it Z J W CO w 2 C7 O m LO co 0 0 H Cn W H Cn m W O CD O J O i ~ CDz LO�—� OfN W W w J �t LL W Q Q �. 2i M J N it LuO J�U �z�ofofo0oz� o O0N Z ZOof 0 J� �0t(j �# Z E O U U H H H H H H Q I H � U ~ m Z >- W p=C) LU 0UZZZZZZ0 00 OZ 0 WOWOW=WUQ)- = z O z Q w Q Q Q 0> Q O w} o Q w Q Z Z — 0 � O LL m co a LL LL LL LL LL LL Cl) W > O � � N Q z � O � z J — � J � O (� M a J (if LLI U z a- Z Q m Z Q Y Y Y Y Y Y z 0 Z z LO X z z U 0� U H Q m 0 m m w� �' U z J J J J J J 2 Q J z 2 2 0 0 LL O Q Z Q 0= Z w z 0 LO Z-t o LO Q x Z LO LO LO LO LO LO O U W (D � m 0 O (�j = CD M E Lo O Q 0 N Q m O Q O 0') O O M Q N N N N N N O O O M ti Q O U LC) o Ln O M Q = Q N LC) � 0 (D LO � M Q O N O� CO O LO — � o N w 0 M==—)Uwo0=C� =�rl-00� Uw=tiLn =�2i= CAN=Cnd LU w_ z 0 J Z W Q— Q Q J 0 J Q Q Q 0 U ice.) Q Q J Q J F- Q J N J Ur co LL z J= o U Q �2iZ W O z Uco06 QJ Oo Qcnz�o206Q Q> J J J J J J J Z o6 LL Q 0 o6 06 �� Q O 06 J� U 06 Cn w LLJ J Q Q F M M M M M M Q 2 Q J LLJ Q Q Z O o� = Z Q °6 —LLJOD�J=Z�w W W W W W W wCnw�JQ�Q JQZ=~~ Z Q=OW�pQ Z Q= Q Q o U O O w w w w w w z> Q = Y 0 J W O0 0 O� J 00 = 0 0C/) wz��W�QQQQQQQZH WQ W �O� wm p — W Q F ZZZZZZN— > Q =Cn0> W _UQCn Y O D U z N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 0 Z Z J 0 Cn � Q= 2 z J Cn O J O p� U== w Q O Q cn Q U)� O w cn cn S z W Q O w J Z w W W W— U Q� Q Q Q Q Q Q( � W 0 0 0 H H F- F- z 0 � Q C0 0 (-) 0 0 0 Q~ J J J U—} 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q m Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 00� 0� 0� 0� 0� 0 0 w U W J J o Y J J J J J z z zo� W W W W W W O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Oo� D D D_ L j L+M cM O O f- 00 p j Do Cl) fl p N Lo ' p O O O i CO CO It OC) p 0 O) - -- , O N O ; 000 � O N O 0 I 0 0 00? O O O ml Cp O N O co 000 � O Q O L 00 OMO O O O f) 00 CO Q LLJ LO � � � J � Q - - It It Co M Z M Z M M M M M M; M M M M M M M M M ZQ w co M M M M J M M LO M M M J J Y J- J J J �n J J J J J J J J J J J- J J= M J J J (n J Q J J J J J Q LL a LL Z LL LL W Q W LL W z W LL W LL W LL W LL LL Cn U J LL W LL Z LL Q LL W LL W LL cn a (n J cn cn U) a cn cn cn O to cn to cn w w 0 w Z cn Q cn z O W cn cn cn O cn � cn cn cn cn (n O W W `S W W W Q W W W W W W w W w W> O W a W W a= w W w w w W w W w W J w J z J J J J J J= J J J J J J J O J W J J J J 0 J F- J J J J J Y a W a Q a a a Y a a a a a a a a a a z z a- a Q a a a a 0 a a a a a U ZQZLLZZZwZZZWZZZZZZZMLWLZwzwz2zzz2zwzzzzz� F-- U) D M N O N _M 00 p IN W Ln IN w � *k Z Z Q *k > J J 00 0 ww U 0 z OQ J J J w w J J J =< < <a' a J OU N (D( Z Z z Z Z< a U 2i 2i 2i m m a 22 2 O O (0 N N IN LU U N �"� O ~ 00 O LO LO LO 000 O� O Q 00 O > 00 � O Mp Mp O >Q N C14 LO IN 0") CD O � O O LO - W N - > � - M W C, C7 I � of � F- cr) � F- F- O z k(nZZ�U' k 0 itF-ZCnz �Zrn HZZ J Q Z W �� a�*} XZ Zik ZYQ W kD ADD *k J J J Q WWWQ a' J W J a. a' J Q J W> W W J Q Q Q J Q Q O w W Q Q Q Q LLB = LLB a Q W Q Q Q Z_ w Q Q Z Q Q w U) Q w >� J J J W J Q Z Q W= Q J F J Q w (n w W Q= J J J U Y J J J J Z w N(D> Z_ Z_ Z_ U Z_ a Q Q(D J Q Z_ w O Z_ a N(D a( Q Z_ Z_ Z_ J Q Z_ Z_ O Z_ O a O Q a Q Q W Q W U O Q U Q m w Q J X O J O m O Q Q Q W W w Q Q z Q W w m�mLL222wZw>wmg02 2Z Qomwm�>O>cn222 z ��Lu 02zcn LO LO Or � C.O � Z N Z m> COO N M i � N m CEO co LO w> OM M CpM O U J cN N O J O Q Z O Y 0 0 (LO D �� 00 Lai CO m� ti a C, IN It � OC) rn rn W Z � LLJ Q W F- W N D Z Q 2 J z Q W a s W m (n(nmZ QJ WO�Q J F-C� UWU)Z U) xS OOQw �� wc~nUa QQO= Z)LLUD of Of �� w zz .6.5w�� J�°6_jQwLL wU�Wcw 06W06LU LL QOzOesa =Q>>WaZW%>Q�WQ C�g�aO 2Z006LUZg� -,=F-ww� JO_�~W Wa'fnW�ZC/) J�QJ_W W_W=D�JWZcn otS�cn��Y < a' z W 2 2 a' O Q m J �S = Z z U U O J fn J O m Z= J a' W Q m Q LaLQWQ��U� Z Ua0»(D LLZYw0wQaWFQ-CDOUz}QQzz U—�QZF- �U mm0 o< U)Y�z>QZ�z�00 �LLWQz�=�nOwZZO�QUN0ZZUWa,F-F-F-F- UWaac�n w Q U U O O w CD Z Z Z F- J J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� w w D> »> Q Q Q Q Q Q Q w w w T O CM Ll It O M ; i W i CM M O 00 O00 LO NO C� CO CO O O p L!) O CV 00 04 M p 0 0 f� O O CO O 00 M O L- O O O M M O O Lp M O O O M O O I- M O 00 O W i i i i i i i i i i � i i 00 Cfl O CO i i 00 _ L() LL �_ 1 Z i Q Y Ln J W' O O O O M LL - Z 0� "t W z L1i - == CO r M co M M M M z M M Z M't M Q M J J M M O Q O m Ld M M 2 M M M z M M M 0 LL LL LL LL w LL LL LL coor- W LL LL J LL (n U W W Y W J Z (n 2 LL LL J LL LL LL U) LL LL LL � n 1cn n (n (6 w W-W--0 n LL o U) a- U) 3: U ( p >- J z an can => can Ua o W W W W U LU LU wW W W O W W O W W� W W J wcan O = JLLj can cwJa� w n JJoJ LLJw n a IL a a zUa 0- a Q a a_aQ = dz Q U z Q Q Q Q Q—O Q Q Q QQ O Q=QU O Q Q Q O o Z W Q QQQ Q o Q Q Q Q Q Uzzzz�zz2iz—(Dz}ZwZZmZZUU2(DJmzz2zzJz2izzzcJan W LO O I O00 M o 00 Z W r 0 r �$ > *k *kk W Q Z Z Z *k > W J J J ly- 0Y y W W W 0 0 Q 0 2 2 2 Q Q Q Z O Q Y Of Of Z= Z Q U Z_ Of Q O Q U) Q 2E Z Q Nm mm c Z Z J O LO O LO Q LO C� LO 00 LO (DW O CM > 00 Or- co O O N O Cn — W N CM O CM W W U) co O CT)J CO H o O J O *k *k J 4k O M NO Cn d CD CN 04 0) Gi W H_ U) w co'T 0� of U) of N H D Of W Z z Z D D~ 0 Z ry Z = zIt = w Z Z of Cl 0 0 0 Z U � ~ m= J o Z J� 0 W' iY 0 W H� O J U J w 0 �- ry 0 Q' J o �' W' W' Z � U) W O D U Cl C W> w m z o _ _ W O 0 0 0 U 0 m= D w Q= Q w Q= 0' Q � U m Q �= LL = W� w W o _ Q o Q Q z J00 w=2zoEWZQLL ZZ�Z_�OQz_�X_z�zJJWJzwwoo ooJo�wz`°zz< W O O Q m Q o Q Q W W� Q Q O H O W W� J_ J O W Q X Q Q- mmwQ wm� �cnw2owo�wpcnm>(nw� E�3p�m �O��g WO J M O� z 00 M y LO U) O Z LO W N w' O LO => �> M (C) O 0 O O z Lo m O LO Z JJ0 Ooo0Li»LLo"to0c)0<co0002otipow4pp(D�Ln(DO W 00000 W = U' J = � = = L� = CA N = = N Cn = = U = � LP) CO = � C4 CD N CD = � = a_ = = Cn Q J z w 2 O J J Q m W = J W W H J H H U) W z U) L j J Z wQ(a U) Q fn o�j W wHH J i<< wJ06 ZZU �w ��Q0- -1 z �wLu>(nzH CO Cl Q Q 0 Q 06 Z Z U Z z� (� Q Q W Lu z 0 J 06 2 m�LLJ Oz �(nW�vJY�� 00Q�0Y�Q=_OJa 06 W W�OxSQQQ�=w Q�Q2(D2CL<<DYW�QQzzQQ��Oz�Q� �C/)U) �Q()f mLLIH=�QW d(n�_�=ZO>�YDYOWO>C)F- O�O(j�Q� a� Q�� H 0 LLI LL H Q W> m O� W' H J O U J < Frli - w� Q z m O W w O Q Q w z J W o O U O Q U o 0 LL Q Q U} C� < Q Q w O w m z L L in LL � H Q W�� Y J W w( o o LLLL O H 0 W H H O O O W W W W W W W W W W 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 O2 2 J2 2 Y Y Y Y Y OY OY Y J I� 00 p N i dj C� dj O O � 00 00 00 N 00 CD } N i N i ti O o O o p I� ti ti O M M Z p i , 00 M Cl) M Cl) M , CA , o= i O f� O o O Cl) Cl) p ti o p o N N N N p O f- O ; O co M M M CO O O o Op i Q� O ' i O i i o i co M co M N i i i LO ob Z> W O W M J J J J M LJL O O O N Z O zQ Q O O O N Z W W W W � 0 o M� M N N M O} co co co W W W W Z 0 M M M Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Q M J_ W H L Q Z� co Q Z Q Z W W W W W- Z Q } J (� ❑ o J co J❑ J J J Q J J Y J (n Cn (n Cn } Q J J J J J J J J= J❑ LL W ZjZ-�LLU)U c) LLLL<LQQQQQ wwwUJwmwwwO�ww J J Q Q O U Q J UJ O Y O❑ J J Q J Q Q Q Q❑ J J J J O J O J J J J Z Z Q z J Z ❑ MJ J J J W X m m m a_ a_� L Q QQO —Q Q�=WQ O OQQQ�II<<<<<m❑QQQQQQQQQQOQJ Z2UZZ2EwU' 0mz2}2Umzz�z����0 ZZZJz2 wzzd e J 0 o Q Q Op CO � H H H N N Cn Cn CO CO W Z *k p CO W Q Z W Z Z Z p ❑ Z J Q } } } J Q W J �= m m m Q U U pOp YWui z Q W H � W J 0 W W W m Y Y Y Q J J J m } m p p 0 0 0 � M Q Q Q LO o O (D o r�co000 OQ� r` 000 0 — — c = 0� w U U U �2 rn❑ Z M J O O O 0 ~~ Z m O O C I- O❑ o= m > ��_*� CncoU) �4tit 04t 2J Z� -i ❑ (~j�QYOZz 0000UQ(Wj❑zz �z w❑0 -1< W�U ❑�U�Of ❑W�OOCnZ) 0 coW WO(nW'd'�-'WQ❑W W JW 00❑WJ W m a 0 Q Q w 2� J m O U m W W O O O w p W CO Y W W Z w (j W= 2 _ J �JQ❑O==J=CnCOU) =�==Cn>=N zJ =F- U 0< z< W= Z 0 m � D Q g rn W N 2 C� �W ❑QO2JOW0002W W WON❑OOO��OXOOzQaOQ m J g� w 0� z m m LU Q z z z U m m � m O D U m o= o d U« rn M~}(o ti Z o 0 0(D(D z� LO O m Q O� O �m=rn=-)ti�200== m� JO=Q�22i2MCDM==Or =0- <CNO==u F- W W F- U) F- O 0 iJ � WF- CnF- _� a_ F- ❑ Q F- wLU0D } F-> Qag a �' Q- Q ���� z �> 000 U Q O Q U J ❑ Q F- 0 Un ❑❑❑ m� O OLJJ > w� Q w O z z z w cnw0- cn<} J ❑00wSO =z< LUC/) � OOO2a 06 Y 06 o6 06 J� U Q Z J W co �� Q U � W W W Z J Q W W W J 06 v w J W~� W z Q (D ❑ m W }— z a J Z Q W W W} Y Z C� } z z J w 06 N~ W Q= W' 0 w (.5 Q J W a w w ~ Q Z O O O W z Q J _U 0 Q Ww m Q a� Y w, Q- (=j Q O m w w w W� W w w p m❑ w 0 0 0— 0❑— wO <00❑QUw UU —wJ zz W(}j� YU= UUUU J Q❑U�w�=w�JZQLU 0603:OO�www0z�QQ (� YY W J��� WUQ��QZYW(n(nCn0W0zZZ�Z JJCnW=wCn(nCncoUH W W J J Z❑ N N O z m d d d Z Z w Q O O O Q Q X � F-� W 2- 0 0 0 O O= F F F F °' ❑QQQ — O O O O O N N O-i Q Q Q Q Q w w w w w w w = = = = = = = = = = = = 2 0 W W W W W W W W W W W>> O�O0 zLnNU QZQQUZZQZQUZ0ZUQZQUUZ �(�QZQZ 00 O Q- M M O U Q U U 000 U O Z N J Q Q Z Q Z N- U w w� U Q Z Q r�ooQ�UcnpozU)ti CO XCq-XaoU ZQrnNUUU0 co=O>oUULn ��o�o�Q0aU�-4 NC) LJC)W�NI� Wr�i����LOM�Of Z�Um — C� oo J J cn N 0 U) C� 00 � Q = cn J m � co N C� m C� Z F a� Z Q Z CO Y Z Z J (D Q O LO r Z m N W' W Q Cl) LL CD J 0o Q-j co U M W U O W H } W U c N Ln Q (� U J co W O CO 13 w U H O o❑ O� z Q O O o z z Q= z 0 F Q O U Q�= Q zQ 2 z 0 JLLBap0YY0=]am0=_wOOmJJ F ZOJQO❑❑�❑LL wZ JY❑0 a 2 Y 0�� 2 U�_j 2� Y U E w 2 Q w ���� F- or- z 00 � Q 2i W w m� Z� Q O Q O Q Q w= Q Q O Q cn O O Q� w Q 0 Z) F- Q Q D O Q Q O z 000-2-10mmUHJYW ��0 22Cnm0 u3:2Emm2i3:Z2EJ� W ry LLI } J Z J p U) a ry Q U Q Q Y❑ w ❑ Y p� O U 0 z w w z ❑ C�QQQ O OU ❑ > 0 w Q ZOZO�LLJJ Lj 0- W co Uw W Q z LU 0 Z ❑❑ ❑ Cn Q Y Z J W J ❑ QCQ 2 Z QO Q W } Q Q Y J 0 W LU LL w U w W N 0 H O ❑~ W J W m w U LOfl oNo co co W N OJ O LO N O�-J N 00 O m cn LC) m N N> m N LO Ll N N I-- _ W_ 0 W_ry 0 N = W O (n O W N co d U) w H Q U Q Z O � (D X W W w Z Q z Y z W z QQ Y Q—SOU cn❑ D LLJ Q�w�wZ Q��� COYQWJ>- Z❑0 w�CnQW W2i Of z N Y w Z m W 00 � W w 2 W a d j p Q� 0 z U w J� w Q p� O �_ ❑QQU2Qz❑w0N�U �W(�C�ZW ❑W ��wZQU-U �� JUZZ O�J W cnZ_w_(DUZCDQZ_Z_ W— W QwJQJz>cn}Q0 QcnQ— JJUz� W<Q�000�DZ�WJO}=�OQ=� WJ❑�wz�Q�N❑LU w Q CJn Q Z zO w O X W J X}❑ U' OE Q 2 W LLI J w W J 0 W m w X Q m U, ❑ N N -� W' (� W O Z❑ m CO� C0 Q2 Q o0 U W Z Q Z Ur m 2E pp W' U Q Q= (n Cn 2 m U co z O N�cnwQz owm0-0LLr>00�Qc?NEz=}Noo�2coo�Lo�000LO(D CO U❑ Y o = N N CO m Q� U Y N CO J DQ� N a_ O co Q Q ~ ❑ W W W Z ~ � Z Q } F H 0 w m � U D W p J Q z U) m= 0 Q w = Z 0 W m �z W ti �� -j 0�=U) 0 z Q (Yj H Q �_ m E .6 = 00 z� J �C) Zm W U=0LLL LaLICl) z06 ❑U Ca 0Sz�Z2i 06 J*k- 0❑Cn Z��Z� W }Cn03 >Z QQ06 CD �ZdW� z�w�zo}O �06Z)z oQ�-QJa��� a� =p =Q0Q W c_nw}�QQ �z0_ 0pwwwwQW}�Qa�w U� W��SLL = LU J= J Q Q a Q J w Z 2 W' Y� Z _� W Q~ J Z Q = Cn Y W Z W Q u1 � YZ W JmHZZ -iCOQ� C�� 000 U w= Q=QQ W Y rn Q w> Q J W CO Q 2 U Q N} w— J U Q O U w Q W W Cn W rn W Y H W W Cn =-- W 0 Cn Cn W W p L11 Z= J Z_ = Z I Q J WJZY� YUzp�z U)W'W'OJw�Y�p2ZW000J JYCn CnZ� ❑ J U- Z Q W J W= Q= a, of m Q z U Q Q= U_ U=} 2 O Cn W = W W W w _ L N Q J Q 2 2 J w_= W N Q Q Q (ifQ Q Q Q Q U O w U 2 Q W O> N N N N N- M 00 00 U U U U U U U❑❑ C� 2 Y Y J J W Cn Cn }}} Q 9.A.2.g PENINSULA`;y ENGINEERING V Marco Shores Golf Course Community PUD PUDA, PL20220003791 Collier County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing Sign Posting — September 19, 2023 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE MARCO SHORES GOLF COURSE COMMUNITY PUD Planned Unit Development Amendment M N LO N CD Packet Pg. 478 9.A.2.g (CHAPTER 8, COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT) A zoning sign(s) must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen (15) calendar days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s) must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent through the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be construed to supersede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to the Administrative Code, Chapter 8 E. 1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street right-of-way or easement. 2. The sign(s) must be securely affixed by nails, staples, or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened securely to a post, or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage. 3. The petitioner or the petitioner's agent must maintain the sign(s) in place, and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost, or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the petitioner's agent must replace the sign(s NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE ASSIGNED PLANNER AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA d COUNTY OF COLLIER c m BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, PERSONALLY APPEARED ��l�i S; t, ply r D. Crj+4- N WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER N f'L �' ' , ' � � � ,ZC:eC� S T 9/ 41)N - rn RE OF APPLI ANT OR AGENT STREET OR P.O. BOX NAME (TYPED OR PRINTED) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER CITY, STATE ZIP The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 2 J', day of Sl t�7E/ti , 20 Z by 0, personally known to me or wh roduc and who did/did not take an oath. �PRYPGB Pearl M Bianchi Signature of Notary Public _ Commission # GG 928804 Commission Expires 11-04-2023 y� o� Bonded Through - Cynanotary Florida - Notary Public Printed Name of Notary Public My Commission Expires: (Stamp with serial number) identification Rev. 3/4/2015 Packet Pg. 479 9.A.3 10/05/2023 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.3 Doc ID: 26555 Item Summary: PL20210000660 - Housing Initiatives GMPA - An Ordinance amending Ord. No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan (CCGMP) of the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, adopting an amendment to the CCGMP relating to affordable housing, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) 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; and to establish a Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict and a Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict (TODS); and directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce (FDOC); and specifically amending the Golden Gate City Sub -element of Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and FLUM to address housing initiatives to allow affordable housing by right in certain commercial zoning districts with a sunset date and to establish a (TODS); and directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the FDOC; and specifically amending the Immokalee Area Master Plan Element and FLUM to establish a TODS, directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the FDOC, and specifically adding a Policy to the Transportation Element pertaining to affordable housing along transit routes; and directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the FDOC; providing for severability; and providing for an effective date. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Planner 111] Meeting Date: 10/05/2023 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Principal — Zoning Name: Michele Mosca 09/06/2023 5:20 PM Submitted by: Title: Zoning Director — Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 09/06/2023 5:20 PM Approved By: Review: Planning Commission Diane Lynch Review item Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Zoning Michele Mosca Review Item Zoning Michele Mosca Review Item Zoning Mike Bosi Division Director Growth Management Community Development Department James C French Planning Commission Ray Bellows Meeting Pending Completed 09/14/2023 4:32 PM Completed 09/15/2023 11:28 AM Skipped 09/06/2023 5:10 PM Skipped 09/06/2023 5:10 PM Completed 09/15/2023 1:42 PM GMD Deputy Dept Head Completed 09/26/2023 7:18 PM 10/05/2023 9:00 AM Packet Pg. 480 9.A.3.a Co e-r County STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: October 5, 2023 RE: PETITION PL20210000660, COLLIER HOUSING PLAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING INITIATIVES GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (GMPA) [ADOPTION HEARING] ELEMENTS: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT/GOLDEN GATE CITY SUB -ELEMENT, IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT, TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT PROPOSED AMENDMENT: 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, and Commercial Mixed Use), and 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, and Transit Oriented Development). One subdistrict is added to the Immokalee Area Master Plan (TAMP) and FLUM (Transit Oriented Development). Also, a policy is added to the Transportation Element for Transit Oriented Developments, and policy additions are included to list the names of the new subdistricts and the one subdistrict with a modified name. Further explanation of the proposed amendments is provided in the Transmittal Staff Report. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) materials include the Ordinances with Exhibit text and maps for the petition. These exhibits reflect the text and maps as approved by the Board of County Commissioners (Board) for Transmittal and as subsequently modified by staff to address the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity's (DEO) Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report (see attachment titled, "DEO ORC Report"). Note: As of July 1, 2023, DEO is now known as the Department of Commerce (DOC). In response to the ORC Report, staff is proposing text changes to 1) The Strategic Opportunities Sites Subdistrict in the FLUE to establish a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and include an acreage limitation for the Subdistrict — both to address the DOC's concern regarding non-residential use intensity; and, 2) The Mixed Use Activity Center (MUAC) Subdistrict in the FLUE to exclude those MUACs located within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) from increasing residential density under this proposed affordable housing initiative. The proposed text changes are identified and explained in the "Response to DOC ORC Report" attachment below under Adoption — Staff Recommendation. Additionally, the referenced text changes are identified in the Ordinance Exhibits. Transmittal hearings on the subject amendment were held on May 19, 2022, CCPC, and on March 28, 2023, Board. The Transmittal recommendations are presented further below. Packet Pg. 481 9.A.3.a Within the CCPC materials provided, you will find the Transmittal Executive Summary from the Board hearing and the Transmittal CCPC staff report for the petition, which includes staff's analysis of the petition. The Transmittal package was provided to the Florida Department of Commerce and other reviewing agencies on April 7, 2023. REVIEW AGENCY COMMENT LETTERS: After review of the Transmitted amendment, the DOC rendered their Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report. The DOC raised two (2) Objections concerning non-residential intensity of use standards and Coastal High Hazard Area density increase. Staff has addressed the DOC's Objections in the attachment titled "Response to DOC ORC Report." Other reviewing agencies rendered their comment letters indicating "no comment" or "no adverse impacts found," or the agency did not respond. The ORC Report is located within the materials provided to the CCPC. TRANSMITTAL: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To Transmit to DOC. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Transmit to DOC (vote: 5/0) per staff recommendation, including a sunsetting provision for the "by right" Subdistricts. BOARD ACTION: Transmitted to DOC (vote: 5/0), per CCPC recommendation, and with removing C- 4 and C-5 properties from the Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict [as now reflected in County Resolution No. 23-57]. ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC forward to the Board a recommendation to adopt and transmit the amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce and reviewing agencies that provided comments, with staff's suggested additions noted below in double underline and deletions in The proposed changes below to the Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict and Mixed -Use Activity Center Subdistrict within the FLUE for affordable housing are recommended by staff in response to the Department of Commerce's ORC Report regarding non-residential use intensity and Coast High Hazard Area density increase. 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 2 Packet Pg. 482 9.A.3.a open space, and a network of pathways for the enjoyment of the proiect's employees, residents, and patrons. Development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following: a. The aroiect site must be a minimum often (10) acres in size. b. A maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for the designated Qualified Target Industry businesses and a support commercial uses component of the aroiect is 0.5. c. 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. '- r d. The site must be rezoned to PUD.° e. The site shall be a mixed -use development including residential uses and qualified target 5 industry business uses and may include support commercial uses. c f. Qualified target industry business uses are as defined in Chapter 288.106, Florida Statutes. g, 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 CD target industry uses. c h. Support commercial uses allowed are those uses in the C-1 through C-3 Zoning Districts that g provide support services to the target industries such as general office, banks, fitness centers, c personal and professional services, medical, financial, and convenience sales and services, J computer -related businesses and services, employee training, technical conferencing, daycare a center, restaurants, and corporate and government offices. LO i. Support commercial uses shall be allowed to comprise a maximum of twenty percent (20%) of LO 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. L Residential development shall comprise a minimum of twenty percent (20%) and a maximum of Z sixty percent (60%) of the total acreage of the site. The residential component may provide for o a mix of single and multi -family units or provide for multi -family units only. a k. Residential development shall provide for housing that is affordable in the following manner: .°a 1. Base density shall be four (4) units per acre, and an Affordable Housing Density Bonus a (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 levels, as provided in LDC section 2.06.03.A. All affordable housing density bonuses y shall be doubled when dedicated to Low or Very Low-income levels. c 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. o 5. Residential density is calculated based on the total site acreage. 6. Residential development is not subject to the Density Rating System. 7. Each project phase that proposes residential development must provide for the ratio of market -rate housing units to affordable housing units, as stated within the AHDB agreement. a V I. When the site abuts residentially zoned land, residential development shall be located proximate to such abutting residentially zoned land, where feasible. a 1. When qualified target industry business uses or supports commercial uses on the site are E adjacent to any property occupied by, or zoned to allow, single-family dwellings, the setback along the commonboundary shall be equal to the proposed zoned building Q heiaht and a 15-foot Tvpe "C" buffer shall be provided. m. 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, Packet Pg. 483 9.A.3.a 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. n. 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. o. 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. p. Total Strategic Opportunity Sites acreage within the Mixed -Use District is limited to a maximum of 130 acres. 1. Mixed -Use Activity Center Subdistrict For residential -only development, if a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed -Use Activity Center that is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict or Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, up to sixteen 161 residential units per gross acre may be permitted. Development located within the boundaries of a Mixed -Use Activity Center and outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area 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 affordable housing 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. LEGAL REVIEW: The County Attorney's office reviewed the staff report on September 11, 2023. 0 Packet Pg. 484 9.A.3.b ORDINANCE NO.23- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP 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; AND TO ESTABLISH A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES SUBDISTRICT AND A TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT SUBDISTRICT; AND DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20210000660] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly 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, staff has prepared an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Economic Opportunity for preliminary review on April 13, 2023, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce reviewed the amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the Department of Commerce to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and [21-CMP-01090/1809122/1] 219 1 of 3 PL20210000660 / FLUE 8/11/23 Packet Pg. 485 9.A.3.b WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on , and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Commerce. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. [21-CMP-01090/1809122/1] 219 2 of 3 PL20210000660 / FLUE 8/11/23 Packet Pg. 486 9.A.3.b PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2023. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko 4b Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Rick LoCastro, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Future Land Use Element and Map [2 1 -CMP-0 1090/1809122/1] 219 3 of 3 PL20210000660 / FLUE 8/11/23 Packet Pg. 487 9.A.3.b PL20210000660 EXHIBIT A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** GOAL: *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** Q a OBJECTIVE 1: N N *** *** *** *** *** text break Policy 1.5 S The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: N 0 *** *** *** *** *** text break 0 A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT o 0 0 *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** c N 13. Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict N J *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** a text break LO 26. Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict LO N 27. Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict N LO 28. Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict w *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** J LL FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION o I. URBAN DESIGNATION o *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** ***** Q a� U A. Urban Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** ***** �a L 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 E residential uses may be located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a 0 freestanding building. Such mixed -use projects are intended to be developed at a 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 Words underlined are added; words StFUGk threugh are deleted. 08/14/23 mrm 1 of 9 Packet Pg. 488 9.A.3.b PL20210000660 this Subdistrict. This provision will sunset 5-years from [the adoption date of this Growth Management Plan amendmentl, 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 PFGjeGt.S 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 ^^mar project acreage. F� S +stFiEt For property ROt Wi+hiR the I FbaR Residential CriRge SubdistFin+ b i+ 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 elo�i�7 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) dwellina units Der acre. All residential units must be housina 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 Words underlined are added; words StFUGk threugh are deleted. 08/14/23 mrm 2 of 9 Packet Pg. 489 PL20210000660 9.A.3.b 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 amendmentl, 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 C-1, C-2 or C-3, as identified in the LDC. 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. 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 *** *** *** *** Words underlined are added; words StFUGk threugh are deleted. 08/14/23 mrm 3 of 9 0 m m 0 0 0 0 N 0 N J IL LO LO LO to N M N LO 0 w J u_ C 0 a 0 Q as U c 0 C L O r C 0 E L c.i a+ Q Packet Pg. 490 9.A.3.b PL20210000660 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 reducina the total vehicle miles traveled. Each Strategic Opportunity Sites project shall be designed as a mixed use development where a landscaped areas, outdoor spaces and internal interconnectivity provide for buffering, usable c� open space, and a networkof 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. c b. A maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for the designated Qualified Target Industry businesses and C support commercial uses component of the project is 0.5. 0 c. 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 protect roadway connection to the arterial road. c 0 d. The site must be rezoned to PUD. o N e. The site shall be a mixed use development including residential uses and qualified target N industry business uses and may include support commercial uses. a f. Qualified target industry business uses are as defined in Chapter 288.106, Florida Statutes. LO LO g, Qualified target industry business uses shall comprise a minimum of forty percent (40%) and a N maximum of eighty percent (80%) of the total acreage of the site. A minimum of eighty percent M (80%) of the total building square feet, exclusive of residential development, shall be devoted N to target industry uses. h. Support commercial uses allowed are those uses in the C-1 through C-3 Zoning Districts that w 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 0 center, restaurants and corporate and government offices. a i. Support commercial uses shall be allowed to comprise a maximum of twenty percent (20%) of 0 Q 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. c L 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 O for a mix of single family and multi -family units or provide for multi -family units only. a k. Residential development shall provide for housing that is affordable in the following manner: 0 1. Base density shall be four (4) units per acre and an Affordable Housing Density Bonus a (AHDB) aareement. in accordance with LDC Section 2.06.00. is reauired in order to exceed this base densitv. Words underlined are added; words StFUGk threugh are deleted. 08/14/23 mrm 4of9 Packet Pg. 491 9.A.3.b PL20210000660 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 levels. as provided in LDC section 2.06.03.A. All affordable housina densitv 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. - a 5. Residential density is calculated based on the total site acreage. a 6. Residential development is not subject to the Density Rating System. y 7. Each phase of the project that proposes residential development must provide for the as ratio of market rate housing units to housing units that are affordable, as stated within the AHDB agreement. ` 1_ When the site abuts residentially zoned land, residential development shall be located a) N proximate to such abutting residentially zoned land, where feasible. o 1. When qualified target industry business uses or support commercial uses on the site are m adiacent to any property occupied by, or zoned to allow, single family dwellings, the setback along the commonboundary shall be equal to the proposed zoned building c height and a 15-foot Type "C" buffer shall be provided. o m. Residential uses shall be integrated, and made compatible, with non-residential uses in the N development through vertical and/or horizontal mixed -use buildings, landscaping, buffering, J open space, architectural embellishments and through pedestrian, bicycle andvehicular (multi- a modal) interconnections. LO 1. The PUD shall include development standards to ensure that residential uses are LO o integrated with the non-residential uses. n. The PUD shall include development standards for non-residential uses that are no less N stringent than those in the C-5, Heavy Commercial, Zoning District. Development standardsLO for residential uses shall be those in the residential zoning district closest to the densityLU 00 proposed. o. The PUD shall include a mechanism to ensure the minimum density is developed and the U- 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 g Certificate of Occupancy for dwelling units. a 0 n Total Strategic Opportunity Sites acreage within the Mixed Use District is limited to a maximum Q of 130 acres. c *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** ***** �a L 28. Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict O The purpose of this subdistrict is to promote high -density residential development along existing or a proposed transit routes of the Collier Area Transit (CAT) system, known as Transit Oriented E 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 a 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. Words underlined are added; words StFUGk threugh are deleted. 08/14/23 mrm 5 of 9 Packet Pg. 492 9.A.3.b PL20210000660 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 ('/4) mile of an existing CAT stop, shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said facility within % 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. q. 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 161 residential units per gross acre may be permitted. Development located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center and outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area, 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 he 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. Words underlined are added; words StFUGk threugh are deleted. 08/14/23 mrm 6 of 9 Packet Pg. 493 9.A.3.b PL20210000660 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 theCoastal 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 Bays ho re/G ateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and the Mixed -Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable outlined in the LDC. If such a project islocated 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 e, xcept as allowed by the Mixed -Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable outlined in the LDC. For a projectlocated 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 theActivity Center. In order to promote compact and walkable mixed use projects, where the densityfrom 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 throughoutthe 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 Words underlined are added; words StFUGk threugh are deleted. 08/14/23 mrm 7 of 9 Packet Pg. 494 PL20210000660 9.A.3.b 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- 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 densityaccumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project shall not be distributed outside of the Activity Center. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** ***** B. Commer-Goal M axed Use SubdistriGt! (p. 70) forth 6111der the CommerGial Mixed Use SubdiStFiGt OR the WrbaR Mixed Use DiGtFiGt. *** *** *** *** *** 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. Words underlined are added; words StFUGk threugh are deleted. 08/14/23 mrm Packet Pg. 495 9.A.3.b PL20210000660 R25E R26E I RUE R26E R2 E RWE 2012-2025 R31E I RUE R33E RUE FUTURE LAND USE NEAP C.Iti,Ca-N Fl.d. �w•W _urir-..n.-r— �.'__."..."':"" �-�_ y, 'COL{L=R COfdiP(RURALd AGR3CIN_1LML __ ��- EE]771 va J R25E R26E R27E R28E R29E RNE R31E 592E R93E R3 E Words underlined are added; words StF6IGk threugh are deleted. 08/14/23 mrm M N LO T 0& W J U. C O Q. O a C m E L O C cm G t (i a 9 of 9 Packet Pg. 496 9.A.3.c ORDINANCE NO.23- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE CITY SUB -ELEMENT OF GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO ADDRESS HOUSING INITIATIVES TO ALLOW AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY RIGHT IN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS WITH A SUNSET DATE; AND TO ESTABLISH A TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT SUBDISTRICT; AND DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20210000660] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seg., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly 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, staff has prepared an amendment to the Golden Gate City Sub -Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Commerce for preliminary review on April 13, 2023, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce reviewed the amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the Department of Commerce to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and 121-CMP-01090/ 1809128/ 11 221 1 of 3 PL20210000660 / Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element 8/ 11123 Packet Pg. 497 9.A.3.c WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on , and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE GOLDEN GATE CITY SUB - ELEMENT OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendment to the Golden Gate City Sub -Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Commerce. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. [21-CM P-0109011809128/11 221 2 of 3 PL20210000660 / Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element 811 1 /23 Packet Pg. 498 9.A.3.c PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2023. ATTEST - CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA IN Rick LoCastro, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Golden Gate City Sub -Element of Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and Map j21-CN4P-0109011809128/11 221 3 of 3 PL20210000660 / Goldcn Gate Area Master flan Element 8/lIM Packet Pg. 499 9.A.3.c PL20210000660 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. www www www www www text break *** www www www *** *** 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. Words underlined are added; words struck threes are deleted. 08/08123 mrm 1 of 5 Packet Pg. 500 *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** A. LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION text break 1. URBAN DESIGNATION *** **r rrr *** *** text break A. Urban — Mixed Use District text break a. Urban Residential Subdistrict 9.A.3.c PL20210000660 *** *** *** *** *rr rrr *,tr **r rrr rrr rrr rrr rrr irra r:• r*� 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. rr* *** r** *r* r*r text break *** r** r*r **** r*r 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 proiects. are intended to be developed at apedestrian- scale, pedestrian oriented and interconnected with abutting ro'ects — whether commercial or residential. This provision will sunset 5-years from the adoption date of this Growth Management Plan amendmenti, unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. Proiects 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 zoninq 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 prowect acreage and shall not exceed sixteen 16 dwellinq units per acre. All residential units must be housing that is affordable. d. In the case of residential uses located within a building attachedto 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 ro'ect. In the case of a mixed -use buildin building square footage devoted to residential uses shall not exceed seventy-five percent 75% of the gross building square footage Words underlined are added; words GtFUGk thFO610h are deleted. 08/08/23 mrm 2of5 Packet Pg. 501 9.A.3.c PL20210000660 e. Street, pedestrian oathwav and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties. where possible and practicable, are encouraged. f. All development shall comply with appiicable portions of Section 4.02.38 of the Land Development Code Ordinance No. 04-41 as amended. Q text break .*. *« **k k** ,.* „* a- 2 0 5. Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict a 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 amendmentI, unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. N Promects utilizi n_q this Subdistrict shall be allowed up to sixteen 16 residential units per 0 = gross acre, subject to the following: o co a. The properties are within the Urban Mixed Use District but are not within the boundaries 0 c of the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict. ba The properties are zoned C-1. C-2 or C-3 as identified in the LDC. o c. The properties have been found consistent by policy,as referenced in Policy 1 1.5 and ii 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 LO district on the subject property_. N e. All residential units must be housing that is affordable. f There is a commitment by Agreement approved by the County Manager and County r 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 CO Development Code Ordinance No. 04-41. as amended. e g A public facility impacts comparative analysis for vehicle trips. water consumption and C wastewater generation between the proposed project and the highest intensity permitted a use within the commercial zoning district on the subject property.has been submitted. r and approved by staff. that demonstrates the proposed promect would have the same or lesser impacts for all three public facilities. 0 a� L Q text break 5 Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict o The purpose of this subdistrict is to promote high -density residential development along existing a or proposed transit routes of the Collier Area Transit CAT system, known as Transit Oriented Q Development TOD within the Urban Mixed Use District. TODs are further described in the Land 0 Development Code. As stated in Transportation Element Policy 12.10. TODs may increase transit c ridership thus reduce single occupancy trips and vehicle mikes travelled. A TOD proiect is eligible for, but not entitled to thirteen 13 dwelling units per gross acre subject to para -graphs a. through f. below. The Density Rating System is not applicable to TODs. 0 c a) E 3 of 5 r Words underlined are added; words struck thraces# are deleted. Q 08108/23 mrm Packet Pg. 502 9.A.3.c PL20210000660 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 subiect 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 112 of the proposed dwelling units must be located within one quarter ('/4} mile of an existing CAT stop, shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said facility within % mile of those units prior to or concurrent with the first residential Certificate of Occupanc_ c. The TOD must comply with the transit oriented development design standards contained in Chapter 4 of the LDC. d. The proiect 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] Words underlined are added; words are deleted. 08/08/23 mrm 4 of 5 Packet Pg. 503 9.A.3.c PL20210000660 � Ili v r F'( EXHIBIT "A' QFLGOLDEN GATE CITY FUTURE LAND USE MAP Legend GREEN BLVD Category G Wu Gain Urb_ Conwl.c w I. ..'I - coiw nne r 00 S�div Davera.I C&v C,—m ca Sub&Wnd J uro.I neewentel 5,'a«ea - M.W u,e Aee,,ky Cents Suoaada Cemm.ve Ilse U- by rayq S.edeeid camarron ar Cba—ma by ft" sueerbIt T—M Dwftd Dfteitpe.IM SY6ee6ed 0 5001000 2,61X) 3,0W Feet m n Fw- ca a � m Z � vy Santa Barbara Gaarneroial 8ubdis GOLDEN GATE PKY DDLCEh GATE CITY FVTVIIEL LUC U.% I�NP ADOPTED-5U`IOIIKR]U MIDI .Ore Ik MIDN Collier Blvd Commercial Subdistrict Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict MixedCenter Sudit Activity Center Subdistrict Golden Gate Urban Commercial Irtfill Subdistrict Downtown Center Commercial Subdlsrrlt:t Words underlined are added; words stFUskt#rOugh are deleted. 08/08/23 mrm or— tY w J O U 5 of 5 Packet Pg. 504 9.A.3.d ORDINANCE NO.23- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO ESTABLISH A TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT SUBDISTRICT; AND DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. JPL202100006601 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seg., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly 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, staff has prepared an amendment to the Immokalee Area Master Plan Element of the Growth Management Plan and Future Land Use Map; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Commerce for preliminary review on April 13, 2023, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce reviewed the amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the Department of Commerce to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and [21-CMP-0109011809126111 220 i of 3 PL20210000660 / Immokalee Arca Master Plan 8/1 1/23 Packet Pg. 505 9.A.3.d WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on , and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendment to the Immokalee Area Master Plan Element of the Growth Management Plan and Future Land Use Map, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Commerce. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. [2 1 -CMP-0 1090/1809126/11220 2 of 3 PL20210000660 / Immokalee Area Master Plan 8/ 11 /23 Packet Pg. 506 9.A.3.d PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2023. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Rick LoCastro, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Immokalee Area Master Plan Element and Map [2l-CMP-01090/1809126/1]220 3 of P1,20210000660 / Immokalee Area -faster Plan 8! 11/23 Packet Pg. 507 9.A.3.d PL20210000660 EXHIBIT A IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES *�* •w* ww* wrw wwx text break GOAL 1: w*r wr* wk* *** *** text break w*� wr• *** ,.z* wow +:� OBJECTIVE 5: **x w*• w:w kww** text break *raw *** wow •:+ tww **w Policy 5.1.1: Future Land Use Designation *w* text break A. URBAN — MIXED USE DISTRICT a r* **w wow *wt x,cw text break 6. Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict **w *** ****w xxa text break *ww www f.w* wiw �w* wwk LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION text break "• *** wwr wwx +** ..* A. 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 mile of an existing CAT stop, shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providin said facility within %4 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. 1 of 3 Words underlined are added; words r!rUGk through are deleted. 08/08/23 mrm Packet Pg. 508 9.A.3.d PL20210000660 d. The protect 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 Count 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] Words underlined are added; words ugh are deleted. 08YO8123 mrm 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 509 9.A.3.d PL20210000660 1. F � Leysnd man wo wtcft nk"A f rr• W. M..OGr.w.rrw iM. CMrV ar. WTM r �r ��f�sy tY.V i�..nrlw+M 4 W.. r•rY V11 MMM' •. w r.r rr.. 08/08/23 mrm EXHIBIT "A_ IMMOKALEE FUTURE LAND USE MAP LA LF LA LA • �"pp A i LA N d C N 7 O 2 0 Lfl W O O O O N O N J a Ln Ln LO N 0 0-25 0.5 ! 1.5 - MYi i pr.c ui, .r ; n. Ma mason prc. as . fo e. �utl ,a 9m.ral �+oW^9 O�rppw: tany —d—eying.M wds ward rnwt befo uwtl,or aGluM DOUMirl.a•'Kr..On1 \' Words underlined are added; words 654W& Owebigh are deleted. 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 510 9.A.3.e ORDINANCE NO.23- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SPECIFICALLY ADDING A POLICY TO THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT PERTAINING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALONG TRANSIT ROUTES; AND DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20210000660] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et.sseq., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly 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, staff has prepared an amendment to the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Commerce for preliminary review on April 13, 2023, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce reviewed the amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the Department of Economic Opportunity to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and [21-CMP-01090/1809115/11218 1 of 3 PL20210000660 ! Transportation 8/I 1/23 Packet Pg. 511 9.A.3.e WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on , and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendment to the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Commerce. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. [21-CMP-01090/ 18091 l 5/ l] 2 18 2 of 3 PL20210000660 / Transportation 8/11/23 Packet Pg. 512 9.A.3.e PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2023. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: �a�P 23 Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A — Transportation Element Rick LoCastro, Chairman [21-CMP-0109011809115111 218 PL20210000660 I Transportation 8111123 Packet Pg. 513 9.A.3.e PL20210000660 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 Planprovides for higher densit residential promects 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 affordableproximate 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] Words underlined are added; words sty thMugh are deleted. 08l08123 mrm 1 of 1 Packet Pg. 514 9.A.3.f COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS (ORC) REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT, County # PL20210000660 and DEO # 23-01ACSC The proposed Plan amendment establishes affordable housing provisions in certain Urban designated areas of the County. The Department's objections to the proposed amendment are below, followed by the County's response. 1. Objection: Nonresidential Intensity Use Standards: The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC is not consistent with the requirements of Sections 163.3177(1) and 163.3177(6)(a)1., F.S., that a future land use category must include meaningful and predictable standards for the intensity of use for nonresidential use. The proposed amendment (Future Land Use Element Future Land Use Designation Description Section) and Golden Gate Area Master Plan (Golden Gate City Sub -Element) does not establish intensity of use standards for the nonresidential uses that are allowed within the Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict, the Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict, and the Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict. [Statutory Authority: Sections 163.3177(1), Section 163.3177(6)(a)1., and 163.3184(4) F.S.] Recommendation: The Department recommends that the County revise Amendment 23-01ACSC to include meaningful and predictable intensity of use standards for the nonresidential uses allowed within the following future land use categories: Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict, Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict and Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict. Response: The Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict and the Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict are applicable only to existing commercially zoned properties within Urban designated areas of the County (Future Land Use Element & Golden Gate City Sub -element). The amendment does not establish new commercial zoning, rather it allows by right the development of affordable housing units and market rate units on these properties; non-residential intensities are limited to the current commercial zoning on the property (Commercial Zoning Districts, C-1 — C-5: https://IibrarV.municode.com/fl/collier commercial zoning districts). Further, the development of residential uses on these properties will reduce the developable Words underlined are added; words StFUElk '" ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 515 9.A.3.f commercial acreage, thereby limiting the commercial development and intensity of these properties. Response: The Strategic Opportunity Sites (SOS) Subdistrict provides for mixed income residential units integrated with Florida Qualified Target Industry businesses and support neighborhood commercial uses (C-1 — C-3 zoning categories). The non-residential use intensities of the target industry businesses are defined in Chapter 288.106 F.S., and the neighborhood serving support commercial use intensities are identified in the Collier County Land Development Code (Commercial Zoning Districts, C-1 — C-3: https://IibrarV.municode.com/fl/collier commercial zoning districts). The number of eligible properties that could rezone under the SOS provision is limited to 4 parcels comprising +130.00 acres, allowing a density increase of 462 dwelling units beyond the density currently allowed. The County is proposing to limit the non-residential uses on these properties to no more than 104 acres, and with an FAR of 0.5. The proposed provisions of the SOS Subdistrict are, in part, based upon the existing Business Park and Research and Technology Park Subdistricts of the Future Land Use Element, and the FAR of 0.5 is derived from a sample business park development in the County. Amend FLUE Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict to read as follows: 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 networkof 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. A maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for the designated Qualified Target Industry businesses and support commercial uses component of the project is 0.5. c. 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 proiect roadway connection to the arterial road. Words underlined are added; words StFUElk '" ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 516 9.A.3.f d. The site must be rezoned to PUD. e. The site shall be a mixed use development including residential uses and qualified target industry business uses and may include support commercial uses. f. Qualified target industry business uses are as defined in Chapter 288.106, Florida C'tatI ItP-Z g. 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. h. 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. i. 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. L 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. k. 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 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. Words underlined are added; words StFUEI( thFOugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 517 9.A.3.f 6. Residential development is not subject to the Density Rating System. 7. Each phase of the project that proposes residential development must provide for theratio of market rate housing units to housing units that are affordable, as stated withinthe AHDB agreement. I. 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 commonboundary shall be equal to the proposed zoned building height and a 15-foot Type "C" buffer shall be provided. m. 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 andvehicular (multi -modal) interconnections. 1. The PUD shall include development standards to ensure that residential uses are integrated with the non-residential uses. n. 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. o. 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. p. Total Strategic Opportunity Sites acreage within the Mixed Use District is limited to a maximum of 130 acres. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** 2. Objection: Coastal High Hazzard Area Density Increase: The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC does not coordinate the future land use map residential densities in the coastal high hazard area consistent with the protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, including population evacuation, which takes into consideration the capability to safely evacuate the density of the coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster consistent with statutory requirements (Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3.e., 163.3177(6)(a)8.a., 163.3177 (6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178(2)(d), and 1633178(2)(h), F.S.) and the Collier County Comprehensive Plan (Conservation and Words underlined are added; words StFUE' '" ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 518 9.A.3.f Coastal Management Element Goal 12, Objective 12.1 and Policy 12.1.2 and Future Land Use Element Policy 1.4). The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC (Future Land Use Element Future Land Use Designation Section) increases the allowable residential density in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict future land use category, and the currently adopted Future Land Use Map and Future Land Use Element Activity Center Maps designate Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Numbers 2, 14, 16, 17, 18 and 22 within the coastal high hazard area as depicted on the Future Land Use Map and Coastal High Hazard Area map. The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC results in an increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area. The proposed Amendment 23O1ACSC is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating that the proposed increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area is consistent with the requirements of Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3.e., 163.3177(6)(a)8.a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178(2)(d), and163.3178(2)(h), F.S. for hazard mitigation and the protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, including population evacuation, which take into consideration the capability to safely evacuate the density of the coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster. The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating that the proposed increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area is consistent with Collier County Comprehensive Plan Conservation and Coastal Management Element Goal 12, Objective 12.1 and Policy 12.1.2 and Future Land Use Element Policy 1.4 (related to the following: ensuring public safety, health and welfare of people and property from the effects of hurricane storm damage; maintaining hurricane evacuation clearance times; appropriate mitigation related to hurricane evacuation times; and that the Future Land Use Map shall be designed to coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating coordination and internal consistency with the Future Land Use Element and Conservation and Coastal Management Element. [Statutory Authority: Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3. e., 163.3177(6)(a)8. a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178(2)(h), and 163.3184(4), F.S.] Recommendations: The Department recommends that the County revise the amendment to prohibit the increase of residential density in the coastal high hazard area above the density that is currently allowed by the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Alternatively, the County should support the amendment with relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating consistency of the amendments with the requirements of Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3. e., Words underlined are added; words StFUE' '" ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 519 9.A.3.f 163.3177(6)(a)8. a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178 (2)(d), and163.3178(2)(h), F.S., and Collier County Comprehensive Plan Conservation and Coastal Management Element Goal 12, Objective 12.1 and Policy 12.1.2. and Future Land Use Element Policy 1.4. Response: The County has amended the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to exclude portions of Mixed Use Activity Centers #2 and #20, and all of #14, #16, #17, and #18 from increasing residential density under the affordable housing provisions established by this amendment. Amend FLUE Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict to read as follows: C. Urban Commercial District (Page 56) *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** 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 161 residential units per gross acre may be permitted. Development located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center and outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area 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 Centerwhich 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, @Rd 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 Words underlined are added; words StFUElk '" ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 520 9.A.3.f 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 acreagewithin 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 theCoastal 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 Bays hore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and the Mixed -Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable outlined in the LDC. If such a project islocated 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 theActivity Center. In order to promote compact and walkable mixed use projects, where the densityfrom a mixed use project is distributed outside the Activity Center boundary: *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** Words underlined are added; words StFUE' '" ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 521 9.A.3.g Ron DeSantis GOVERNOR The Honorable Rick LoCastro Chairman, Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 Dear Chairman LoCastro: 4-') FLORIDA DEPARTMENTof ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY June 12, 2023 Meredith Ivey ACTING SECRETARY The Department of Economic Opportunity ("Department") has completed its review of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for Collier County (Amendment No. 23-01ACSC), which was received and determined complete on April 13, 2023. We have reviewed the proposed amendment in accordance with the state coordinated review process set forth in Sections 163.3184(2) and (4), Florida Statutes (F.S.), for compliance with Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. The attached Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report outlines our findings concerning the amendment. We have identified two objections and have included recommendations regarding measures that can be taken to address the objections. The County should act by choosing to adopt, adopt with changes, or not adopt the proposed amendment. For your assistance, we have enclosed the procedures for final adoption and transmittal of the comprehensive plan amendment. The second public hearing, which shall be a hearing on whether to adopt one or more comprehensive plan amendments, must be held within 180 days of your receipt of the Department's attached report, or the amendment will be deemed withdrawn unless extended by agreement with notice to the Department and any affected party that provided comment on the amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(4)(e)1., F.S. Florida Department of Economic Opportunity I Caldwell Building 1 107 E. Madison Street I Tallahassee, FL 32399 (850) 245.7105 1 www.FloridaJobs.org I www.Twitter.com/FLDEO I www.Facebook.com/FLDEO An equal opportunity employer/program. Auxiliary aids and service are available upon request to individuals with disabilities. All voice telephone numbers on this document may be reached by persons using TTY/TTD equipment via the Florida Relay Service at 711. tU W O a_ U 0 U Q 0 M N Packet Pg. 522 9.A.3.g The Honorable Rick LoCastro, Chairman June 12, 2023 Page 2 of 2 Department staff is available to assist the County to address the objections. If you have any questions related to this review, please contact Scott Rogers, Regional Planning Administrator, by telephone at (850) 717-8510 or by email at scott.rogers@deo.myflorida.com. Since 6es D. Stansbury, Chief ureau of Community Planning and Growth J DS/sr Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report Procedures for Adoption Reviewing Agency Comments cc: Michael Bosi, Division Director, Collier County U W Margaret Wuerstle, Executive Director, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council 0 a U y U Q 0 M N Packet Pg. 523 9.A.3.g Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Collier County Amendment 23-01ACSC The Department of Economic Opportunity has identified two objections regarding Collier County's proposed comprehensive plan amendment. The objections are provided below, along with recommended actions the County could take to resolve issues of concern. If the County adopts the plan amendment without adequately addressing the objections, the Department may find the amendment not in compliance with Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.), pursuant to section 163.3184(4)(e)4., F.S. Department staff has discussed the basis of the report with local government staff and is available to assist the County to address the objections. 1. Objection 1 (Nonresidential Intensity of Use Standards): The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC is not consistent with the requirements of Sections 163.3177(1) and 163.3177(6)(a)1., F.S., that a future land use category must include meaningful and predictable standards for the intensity of use for nonresidential use. The proposed amendment (Future Land Use Element Future Land Use Designation Description Section) and Golden Gate Area Master Plan (Golden Gate City Sub -Element) does not establish intensity of use standards for the nonresidential uses that are allowed within the Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict, the Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict, and the Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict. Statutory Authority: Sections 163.3177(1), 163.3177(6)(a)1., and 163.3184(4) F.S. Recommendation: The Department recommends that the County revise Amendment 23-01ACSC to include meaningful and predictable intensity of use standards for the nonresidential uses allowed within the following future land use categories: Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict, Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict and Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict. 2. Obiection 2 (Coastal High Hazard Area Density Increase): The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC does not coordinate the future land use map residential densities in the coastal high hazard area consistent with the protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, including population evacuation, which takes into consideration the capability to safely evacuate the density of the coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster consistent with statutory requirements (Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3.e., 163.3177(6)(a)8.a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178(2)(d), and 163.3178(2)(h), F.S.) and the Collier County Comprehensive Plan (Conservation and Coastal Management Element Goal 12, Objective 12.1 and Policy 12.1.2 and Future Land Use Element Policy 1.4). The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC (Future Land Use Element Future Land Use Designation Section) increases the allowable residential density in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict future land use category, and the currently adopted Future Land Use Map and Future Land Use Element Activity Center Maps designate Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Numbers 2, 14, 16, 17, 18 and 22 within the coastal high hazard area as depicted on the Future Land Use Map and Coastal High Hazard Area map. The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC results in an increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area. The proposed Amendment 23- 01ACSC is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating that the proposed tU W O a_ U 0 U Q 0 M N Packet Pg. 524 9.A.3.g increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area is consistent with the requirements of Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3.e., 1673.3177(6)(a)8.a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178(2)(d), and 163.3178(2)(h), F.S., for hazard mitigation and the protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, including population evacuation, which take into consideration the capability to safely evacuate the density of the coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster. The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating that the proposed increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area is consistent with Collier County Comprehensive Plan Conservation and Coastal Management Element Goal 12, Objective 12.1 and Policy 12.1.2 and Future Land Use Element Policy 1.4 (related to the following: ensuring public safety, health and welfare of people and property from the effects of hurricane storm damage; maintaining hurricane evacuation clearance times; appropriate mitigation related to hurricane evacuation times; and that the Future Land Use Map shall be designed to coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). The proposed Amendment 23-01ACSC is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating coordination and internal consistency with the Future Land Use Element and Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Statutory Authority: Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3.e., 163.3177(6)(a)8.a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178(2)(d), 163.3178(2)(h), and 163.3184(4), F.S. Recommendation: The Department recommends that the County revise the amendment to prohibit LO the increase of residential density in the coastal high hazard area above the density that is currently `= allowed by the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Alternatively, the County should support the amendment L) with relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating consistency of the amendment with the O requirements of Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3.e., a 163.3177(6)(a)8.a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178(2)(d), and 163.3178(2)(h), F.S., and Collier y County Comprehensive Plan Conservation and Coastal Management Element Goal 12, Objective 12.1 a and Policy 12.1.2 and Future Land Use Element Policy 1.4. 0 M N Packet Pg. 525 9.A.3.g SUBMITTAL OF ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR STATE COORDINATED REVIEW Section 163.3184(4), Florida Statutes NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED: Please submit electronically using the Department's electronic amendment submittal portal "Comprehensive Plan and Amendment Upload" (https://fldeo.my.solesforce-sites.com/cp/) or submit three complete copies of all comprehensive plan materials, of which one complete paper copy and two complete electronic copies on CD ROM in Portable Document Format (PDF) to the State Land Planning Agency and one copy to each entity below that provided timely comments to the local government: the appropriate Regional Planning Council; Water Management District; Department of Transportation; Department of Environmental Protection; Department of State; the appropriate county (municipal amendments only); the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (county plan amendments only); and the Department of Education (amendments relating to public schools); and for certain local governments, the appropriate military installation and any other local government or governmental agency that has filed a written request. SUBMITTAL LETTER: Please include the following information in the cover letter transmitting the adopted amendment: Department of Economic Opportunity identification number for adopted amendment package; Summary description of the adoption package, including any amendments proposed but not adopted; Ordinance number and adoption date; Certification that the adopted amendment(s) has been submitted to all parties that provided timely comments to the local government; Name, title, address, telephone, FAX number and e-mail address of local government contact; Letter signed by the chief elected official or the person designated by the local government. Effective: June 2, 2011 (Updated October 2022) Page Packet Pg. 526 9.A.3.g ADOPTION AMENDMENT PACKAGE: Please include the following information in the amendment package: In the case of text amendments, changes should be shown in strike-through/underline format; In the case of future land use map amendment, an adopted future land use map, in color format, clearly depicting the parcel, its existing future land use designation, and its adopted designation; A copy of any data and analyses the local government deems appropriate. Note: If the local government is relying on previously submitted data and analysis, no additional data and analysis is required; Copy of executed ordinance adopting the comprehensive plan amendment(s); Suggested effective date language for the adoption ordinance for state coordinated review: "The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, LO N shall be the date the state land planning agency posts a notice of intent determining that this amendment is in compliance. If the amendment is timely challenged, or if the state o land planning agency issues a notice of intent determining that this amendment is not in a compliance, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted co U amendment to be in compliance." a 0 M N List of additional changes made in the adopted amendment that the Department of Economic Opportunity did not previously review; List of findings of the local governing body, if any, that were not included in the ordinance and which provided the basis of the adoption or determination not to adopt the proposed amendment; Statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes not previously reviewed by the Department of Economic Opportunity to the ORC report from the Department of Economic Opportunity. Effective: June 2, 2011 (Updated October 2022) Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 527 9.A.3.g From: Plan Review To: Powell Barbara; DCPexternalagenr`comments Cc: Plan Review Subject: [EXTERNAL] - Collier County 23-01ACSC Proposed Date: Thursday, May 11, 2023 10:30:38 AM Attachments: imaaeOO2.®ng To: Barbara Powell, Deputy Bureau Chief, Plan Review and Processing Re: Collier County 23-OIACSC —State Coordinated Review of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment The Office of Intergovernmental Programs of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) has reviewed the above -referenced amendment package under the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The Department conducted a detailed review that focused on potential adverse impacts to important state resources and facilities, specifically: air and water pollution; wetlands and other surface waters of the state; federal and state-owned lands and interest in lands, including state parks, greenways and trails, conservation easements; solid waste; and water and wastewater treatment. Based on our review of the submitted amendment package, the Department has found no provision that, if adopted, would result in adverse impacts to important state resources subject to the Department's jurisdiction. Please submit all future amendments by email to _ _, r_ If your c.> submittal is too large to send via email or if you need other assistance, contact Lindsay p Weaver at (850) 717-9037. a U y U Q 0 F M N Packet Pg. 528 9.A.3.h Co eCT you -sty 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 (TAMP) 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. Page 1 of 10 Packet Pg. 529 9.A.3.h PURPOSE: The primary propose of this GM A 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 GMPAApplication — 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]. Page 2 of 10 Packet Pg. 530 9.A.3.h 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 FL UM; 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 Page 3 of 10 Packet Pg. 531 9.A.3.h 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. Page 4 of 10 Packet Pg. 532 9.A.3.h Table: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Subdistricts Changes Summary EXISTING PROPOSED MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only Eligible Density Location (DU/A) Not in URF or UCF Subdistricts 16 1.5/2.5 with URF TDRs 4 except per DRS (AHDB of 12 du/a) UCF and B/GTRO) MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Mixed Use Eligible Density Location (DU/A) Not in CHHA or URF 16 4 except CHHA B/GTRO 1.5/2.5 with URF TDRs INTERCHANGE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only AND Mixed Use Eligible Density Location (DU/A) Not in URF 16 1.5/2.5 with URF TDRs MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only Location Eligible Density (DU/A) 16//25 per Mixed -Income Not in UCF or URF Housing Program 1.5/2.5 with TDRs//25 per URF Mixed -Income HP 4 except per DRS (AHDB of 12 du/a) and B/GTRO)//25 per Mixed -Income Housing UCF Program MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Mixed Use Location Eligible Density (DU/A) 16//25 per Mixed -Income Not in CHHA or URF Housing Program 4 except B/GTRO//25 per CHHA Mixed -Income HP 1.5/2.5 with TDRs//25 per URF Mixed -Income HP INTERCHANGE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only AND Mixed Use Location Eligible Density (DU/A) 16//25 per Mixed -Income Not in URF Housing Program 1.5/2.5 with TDRs//25 per URF 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 r L 0 a a� U d V v r E N c t= c a� E z U 2 r Q Page 5 of 10 Packet Pg. 533 9.A.3.h 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 GMPAwill 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 Page 6 of 10 Packet Pg. 534 9.A.3.h 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 TAMP 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 Page 7 of 10 Packet Pg. 535 9.A.3.h 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. 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. Page 8 of 10 Packet Pg. 536 9.A.3.h 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: • 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. • 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. • 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). Page 9 of 10 Packet Pg. 537 9.A.3.h 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. 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 Ns 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 TAMP). Second, to clarify that these Subdistricts cannot be used in combination, e.g. cannot use TOD and SOS. Attachments: A) Resolution with Exhibit Ns 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 1) 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 Page 10 of 10 Packet Pg. 538 9.A.3.i 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 Packet Pg. 539 9.A.3.i 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]. 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." Staffs 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; coun tywide FL UM; GGCS-EFLUM.) 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]. Packet Pg. 540 9.A.3.i 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 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]. Packet Pg. 541 9.A.3.i 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: 510) 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: Packet Pg. 542 9.A.3.i 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. £ 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 Packet Pg. 543 9.A.3.j RESOLUTION NO. 2023- 5 7 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 [21 -CMP-01 090/1723199/11 PL20210000660 Words underlined are additions; words stmok t4ough are deletions. Housing Plan 3/6/23 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 544 9.A.3.j 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, on March 28, 2023, 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 cay of fflavck- , 2023. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZE� ' ERK By: Attest --- Attest as t0CJJa1TM0rt, e Cl signature,only ` Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A — Text and Maps BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER?CL/F ORIDA By: j Rick LoCastro, Chairman [2 1 -CMP-0 1090/1723199/11 PL20210000660 Words underlined are additions; words strucak dffeugh are deletions. Housing Plan 3/6/23 2 ol'2 Packet Pg. 545 9.A.3.j 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 Words underlined are added; words stFuelFthFough are deleted. 1 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 546 9.A.3.j this Subdistrict. This provision will sunset 5-years from [the adoption date of this Growth Management Plan amendmentl, unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. a. For properties zoned C-1, C-2 and C-3, as identified in the LDC, protects PrejeEts 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 GeFn neFG*al project acreage. eF For property not within the UFbaR ResideRtial Fringe Subdistri6t, 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 e'^��) 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, protects 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 Words underlined are added; words stru& thFeugh are deleted. 2of18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 547 9.A.3.j devoted to residential uses shall not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the gross building square footage and acreage of the protect. 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 amendmentl, unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. Protects 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 C-1, C-2 or C-3, as identified in the LDC. 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. 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 protect 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 *** *** *** *** *** *** 3of18 Words underlined are added; words struel( threugh are deleted. 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 r N O N J IL LO LO LO N ti U2 M N 0 N c 0 0 a� �a r r E c L r c O E R Q 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 548 9.A.3.j 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 reducina 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 networkof 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 onlv. L Residential development shall provide for housing that is affordable in the following manner: t. 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 Words underlined are added; words ^'F^'" are deleted. 4of18 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 r N 0 N J IL LO W N ti U2 M N 0 N c 0 0 a� �a r r E c L r c 0 E a 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 549 9.A.3.j 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 densitv shall be ten (10) dwellina units Der gross acre. 5. Residential density is calculated based on the total site acreage. 6. Residential development is not subject to the Density Rating System. Q a 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. S 1. When qualified target industry business uses or support commercial uses on the site are CD S adjacent to any property occupied by, or zoned to allow, single family dwellings, the o setback along the commonboundary shall be equal to the proposed zoned building = height and a 15-foot Type "C" buffer shall be provided. o 1_ Residential uses shall be integrated, and made compatible, with non-residential uses in the o development through vertical and/or horizontal mixed -use buildings, landscaping, buffering, c open space architectural embellishments and through pedestrian, bicycle andvehicular (multi- o modal) interconnections. N 1. The PUD shall include development standards to ensure that residential uses are a- integrated with the non-residential uses. m. The PUD shall include development standards for non-residential uses that are no less LO stringent than those in the C-5 Heavy Commercial, Zoning District. Development standards v for residential uses shall be those in the residential zoning district closest to the density ,- proposed. M M n. The PUD shall include a mechanism to ensure the minimum density is developed and the N minimum percentage of target industry uses are developed. This might include specifying the C timing of developing a minimum square foot of target industry uses in relation to the first 2 r Certificate of Occupancy for dwelling units. o as *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** r 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 a increase transit ridership thereby reducing single occupancy trips and vehicle miles travelled. A E TOD protect 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 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. Words underlined are added; words stFuel( thFeUgh are deleted. 5of18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 550 9.A.3.j 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 ('/4) mile of an existing CAT stop, shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said facility within'/4 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. e There is a commitment by Ordinance or Agreement approved bV 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 161 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, a44d-the Bays hore/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 Words underlined are added; words stFaskthFet+gh are deleted. 6of18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 551 9.A.3.j Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and is not within theCoastal 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 islocated 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 ei xcept as allowed bV the Mixed -Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable outlined in the LDC. For a projectlocated 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 theActivity Center. In order to promote compact and walkable mixed use projects, where the densityfrom 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 throughoutthe 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 - Words underlined are added; words StFU& thFeag# are deleted. 7of18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 552 9.A.3.j 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 bV 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 densityaccumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project shall not be distributed outside of the Activity Center. ** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** 8. i`ommer6mal Mixed Use SubdistriGt; (p. 70) The purpose of this Subd'str'Gt is to enE;ourage the developmeRt arld re develepmen commerGially ZORed properties with a mix of residential and GornmerGial uses. The resideRtial uses may be 10Gated above GOmrnerGial uses, in aR attaGhed building, or OR a freestandiRg forth 6119der the CommerGial Mixed Use Subdistriet irl the Urban Mixed Use Distr'Gtr *** *** *** *** *** 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. Words underlined are added; words stF egig" are deleted. 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 553 9.A.3.j R 25E I R26E I R27E R29E R29E R30E R31E R32E R33E R34 E 2012-2025 MAW FUTURE LAND USE MAP Curlier Cowry FWW. v `_� 0-...."V� --- 0��. OFTRa: Of THE Rl9AdERlAY A1tEAA1tE 9NOWR Ra«nelvru¢wm use uwlrtaeo: � ��_ •�•�� ��-•� p 'COatiB1 COURY RUUL aacSrc:xr Ru •RlA aGQ591lN15T[YNRLGXIF WlRiAY ll1R' ""�." -EG'L.�. �•••` it I y _ J R25E R29E R27E RXE R29E R30E R31E R32E R33E R34E Words underlined are added; words Haag# are deleted. 9of18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 554 9.A.3.j 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 bV 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 *** *** *** *** *** *** 10of18 Words underlined are added; words stFuek thFeuigh are deleted. 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 555 9.A.3.j 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 protects 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. Protects 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 protect. 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. Words underlined are added; words struok thFeugh are deleted. 11 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 556 9.A.3.j *** *** *** *** *** 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 amendmentl, 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 C-1, C-2 or C-3, as identified in the LDC. 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. 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 hiqh-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 ('/4) mile of an existing CAT stop shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said Words underlined are added; words siysk-thFeegh are deleted. 12 of 18 0 co m 0 0 0 0 N 0 N J a. to LO LO W N m N 0 N c 0 r 0 0 a) W r E cn c m c m c� a 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 557 9.A.3.j facility within'/4 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] Words underlined are added; words strtGIh are deleted. 13 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 558 9.A.3.j EXHIBIT "A" 0� GOLDEN GATE CITY FUTURE LAND USE MAP m R2o E Words underlined are added; words st ghh are deleted. Legend GREEN BLVD Category m GofdCore Urban Coaercia anInRr Subdhtrin � carer eye canmardei smasnin Do«Mwm Curanm Curter Cernal Subaietria JiSantaa tBarb—N COrmYfCC1l sUW19Mn Urban Reaidom�a suoa�trla _ Mid Ux,oa;„y Center st,oalstnn Commercial Mixed U. by Right Sibdiatrict md cvsion u corn —am by Rightt+ st,ys,t„n Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict Trrrolt Orienbd De+elapnnrlt su7diatna l----�------. ----- D 5001,000 2,000 3,000 op � Fee[ r � Mixed Use Activity p Center Subdistrictm J FW- m F Q W m W Q O Z Z U Q � Goldenold�n Gate Urban Commercial Infill Subdistrict BiN6ifi GOLDEN GATE PKY Downtown Gntrrr �� a„E am F�u� tiro t� �, �oorreo-serrerremr aola Commercial district 14of18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 559 9.A.3.j 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 hiqh-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 existinq or proposed CAT fixed route. b. At least one half (1/2) of the proposed dwelling units must be located within one quarter (%) mile of an existing CAT stop shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said facility within '/4 mile of those units prior to or concurrent with, the first residential Certificate of Occupancy. c. The TOD must complv with the transit oriented development design standards contained in Chapter 4 of the LDC. Words underlined are added; words strUGI( thFaugh are deleted. 15 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 560 9.A.3.j 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] Words underlined are added; words fig# are deleted. 16 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 561 9.A.3.j pRPF'( IMMOKALEE FUTURE LAND USE MAP r ! LR LR �4- MR I - r- v MR ,I cru ~� HR av¢ HR 1 / IMU\ LR - IN \ IMU Lepnd OVERLAYS A,ND ErECLLL FEATUREE HR LR EwioNr LU FUTURE LAND USE LR Re UPI" oru.7loN ... uaaw amsua arracr 0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 ., e.,..,.,,«.. w.«.,.., .,�,.,o.. wcNNu.w.w.•. Mbe Q .w.r 1 a laim[ The in tl ,s to t usse general mapping (Gr r fud I ae only. . f r Ground aurvayinp and records search must be uactl for absolute words b J/ s sear riesla bounderiealacreapeE) Words underlined are added; words StFUGk are deleted. 17 of 18 O t0 t0 O O O O N O N J a to In Lf� O N ti u2 M N O N C O In a) W E N C m L C m E t :i Q 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 562 9.A.3.j 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 proiects 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] Words underlined are added; words straskthFeugh are deleted. 18 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 563 9.A.3.k Collier County Growth Management Community Development Department April 7, 2023 Mr. Ray Eubanks, Plan Processing Administrator Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Division of Community Planning/Plan Review and Processing 107 East Madison Street — MSC 160 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-4120 RE: Transmittal of proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment Dear Mr. Eubanks: In accordance with Chapter 163.36187(1), F.S., and the Department of Economic Opportunity's posted procedures, Collier County has uploaded the transmittal package for the proposed adoption of the Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives, including all support documents, to the Department of Economic Opportunity. Petition PL20210000660 was approved by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) (local planning agency) in a public hearing on May 19, 2022, by a vote of 5-0. The Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved forhansniftdd eGMPAmendment by Resolution 2023-57, in an advertised public hearing on March 28, 2023, by a vote of 5-0. A summary of this amendment is below. Additional details are provided in the Staff Report and Executive Summary to the Board of County Commissioners. PL20210000660 proposes 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 The amendment qualifies as a large-scale amendment pursuant to Chapter 163.3184, F.S., as it 1) is more than 50 acres and 2) involves a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of Collier County's Growth Management Plan. Collier County has previously provided the complete adopted Growth Management Plan, including amendments and support documents, to all review agencies listed in Chapter 163.3184(3), Florida Statutes. Finally, if you have questions or need additional information, please contact: a U_ 0 a m Q. E 0 0 al Office of the Department Head • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, Florida 34104.239-252-2517 - www.colliercountyfl.gov Packet Pg. 564 9.A.3.k Co 76T C;01 .14ty Growth Management Community Development Department Mike Bosi, AICP, Division Director Planning and Zoning Zoning Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: 239-252-1061 Email: michael.bosi@colliercountyfl.gov Sincerely, Michael Bosi, AICP Division Director, Planning and Zoning Collier County Attachments: 1. Executive Summary 2. Resolution 2023-57 3. Transmittal CCPC Staff Report 4. Consultant Report 5. Countywide Future Land Use Map 6. Golden Gate City Future Land Use Map 7. b=okalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map 8. East Naples Community Development Plan Boundary Map 9. C-4 & C-5 Inventory 10. Consistent by Policy Maps 11. Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps 12. Legal ad BCC June 28, 2022 13. Legal ad BCC March 28, 2023 cc: Board of County Commissioners (copy of cover letter only) Amy Patterson, County Manager (copy of cover letter only) James French, Department Head Growth Management Michael Bosi, Director Planning & Zoning Office of the Department Head • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, Florida 34104.239-252-2517 • www.colliercountol.gov Packet Pg. 565 9.A.3.k 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 Packet Pg. 566 9.A.3.k 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]. 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." Staffs 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; coun tywide FL UM; GGCS-EFLUM.) 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]. Packet Pg. 567 9.A.3.k 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 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]. Packet Pg. 568 9.A.3.k 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: 510) 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: Packet Pg. 569 9.A.3.k 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. £ 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 Packet Pg. 570 9.A.3.k RESOLUTION NO. 2023- 5 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING COUNTY -INITIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE a COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, TO ADDRESS HOUSING N INITIATIVES TO ALLOW AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY RIGHT IN > CERTAIN COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS WITH A SUNSET a DATE; TO INCREASE DENSITY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING; c TO ESTABLISH A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES SUBDISTRICT; AND TO INCREASE DENSITY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS ALONG COLLIER AREA TRANSIT x° ROUTES; SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE 0 ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP; GOLDEN GATE CITY SUB -ELEMENT OF GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN o 0 ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP; THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP; N AND ADDING A POLICY TO THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT a PERTAINING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALONG TRANSIT In ROUTES; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF N_ ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. [PL202100006601 �L_ 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 [21 -CMP-01 090/1723199/11 PL20210000660 Words underlined are additions; words stmok t4ough are deletions. Housing Plan 3/6/23 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 571 9.A.3.k 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, on March 28, 2023, 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 c day of fflavck- , 2023. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZE� ' ERK By: Attest --- Attest as t0CJJa1TM0rt, e Cl signature,only ` Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A — Text and Maps BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER?CL/F ORIDA By: j Rick LoCastro, Chairman [2 1 -CMP-0 1090/1723199/11 PL20210000660 Words underlined are additions; words strucak dffeugh are deletions. Housing Plan 3/6/23 a u_ c a as as a E 0 U 2 ol'2 Packet Pg. 572 9.A.3.k 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 Words underlined are added; words stFuelFthFough are deleted. 1 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 573 9.A.3.k this Subdistrict. This provision will sunset 5-years from [the adoption date of this Growth Management Plan amendmentl, unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. a. For properties zoned C-1, C-2 and C-3, as identified in the LDC, protects PrejeEts utilizing this Q 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 GeFn neFG*al project acreage. eF For property not within the UFbaR ResideRtial Fringe Subdistri6t, 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 e'^��) 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, U- or in the case of a freestanding residential building, building square footage and acreage a devoted to residential uses shall not exceed seventy percent (70%) of the gross building r square footage and acreage of the project. a 5. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties, where c possible and practicable, are encouraged. a 6. All development shall comply with applicable portions of Section 4.02.38, of the Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. c� b. For properties zoned C-4 and C-5 as identified in the LDC, protects utilizing this Subdistrict shall comply with the following standards and criteria: 1. This Subdistrict is applicable to the C-4 and C-5 zoninq 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 Words underlined are added; words stru& thFeugh are deleted. 2of18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 574 9.A.3.k devoted to residential uses shall not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the gross building square footage and acreage of the protect. 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 amendmentl, unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. Protects 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 C-1, C-2 or C-3, as identified in the LDC. 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. 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 protect 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 *** *** *** *** *** *** 3of18 Words underlined are added; words struel( threugh are deleted. 0 CD 0 0 0 0 r N 0 N J IL LO LO LO N a_ 0 IL a� a� a E 0 a IL c� N > r .E c 0 I w r Cn c �a L E C.) Q 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 575 9.A.3.k 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 reducina 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 networkof 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 onlv. L Residential development shall provide for housing that is affordable in the following manner: t. 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 Words underlined are added; words ^'F^'" are deleted. 4of18 0 CD 0 0 0 0 r N 0 N J IL LO LO M a_ 0 IL a� r a� a E 0 a c� N r M c c 0 I w E Cn c �a c aD E r Q 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 576 9.A.3.k 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 densitv shall not exceed twentv-five (25) units per aross acre. a 4. Minimum density shall be ten (10) dwelling units per gross acre. a 5. Residential density is calculated based on the total site acreage. 6. Residential development is not subject to the Density Rating System. as 7. Each phase of the project that proposes residential development must provide for the r c ratio of market rate housing units to housing units that are affordable, as stated within the AHDB agreement. N k. When the site abuts residentially zoned land, residential development shall be located _ ° x proximate to such abutting residentially zoned land, where feasible. 1. When qualified target industry business uses or support commercial uses on the site are 0 o adjacent to any property occupied by, or zoned to allow, single family dwellings, the o setback along the commonboundary shall be equal to the proposed zoned building CD height and a 15-foot Type "C" buffer shall be provided. c I_ Residential uses shall be integrated, and made compatible, with non-residential uses in the a development through vertical and/or horizontal mixed -use buildings, landscaping, buffering, open space architectural embellishments and through pedestrian, bicycle andvehicular (multi- In modal) interconnections. N 1. The PUD shall include development standards to ensure that residential uses are U- integrated with the non-residential uses. a 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 c proposed. n. The PUD shall include a mechanism to ensure the minimum density is developed and the a 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. >_ r ° *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** a� 28. Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict The purpose of this subdistrict is to promote high -density residential development along existing or o proposed transit routes of the Collier Area Transit (CAT) system, known as Transit Oriented =I 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 protect is eligible for but not entitled to thirteen (13) dwelling units per gross acre, sublect to L paragraphs a through f below. The Density Rating System is not applicable to TODs. ~ c A TOD that includes housing that is affordable is eligible for but not entitled to up to an additional E twelve (12) dwelling units per acre subject to paragraphs a. through h., below. U r a 5of18 Words underlined are added; words stFuel( thFeUgh are deleted. 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 577 9.A.3.k 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 ('/4) mile of an existing CAT stop, shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said facility within'/4 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. e There is a commitment by Ordinance or Agreement approved bV 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 161 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, a44d-the Bays hore/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 Words underlined are added; words stFaskthFet+gh are deleted. 6of18 a u_ 0 IL a� a� a E 0 U ZI 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 578 9.A.3.k Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and is not within theCoastal 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 islocated 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 ei xcept as allowed bV the Mixed -Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable outlined in the LDC. For a projectlocated 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 theActivity Center. In order to promote compact and walkable mixed use projects, where the densityfrom 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 throughoutthe 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 - Words underlined are added; words StFU& thFeag# are deleted. 7of18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 579 9.A.3.k 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 bV 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 densityaccumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project shall not be distributed outside of the Activity Center. ** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** 8. i`ommer6mal Mixed Use SubdistriGt; (p. 70) The purpose of this Subd'str'Gt is to enE;ourage the developmeRt arld re develepmen commerGially ZORed properties with a mix of residential and GornmerGial uses. The resideRtial uses may be 10Gated above GOmrnerGial uses, in aR attaGhed building, or OR a freestandiRg forth 6119der the CommerGial Mixed Use Subdistriet irl the Urban Mixed Use Distr'Gtr *** *** *** *** *** 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. Words underlined are added; words stF egig" are deleted. Q a_ 0 IL a� r a� a E 0 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 580 rr 0111% 1 ism wwkkq..m- R 25 E R 29 E R27E RME R 29 E R 30 E R31 E R32E R33E R34E Words underlined are added; words StFUGk thFough are deleted. S 0 CD to to Q CD CD CD T- CN CD 04 —j LO Ln LO to - 0 IL CD E 0 U CQ th CD m r- tm r- 0 tv CD E m U 2 9 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm I Packet Pg. 581 9.A.3.k 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 bV 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 *** *** *** *** *** *** 10of18 Words underlined are added; words stFuek thFeuigh are deleted. Q 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 582 9.A.3.k 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 protects 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. Protects 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 protect. 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. Words underlined are added; words struok thFeugh are deleted. 11 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 583 9.A.3.k 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 Q 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 amendmentl, unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. Protects utilizing this Subdistrict shall be allowed up to sixteen (16) residential units per gross r acre, subject to the following: a� c a. The properties are within the Urban Mixed Use District but are not within the boundaries of o the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict. x b. The properties are zoned C-1, C-2 or C-3, as identified in the LDC. c c. The properties have been found consistent by policy, as referenced in Policy 1.1.5 and as o provided for in Future Land Use Element Policies 5.12 and 5.13. c d. Development standards shall be no less restrictive than those for the commercial zoning district on the subject property o e. All residential units must be housing that is affordable. f. There is a commitment by Agreement approved by the County Manager and County a Attorney or respective designees that all units shall be maintained affordable in LO 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 o wastewater generation between the proposed protect and the highest intensity permitted a use within the commercial zoning district on the subject property, has been submitted, and a� approved by staff, that demonstrates the proposed project would have the same or lesser impacts for all three public facilities. 0 a *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** C9 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 o for but not entitled to thirteen (13) dwelling units per gross acre subject to paragraphs a. through m f. below. The Density Rating System is not applicable to TODs. w A TOD that includes housing that is affordable is eligible for but not entitled to, up to an additional r N twelve (12) dwelling units per acre subject to paragraphs a. through h. below. L 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 ('/4) E mile of an existina CAT stop, shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said Words underlined are added; words str each are deleted. r Q 12 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 584 9.A.3.k facility within '/4 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 protect 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] Words underlined are added; words struelc thFeugh are deleted. 13 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 585 9.A.3.k EXHIBIT "A" 0� GOLDEN GATE CITY FUTURE LAND USE MAP m R2o E Words underlined are added; words st ghh are deleted. Legend GREEN BLVD Category Gofdm Cote Urban Coaanercia InRt Subdhtrin � cater eye canmardei smasnin Do«Mwm Curter Canmernal Subaietria Jirna t3aNaN COrmYfCC1l sUW19Mn _ ] txlwn Reaidom�a suoa�trla _ Mid Ux,oa;„y Center st,oaletnn Commercial Mixed U. by Right Sibdiatrict cmvdsion u com�am q, w9t+ st,ys,t„n Trarrolt Orienbd De+elapnnrlt su7diatna Downtown Ctnter Commercial Subdistrict _... D 5001,000 2,000 3,000 op � Fee[ r � Mix�dUse AMivity I, p m C&rtter Subdistrict - J m FW- F Q W_ m W Q O Z Z U Q � Goldin Gate Urban Commercial Infill Subdistrict BiN6ifi GOLDEN GATE PKY Downtown Cantrrr �� a„E arrr F�u� tiro t� �, �oorreo-serretremr aola Commercial Subdistrict 14of18 Q LL a a� a� a E 0 V 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 586 9.A.3.k 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 hiqh-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 existinq or proposed CAT fixed route. b. At least one half (1/2) of the proposed dwelling units must be located within one quarter (%) mile of an existing CAT stop shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said facility within '/4 mile of those units prior to or concurrent with, the first residential Certificate of Occupancy. c. The TOD must complv with the transit oriented development design standards contained in Chapter 4 of the LDC. Words underlined are added; words strUGI( thFaugh are deleted. 15 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 587 9.A.3.k d. The protect 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] Words underlined are added; words struek thFeugh are deleted. 16 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 588 9.A.3.k EXHIBIT "A" pRP� IMMOKALEE FUTURE LAND USE MAP e LR LR I MR MR- TIa1Nra \.> LR IN GW[ Imu {I I \ Lepand OVERLAYS AND EREaILL REAnR1eE I HR I c.ww�`.i��.e a«w•r<�• ...,,«.,,. a,,...r..� LR YINIRALEE FUTURE UNb 115E LR UR[AN bEWNATION • .. • .. u m wool i. Ha-a.r n.w a.e vw,.,1 o 0.25 os 1 1.5 ,, w„r.rNnay,nswFn areee /I� (OiselaimorThe information pmwoad is to be used for general mapping purposes only.` 1 Ground sumaying and records search must be used for absolute boundarisslacreagasl Words underlined are added; words S+F, l^� are deleted. 17 of 18 O CD O O O O O N O N J d In tD v LL 0 a Q E O a Ia^ V to (D r R C 7 O 2 I R w r T N c IC L E C.) a 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 589 9.A.3.k 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] Words underlined are added; words str ^high are deleted. 18 of 18 03/28/23 dw/mrm Packet Pg. 590 9.A.3.k Co eCT you -sty 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 (TAMP) 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. Page 1 of 10 Packet Pg. 591 9.A.3.k PURPOSE: The primary propose of this GM A 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 GMPAApplication — 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]. Page 2 of 10 Packet Pg. 592 9.A.3.k 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 FL UM; 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 Page 3 of 10 Packet Pg. 593 9.A.3.k 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. Page 4 of 10 Packet Pg. 594 9.A.3.k Table: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Subdistricts Changes Summary EXISTING PROPOSED MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only Eligible Density Location (DU/A) Not in URF or UCF Subdistricts 16 1.5/2.5 with URF TDRs 4 except per DRS (AHDB of 12 du/a) UCF and B/GTRO) MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Mixed Use Eligible Density Location (DU/A) Not in CHHA or URF 16 4 except CHHA B/GTRO 1.5/2.5 with URF TDRs INTERCHANGE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only AND Mixed Use Eligible Density Location (DU/A) Not in URF 16 1.5/2.5 with URF TDRs MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only Location Eligible Density (DU/A) 16//25 per Mixed -Income Not in UCF or URF Housing Program 1.5/2.5 with TDRs//25 per URF Mixed -Income HP 4 except per DRS (AHDB of 12 du/a) and B/GTRO)//25 per Mixed -Income Housing UCF Program MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Mixed Use Location Eligible Density (DU/A) 16//25 per Mixed -Income Not in CHHA or URF Housing Program 4 except B/GTRO//25 per CHHA Mixed -Income HP 1.5/2.5 with TDRs//25 per URF Mixed -Income HP INTERCHANGE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only AND Mixed Use Location Eligible Density (DU/A) 16//25 per Mixed -Income Not in URF Housing Program 1.5/2.5 with TDRs//25 per URF 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 Page 5 of 10 Packet Pg. 595 9.A.3.k 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 GMPAwill 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 Page 6 of 10 Packet Pg. 596 9.A.3.k 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 TAMP 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 Page 7 of 10 Packet Pg. 597 9.A.3.k 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. 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. Page 8 of 10 Packet Pg. 598 9.A.3.k 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: • 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. • 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. • 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). Page 9 of 10 Packet Pg. 599 9.A.3.k 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. 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 Ns 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 TAMP). Second, to clarify that these Subdistricts cannot be used in combination, e.g. cannot use TOD and SOS. Attachments: A) Resolution with Exhibit Ns 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 1) 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 Page 10 of 10 Packet Pg. 600 51NCE 1946 ENGINEERING TO: Hilary Halford 11 DATE: December 11, 2020 Final Delivery of Initiative Two, Three, FROM: Mike Bosi, AICP RE: Four and Five —Contract No. 13-6164 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 2350 Stanford Court . Naples, Florida 34112 (239) 434-0333 . Fax (239) 434-9320 Packet Pg. 601 I 9.A.3.k I Initiative Two 0 CD 0 0 0 0 r N O N J d LO LO m CD N LL 0 a a� r a� a E O a a 0 N O > r R C 7 O x I R w r T N c IC L E C.) Q Packet Pg. 602 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO STREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 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. ****************************************************************************** 12/8/2020 Initiative Two Packet Pg. 603 FFF OBJECTIVE 1: OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO STREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 9.A.3.k 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). 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. ****************************************************************** 12/8/2020 Initiative Two Packet Pg. 604 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO STREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 27. 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. a a. B. Commercial Convenience District (C-2). N 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. 46. Mixed residential and commercial uses containiniz housiniz that is affordable subject to the Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts provision of Policv 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 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. subiect to the Housine that is Affordable by Riaht in Commercial Zoninc Districts provision of Policv 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 Affordable by 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. ****************************************************************** 12/8/2020 Initiative Two Packet Pg. 605 9.A.3.k I OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO STREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 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 as intermediate district (C-4). 0 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). 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 T,nC_ ************************************************************************************* 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. 6 163.3161 et 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 12/8/2020 Initiative Two Packet Pg. 606 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO STREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 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 followingare re 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. Income Level as a percent of Median Income Gap (>120 - <140) Moderate (>80 - <120) Low (>50 - <80) Very Low (<50) 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 Methodolog�re regarding for sale units or the annually pdated 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 broiect to ensure nricina 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 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. 12/8/2020 0 to 0 0 0 0 o_ N O N J a un Ln Ln W N LL c (L as as a 0 U a (L c� as 0 .E a� c .N 0 0 x I E U) c 0 L c a) E U M a Initiative Two Packet Pg. 607 • 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO STREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 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 2.07.00, or to knowingly give false or misleading information with respect to any information required or requested by the a County Manager or designee or by other persons pursuant to the authority which is a. delegated to them by section 2.07.00. N 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 Ag 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 c 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 o extent allowed by law. o E. Commitment. The commitment to provide for Housing that is Affordable shall be in the N form of developer's agreement, a PUD developers commitment or rezoning condition of a approval, all of which are subject to the requirements of LDC section 2.07.00. In In 4.02.xx —Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts N A. As required by the Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts a 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 a all units within the project up to a density of 16 gross units per acre, subject to satisf inyg a c c traffic impact analysis provided for within Policy 5.3.e of the Future Land Use Element. a 1. The proposed affordable housing project's traffic impact shall be evaluated against the N 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. E 2. In addition to the public facilities impact analysis, to qualify for the administrative a� N process, the project must submit a School Impact Analysis per LDC Section 10.04.09. I 3. The Affordable Housing by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts project must be multi- family, single family attached or townhouse. E c 4. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan for the project, the application must satisfy M 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 Q as provided within LDC section 2.07.02. 12/8/2020 Initiative Two Packet Pg. 608 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO STREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS b. For units that are for sale. one half of the units must be at a price point that is affordable to either the Low or Very Low income levels 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 2.07.02.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 aU propertypied by, or zoned to permit, a single family dwelling unit: 1). Setback from the common boundaries shall be equal to the proposed zoned buildin..height; 2). A 15-foot Type `B" buffer shall be provided along the common boundaries. 12/s/2020 Initiative Two Packet Pg. 609 I 9.A.3.k I Initiative Three 0 CD 0 0 0 0 r N O N J d LO LO m tD N LL a a� r a� a E O a a 0 N O > r R C 7 O x I R w r T N c IC L E C.) Q Packet Pg. 610 INITIATIVE THREE Irr INCENTIVIZE MIXED INCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS 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 Activity 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. 9.A.3.k Initiative Three 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 611 INITIATIVE THREE 9.A.3.k INCENTIVIZE MIXED INCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS ea of change —Mixed Use Activity Centers and Interchange Activity Center Subdistricts of 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 M 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 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 612 9.A.3.k INITIATIVE THREE INCENTIVIZE MIXED INCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS r' DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS 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 a. project is located within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center which is within the c� 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 sec. 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 verb 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 housingdevelopment evelopment will provide price points of specific units that align as affordable to Initiative Three 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 613 9.A.3.k I INITIATIVE THREE INCENTIVIZE MIXED INCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS 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 Qualifyin>; 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. Income Level as a percent of Median Income Gap (>120 - <140) Moderate (>80 - <120) Low (>50 - <80) Very Low (<50) 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. 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 Methodolog�re 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 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 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 Enforcement. 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 0 to 0 0 0 0 o_ N 0 N J a In Ln Ln m N LL c a W 0 a E 0 U a a c� as 0 .E aM c 0 0 x I E U) a L c as U 0 Q Initiative Three 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 614 9.A.3.k INITIATIVE THREE INCENTIVIZE MIXED INCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS as specifically permitted by the terms of section 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 2.07.00. a a 2. The County Manager or designee shall have full power to enforce the terms of this y section and any developer agreements, rezoning conditions or stipulations, and planned > unit development (PUD) conditions and stipulations pursuant to this section and the M rights, privileges and conditions described herein, by action at law or equi .. In the c event that it is determined that a violation has occurred and has not or will not be c 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 x° provided in the Housing that is Affordable commitment shall be pursued to the fullest o extent allowed by law. to 0 0 E. Commitment. The commitment to provide for Housing that is Affordable shall be in the o form of developer's agreement, a PUD developers commitment or rezoning condition of o approval, all of which are subject to the requirements of LDC section 2.07.00. a. 4.O2.xx—HousinLF that is Affordable by Right in Commercial ZoninLF Districts N 4.O2.xx —Housing that is Affordable within Activitv Centers or an Interchange Activity' as Centers a E 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.O7.O2.A.1. c9 Additionally, the project must: 1. Be a multi -family, single family attached, or townhouse project submitted as a Planned Unit c° Development or Planned Unit Development Amendment; c a) c 2. Enter into a commitment that will contain the specifics of the price qualification for income levels served, term of commitment, eli ig bility requirements, and violations and enforcement = as provided within LDC Section 2.07.00. �I B. The following are additional required components of the commitment for Housing that is E Affordable for a project. L 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 E 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 Q of the income levels identified within the chart in 2.07.02.A.1. Initiative Three 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 615 9.A.3.k rr INITIATIVE THREE INCENTIVIZE MIXED INCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS 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 propertypied 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 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 616 I 9.A.3.k I Initiative Four 0 0 0 0 0 r N O N J d LO LO m CD N LL 0 a a� r a� a E O a a 0 N O > r R C 7 O x I R w r T N c IC L E C.) Q Packet Pg. 617 9.A.3.k OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY 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. Maximum Allowable Density Bonus by Percent of Development Designated as Affordable Housing 9.2, 3 Product (% of MI( 10% 20% 30% 401k 50% 6095 70% 80% 90% 100% Gap (>120-140) 4• s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 n1a n/a Moderate (>80—s120) 4 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Low (>50—<_80) 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 12 Very Low (<_50) 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 12 12 12 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 Initiative Four 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 618 9.A.3.k OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY 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. .......................................................................... Initiative Four 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 619 OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR 2EATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY lrban Mixed Use District (Page 27) 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 arc 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 plarmed 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 Count transportation system by reducing the total vehicle miles traveled to satisfy primary household need of employ The SOS should be designed in a mixed use environment where landscaped areas, outdoor spaces and internal interconnectivityprovide 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: 9.A.3.k Initiative Four 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 620 9.A.3.k A 4 OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY A. The proposed SOS subdistrict must provide for housing that is affordable in the following manner: 1. Base Densitv shall be at 4 units tier acre with the reauirement that an Affordable HousingDensity Bonus (AHDB) agreement must be established. a a 2. The commitment for housing that is affordable shall be authorized throughthe 0 Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB,) program, as specified within LDC section 2.06.00. W 0 3. A minimum of 20 percent of the total units must be committed as affordable housing c 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 M dedicated to the Low or Very Low income levels. o 4. Maximum density shall not exceed 25 units per net acre. o 0 5. Each phase of the project that proposes residential development, must provide for the o ratio of market housing units to housing that is affordable units stated within the o AHDB agreement. a un 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 U. to the arterial or collector road, provided the portion of the local roadway intended to a as provide access to the SOS is not within a residential neighborhood and does not service as a predominately residential area. E 0 C. When the SOS is located within the Urban Industrial District or includes industrially a 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 c uses, as defined within the Research and Technology Park Subdistrict of this Element. E 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. 0 x_ 0 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. M 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 M provided. Q E. Housing shall be fully integrated with other compatible uses in the project through Initiative Four 12/s/2020 Packet Pg. 621 9.A.3.k OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY vertical or horizontal mixed use buildings, landscaping, open space and through pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular (multi -modal) interconnections, demonstrated through the submittal of a Mobilityplan and an internal capture analysis. 1. The Mobilitv 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 Mobilitv Plan shall also provide for an analvsis 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. 1. 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 Initiative Four 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 622 OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR 9.A.3.k ATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY ig criteria. When this Plan was originally adopted in 1989, there were 21 Activity Centers. 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 f 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_Opportuni . 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 employ and employers within a proposed SOS, but also benefits all users of the Count transportation s, stay reducing the total miles traveled to satisfy a primary household need of employ 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; Initiative Four 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 623 9.A.3.k OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY n. High density residential as part of a proposed Strategic Opportuni . Site. . 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 a 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 Opportuni . 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 employ and employers within a proposed SOS, but also benefits all users of the Count transportation s. stay 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 interconnectivityprovide 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 subiect to the criteria set forth under the Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District. Initiative Four 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 624 I 9.A.3.k I Initiative Five 0 CD 0 0 0 0 r N O N J d Packet Pg. 625 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 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) 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 626 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 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 singlepancy 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 12/s/zozo Packet Pg. 627 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS To further facilitate the prioritization of higher density projects along existing transit routes of the 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 ma.. b�quested. 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 twentv-five (25) dwelling units Der 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 densi . developments, of multi -modal character, interconnected with other land uses, pedestrian orientated, multi -family and designed to support frequent transit service operatingthrough hrough the Collier Area Transit system on available roadway connections. ************************************************************************************* LDC 2.07.00 — Price Oualifying Program for Housing that is Affordable 2.07.01— Purpose and Intent 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 628 OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS Section 2.07.00 is intended to implement and be consistent with the GMP, § 163.3161 et sec. 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 ggp-, 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 that is Affordable within the nroiect must be affordable to income levels as identified within the below chart. Income Level as a percent of Median Income Gap (>120 - <140) Moderate (>80 - <120) Low (>50 - <80) Very Low (<50) 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 nroiect to ensure pricing does not exceed the thresholds established. 9.A.3.k 0 to 0 0 0 0 o_ N O N J a In Ln Ln m N ILL C a d 0 a E 0 U a (L as 0 c IM c 0 0 x I E U) a L a a) E U M Q 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 629 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE Ir INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 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 a. 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 2.07.00 to rent, sell or occupy, or attempt to rent, sell or occupy, an affordable housing unit provided under the Price Qualifying ing program except as specifically permitted by the terms of section 2.07.00, or to knowingly give false or misleading information with respect to any information required or requested by County Manager or designee or by other persons pursuant to the authority which is to delegated to them by section 2.07.00. o 0 0 2. The County Manager or designee shall have full power to enforce the terms of this o section and any developer agreements, rezoning conditions or stipulations, and planned J unit development (PUD) conditions and stipulations pursuant to this section and the a. rights, privileges and conditions described herein, by action at law or equity. In the to event that it is determined that a violation has occurred and has not or will not be o corrected within 60 days, the certificate of occupancy for all Housing that is affordable N units within the development shall be withdrawn and the sanctions or penalties a provided in the Housing that is Affordable commitment shall be pursued to the fullest, extent allowed by law. a E E. Commitment. The commitment to provide for Housing that is Affordable shall be in the 0 form of developer's agreement, a PUD developers commitment or rezoning condition of a gpproval, all of which are subject to the requirements of LDC section 2.07.00. as 4.02.xx —Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts c c 4.02.xx —Housing that is Affordable within Activity Centers or an Interchange Activity w Centers ° x m E 4.02.xx —Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Design Standards L 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 alongexisting xisting transit routes. m B. All proposed multi -family projects that front on an existing Collier Area Transit fixed route Q or on a proposed route as identified for funding on the Transit Development Plan, are 12/s/2020 Packet Pg. 630 9.A.3.k • OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 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 fundingneeds. eeds. 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. Duriniz 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'/4 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, eligibilityrequirements, 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 densitv (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. 12/s/2020 Packet Pg. 631 9.A.3.k OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 3. For units that are for rent, two-thirds (2/3) of all units above 13 units per acre must be made available at a price point affordable to Low and/or Very Low income levels as brovided for within LDC section 2.07.02.A.I 12/8/2020 Packet Pg. 632 I 9.A.3.k I Initiative Marketing Brochure 0 0 0 0 0 r N O N J d LO LO m CD N LL a a� r a� a E O a a 0 N O > r R C 7 O x I R w r T N c IC L E C.) Q Packet Pg. 633 We are Improving Housing Choices for Working Families and Want to Hear from YOU! INITIATIVE #1. Regulatory Relief (Cost Maintenance) for Design and Construction of Residential Housing 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. Housing is considered affordable if a family . or individual spends no more than 30% of their income to live there. 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 s' a. 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 �� J 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. INITIATIVE #3. Redeveloped Activity Centers ;. to include Mixed -Income Family Housing The greatest need for affordable housing is in close z proximity to employment, healthcare, groceries, and other i 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 r ,. = f �n to stimulate housing within areas of up to 25 units per acre where households of mixed economic levels are served. Gap >120 to <140 Moderate >80 to <120 Low >50 to <80 Very Low <50 Collier County LDC 2.06.03 (Ordinance 19-02) Proposed changes to the GMP include: 44 • 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. Packet Pg. 635 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 i 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 corridor • Change the Density Rating System to allow TOD market rate projects be eligible for increased density incentives. Specificall 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. I 9.A.3.k I October 9th, 2018 BCC Recap 0 10 0 0 0 0 r N O N J d Packet Pg. 637 9.A.3.k fir- I a 11101 ttallluel1V1111111111111111 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 REGISTERE❑ 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 l October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 638 9.A.3.k 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'Angel❑ 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 2 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 639 9.A.3.k 3. 4. 5. D. September 20, 2018 BCC/Budget Hearing Meeting Minutes Approved as presented — 5/0 a AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS A. EMPLOYEE B. ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS C. RETIREES D. EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH 1) Recommendation to recognize Lorraine Lantz, Principal Planner, N Growth Management Department as the September 2018 Employee of a. the Month. Ln Recognized N U. PROCLAMATIONS (One Motion to Adopt all Proclamations) a A. Proclamation designating October 20, 2018 as Children's Business Fair Day E in Collier County. To be accepted by Michael Dalby, Nikkie Dvorchak, Madeline Young, Amanda Beights and Alex Breault. a 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 PRESENTATIONS Page 3 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 640 9.A.3.k 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 4 October 9, 2018 a Packet Pg. 641 9.A.3.k 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 a Opportunity Sites; (6) Provide an increase in density in the Community 0 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 510; • Motion to approve presentation recommendations for #2 - Approved 510; • Motion to approve presentation recommendations for #3 - Approved 312 (Commissioner McDaniel and Commissioner Fiala opposed); J • Motion to deny presentation recommendations for #4 - Failed 213 a (Commissioner Saunders, Commissioner Taylor and Ln Commissioner Solis opposed); Motion to accept recommendation N. as presented with exception of activity centers, staff to bring back U. recommendations - Approved 411 (Commissioner Fiala opposed); • Motion to deny presentation recommendations for #5 - Failed 213 a (Commissioner Saunders, Commissioner Taylor and c Commissioner Solis opposed); Motion to approve presentation a recommendations as shown on the screen - Approved 312 (Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner McDaniel opposed); N ■ Motion to approve presentation recommendations as shown on the screen #6 - Approved 312 (Commissioner Fiala and cc Commissioner McDaniel opposed) 0) 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 510 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 5 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 642 9.A.3.k 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 S3,038,402.12 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 6 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 643 9.A.3.k 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 7 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 644 9.A.3.k 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 a 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 N sewer facilities for Hammock Cove Tract C, PL20170000348, accept unconditional conveyance of a portion of the sewer facilities, and to a authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and Final Obligation Bond in the total E amount of $6,074.82 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent. a 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 E 6) Recommendation to approve and Authorize the Chairman to sign the S Utility Facilities Quit -Claim Deed and Bill of Sale between Collier 0 County and Minto Sabal Bay, LLC, in order to correct an error in the =1 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 M 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 8 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 645 9.A.3.k Number PL20180001040) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. Wlstipulations 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 1 0) 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 9 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 646 9.A.3.k I:1 C. 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 S10,000 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/bla Commercial Land Maintenance and Superior Landscaping & Lawn Service, Inc. As detailed in the Executive Summary 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 CR.A 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 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 10 October 9, 2018 a U. c (L as a E 0 U Packet Pg. 647 9.A.3.k 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 a Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., on June 26, 2018 as Agenda Item # 11 G. 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 N Easement along the eastern edge of the Gordon River Greenway to the a. City of Naples. An easement over a parcel of County -owned land necessary N to construct, operate and maintain infrastructure U. c a 2) Recommendation to approve the FYI 8-19 contract with the State of Florida Department of Health {DOH} for the operation of the Collier E County Health Department in the amount of $1,491,400. Effective October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019 a 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 designated as Strategic Habitat Conservation Area for Conservation Collier. Page 11 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 648 9.A.3.k 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 tounsm. 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 12 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 649 9.A.3.k 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 a 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 Gil 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 a and Resolution for the funding of Training and Medical/Rescue Equipment in the amount of $63,545 and to authorize the necessary E Budget Amendment. Resolution 2018-171 a 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 13 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 650 9.A.3.k i �VKliWI rWu KI0K1li 01 :Al] 9 04 :AN r 0]►6.1 1) Recommendation to award Solicitation No. 18-7434 for Pelican Bay ^ Streetlight Pole Repairs to SPE Utility Contractors FD, LLC in the a amount of $97,894 and authorize the Chairman to execute the 0 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 U. 4) Recommendation to award RFP # 18-7281 R, "Tourism Fulfillment a and Call Center Services" to Faneuil, Inc., for $21,772.97, authorize the Chairman to execute the associated agreement, and make a finding E that this action promotes tourism. To fulfill requests for information, answer incoming requests a 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 14 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 651 9.A.3.k G. H. 1. J. 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 1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Resolution authorizing execution of Joint Participation Agreement Contract No. GOE50 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 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 1) Recommendation to extend the 2018 Tax Roll at the request of Tax Collector Larry Ray. Page 15 October 9, 2018 a U. c (L as a E 0 U Packet Pg. 652 9.A.3.k Extending it past November 1 due to Value Adjustment Board petitions 2) Recommendation to approve the FY 2018 SCARP 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. Page 16 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 653 9.A.3.k Resolution 2018-176: Reappointing Barry Gerenstein to a 4-year term expiring November 5, 2022 3) Recommendation to reappoint two members to the a HistoriclArchaeological 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. 1 f-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 — 510 Page 17 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 654 9.A.3.k A. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments (appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the Fiscal Year 2019-19 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. Page 18 October 9, 2018 Packet Pg. 655 I 9.A.3.k I October 9t", 2018 Executive Summary & PowerPoint Packet Pg. 656 10/09/2018 9.A.3.k 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 Q needs housing); (3) Develop a streamlined process for commercial to residential conversions via the Hearing Examiner; (4) Develop guidelines to incentivixe 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) S 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. c a In 2017, the Urban Land Institute (LTLI) 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 Q. better the needs of the 40% of the population (58,685 households) currently living in Collier County that c are cost -burdened, spending more than 30% of their income on housing. This large segment of Collier Q 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 Packet Pg. 657 9.A.3.k 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. a 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. • HistoricaIly 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 incentivixation 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 16ula) - 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 16u1a) 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 Packet Pg. 658 10/09/2018 9.A.3.k transit corridors - Direct staff to develop GMP and LDC amendments that will allow increased density and other incentives in CRAB 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) Packet Pg. 659 9.A.3.k 10/09/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: I LA 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; (d) 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) Meeting Date: 10/09/2018 Prepared by: Title: — Community & Human Services Name: Hilary Halford 09112/2018 I:41 PM Submitted by: Title: — Community & Human Services Name: Cormac Giblin 09/12/2018 1:41 PM Approved By: Review: Public Services Department Community & Human Services Community & Human Services Public Services Department County Attorney's Office Public Services Department County Attorney's Office Office of Management and Budget County Attorney's Office Zoning Budget and Management Office County Manager's Office Kristi Sonntag Additional Reviewer Cormac Giblin Additional Reviewer Kristi Sonntag Additional Reviewer Todd Henry Level 1 Division Reviewer Jennifer Belpedio Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Steve Carvell Level 2 Division Administrator Review Emily Pepin CAO Preview Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Michael Bosi Additional Reviewer Ed Finn Additional Reviewer Leo E. Ochs Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 09/12/2018 6:10 PM Completed 09/17/2018 10:53 AM Completed 09/17/2018 12:19 PM Completed 09118/2018 10:45 AM Completed 09119/2018 11:59 AM Completed 09/25/2018 10:36 AM Completed 09/25/2018 1:45 PM Completed 09/25/2018 4:41 PM Completed 09/26/2018 10:56 AM Completed 09/27/2018 8:48 AM Completed 10101/2018 10:27 AM Completed 10/02/2018 2:01 PM Packet Pg. 660 10/09/201 H 9.A.3.k Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 10/09/2018 9:00 AM Q O W t0 O O O O T- N O N J (L LO W) LO t0 N LL 0 IL a� r a� a E O U a IL c� to N > r R C 3 O 2 I R .r r rn c tv L E t U 2 Q Packet Pg. 661 - L ok 4 — -- � PT-- + a ` 47 o s 4 J " r 1 I'G it 0 Fy 20 0 11 p } 4w w z 0 aa� L E V) r Ln m MENEM l�l mj*" it U c •� 1 v � v I� R v trio Gn ^0 o NO A ;w v A 4- a 4 U ��+ O U �A U +'fir' .,-� cw tF.i it �i ❑ 4-1 A A ar c 444-0 Qn v +r v v 2 to to 6 IL m U m a 4.4 o y 1 li'1 rN r v p� rn .d ,--i c ■i v a n o c o , jy O u•) u) In 00 CL - IL x Q O wcru 3 N 11 c a 3 Y J Y [Yi 0 CV 0 N In N N ,i Ill N G O O O Ln 5 r- V Ln r- �l N Li ) a 14 O O Q 0) rn v-A N u CSW C uA W Ln lfl O N n [u ' D E N Ln Ln Ln a +' � c O [0 a O +j CD O 0 v LO pCD 0 0 a -i� -n ko N N Y Ln -� in- c {y a a A -n M O O O O N o 'a c o � O � Lfl co 4 OD �t r�l mr W 3 o a N oD T I O Lr O r O LL 0 m Ln I� m — v - N Zn m o o n v a ..0 J c 1Ln C* N r•1 3 E +1+ o O = N m u� 1•'I — J 3 3 p1 d fa LL a ]- o J v -a m y a o x w m j Y Lx IL L Y f. G C [1C W. v v 3 � � � 4i v •� D D pv 0 U x T u r T M., w Kai v U A x w E. v CIO D V v r: Er inn ro CI) d. co C v G 0 U D y • 'U o � v � � a � o c ;. U LY r/ Lu U Q) 70 E .D 0 CD U Q •_ ❑ E c 0 0 v 0 0 WE CA 0 RO E 0 0 W a� 0 _0 75 A0) i 0 IL Q. U CL 0 .� Q L 5):t _0 0 0 C: o > ❑ C) t cn .0 0 0 �a D Q 0 0s 0).0 •� W Ln 0 T W 0� cn U 0 E 0 a� Ln a� 0 AL* W E E 0 u 0 ji 0 CL. L 0 u Q 0 43 LR U Q cn 0 T) AW I A 0 W D L a aU c G1 O E -- N 0 c o Ln 0 u) Ln � c-1 Ln LO a x � � Q 6 Z W tLocfu C 3 a 3 4' LL - ro o N 0 N LID N N L++ Lr) � �y cr► } .00 C aan O Ln r- Ln C � U N a w d' � n o O ai N en a In lfl Q N n mZ d U) U) Ln = rl a c 0 m aCD d v c, d Ln o T-A O aLn Ln CL ko N N Ln c N a a � -Vk -� �0000N o�a� to m s o -c oa ct N m �r c)a N as N-i (D Liz O o o ri o r--i M Ln rn al m a J Ln co N ti a O O N M in 'i 66 — J 3 a w M UI 0 J 4. y x w m j y a+ iIC G C cc w D D 3 Q Q m W i iI IN ■ ■1 1�' G V7 v �7 � v � � U Q � •ry � � � � v � � � U7p 0) Q— ��� � '� U7 � v � U p v > v Q. • u, v -� 'L •� U U v v v � CD 0 (D � •U 0 0— D� 0 U U 0 L 0 4) � v 0 cn cn v U "' -0 0 • `=-' u U i E U •— v v 4) 4) �- u, U 4) � -0 � E � co E -Q Q U7-Q U A '& � ■ 0 C) I A >, o.c c 41 - c �4- u o o .r0 •_ 4- DL 4i E . - L.- 4- o 0 •Q} 0 c„ 0 E U 0 C)� EZ o , t„ 43 0 0 0 L-0 D � � 43 p E 0 o D L 4) -- 0 o 0 w � 0 QL- -a 'o c 0 z Ll C) 0 (D 0 v Q) •� L tz N v U OL 0 Q1 D L cn cn rr0 V d o (1) 0 Q) -C • N CL Q Qo 0 � �- 4� Q} � o o o -0 •� ) 0 . o E o 0 0 0 0 0 u ~ C 3wG E �} L I& n Ln 0 Ln 0 0 0- 0 C) U Q) 0 E LI C) L v U- Q E L 0 Q 0 CD oD U CIO Q a� 0 E ►A 14, AL A� I-Z Q3 {Q D Q} . • L n�n W W J -0 w C] Q Z E — (Q t6 i Z J 0 m v �� w > > o L a ` } -0 z w z 0 � ] o 1 w a C )7 J U E �tf-�_ >, 70 c am 0) 0)— (1) o0)4-c��� U)Lo * 0 v � � v � t�0 U CO LIi Ln ❑ Lf1 bb q) -p = > +-r +' CCf — [i ❑ a Ll} (U 4-J U L a 4-1 Ln +, • U T — V� -0 u ❑ V) L C2 v LIi ' •E jrL ❑ L.L qj u u �_ 41•i v � V7 v bjDV W Ln •� tIL4 p LL (n U- C6 ❑ 0D J V) 0 0 v - r- -0 °3 M Q n a X a) S U ❑ ❑ U ❑ _ •� L a--► d ❑ — (u }+ .— VLE J Q) L tm v 4- 4- U Ln O v c � ❑ E � . L,i'1 4..1 s_ ❑ f� u � U) 1--J Ev ; v L < ��••�� ❑ - ( L t u v � [+� — � .� fQ m 0 _ v s ao .IZ- C- u 3 • ra •� A � L T V] • 1 ❑ rC 4/} o .� Ski CL 4-J Q} 0.0 �} _g Rip ❑ p s to ❑ — .- txo zs v = v E s � L m > v L- 14 u ]C ❑ ❑ •E i L Q m ❑ v v � � OQ � LU LU Lij 0 n000 � QQ Q uUQo LL- LL- 0 � •N o Q T � � N �Q o • O+ a� �Q a1 rp", (D 0.0 5 -1— 0 o �u �Q- Q- r QAk L L .( _ (D V) � Q ry V) 4) � •0 L I CAI �. 4t Q 'L 0 E U 0 .� 0 E U �n 0 Q) U 0 .� Q) -w-- Q) D L � 0 o 0 CL }o)E � � 0 0 0 Q) Ln a) 0 y_ U� 0 Q C LL. C) 0 �> cn 0 U) u7 � o Q 0-�-- L 0 � � Q 0 0 U v (D_0 > Q a) -0 LI_v � _ L -0 '- 0 E :)4- D o arc =� 0 Q) v . - �(1) —0 0 � U � 0 0 _o_ Q .� Q •� /iW i 00 r� W } CL 0 Q0 u - i 0 0 0 3 m Q s U --� .n i � } � E E a� o a E Zs a v •� a� } o Im s C lie o =� 04. W - ■ Q U 0 �3 U 0 0 } o -C) p .- -0 0 E ' `� p _ 4-4) +- (D Q `) ' L„Ln C� Ln 43 (D . �. . F.Ul D U p 0 U C� 0 a� 0 Fl r' T O LA --- � . 0 0 0 Q •� Q Q " L+- Q) U Q Q o Q) Q o Ln •- 0Eo0) 70 � 0) u (D -0� .— 0 0) Q cn cn 0 - Q L (DQ U Q � Q) • — 0 cn � ._ cn p �- • V, -0 4- Q) Q) 0 0 Q) o o- 0 �} , • —> � -� o Ln E o N Q .� C� x4-- 0 . a) • - o Q L— Q Q 0 •� a) Q) 0Ln o E V) o Q) Q) Q o — Q (D Q j • `I' U Q) cn r= o +-- C 4-Q Q Q o u . s-: o Q F--- -0 cn Q 4 'j Vnn,, n� W < VJ V) .� 0 �..� • W nn 11 � U) > W V nL1 C— U C- Lf) u 0 -+--- 0 .- -4_-QL Q� 4) (D 0 0 "' u 4� 4— 0 ry 4 4- � � >- a) (1) } Y E T V 0 (D -+-- ooV) v E 0 C) o E 0 > Q) Q U x ( ) L w -0 - -- 4� 0 Q3 U �� / 1 >0 L • 0 }., Q = a) 0 •c!� u �> V) V) 0 � VJ > a) 7C) v �o U :+- C Q � Z) > C� v .C) U Lf) 0 o4- 0) (D Ln .� � � � 5 > E C)(D v 0 v ry C = Q a) .— o E E '� o •— = U 0 (1) L v E o� �E.� 7C) v L UE E 0 D -0 (D U x 0) c C) L W p • UAL cry Q3 U ,A co Q = 4 > Ln .0 V) n W 0 a 0 U L E *E 0 0 V x I.-W y_ L 0 nU W cyI) 4 •> F1 i�� Ire. r F1 -r- D 0 4— in!,) W L 0 u Ll-- L— C) U 0 L. Q 0 L 0 y— ■nL1 W . L V L nU (1) V n� W V7 L U 0 co 0 X W c 0 a� 0 U N rp000 0 U N Fil • u L 0 O 0 Q. ■ Ln 0 T O A ""I I . •i ,i rl 4k VW.� 0 ! C 1 fir' • � °`''�' � �� � ,ice �� log 10 rf If F 'alai � 1 .r �• :•r� �'� • tiC ., ..'r: rPV,. pw s-- hamR is mc C} *� ut _ 11116 1 0 1 $MR k Iwo 6'— Mom* Ai AA 4— do z A qwo loop 70 V, 7-VOK- d jr- -mejfb*#- J1 AM C) 0 a) - f. L 0 F � VS x + CL L I 5 0 0 1 �.! U) D 0 V) L L 4- 0 v L W . L!7 .L ._ o L a� � L 0 0 L o u 0 w Q A� A D 0 C� Q] 0 LJ L 0 L 0 0 0 Ln 0 aD 0 4— x o pon For, 1 O Q. Q 0 .N N L 0 Q No r- IJ I nV1J LLJ -H L ny n W � Lo W 0 C!7 u 0 QQ}� Q� � Q � L�� 4t 4a. s N N X rv, of I Q) n J 0 U 4) Cr7 v v � U `f' 0 4 ) U C • crn 0 v 0 0 -A- 0 V U � � 0 � v �7 4t0CD V) c 0 0 v 0 A o C v � v v � i �-C 0 0 v0 vU) V) a) v -C 0 C3 v •� v o� v U .= U U Q 4— QL' Ul) a�E U(- "v o L � v o } v vACO -u U 4- Z) U}U LU •� Q_ Z7)- v a o U v c Cal v �_ i •? 7C) v v.- Qv oz) 0 --- v a)-0 Qa 0U� •�, °) c) L vV a.- 0 0) E•� U o c v a) o'-.� Eve 0-(D0)0L L Q •U Lo 0 v U Ln .C) Q) Lo ) Eta ��N u� �Cv Q M- -� w U -0 ® A AL Ni- C) 4- 0 0 D CT V) 0) U C) 0 Ul) CD CY') v u v 0 a� u E _1 V) 0 u v 0 D v ►3 `Q) V C) 0 .V) D 0 .Q 0 v 0 a� v L Q] y CI) v LO) Q) v c n i V v c� v 4) E C _0 v 4) u .E 0 c 0 v w v U- A a� 0 u C� o o (1) � o N O v U � (1)ry p 4- N N U O Q Pei N W W 0 0 N c 0 U i 0 i 0 .N Ln J Lot • =I MA 0 4C,k 1� 0 u OL V) u 0 (D 0 U) LO CQ No tJ') W L rn V J 0 wrj � -H Lf) ' W 4� rr"o Q C) U Q � o Q 4� C U o v 0 > 4� (2L � U U U U co AL r4 I I 9.A.3.k I Collier Housing Plan 0 0 0 0 0 r N O N J d LO LO m CD N LL 0 IL a� r a� a E O V a IL 0 N O > r R C 7 O x I R w r T N c IC L E 0 Q Packet Pg. 718 FINAL Collier County Community Housing Plan October 24, 2017 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 1 Packet Pg. 719 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 2 Packet Pg. 720 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 "Housing is not a social issue, it is an economic issue. " -ULI Panel 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. 9.A.3.k Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 4 S Packet Pg. 722 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. Urban Land Institute (ULI) , P r�t ommunity Public y &Human Services Community Housing Plan Comm Growth Stakehldrs Managmt Group Dept A}f Hsg Advisory Comm (AHAQ Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 5 Packet Pg. 723 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 6 Packet Pg. 724 9.A.3.k October 24, 2017 To the Board of County Commissioners, As members of the County appointed Housing Stakeholders Committee, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, and employers and residents of Collier County, we are grateful for the opportunity to have met and studied the housing affordability problems that face Collier County. We have spent more than 18 months meeting, researching and discussing this challenge impacting our community. We have determined that there is a need to seriously address the lack of housing that is affordable now, in 2017 and 2018; and not "kick the can" down the road. Many facets of the public sector and business communities have difficulty hiring and retaining employees who cannot find rental or for -sale housing that is affordable based upon their income. From our research and discussions, the lack of housing affordability impacts a very broad section of our community from professionals in health care, education, and other businesses, to our first responders, our hospitality and construction engines, and our low- income senior citizens. The proposed plan presents a well -reasoned, modest, and balanced approach that is based on facts and best - practices, that acknowledges that we all have a part to play in implementing interwoven strategies and solutions. This plan moves us forward as a community in addressing this important issue. As stakeholders actively involved in these discussions, we the undersigned whole heartedly submit this Plan to the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) for approval. On behalf of the AHAC, these recommendations are accepted and supported, and most importantly, we endorse the implementation by the Board of County Commissioners of the recommendations presented in the Community Housing Plan. Jointly, we stand at the ready to continue assisting Collier County Government in addressing this matter that has tremendous impact on the quality of life, sustainability, vibrancy, and future of this community that we all proudly call home. 'Resp�eec`tffu/lly, Michael oal CEO, �Chamber of Commerce /. 1�I+�i"-Wei. CEO, NCH Healthcare Shefif Kevin Rambosk CY,heriffs Department Chair, AHAC Nick Kculoheras Chair, Stakeholders Group L Dl laclynn Faffer Pres./CEO, JFCS Oscar Hentschel Exec Dir, CC Housing Authority Stev-k� Peres./CEO, United Way of CC Reinhold Schmieding CEO, Arthrex "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 cou nty.11 - ULI Panel Report pg 7 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 7 1 a Packet Pg. 725 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 terminnlnev is that it fines not nut the fnrus nn inrnme alone- instead. it "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 >.6 Figure 1. Cost Burdened Professions Who is cost -burdened in Collier County? People from across the communitX mun"Im"l-IMM Off Firefighters, Police Officers Health Care Nurses, N u rsinglMed ical Assistants, Senior Care Providers Education Teachers & Teacher Assistants, Support Staff Wait staff, hotel staff, retail I trade salespeople, golf course employees, landscape maintenance Bank tellers, government employees, administrative assistants These job sectors make up over 50% of all jobs in the county They are first responders, educators of children, and health care providers. 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 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 >7 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 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% 1 38% 1 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"/1 25"/„ Teaching Assistants $22,000-$24,000 45% 101 % 51 % Public Safety Firefighters $39,000-$57,000 29% 431%. 21 % Patrol Officers $47,000-$59,000 26% 41'% 21% Service Workers Maids/Housekeeping $18,000422,000 109% 55% Massage Therapist $26,000-$55,000 37°/u 44°/u 22% Concierges $25,000-$31,000 1 48% 39% Entry Levell Mid Tier Professionals Human Resources Specialists $35,000-$55,000 31% 45% 22% Dental Assistants $33,000-$43,000 36% 29% Administrative Assistants $22,000-%33,000 37°/, Source: ULI Collier Report 2017 Figure 3. 2009-2014 Employment Commuting Patterns in Collier Co. Commuting 20,313 employees 14.7% of Commute from: Lee, &_ r1_11:.... -..* _Ir 1 !30 Ann I ..1-111'r-1- I LJ.. 4 "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) 9.A.3.k 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 Snaoshot" 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 $801 $973 $1,195 $1,606 $1,996 Rent chg from prior +11.3% +14.3% +14.7% +15.5% +15.6% year Source: Collier County Apartment Survey, HUD Figure 6. Collier County Median for Sale Housing Increases 2016/17 Multi- Single- Combined Family Family March 2017 Collier $275,000 $422,000 $340,000 M Collier's housing affordability gap will continue to grow as rents and for sale housing prices continue to trend upward year over year. >9 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 12 Packet Pg. 730 9.A.3.k 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 1 400 350 300 z5o $�75k zoo lSo LOO $65_7k So _ Area Median Home Price -Housing Opp.rt ily Index -Area Median Income 61.4% of t h e 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. 49_8 Or C11 CT CY CY Or 81 (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 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 13 $318k $68.3k IN THE PAST 3_5 YEARS - • HOME PRICES INCREASED - 25.6 -ME IAN INCOME INCREASED 3.9 •AFFO RDAB I L)TY (HOI) DECREASED 6.9% NAPLES/MARCO HOI (Ho r, opportunity index) s the share of housing sold that Id be affortlabl¢ to a family earning median income based standard ortgage nderwriting cr 30f%of (as es gross m spent on ho sing with 10% down payment). National Association of Home Btr tlders (NAHB) a d Wells 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 & ✓ Enhance Transportation Governance Options ✓ Increase Supply ✓ Enhance Wages ✓ Maintain or Restore ✓ Communication and Existing Supply 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 Increase Density Bus YIMBY a 7 member BCC in AHDB route Volunteerl program aff. development wages Projects Directory Incl. Zoning with Simple Majority Park and Ride affordable flexibility Minimum wage for AH Zoning System housing for options developer$ Increase Density Rental of guest Bus Rapid transit Myths and FaaV at Strategic Sites houses / ADU or express routes Brochure Commercial by Marke Increase Admin Transp, Jobs; Implement Commu 'q Approvals Pathways Plan Incr. density Plan Expedite Community Land Promote Ride Hire Community Permitting Trust Sharing Options Outreach Coord Streamline Reduce regs to Use Publicly Secure revenue reduce cost owned land source for transit applicatio process Directory of Adopt SMART Reduce or waive affordable code (LDC) impact fees housing for consumer%� Reinstate Dev Hous Housing Trust Educatio Fund Program Dedicated Housin Funding c^jfiW Resources Hire Housing Counselor ' I , Community 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 I far sooner than expected. —ULI Report, pg.37 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 14 1 Jr'---- 1 '. Packet Pg. 732 1 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 15 Packet Pg. 733 9.A.3.k,r - Category Name Percentage Category Income Limit by Num er of Persons 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 $501240 $55,760 $60,240 Moderate 120% $58,560 $66,960 $75,360 $83,640 $90,360 Gap j 140% 1 $70,272 $80,352 $90,432 $100,368 $108,432 Category Name Percentage Category Rent Limit by Number of Bedrooms (incl. utilities) 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 Category Name Percentage Category Typical purchasing power for household size (Uncome) 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 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 rliirina a 44-vaar arniinrl laaca A CI T is tvniralIx/ mnnaaarl by n nnn-nrnfit 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. t5 9.A.3.k 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 121" 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 57,601 Households 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 CilMill 143,771 57,601 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 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 18 are cost burdened in Collier County — of which 29,342 are severely cost burdened (spending more than 50% of their income on housing) Packet Pg. 736 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 The Housing demand model shows a need for 1,665 units at various income levels. Collier County Housing Demand Model - Sept 1, 2017 e a a m tt to a to Houuheld Income in ErHelnS 2018 Ctsst Burdened Population Unit. Needed In Toed Units Avallable Avallable Relnalnhq Vnk Type Income Tereet Household Dollars (i Ma. Ront/Purchas•Pnca Hausin( Rnrktad Household, Growth Order to Lowar Needed per Units Units Units Resourw, Funding Income Lovd 2017 (HUD) Inventory Approved (2015)40%of Demand mat Burdened year Purchase Rental Needed Awilable Asaalabla h usehoWl IAud 2017) Affordable $471 - 150 all Heuuhald, 2017 hY 1% 303 287 352 243 254 536 (Au82017) pWy 2017) (ye.rtyl R.rst.l Eeerm.lylow Wathe. 30% $18,84D 12,106 233 0 D 536 sxlP,eoI28, NOM ESG Rannal very I— 11%-W L $31,400 $785 - 1,411 11,465 263 550 0 D 550 SHIP, MISS, M NOM ESG f1AW� nern•r/Rental Lo+ 51%4K L $50,240 $1256/t$115,000 12,052 4,285 $200,000 43,335 - $250,000 22,740 - �5,846 14,078 413 464 444 765 707 698 206 27 532 47 n/l. _P'_ e' HOME $2,100AM owner alludes. SM-1m% $75,360 9.723 10,195 500 160 SHIP $SWAM Own., Gap lu%-M% $90,432 617 312 �Ie We Total 78,127 57,567 1,817 f 1,439 1 3,256 1,323 499 1,1 $4,s5oaoo 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 Reportfrom 2016 was used which includes jobs located in Collier County 4. Collier County Property Appraiser S. Includes Manufactured Homesl. (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 forAffordable 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 migrantform-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 makeup 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. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 19 9.A.3.k 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. 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 20 I ■ Packet Pg. 738 9.A.3.k 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 21 MIXED USE & INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER ACREAGE �y.ymrT vee.b G.^.0 „a[pV w[osei cry ha1nE u�eNM + ] rccax uar« +vrt M emu] k• aesd.le wv.]a�es e[r[�pea Packet Pg. 739 9.A.3.k 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- CL.. MAY ma . COINTY 0 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 22 Packet Pg. 740 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 r-h.,., +hic r i-uses sar 1drl ho clonrs N-4 ieni—+km 1r 1 nff.,t-Antrim h.,rrcienr, PROPOSED 1-06.03 - AHD8 harm& system TAU A- AITordabk-IT"orkfo..e"Gap Housing Density Hooas (Addilioaal A, siloble Dwe8ia8 Caits Per Gross Acrr) Mamwm Allowable Density Saws by Pe aret of D—IDpnwnt DonlatM as AOordabk-Worldme-Gals HWprq Household Product Incase 10% 20% 30% ao% StMi 6D% T01i e0li 90% lODli l%rMdon) I i 12mill..% Gap Na 2 3 t S 6 7 8 19 Na Moderate Na 8 5 6 7 8 9 10 31 12 51 tow Na 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 12 "Lose Na 8 9 30 11 12 12 U 12 12 'Owner lsned only -Nay only, be used in corjundkn wlh at Will 10% at w below 80%MI Total Allowable Density = Base Density . A6ordablerWallorc"ap Henq Density Bonus In no event shall the maximum gross demky Allowed exceed 16 units pet acre B The AHDB shall be available to a development only to the extent that b othavwis.e complies and is consistent with the GMP and the land dnnkpmenl regulations, including the procedures. requiemerefs condtimrs and criteria for "PDDs" and wGni ngs. where appkable C The mininorn number of affordable housing units that shall be provided in a det•elopment pursuant In this section shall be ten fl0f a8adable housing urcts D. The ratio of number of bedrooms per a6ordable housing unit shal in general be equal to the ratio of dre number of bedooms nor residential unit fa the entire develo mein requirements. Figure 11. PUD Residential Approvals 2007-2017 PUD UNIT APPROVALS Example Mixed Income Housina Reauirements/Units YEAR PUD Units Approved 5% 10% 15% 20 /o 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 r 610 31 61 92 122 2017 Projected 1,220 61 122 183 244 2007-2017 (Projected) Total 13,260 663 1,3261 1,989 2,652 4. Establish or Increase Administrative Approvals A. Allow commercial conversion near tareeted transportation and iob 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 "Density is Key" -ULI Panel 12 9.A.3.k 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. a• m7ft a ~ \ . v r Aim � *- 9.A.3.k 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 r_� Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 26 Packet Pg. 744 9.A.3.k Example: Figure 13. Smart Code Neighborhood Transect Zones Preserve East of Golden Goodlette Pine 5th Ave S. Everglades Gate Rd -Collier Ridge Rd. Mercato Blvd. Estates Blvd. U541 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: _ Ott! r r - Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 27 Packet Pg. 745 • 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 (35vo) 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) Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 28 Fieure 13. Proposed Uses of Housing Trust Fund Programs Developer Consumer Down Payment Assistance X Impact Fee Relief X X Land Acquisition/Pre X Development Funding Construction Loans X X Community Land Trust— X land acquisition Preserve existing X X affordable housing supply — For rehabilitating rental or owner occupied dwelling units Rental assistance X Local contribution for tax X credit or SAIL applications 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. C+nihln C11n&4ino Ceti IrPnf G7 9.A.3.k 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 Q and motel taxes. s 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 Potential Revenue r Include as a priority for lobbyists on staff Mill $2M Annually or under contract with Collier County that the legislature appropriate all the Sadowski state and local housing trust funds for Florida's_ housing programs. Adopt a Linkage Fee for Non -Residential $1/SF = $2M/yr (based uses on 2017 projection) Adopt an in -lieu of fee or donation of $127,000/unit = land in lieu of constructing required $1,270,000/yr est. workforce units under the mixed income housing requirement Sale proceeds from donated or surplus Cannot assess land designated for affordable housing_ Develop philanthropy in the form of Cannot assess cash or land donations Continue with Tax Increment Financing TBD for a new CRA (Bayshore CRA), and consider similar structures for other CRA's Public/Private Partnerships Cannot assess Community Foundation/ other non- Cannot assess profits Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 30 9.A.3.k 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 31 c a� E C J M t Packet Pg. 749 'NEI often charged to developers on a square foot basis, can then supplement 9.A.3.k an affordable housing funding program that targets certain areas. Figure 15 NON-RESIDENTIAL PERMITS Example Linkaqe Fee Requirements/Revenue YEAR PeSgFted $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 $ 4,941,4861 2016 731,456 $ 365,728 $ 731,456 $ 2,194,368 2017 1 /2 r 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) Totaij 4,963,172j $ 2,481,586 j $ 4,963,172 j $14,889,516 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 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 32 Packet Pg. 750 agreement, and the payment of such tees 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 law'. 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 UA Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 33 Packet Pg. 751 9.A.3.k 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 34 9.A.3.k 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 35 9.A.3.k 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 Countyfunds, 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. Philanthropv 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 36 Packet Pg. 754 9.A.3.k 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 CRAB. 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 37 Packet Pg. 755 1 9.A.3.k Figure 16. Additional Revenue Sources Include use of funds for affordable housing with ' Undetermined potential Sales Tax referendum/program with funds allocated to a Housing Trust Fund annually. Establish a certain percentage or dollar amount from ad Undetermined valorem taxes to be allocated to a Housing Trust Fund annually. 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. ago 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 r. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 38 Packet Pg. 756 9.A.3.k 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 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 K. Kentai housing - ,vrroraaaie 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 EQUAL HOUSING such as solar panels, rain water capture and storage, tank -less water OPPORTUNITY 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 Packet Pg. 757 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 HUD- Infrastructure, land $1.5M CDBG acquisition, purchase assistance HUD- Construction or rehab of $350,000 HOME units FHFC- Purchase assistance, rehab $1.51VI SHIP or new construction 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. 9.A.3.k Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 40 wl Packet Pg. 758 9.A.3.k 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 Using a community land trust (CLT) is a way to stop losing ground both figuratively and literally. 9.A.3.k 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 42 Packet Pg. 760 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 South Florida Neighborhood Community Trust Name: Community Renaissance, Land Trust of Land Trust Inc. Palm Beach County, Inc. Year Founded 2006 2005 2006 Geographic Area Broward and West Palm Palm Beach served Miami -Dade Beach County Counties Number of Staff 4 6 2 Number of 8 13 29 Ownership Units Number of 55 80 82 Rental Units Anticipated At least 6 36 rental and 32 Growth over additional 25 ownership next two years homeownership homeownership units (through 2019) units (deed restricted per local government program) Commercial None owned at None within the Owns a small property this time, but land trust commercial ownership and considering co- space within plans working or a rental office space for community non -profits 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 43 Packet Pg. 761 9.A.3.k 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 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 8, 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 45 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 46 I ■ Packet Pg. 764 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 47 Packet Pg. 765 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 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 48 Affordable housing is an essential part of eve ry community's infrastructure. It is one of the cornerstones to creating a healthy, vibrant and sustainable community. Packet Pg. 766 9.A.3.k (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 1 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 49 Packet Pg. 767 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 50 Packet Pg. 768 9.A.3.k and others, will help the county increase the supply of rental housing that is affordable to accommodate its future population and employment I 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 Units to be Produced by Strategy Household Housing TOTAL Tenure Target Household Income in Dollars (3- Rent/Purchase price Remaining Increased Increased Trust Fund with Linkage Mixed Income Housing (15% of Land Trust Grant Funding Projected Income Level person Units Needed Density Certainty Fee Approvals) lest 20ac.) ($50k/unit) Units household) ($50k/unit) Produced Rental Extremely Low Lessthan30% $18,840 $471 536 4 0 3 5 15 20 47 Rental VeryLow 31%-50% $31,400 $785 550 50 50 20 10 40 40 1 210 Owner/Rental Low 51%-30% $50,240 $1256/$115,000 532 75 75 20 55 45 20 290 Owner Moderate 81%-120% $75,360 $200,000 47 100 150 5 55 20 10 340 Owner Gap 121%-140% $90,432 $250,000 n/a 50 271 2 55 0 0 378 Total 1,665 279 546 50 180 120 90 1265 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 51 Packet Pg. 769 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 52 Packet Pg. 770 • 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 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 53 I Packet Pg. 771 I 9.A.3.k I ULI Collier Housing Assessment 0 0 0 0 0 r N O N J d LO LO M CD N LL 0 IL a� r a� a E O V a IL 0 N O > r R C 7 O 2 I R w r T N c IC L E M 0 a Packet Pg. 772 9.A.3.k Ilier County Florida January 29—February 3, 2017 Urban Land Institute Q a Packet Pg. 773 Collier County Florida Expanding Housing Affordability January 29—February 3, 2017 Urban Land Insiituie 9.A.3.k Packet Pg. 774 9.A.3.k 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, Linkedln, 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. 2 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 775 9.A.3.k 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 EditorlManager 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 Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 776 9.A.3.k 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 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 iel Jr. The panel would also like to thank the city of Naples, thanks ULI Southwest Florida, which will continue to be a the city of Marco Island, Everglades City, the Collier County local resource for Collier County moving forward. Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, and the Commu- nity Housing Plan Stakeholders Committee for inviting the Finally, the panel would like to thank the approximately 90 panel to examine housing affordability challenges in the residents, business and community leaders, and repre- and it thanks the community at large for being so from the Greater Collier County community who sentativescounty, warm and welcoming. shared their perspectives and insights during the panel's stakeholder interviews. 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. 4 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 777 9.A.3.k Contents ULIPanel and Project Staff...............................................................................................................................6 Background and the Panel's Assignment..........................................................................................................7 Study Area and Surrounding Context.................................................................................................................9 CurrentConditions........................................................................................................................................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 Aboutthe Panel.............................................................................................................................................43 Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 778 9.A.3.k ULl Panel and Project Staff Panel Chair Philip Payne Principal and Chief Executive Officer Ginkgo Residential Charlotte, North Carolina I' MO N IM111170 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 6 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 779 9.A.3.k Background and the Panel's Assignment 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 affordabilityproblem. 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 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. Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 780 9.A.3.k 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 Collier County circa 1930-1945. m 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. 8 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 781 9.A.3.k Study Area and Surrounding Context LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST END of the Florida Charlotte Harg&V�l1►est Palm Beach peninsula, Collier County is the largest county by land Fo�t Cape HEN DR��j ?�� �la B ynon lea area in the state. The county contains a variety of differ- LEEr alee 441 ent communities including the city of Naples, inland Im- _� - _ - r a mokalee, and Marco Island, as well as four large nationally Naples ort Lauderdale protected environmental areas. According to the 2010 C o 41 L I E R BROWARD Bi9 Cypress j t - _ ollywood census, the population breaks down to 65.7 percent non- N PRES GULF Hispanic whites, 25.9 percent Latino, 6.6 percent African `i I Tam' a, �� �--}� iaml American, and 1.1 percent Asian. This diverse community, O F s °E DADS _hl Biseyne NP both geographically and ethnically, makes Collier County M E x I C O yyhitewaferB Hoineste - ' ATLANTIC unique when compared with similar tourist destinations. E lades NP However, this diversity has also led to housing issues OCEAN throughout the county. FLORIDA BAr" 1 Key Focus Areas ■ Key West. 1 Although the county was examined at large, the panel was Located in southwest Florida, Collier County is the largest county by land area in the state. asked to focus on the following key areas: ■ The city of Naples is an incorporated municipality Collier County bordering the Gulf of Mexico on the west and the Florida _ <— Immokalee area 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 Urban "}area number of commercial areas consists primarily of retail �� -_' �_ : Z. centers and financial institutions. City of "t = -y ^ Rural lands/Estates area ■ The urban area is located between the city of Naples Naples �;�• . a _.- and the rural lands (which run from the coast to about 9 •• ten miles inland). Most of the housing, commercial, re- l 1111 tail, and other services are located and permitted in this - area. The urban area is characterized by large, planned, co gated communities and by strip -mall developments. ■ The rural lands and the Estates area are located iP I between the urban area and the more environmentally sensitive areas to the east. The Estates area is largely The panel's study area encompasses the entire county. However, key focus areas within the study Composed of platted, subdivided lots that range from include the city of Naples, the urban area, the rural lands, the Estates area, and the Immokalee area. Collier County, Florida, January 29-February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 782 9.A.3.k 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. 10 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 783 9.A.3.k 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 EMYL. oWNG Xc kDPV I j rw What Is Affordable Housing? 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. 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 Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 784 9.A.3.k 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. 12 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 785 9.A.3.k 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. 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 Table 1: Cost Burden in Collier County 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. Burden for Three -Person Household Earning 30 to 150 Percent of Area Median Income Annual household income $20,160 $29,600 $47, 300 $59,125 $65, 038 $70,950 $88,688 _ Percentage of income Percentage of income Percentage of income Percentage of area needed to afford needed to afford needed to afford median income median rent* median -price home** median -price condo*** 30 61 50 41 80 26 100 21 110 19 120 17 150 �I _ 14 1 149 101 63 51 46 42 34 ®1 69 43 35 31 29 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. Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 786 9.A.3.k 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, 14 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 787 9.A.3.k Table 2: Estimated Cost Burden for Households Headed by Selected Wage Earners Health care Registered nurse $47,000—$65,000 0 Medical assistant $30,000435,000 41 % Emergency technician $28,000—$36,000 42% Education Teacher $44,000—$59,000 28% Teaching assistant $22,000—$24,000 45% Public safety Firefighter $39,000—$57,000 29% Patrol officer $47,000—$59,000 26% Service workers 38% 43% 41% Maid and housekeeping Massage therapist $18,000—$22,000 _ffMMM'r $26,000—$55,000 3791044% Concierge $25,000—$31,000 48% Entry-level/midtier professional Human resources specialist $35,000—$55,000 31 % 45% Dental assistant $33,000—$43,000 36% �i Administrative assistant $22,000—$33,000 1 - 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. 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 Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 788 9.A.3.k just taking into consideration FIR 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 higherthan 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 Table 3: Collier County Housing Market Snapshot Units Affordable for Households Earning Less Than 100 Percent of Area Median Income Housing type Single-family, for -sale homes Condominiums Single-family rentals Number of units 65-250** Multifamily rentals Sources: Zillow.com; Apartments.com. *3.8 percent of inventory on multiple listing services **Priced at $120,000 to $175,000 23 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. 16 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 789 9.A.3.k Vision: What Do You Want to Be When You Grow Up? 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 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) Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 790 9.A.3.k 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 18 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 791 9.A.3.k 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. panel 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. Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 792 9.A.3.k Implementation 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 20 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 793 9.A.3.k 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 Toledo/Lucas County, Ohio interest (land bank) Real estate transfer tax Columbus/Franklin County, Ohio Hotel/motel tax AME Columbus/Franklin County, Ohio Developer impact fees/proffers Fairfax County, Virginia Food and beverage tax 'V Dade County, Florida a 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. 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. An example of existing density that allows for a mix of uses in p downtown Naples along Fifth Avenue. Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 ill Packet Pg. 794 9.A.3.k 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. 22 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 795 9.A.3.k 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 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. 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 Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 796 9.A.3.k 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. 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. 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 Repurposing Vacant and Underused Retail Space to developers looking to refurbish existing properties, and 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 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 panel strongly recommends that the county take an inventory of vacant and underused commercial parcels that might be available for housing development. 24 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 797 9.A.3.k 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. (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. 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 NO 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." ■ 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 Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 798 9.A.3.k 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 The Bayfront Naples development is an example of successful and appropriate density and mixed -use development in Collier County. 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 26 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 799 9.A.3.k 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. Forprojects 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 Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 800 9.A.3.k 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. 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 simple -majority, which will provide greater certainty. For ex- and convenient, efficient access to jobs seriously affect ample, Hillsborough County, Florida, has a seven -member the attainability of housing and the overall viability of a board with three at -large board members. community. For instance, even if housing is affordable, the costs of transportation can outweigh the financial benefits Although there is an expedited construction permit review of those price points. 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/ DevelopmentlnCRD_CRA.pdf) for comprehensive plan amendments and zoning applications as an incentive for redevelopment of older areas of the county. 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 28 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 801 9.A.3.k 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). 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- 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 tion system that better connects labor, jobs, services, and cost decreases to 9 percent; for those in auto -dependent amenities to housing. It is time to act on the work of the communities, it increases to 25 percent. Thus, transporta- 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 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- Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 802 9.A.3.k 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 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. 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. 30 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 803 9.A.3.k An example of the successful and well -used bike lane infrastructure along 151h Street, a major downtown corridor in Washington, D.C. 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 ■ Enhance safety for transit mobility: The recommen- source should also be identified and provided for such dations of the 2014 "Safety Study" should be prioritized additional capacity. and funding should be allocated for the full implementa- tion of key safety issues, including continuing educa- Create Ride -Sharing Option 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 priork 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 - 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 port from the Louisiana Public Health Institute. options for Collier County. Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 804 9.A.3.k 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. REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION lFs:Fo50N. nV rF - 7 WF IlP MP F T'"-NI — .9.F5 s...r.Q .n„ Nn. D�I.cw n+rrroaolilo� R.vion �• Metro New Orleans GreenRide links commuters with carpool matches in the New Orleans metropolitan region. First, 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 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. 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, 32 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 805 9.A.3.k to 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 ry �sknrny 7. ENVIS16NING J)EVELGPMM T0OLKIT New York -:,� 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 I' 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. Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 806 9.A.3.k 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. 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. 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. 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- 34 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 807 9.A.3.k 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 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. peel �r ixgtwerx e � � Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 808 9.A.3.k partner with the philanthropic community to develop fun and creative community volunteer projects and programs to raise awareness and bring the community together. 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 - Examples include planting projects related to new housing pressed property values). In addition, creating a workhouse developments, public art initiatives, "welcome wagon" media campaign could be another valuable approach to programs, and "yes in my backyard" (YIMBY) campaigns. community -wide education about housing affordability and Those types of programs can go a long way toward bring- whom it affects. 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 36 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 809 9.A.3.k Conclusion 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. Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 810 9.A.3.k Appendix A. Implementation Schedule mplementation Schedule Added Supply Regulation and Governance Communication and Education Strategies Short Term Review existing land inventory for possible Draft additions to the Land Develop- Develop inventory of affordable housing affordable housing development sites, ment Code (LDC) and the Growth units and update regularly. 0 to 3 years including commercial sites for conversion. Management Plan to include inclu- sionary zoning and expand expedited Develop a marketing and communications Develop a cross -agency strategy to permit review process for all affordable plan. consider other public facilities. projects. Employ a housing counselor. Identify and vet funding sources to reinstate Housing Trust Fund (HTF). Permit guest houses as rental units. Expand and enhance educational Revise the LDC to include a smart code programs to that makes it easier to create mixed- ■ Explain housing affordability income developments. ■ Explain cost burden Identify strategic opportunity sites for density increases such as the ■ Assist residents (renters and homeowners) Bayshore Gateway Triangle in household budgeting. Community Development Area. Create an expedited and/or concurrent comprehensive zoning plan approval process. Offer administrative approvals for certain applications. Medium Term Implement an inclusionary zoning program. Plan for additional increased density in Continue to refine and update affordable certain activity centers with the provi- housing inventory. 3 to 5 years Implement an expanded fee waiver/ sion of mixed -income housing. deferral program. Update and refresh the marketing and Add at -large Board of County Commis- communications plan as needed. Fund HTF to take advantage of other sioners members and/or reduce the financing vehicles (LIHTC, AHP, etc.) to super -majority rule. Update and refresh educational tools and support affordable housing development. programming as needed. Develop a process for commercial -to- Review and refine resources and tools residential conversions. available to the housing counselor. Long Term Conduct an annual review of HTF levels Continuously review and monitor the Continuously review and monitor affordable and report on fund expenditures. LDC and revisions, strategic opportu- housing inventory, marketing and com- 5 to 10+ years nity sites, and updated comprehensive munications plan, and educational tools and Adjust the inclusionary zoning program to zoning plan approval process to ensure programming, as well as resources and tools balance the needs of residents with those that the desired goal of increasing the available to the housing counselor, to ensure of developers and the current market. availability of affordable housing is that the goal of increasing the availability of Continuously review and monitor inclusion- being met. affordable housing is being met. 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. 38 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 811 9.A.3.k Appendix 13: Examples of County Housing Initiatives Private funding for housing development and services: Helping low-income families access opportunity neighbor - Santa Clara County, California (www.housingtrustsv.org/) hoods: King County, Washington (https://www.kcha.org/ Mobilizing owners and resources to preserve existing about/education/) affordable units: Cook County, Illinois (www.preservation - Inclusionary zoning: Palm Beach County, Florida (https:// 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/) u I i.org/larson-pol icy-awards/robert-c-I arson-award- finalists-palm-beach-county-florida/) Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 812 9.A.3.k Appendix C: City of Austin, 2014 Robert C. Larson Policy Leadership Award Winner — rw_ ROBERT C. LARSON HOUSING POLICY LEADERSHIP AWARDS 2014 WINNER 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 (MR), with 12 percent serving house- holds at 30-50 percent of MFI NUMBER OF UNITS PRODUCED 18,406 WEBSITE hp p://h o u s i ngworksaust i n. o rg/ www.austintexas.gov/department/ imagineaustin ®Urban Land II15ti11ItQ Terwilliger Center for Housing 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. 40 A ULI Advisory Servic Packet Pg. 813 9.A.3.k 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 MR. DEVELOPER INCENTIVES • S.M.A.R.T. HousingTM (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 MR 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 MR. To date, 117 units have been constructed at 50 percent of MR, ten at 65 percent of MR, and 357 units at 80 percent of MR. • 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 Collier County, Florida, January 29-February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 814 9.A.3.k "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." 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 TM 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 Mandy DeMayo affordable housing —from zoning to streamlining development HousingWorks Austin approvals, transit, and green construction —provides an Austin, Texas 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. For more information about the Terwilliger Center Awards,see www.uli.org/terwilligeraward. 42 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 815 9.A.3.k About the Panel 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 Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 816 9.A.3.k 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 44 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 817 9.A.3.k 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 Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 818 9.A.3.k benefit their surroundings as the result of a very intentional from 1984 to 1986, where he earned the Excellence in design process. Teaching award. He also held an appointment as a visiting professor at the Universidad de las Americas in Puebla, Orfield's recent projects include major projects for South- Mexico, from 1994 to 1995. 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 Cassie Wright the 500,000-square-foot Training and Operations Support Denver, Colorado Center at Dallas's Love Field. Other projects include the Texas A&M West Campus student housing complex, which Wright is the project manager for Urban Ventures LLC, a 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 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. 46 A ULI Advisory Servi Packet Pg. 819 9.A.3.k 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. Collier County, Florida, January 29—February 3, 2017 Packet Pg. 820 9.A.3.k Urban Land Institute 2001 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 www.uli.org ® Printed on recycled paper. Packet Pg. 821 W SA w N w LU LO N w LO C**4 O C**4 C**4 C**4 am a LU U) z Q J LU FM LL ca 0 LL D 0 U Q w Z) Z) aU Q� �0 wQ U)06 Z) J 0 Q Z 0� QZ) J ry w>- ry� Z) Z I-.- Z) Z)0 LL U wry =w � J Z J 00 U T 46 S Q W ry Q T 47 M d IL a LLI cn Z LLI J H LL V LLI Q Z LLI G J O Q 6uisnOH - 099000UZOZ-1d : 9999Z) =10d a;aldwoo ddWO sani;ei}iul 6uisnOH-IeP!wsueal :;uauayoejjv J GO Z w w z.4t U D) � U O � N U i a E5�j 4> E cn as E N Lj E U=) U E o m w E m U > a) U U `as -0 Q m -2 N 0 U Om 30 m Of D a a m a) _ O Q (� U 0 cn ®D10001 aAIS U311100 aA18 ` MV13HV13 VINVS O pU- O M p zE O �' O Qa N z� Ewa mz� O C) o 26 wpw1 p a�LLo O Lo O SL 31VISH31NI 0 r Q Q c� �o Q N z J N W N m a D wo FLUZ �rnw L L o !0 Q w o w !0 O m z w a .� w o = L Q 0 NE O O U / M N co 6 a m a w w N w S6VI 6uisnoH - 09900006ZOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioe;;d - - - T N M ` °° d UO o y I d CD Q d i Q V m j .Q a Q �? E2 Cl) Ro e E N y C M N t6 M N i -4 Oi w -0 n d m 0 7 <xu m E dE =< N U O 2 3 .. w O N Z <9�LLo � C V) Cl) LO N N as 0 a• J Q o E Ea R w C � C Q� C LLI / F N .. 3 U 3 O eQ� I y_ o 0 d 1 1 N N �I co N N �I N I I \ I M a m Inw aULLa ayNt'x=« _UU- bO FQFoz aaE- m� D3 w LL Uy E O J Q W LU Sz elf N Q y Z m KZ E LL N 0 ymE W a Li IIoa 00Dozoo 011 °m 6uisnoH - 099000MOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo d WE) sani;ei;iu1 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioelly M d LO N 00 6 a m m a Y M Q 6uisnOH - 099000UZOZ-1d : 9999Z) =10d a;aldwoo ddWO sani;ei}iul 6uisnOH—Iell!wsueal :;uewt4oelly t nI U M H Cil C m u O J Of laf oC Of Of 01 01 01 Ol 01 I w I w I w I w I w J J J J J LL LL LL LL w O O 1-1 ri O O Lri V v v u u (10 m 00 00 0 O O L U u u L m O v a) u O O O O O M M M M ri r-I r-I r-I .—I O O O LO O Zt N 00 1- m N r-1 r-I N N IZ M N N 1- M Lq N O O O O N � N ri c-I ri Ln LO Ln LO Ln N N N N N LLi Lfi LP1 Lfi to r-I X a) Q m r-I O I- V) D O O L L t L C u u u u co 00 co o0 (0 (6 (6 (6 z N o o o o m m m m D Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln \ \ \ \ \ N N N N W U U U U U Ln N qT 0) N LL LL LL CJ CJ CJ M M M c-I c-I c-I I w I w w > > D J J J w w LL C O L v 3 a1 Q c0 s uo a1 i Ln Ln O Ql I, N N Lf1 Lf1 O I- 00 Ln ri M Il% N u t 00 r-I 00 c-I f'A LA ri in E O O r-I N w In v Oma w M N .4... O v - v LL c0 � c c-I c-I c-I m v � O v m 3 � II LlJ N N N i= u J S 5 LL N N N Ln Ln Ln 00 00 00 c-I c-I r-I a) •L 0 f0 ro O O O O (J U b00 cu aJ u L O C (6 > Q a ✓ t v fE E c v O L V CL C O t o fL6O = O O O O N (7 11 Ln a) II 11 U \ Ln LU Ln W H E J ) t/1 K LD v7 L7 3 I 0 U U U H Y 6uisnoH - 099000UZOZ-1d 9999Z) =10d a;aldwoo ddWO sani;ei}iul 6uisnoH—Iell!wsueal :;uewt4oelly M N Q 00 d r+ d Y V R d M d 6uisnoH - 099000WOZ-ld : 9999Z) add ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH—IB41! asueJl :}uewLioe;;d 11 �� �:. 1111�11:■ 11111�111!II Ila1�����_ ,; Ali=::11111111 RINSE, E-11 1111/1/1 ■G— �m MIS __---- a -- -o— � v r- — n_—�•-__n _Z � ✓�:' �:%Ire �g �• � " �z�-��-. �- [r�-,tea _— — • .:- : �J".a�ffa/lU� s ��� - - — �111`III�IIIIIIIiiii�111 le �1�1 ■i�_CI: •,a 11■::1: .—n._ N�� _ a .- _--,• ` = w�.nnwYmmmmmuunl +r�_wi wwmw.:�a7imaw lurl Vim �,I jJ�1y^j `T: , ���' • III 1� I�i o r� - 00 N co a m a 6uisnoH - 099000MOZ-1d : 9999Z) add ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iu1 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioelly M d numlwunepmmgm■1 l Inglgn Igwlw�nL IIIIIIIIIIIn1 Iluumm�l immmnasm IN. -; _ ulllAluiui wllnnlwl ww1@ng1 IIn111n11g1 w _lwlnnn 'h�c�in'ulii'uu.uium'iu`Wil-■=unu'nt�u?umlum'17 -iiiiiniini y,nYiT■wm �111111111111 =gpmm�l � rwlwwl 11 91nni �■s �11�n=iulltilului �n=�;�®!N; 1 �1 .. nm.0■ ����'q ���� gull ��,..� ■ cc glignlwllwlulllwnwl Illlllllgw©© - s-■mmmnmmm man _=_== Illnnnn6]mlllnril-- _== _ =x NINE, �II_■rq im■umun�u..■■■1i n_ini■oiullll■n■�n■—: _ ZZIS Imn_uninu1imm0111I -- = I=�= _ ��_Z=� �� ��o- .■� / 11■ lrli�ll�il £�� i n nlllqu�IgIR1 l� I __ IAll� U1 iq 'lly�H an xullls�� ■■--C��q-= �I ,`1 III l91 ` IIIIIn�lltd �nIf11 !lIfII�FIk�I' 1-iWHILAIRAffif um-1 I. �__ ■■Llle""I' �:IIIIIIIIII6�.■:Itlll� � :�. Woft t EZO N a m m a 6uisnoH - 099000WOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iu1 6uisnoH—IB41! asueJl :}uewLioe;;d 1■ ■��11m•1m■■1:11mm MEN t�■11�111111-- --r ��iilniiiii������i`��■:iB ■:Iltr ■Ila■■:11� �= BE •11■ 5 ®■111■IIIIIII�f.�� � "■ �� E■ . - sa 77 F ilt 1 71 �_ 11/11111 • -- 11 11 11 1 11 ■11111 1111• - - - 7��1i11111- - �4—:.: 1 111111 11t111 1.1141 1 1111_I - ._ ��� _ ,e,'C' y��lll I I ■ 0 Cl) 00 a m m a 6uisnoH - 099000WOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH—IB41! lsueJl :}uewLioe;;d S Is I All M Ln fY1 D g Ln IU Ln V 1' W a — � W N m o� ! - ---__ E — - -- tD m = ON @ ( g g N LL LL W ' m i u. 3 D a W Ou to 1� m ' $ a �) to m m ZFE Ln i O z s , to p Z FO m° Z N s m 0 Ln W W W N Ln " N m a 0: a = d 7yYy �g�3g$8 e a ■El00 3€ea T SI S r M co 6 a d v R a 6uisnoH - 099000WOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioelly M d N Cl) 00 6 a m m a q � » BmsnOH-0 900M Z d:5 5 Z ]Qd mmdmo ¥dW0S m7mmBmsnOH-Iel�|ms BJ1:4uemLioen¥ § ) § § § � � § � » • O■ � D D D D Et] N -} , /� / w § /§/§\ e # iRMI §®! j )§§(§` § ) :5 � d [ M d 6uisnoH - 099000WOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioe;;d Cl) 00 6 a _ U H-2 9` Z W Iz > N r�i u 6 J_C B. a xrx W o W 6? __ ww ww ww w_ ww ww _ __ ww w_ _ _w ww _ram _w ww ww ww —w _w mew �w _w _w _w __ wew `w ww ww w ww !ew `w ww ww ww ww __ wew wa ww __ _w ww _w __ WE wew ww _w _w ww ww wew wa ww __ ww ww ww m m a M d 6uisnoH - 099000WOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iu1 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioelly LO Cl) 00 6 a N CF�W �n j & o=-=6 9< HE W w W Z o ga-51 g O W .J u H?'$�-o i N11H w o 0 5� z F BD�U`w' 6V = ANNI ��111111. � ���►� .� � ���1111'� i- •A • I q � » BmsnOH-0 900W Z d:5 5 Z ]Qd mmdmo ¥dWOS m7mmBmsnOH-Iel�|ms BJ1:4uemLioen¥ % _ a � a. q � » BmsnoH-0 900W Z d:5 5 Z ]Qd mmdmo ¥dWOS m7mmBmsnoH-Iel�|ms BJ1:4uemLioen¥ � _ a Ez§ 29 , / § ( E-«§ �� ! X. �,;„ ] §w z B z§§§|; 2 §| \ w § 2HMI §N§ § ] )|§;§, ! § - § ;&|!E§ )§ § !/ r § | B$ /f PON �� ������� ` �� � ■ � _ e I � m ■ � � � E M � f : ■� \ `� ■ . � . ■ `� � `� ■ / ¥ � ;� / ` | ; � & ~�• / � ©� W � � � � e � � �� ■ � �» + ����#��■ �� � ©<���■ �■ �� ►�_� � � I msnOH-0 900W Z d:5 5 Z ]Qd mmdmo ¥dWOS m7mmBmsnOH—lBWWS 8J1:4uemLj3env k 40 d\; z w5 M2 w $f u!= §` �z2ui | �¥e 2 \ ^.0 00 LU — 2\ u \ u) k |} § � !§ §& \ �\ §\� eaeeaeeeeeeee*eeeeA §KR r § _ j�� •) \, @® _ _1 , «■7■� }!!e!e! , ; q e \ \§ ) �/ ) SIB I )k / $ \ !E® ( . | e 2 ® r m ® @■,»q■&® ! 2 \ e@e»;«m&, e ® e : e § % \�\ IL / § \ pa & « \\ )� _ 2 ) . |\ @ m e ! � < &+e9&9@7 ! @ ( u �2 e o § | )/ IL 0 " /§ § n a z • 6 § )! LL (! \� § :> ,7 a:` IL }� �\ �(/ m/ , 4 ! �w A|, ° m e |, I X° ; §| ' if ! |® a e \ _ ` f�® e° ! .\, § e _____I |e ----- u . � | § a � 6uisnoH - 09900006ZOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioe;;d a) c7 Cl) d °° oi a m �c Wx. - ubs �5 a w u U W w z o f £ J gg yu? F S V' p g z m eg i s F�o�w eDH wrcl r o U z a �ls €3? u oNS� x w IIJLJ ` �s is3x a�ruxu olonra O. zo �� a� i� e a� t 15 15 � _ � b e `i 3B B rJu rrma ml wd � ml mnnnroa xulm WE mn�cue vmn> Ice «n a-e vlaunn anus �„ rays I d d �wv nocm y an rm� � b � s vo vrmr3n z a e g 5 I e � I I - I _______ ____ I I 1 I I i � M O r N ^ N2 In0 O I d I? I Z W Z W D W� p.o wO w9 pO � ip yl0 Z W w a a a 6uisnoH - 099000MOZ-1d : 9999Z) add ejeldwoo d WE) sani;elj!UI 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioelly c ai 00 d °° a � �3fJyy <iE =oo �� ` w 7 W oypy oFF�.i �LLU Va F Op�pp� me N_ O -� m Fpy�jo� w� yU' EEO u l spo w 8 R. V �� 0 �� z� W rc w z�w�z+ o RUMI W� o o y pp55�y W 0 5` z mks bi u�s. a W � � ¢b o n W m a — — — — — v F — — — — — — — — — — — wu a------------i � I O `----------- i a�6 f 0 S p 7 b� - i Osswm g 3 pg E 9g rg `pq !w k i ...... _ . _ . _ . _ — E ! u � �Wnn S W I 8 B $$e 6uisnoH - 09900006ZOZ-1d : 9999Z) =10d a;aldwoo d WE) sani;ei}iul 6uisnoH-Iell!wsueal :;uewt4oelly a W W N N w N W Z O u N d' r FN z wz U) z w W z U y.�y n w 0 ❑� W 9 2O oO o K U w Z A ❑ L> U ¢ w U Q Q 00 a m V� Li Ali >�m W$¢§ �11111�1 ��111 �11111 1'IIIIIIIII Ila ■�' �� ```oo►►o►mni��� 1 ■�II� Mtn - Inn``����0,`��►►s►a►wprrriiliii 1 go" umm�■■ ■ e I - - hpummmmmn umm ■■ : � � mow ::: - � I�Uoou■w noon �� . . :. ...............:....�.— -= -- �mmnnnnnnno unnmo■►� � _ � � I� � J � I� �IIIIII_ II��1111� �r� .. ■ fG�I �... �- 11 Cism MMME Em i iE ii ii , ��� �111►/I/ll ppplll � ME HIM Ow MMNO SO � ■■ .■ .. . ■� m■ ■■ . ■■■mm ..■ ■■■■■■ Mi M d 6uisnoH - 099000MOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo d WE) sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioe;;d o Sg B. Z = m PdN Fob FN a W w w z .WJ w 'uS o s €Ua d� tS I F P LLAL ¢? N co 6 a d m a q � » BmsnOH-0 900W Z d:5 5 Z ]Qd mmdmo ¥dWOS m7mmBmsnOH-Iel�|ms BJ1:4uemLioen¥ � _ a I; � ;!§® •� «| ) HL E °§■E' \ �\ ) ( ]$ � |$ E I. E E E�l3dmn- p WON ___. m__ _ _ : _ _ __ � �. \ § ° E �) 2�• � \� /� M� ; ;- 6uisnoH - 099000MOZ-1d : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo ddWD sani;ei;iu1 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioelly ai 00 d °° a BE _ I Bo lap I_ o �. . o ■■ ■ ice° �� ■■ �■ �� f �� �� . o WIN WE , - i■■ WIN! ♦���1,� �11 r�1.\ �•I■■I On mm 1�■■■■�■�■ ■ .a _ � � IIIIIIEIIIIIIIIIII ����� mMEN ■ B' � � /: ►� : � �ot�jir� ago � �� I► I\ � ♦ � � ■■ .■ �� 6uisnoH - 099000MOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo d WE) sani;ei;iu1 6uisnoH—IB41! asueJl :}uewLioelly - - I . I n n IIIIIIIIIh = IIII� II�II►�♦` � � \� IIIIIIIII►� 1) �- �— IIIIIIIIIIIIIII1111111�1111111\ :IIIIIIIIIIIIIiII�j� �1111111111■ �1111111101�� � © �IIII�G1111■ ■111°�: �1111� 1 ' j � �� ;� L� .� .�.IOU � �, ��\► `\ram :. ■III I�I��II��� �p ■�Niii�����HEmom �i i ■ ■1111011■ ��©�j LO w 6 a m m a q � » BmsnOH-0 900M Z d:5 5 Z ]Qd mmdmo ¥ Wei m7mmBmsnOH-Iel�|ms BJ1:4uemLioen¥ 7 _ a . r r § ® a 12 z )! §7 \ § cz 2:9 !§! \ §| 2 § |h/I § g § | \\ §! .) § 2E-M, \ ° \ / \ | k 5|\§\ k �\ j §i\ ul « § \ | B( /( ; \ I I r - � �§ . ) # -- to I � \i I % ' wn. � ��{— _,� :�� ■ ■,| ,—Jj � )I/ ! ■ . . - ■ §� - � � � . ■ { ;� |_� ��' � •� � , ~§ � . ._._._._.� - ! � ` § ! | � § ) | ) \ < , uisnoH - 09900006ZOZ-1d : 9999Z) dad ejoidwoo d WE) sani;ei;iu1 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioe;;d �o m N W V N W z md' mC ZQ _ N Wo LN MLI o F-N W-- ZN v U m d �Z IL LUz ' N ICI D D O vi O ., �- O LU z ►�-i ❑ Z o o U W W a W Q W C ¢o d 'o m m Z Ell ;n 6�8 0 t oil OHM ItZ3m��®� ■ lal r>�� _ ■amFA ' 0 ego moaner alter N. ®� �� moo. .� �� p��od d ®o�®® ■ . � HHEM ®� 6uisnoH - 099000WOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH—Ie}}ivasueJl :}uewLioelly 00 w 6 a s N rj � h W� N � � N N W N W N Enz 6 Z az � , Lcul 9 -O W o z w W 6 � OFHW i g U - N Wm N o w W' w c�<o�Q< epg$ W o F oaNp� o � gn m a 3— x�x mo o �o , Go 29S ix.� uisnoH - 099000WOZ-ld : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo `ddWJ sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH—Ie41ivasueJl :}uewLioe;;d � n m a rl N � U O O uLL J2 N Rp ZQZ W Q u Ra Q.N Wo LN d' N ZN m Z NZ LLZ ?Z L = H u wE zp E Wp 'o Wp Oi o0 ❑ w o z z a a lu �d Ua � o m a OO' , O���r�`'�� 888000GGGGGGGGGGBG88�0 • ® oPo� v � o . s s cesee eeeeo o 0 o ee wee o� o a o ooao ad��eeooe� von o uy y�i Ll C��OOO�C o _ v�� a m V m a 6uisnoH - 099000MOZ-1d : 9999Z) dad ejeldwoo d WE) sani;ei;iul 6uisnoH-le}}lulsueJl :}uewLioe;;d c ri 00 `o a A O 9 „a o o W -i w o=sue ^ UFO' w o� m :�z o c� z > F -oSyl woF ww nu - N ¢= a ��� .�allmul►i�, O1111\�i��1� ■ �g1111�11111111111 �I��'�tata� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII; ,��� �,,� �" � � ■ � 111111: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII . SO � — • �IIII 11/� ���"1I111111 • unununuum � 2 © ►��=��V�� i�� IIm1� uuunuuuum=. . � I �� • muuuuunuw� • � 'ONEC i� i .� Q/llnm p Clumnnminuu - ► a' m ONE — •■ p �� ��. Mono p =: — — munnmmmuu 2 nuuuuunnml° _: IIIII►� - � ONEl=� �,—►�1► �O��V �.. wnnnunnnn 111111111::11111111111?.- 1111 = .����=-�III�II�� 1111111111111111111111 _. q �■ =o 1-�11 •— ._ • ; 1111111111111111111111 F7 �� �►� -„�� � ■ IIIIIIIlIllllllllllll_� � .MOVE-.� ,ICJ � ��•�IIi ��11 i� p0 � ��4111111111� � � mill •,••• �,, ,, �� mill ©, I�II� mill .� �411111111111111111, mm ME ME Hill m ME -- -- lulu A == == �plipq �i�ll��llllll►+ �i �-^1111111111� =c �a3-7 9.A.3.k NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at 9:00 A.M. on June 28, 2022, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL, to consider: 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] rn aee collNr county Florida F °°F TM v MAP= O arcOF 9 MMCa- SAM A copy of the proposed Resolution is on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. NOTE: All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three (3) minutes on any item. The selection of any individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. 1f recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted ten (10) minutes to speak on an item. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the Board agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of,three (3) weeks prior to the respective public hearing. In any case, written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record. As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like to participate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www.colliercountyfl.gov/our-county/visitors/ calendar -of -events after the agenda is posted on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user's risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252-8369 or email to Geoffrey.Willig@colliercountyfl.gov. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two (2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA WILLIAM L. MCDANIEL, JR., CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT & COMPTROLLER By: Ann Jennejohn Deputy Clerk (SEAL) ND.GC1M932N-01 Z a r m in Z M VI 0 0 M 0 Z m v D -C C Z m m Q C9 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 N 0 N J a u7 LID ro LL 0 a a� a� a E 0 t1 Q (7 N d w C N M 0 2 I E N C cC fL C tv E s U M r Q Packet Pg. 851 9 30.1`1 9.A.3.k NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at 9:00 A.M. on March 28, 2023, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL34104 to consider: 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. EPL202100006603 A copy of the proposed Resolution is on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. NOTE: All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three (3) minutes on any item. The selection of any individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. If recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted ten (10) minutes to speak on an item. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the Board agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of three (3) weeks prior to the respective public hearing. In any case, written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record. As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like to participate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www.colliercountyfl.gov/our-county/visitors/calendar-of-events after the agenda is posted on the County wsbsite. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user's risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at (239) 252-8369 or email to Geoffrey.Willig®collieroountyfl.gov. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two (2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RICK LOCASTRO CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT & COMPTROLLER BY: MERLINE FORGUE, DEPUTY CLERK (SEAL) 0 0 O O 0 0 _O N O N J D_ 0 L0 0 O 04 LL 0 D_ 4) tv CL E O t� Q N d > R w C .y 3 O 2 I lC E y C l6 L H C d L t� R w Q NO-G0110259$4-01 Packet Pg. 852 9.A.4 10/05/2023 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.4 Doc ID: 26554 Item Summary: PL20230000930, US 41 East Overlay & South US 41 TCEA Expansion GMPA - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the US 41 East Overlay to allow certain economic development uses within the Corridor segments; and, allow increased height and density, and certain economic development uses in Regional Centers and Community Centers through incentives; and furthermore directing the transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. and An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Transportation Element and maps to expand the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area; and furthermore directing the transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Planner III] Meeting Date: 10/05/2023 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Principal — Zoning Name: Michele Mosca 09/06/2023 5:25 PM Submitted by: Title: Zoning Director — Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 09/06/2023 5:25 PM Approved By: Review: Planning Commission Diane Lynch Review item Completed 09/13/2023 12:27 PM Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 09/14/2023 1:00 PM Zoning Michele Mosca Review Item Skipped 09/06/2023 4:54 PM Zoning Michele Mosca Review Item Skipped 09/06/2023 4:54 PM Zoning Mike Bosi Division Director Completed 09/15/2023 1:33 PM Growth Management Community Development Department James C French GMD Deputy Dept Head Completed 09/21/2023 10:50 PM Planning Commission Ray Bellows Meeting Pending 10/05/2023 9:00 AM Packet Pg. 853 9.A.4.a Ci0 eY CoY• "ty a c� c 0 STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION �. x w Q w FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT v DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING «s SECTION L d HEARING DATE: October 5, 2023 RE: PETITION PL20230000930, STAFF -PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP co SERIES, AND MAP TR-4, SOUTH US 41 TRANSPORTATION c CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA, IN THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. c [ADOPTION HEARING] M J a PROPOSED AMENDMENT: This staff -initiated Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment is comprised of the following two Ln components: 1. Amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series Z to establish a new US 41 East Overlay for a segment of US 41 East, from approximately Palm Drive (road separating Walmart from Naples Towne Center) to Greenway Road (the Urban- Agricultural/Rural boundary) lying about 3.4 road miles east of Collier Blvd. The Overlay will allow c increased density for vertical mixed -use developments within portions of the Overlay and will allow Q certain economic development uses throughout the Overlay. 2. Create a new map (TR-4.1) depicting the expansion of the Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) from its present terminus at the Rattlesnake -Hammock Road and Thomasson Lane O intersections with US 41 East to the southeast along US 41 East to the east side of Mixed Use Activity Center #18 at the intersection of US 41 East and Collier Blvd.; update the tables on the existing TCEA Map (TR-4) to reflect current conditions; and, amend Policy 5.4 of the Transportation Element (TE) to provide a reference to the new TCEA map (TR-4.1). Further explanation of the proposed amendments is provided in the Transmittal Staff Report. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) materials include the Ordinances with Exhibit text and maps for the petition. These exhibits reflect the text and maps as approved by the Board of County Commissioners (Board) for Transmittal and as subsequently modified by staff to address the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity's (DEO) Comments Letter and the Florida Department of Transportation's comment (see attachments titled, "DEO Comments Letter" and "FDOT Comment"). Note: As of July 1, 2023, DEO is now known as the Department of Commerce (DOC). Packet Pg. 854 9.A.4.a In response to the comments received from the DOC and FDOT, staff is proposing text changes to the amendments to require mitigation, as applicable, for projects proposing to increase residential density in a the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) and cap the total density bonus units to 900 units — both to 2 address the DOC's concerns regarding increased density in the CHHA and the protection of human life and property against the effects of natural disasters; and, to address FDOT's concern regarding potential •2 impacts on State roads. The proposed text changes are identified and explained in the attachment titled a "Response to DOC Comments Letter and FDOT Comment" below under Adoption — Staff X UJ Recommendation. Additionally, the referenced text changes are identified in the Ordinance Exhibits. w Transmittal hearings on the subject amendments were held on March 16, 2023, CCPC, and on April 25, cs 2023, Board. The Transmittal recommendations are presented further below. L d Within the CCPC material provided, you will find the Transmittal Executive Summary from the Board 0 hearing and the Transmittal CCPC staff report for the petition, which provides staff's analysis of the w petition. V- The Transmittal package was provided to the DOC and other reviewing agencies on May 9, 2023 REVIEW AGENCY COMMENT LETTERS: The DOC rendered their Comments Letter after 0 0 reviewing the Transmitted amendment. The DOC commented on the proposed density increase in the N 0 Coastal High Hazard Area and its potential impact on property and human life due to natural disasters. N Additionally, the FDOT commented that the proposed population increase may adversely impact a transportation resources or facilities of state importance. Staff has addressed the DOC's and FDOT's LO comments in the attachment titled "Response to DOC Comment Letter and FDOT Comment." Other N reviewing agencies rendered their comment letters indicating "no comment" or "no adverse impacts Z found," or the agency did not respond. The DOC Comment Letter and FDOT email are located within the materials provided to the CCPC. ° a 0 TRANSMITTAL: a ° STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To Transmit to DEO. O CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Transmit to DEO (vote: 6/0) per staff recommendation. y ° BOARD ACTION: Transmitted to DEO (vote: 510), per CCPC recommendation [see attached County T- Resolution No. 23-81]. cn ADOPTION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC forwards to the Board a recommendation to adopt and transmit the amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce and reviewing agencies that provided comments, with staff's suggested additions noted below in double underline and deletions in The proposed changes below to the US 41 East Overlay are recommended by staff in response to the comments provided by FDOT and the DOC. Also, text was added, for clarity, that the FLUE Overlay will be implemented through a zoning overlay. 2 Packet Pg. 855 9.A.4.a K. US 41 East Overlay This Overlay is located along portions of the US 41 East corridor from Palm Drive to Greenway Q Road. It comprises three Regional Centers, four Community Centers, and multiple Corridor segments 2 between those Centers, all of which are depicted on the Future Land Use Map and US 41 East c Overlay Maps. The Overlay is intended to allow mixed -use and economic development and o encourage a pedestrian/transit-friendly development pattern. The Regional Centers allow medium to cc high -intensity mixed -use development, commercial, residential development, and certain economic x development uses and are located within Mixed Use Activity Center numbers 16, 17, and 18. The w Q Community Centers allow moderate to low -intensity mixed -use development, commercial, v residential development, hotel/motel at a maximum density of 26 units per acre, and certain economic development uses. The Corridor segments allow low -density residential development, commercial >% development permitted by the underlyingzoning oning districts, and certain economic development uses. A zoning overlay shall be established within one year of the effective date of this Overlay and include > 0 Regional Center, Community Center, and Corridor Subdistricts. The zoningoverlay will provide for N allowed uses, design standards, and increased density and/or height for projects in the Regional w Centers and Community Centers, including certain design elements such as vertical mixed -use, _rg een building standards, and low -impact development standards. co 0 M Mixed -use development within the Regional Centers and Community Centers of this Overlal o be eligible for increased density and/or height when utilizing incentives outlined in the zoning c overlay and is subject to the following limitations: N 1. The density bonus incentive is available only to multifamily development within the J Regional and Community Centers. It is limited to an aggregate maximum of 900 dwelling a units for both Regional Centers and Community Centers. Iq LO a. All projects located within the Coastal High Hazard Area and utilizing the density c bonus incentives shall be evaluated for hazard mitigation from the effects of natural N disasters by the County's Bureau of Emergency Services (BES) Division. J z b. If BES determines a project to have an impact(s) on emergency operations, including c but not limited to evacuations and shelter space, mitigation for those impacts shall be a required. 0� 2 Mixed -use development within the Regional Centers is eligible for up to twenty(20, dwelling Q units per acre when utilizing the density bonus incentives outlined in the zoningoverlay. It is not L subject to the density rating system. > 3. Mixed -use development within the Community Centers is eligible for up to sixteen (16)dwelling units per acre when utilizing the densi bonus incentives outlined in the zonin og verlay. It is not W subject to the density rating system. 4. Only multi -family dwelling units are allowed for a mixed -use development pursuant to paragraph T- 1. or 2. above. 5. The maximum height increase for properties within the Regional and Community Centers shall a be limited to twenty(y 20) feet above that permitted by the underlyingzoning oning district. M Residential -only development, mixed -use development not utilizing incentives outlined in the zoning y overlay, and commercial -only development other than certain economic development uses shall be a in accordance with the underling future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. v This Future Land Use Overlay shall only be implemented by establishing a zoning overlay, which c shall occur within two (2) years from the effective date of this amendment. 0 M a Packet Pg. 856 9.A.4.a LEGAL REVIEW: The staff report was reviewed by the County Attorney's office on September 11, Q a. 2023. c� a W U H Ca O O O N O W 4 Packet Pg. 857 9.A.4.b ORDINANCE NO.2023- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO ADD THE US 41 EAST OVERLAY TO ALLOW CERTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT USES WITHIN THE CORRIDOR SEGMENTS; AND, ALLOW INCREASED HEIGHT AND DENSITY, AND CERTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT USES IN REGIONAL CENTER AND COMMUNITY CENTERS THROUGH INCENTIVES; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING THE TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20230000930] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly 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, staff has prepared an amendment to the Future Land Use Element, and an amendment to the Future Land Use Map and Map Series, of the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Commerce for preliminary review on May 9, 2023, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce reviewed the amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and [23-CMP-01147/1809005/11139 1 of 3 US 41 East Overlay/PL2023 000093 0 8/16/23 - FLUE Packet Pg. 858 9.A.4.b WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on , and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendment to the Future Land Use Element, and the amendment to the Future Land Use Map and Map Series attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Commerce. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. [23-CMP-01147/1809005/11139 2 of 3 US 41 East Overlay/PL2023 000093 0 8/16/23 - FLUE Packet Pg. 859 9.A.4.b PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2023. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA M. Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: wrA(- Heidi Ashton-Cicko 8-16-23 Managing Assistant County Attorney LIN Rick LoCastro, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Future Land Use Element and Maps [23-CMP-01147/1809005/1 1139 US 41 East Overlay/PL20230000930 8/16/23 - FLUE 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 860 9.A.4.b PL20230000930 Exhibit A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (As amended through Ordinance No. 2022-28, adopted June 28, 2022) 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. 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. Policy 1.9: [re -lettered to reflect merger of Ordinance No. 2002-32 and 2002-54] Overlays and Special Features shall include: A. Area of Critical State Concern Overlay B. North Belle Meade Overlay C. NC Square Mixed -Use Overlay D. Natural Resource Protection Area Overlays E. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay F. Airport Noise Area Overlay G. Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay H. Urban -Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay I. Coastal High Hazard Area Boundary J. Ventana Pointe Residential Overlay K. US 41 East Overlay L. K—. Incorporated Areas V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES K. US 41 East Overlay This Overlav is located along portions of the US 41 East corridor from Palm Drive to Greenway Road. It is comprised of three Regional Centers, four Community Centers, and multiple Corridor segments between those Centers, all of which that are depicted on the Future Land Use Map and US 41 East Overlay Maps. The Overlay is intended to allow mixed use development and economic development and to encourage a pedestrian/transit- friendly development pattern. The Regional Centers allow medium to high intensity mixed use development, commercial, residential development, and certain economic development uses, and are located within Mixed Use Activity Center numbers 16, 17, and 1of16 Words underlined are added; words struck threu^" are deleted 08/16/23 mrm Packet Pg. 861 9.A.4.b 18. The Community Centers allow moderate to low intensity mixed use development, commercial, residential development, hotel/motel at a maximum density of 26 units per acre, and certain economic development uses. The Corridor segments allow low density residential development, commercial development permitted by the underlyingzoning oning districts, and certain economic development uses. A zoning overlay shall be established within one year of the effective date of this Overlay and include Regional Center, Community Center, and Corridor Subdistricts. The zoning overlay will provide for allowed uses, design standards, and increased density and/or height for projects in the Regional Centers and Community Centers that include certain design elements such as vertical mixed use, green building standards, and low impact development standards. Mixed use development within the Regional Centers and Community Centers of this Overlay will be eligible for increased density and/or height when utilizing incentives outlined in the zoning og verlay, and is subject to the following limitations: 1. The density bonus incentive is available only to multifamily development within the Regional and Community Centers and is limited to an aggregate maximum of 900 dwelling units for both Regional Centers and Community Centers. a. All proiects located within the Coastal High Hazard Area and utilizing the density bonus incentives shall be evaluated for hazard mitigation from the effects of natural disasters by the County's Bureau of Emergency Services (BES) Division. b. If a project is determined by BES to have an impact(s) on emergency operations, including but not limited to, evacuations and shelter space, mitigation for those impacts shall be required. 2 Mixed use development within the Regional Centers is eligible for up to twenty (20) dwelling units per acre when utilizing the density bonus incentives outlined in the zoningoverlay, and is not subject to the density rating system. 3. Mixed use development within the Community Centers is eligible for up to sixteen ,16, dwellingper acre when utilizing the density bonus incentives outlined in the zoningoverlay, and is not subject to the density rating system. 4. For a mixed use development pursuant to paragraph 1. or 2. above, only multi- family dwelling units are allowed. 5. The maximum height increase for properties within the Regional and Community Centers shall be limited to twenty (20) feet above that permitted by the underling zoning district. Residential -only development, mixed use development not utilizing incentives outlined in the zoning og verlay, and commercial -only development other than certain economic development uses, shall be in accordance with the underling future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. This Future Land Use Overlay shall only be implemented through the establishment of a zoning overlay, which shall occur within two (2) years from the effective date of this amendment. 2of16 a IL c .2 c M a x Lu a Lu U 08 L as 0 r M Lu T Iq Cn D 0 M CD 0 0 0 0 M N O N J IL LO LO LO W N LU J LL M N to oo 0 d c M ac 0 c d E M a Words underlined are added; words struck threugI4 are deleted 08/16/23 mrm Packet Pg. 862 9.A.4.b L. K-. Incorporated Areas FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Activity Center Index Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps US 41 East Overlay Maps 3of16 Words underlined are added; words stpue'( thFeugh are deleted 08/16/23_mrm a. c� c 0 .y C Q x w Q w U H Ca c� a� O r N R W O Cl) O� O O O O M N O N J a. LO t0 N W J U- m N tD r O O N V C R C L O E t :i Q Packet Pg. 863 9.A.4.b R] E R2 E R] 2012-2025 FUTURE LAND USE MAP Golder Garry Flontle i 2fE Rsa Etlll 881E Ft UP R14E F, F J R- -E I R]]E I RZeE -E -E I R31E I RVE I -E I -E a IL C .N C m a K LU a W U H 08 O m w 0 M O O O O O M N O N J IL LO W) co N- UJ J LL M N O O O N V C m C O C d E t U R r r+ Q 4of16 Words underlined are added; words stpue'( thFeugh are deleted 08/16/23_mrm Packet Pg. 864 9.A.4.b DRAFT C-3 RMF�`rBLfJ�31 OZPU L Le RSF BZO-R1 C-3-13ZOa31 !RSF-4-9ZO-Rl �j =U4=-6-BZD-R1 LAI" Eshihit -k 1~ S 41 East Overlay - Regional ['enter -flap 1 Collier County, Florida C-1-BZO-R1 TT�r —e I r -, RMF U-RI I MMG-M IH C-5 PL 10230000930 RMF-G COG C- 3 u ADOPTED-xxxx 0 250 5DO 1,00O Feet LEGEND (Ord. No. xxx) US 41 East Oved ay - Pnd�wnr..y+ucr a Regional Center •Y JL+14s —pft.crJ —WN.plmtl Words underlined are added; words struck thre I^" are deleted 08/16/23 mrm a IL c 0 .N c m a x LU a W U I- 08 L Q m LU T O M O O O O O M N 0 N J IL LO LO �O N LU J LL M N O O O N V C m C a E 0 C d E t U R a 5of16 Packet Pg. 865 9.A.4.b DRAFT Lxhibir A PL'_Q_'300003G F r J dp JOE- 1 1 11 111 - Words underlined are added; words struck *"ram" are deleted 08/16/23 mrm a IL O c 0 .N c m 0. K LU a W U H 08 O m w Cn 0 M CD O O O 0 M N O N a LO LO LO W N W J LL M N to 10 0 Jv V C m C O C d E t R r a 6of16 Packet Pg. 866 9.A.4.b DRAFT Exhibit A PL 2 023 00 0093 0 1 1 h r III I - � t � f r 1 IM Words underlined are added; words struck threugI4 are deleted 08/16/23 mrm a IL 0 .N c m Q. K W a W U H 08 L 0 m W Cn D 0 M CD O O O O M N O N J IL LO LO W N W J LL M N to T- oo 0 d V m a 0 CD E m a 7of16 Packet Pg. 867 9.A.4.b DRAFT Exhibit A PL 20230000930 PU D CS C-3 Kcz--j Diamond MH Enchantina BLVD US 41 East OveOav - Community Center flap 1 Collier County, f1wida 1 PUD Gc GC RSF-3 'OG + M fly ADDPTED - xxxx 0 200 400 800 Feet LEGEND (Ord_ No. ?SXX) US 41 East Overlay - F,.P Community Center Words underlined are added; words struck threugI4 are deleted 08/16/23 mrm a IL C O .N C O O. K W a W U H 08 O O r M w T cn 0 M O O O O O M N O N J IL LO m m N W J LL M N O O O N V C O C E O C d E t t� r Q 8of16 Packet Pg. 868 9.A.4.b DRAFT Exhibit A PL 20230000931' m- i ADOPTED - XXXX (ord- ND. XXX) US 41 East Overlav - Coinmuuih- Center flap 2 Collier County, Fla»da 0 2D0 40D SD0 Feet LEGEND 11 I ITI 1 I---- US 41 East Overlay - CDmmunity Center 9of16 08/16/23 mrm Words underlined are added; words struck threugI4 are deleted Packet Pg. 869 9.A.4.b DRAFT Exhibit A PL 202 34000430 US 41 East Overlay - Cammunity Center Map 3 Collier Cou n ty, Florida A c- RSF-3 AAyr C� �� � R9F� ie_LN PUU RYFA CPUD PUS riar ci Puo m x � ao L cS m i4 t f G� 'a �1 PUD R9F- P � S MH Puo Oregon TItL Osage TRL ADOPTED -XXYX a 250 sod 1,000 Feet LEGEND (Ord_ No. XXX) US 41 East Overlay - .r Community Center 10 of 16 Words underlined are added; words stpue'( thFeugh are deleted 08/16/23_mrm a IL O c 0 .N C 0 0. x Lu a LU U H 08 Rs L O rn M LIJ T 0 M O O O O O M N O N J IL Ln Ln co N LLJ J LL M N CD oo 0 d c M C O C 0 E z r Q Packet Pg. 870 9.A.4.b DRAFT EshibirA PL 20230000930 US 41 East CK-erlay - Co Center -N-lap 4 Collier County, Flo»da ❑❑M��L�❑ Sandfleld LN ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ AkndrAa L PUD W YIV-LN J C a MH;5'- Cecil Ra �A PUD PUB palachee-S. c� TTRVC IJ 1i PUD {Y Z J L` ADOPTED - XKXX 0 20D 40D 800 Feet LEGEND (ord- no. XXX) �I I ITI I US 41 East Overlay - ,,,p Commu nity Center FY Y'. +I [rr Wrr�Y=m—N!{nW �Pinm 11 of 16 Words underlined are added; words struck througl4 are deleted 08/16/23 mrm a IL C O .N C O O. K LU a W U H 08 O N O LU le rn 0 M O O O O O M N O N J IL Ln Ln m N LU J LL M N O O O N V C m C a L O C d E t U R r Q Packet Pg. 871 9.A.4.b DRAFT Exhibit A Pi. zoxa00009ao "� logor ^■ ■■ ■w ,-: ii r4 is �� :•.; mi E. • m NMI mmm �■ a ►. ■LIIIIIIIIIIIf11111Ell i• # R Y � • it i 4 7 � VElm � • i s w' t I �r��lll � �■ ■IIL 11111 � i ■ ��Ir �■ �111!,1,�1l � �� ■IIIIIIIIIIIIII�IL � ��* OF milliIIIIIIIIIIIII m� miMOMl`l` r mom Ermm am'—■��II OF Ei•J■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■-■■a� mm soon ■■■■■■■■ Blooms ■■rmom � Y� .. � �LEGEND 41 East 0 EDUS CM16OF Words underlined are added; words struck threugl4 are deleted 08/16/23 mrm a a 0 .N c m a K w a w U H 08 O m w N 7 0 M CD O O O O M N O N J a LO LO N w J LL M N to T- oo 0 d V m E O CD E m a 12 of 16 Packet Pg. 872 71r, 9.A.4.b DFUFT Exhibit A PL 20230004930 C (L 0 .y c 0 a x LU Q LLJ U ca 0 N 0 Lu U) _ O M O� O O O O M N O N J d LO co 04 LLJ J LL M N tD 00 0 E 0` E ca a 14 of 16 Words underlined are added; words stpue'( thFeugh are deleted 08/16/23_mrm Packet Pg. 874 9.A.4.b CRAFT Exhibit A PL 20230000930 Words underlined are added; words stpue'( thFeugh are deleted 08/16/23_mrm a IL c 0 .N c m a x W a W U H 08 L O m W T O M O O O O O M N O N J IL LO W N W J LL M N O O O N V C m C 0 a d E t t� R r r+ Q 15 of 16 Packet Pg. 875 uum POO IJ)l 9.A.4.c ORDINANCE NO.2023- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT AND MAPS TO EXPAND THE SOUTH US 41 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING THE TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL202300009301 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly 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, staff has prepared an amendment to the Transportation Element and Maps of the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Commerce for preliminary review on May 9, 2023, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce reviewed the amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on , and the Collier County Board o I' County Commissioners held on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been Q met. [23-CMP-01147/1809046/1]140 1 of 2 US 41 East Overlay/PL20230000930 8/11/23 - Transportation Packet Pg. 877 9.A.4.c NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT AND MAPS OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendment to the Transportation Element, and Maps attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Commerce. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state Iand planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2023. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Rick LoCastro, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Transportation Element and Maps [23-CMP-01147/ 1809046/ 1 ] 140 2 0 US 41 East o+�erlay/PI.20230000930 f 2 8/11123 - Transportation Packet Pg. 878 9.A.4.c PL20230000930 Exhibit A TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT (As amended through Ordinance No. 2017-25, adopted June 13, 2017) LIST OF TABLES/MAPS/FIGURES MAP Page "IR-1* Cost Feasible Network Map — 2040 27 TR-4* and TR-4,1 * South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) Maps 35- 36 TR-5 Northwest Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA) Map 3,637 GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES 10 OBJECTIVE 5: Coordinate the Transportation System development process with the Future Land Use 14 Map *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Policy 5.4: Pursuant to Section 163.3180, Florida Statues and the Urban Infill and Urban Redevelopment Strategy contained in the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) is hereby designated. Development located within the South US 41 TCEA (Maps TR-4 and TR-4,1) may be exempt from transportation concurrency requirements, so long as impacts to the transportation system are mitigated using the procedures established in Policies 5.5 and 5.6 below, and in consideration of the following: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** I c) f a a c� _ 0 .N _ to x w a w Ca L d 0 N R w le co O M O O Co O O M N O N J a v LO LO co N _ 0 r ea 0 a �a L �I CO) N oo O m _ M _ =a L 0 fr _ c) C t <.i R yr r.+ Q Words underlined are added-, words stFuek threu^" are deleted 38/08/23 corm-dw Packet Pg. 879 9.A.4.c DRAFT S� 0 01503 0.6 09 Miles 3: WPC W,?En AM; A':P EIII.b LI A OAV/[S BLVD PL ' O,'M0009$0 Pablic Comm=ial Residential Total Acres 93.07 453.52 429.5 976.09 9.53% 46.46% 44.00S. 100% 41� b A O IHOFM6- VIiN _ RATTLESNAKE NALWOOKRD TR - 4 South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) - - -- 1 1 Arewaeoxxx.xxxx 13.E M. xxxx! INPws ;.bYe•li;�.100 ::.5Vnd s+n•71'.OG'OW' v.u+. Cw� • :H ,13 M.I SrP d arrs = +0.' S$ Oa t'. Fb.V�tan CNv • 5iG � i 9E 4�t. 'un da.. • 617 }I 9G �.I 2of3 C 0 C Q K LLI Q LLl U H 06 L O Ch M LLl 0 M O) O O O C M N O N J IL LO Ln W 04 0 L 0 Q L M N CO O d V C fC C i 0 C d E L V R r r Q 08/08/23 mrm-dw Words underlined are added; words +e1( thFeugh, are deleted Packet Pg. 880 DRAFT z V T00MUSON DR RArTLIS...M HAMMOCK RD Public Commercia Residential Total Acres 406.42 626.73 1 181.08 1214-23 33.47% 51.62% 14.91% 1 100% 0 02E, OS 15 0 Miles Libibit A PL 10230000930 ■ RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD Fkwr Z vOR" r CR LELY DR r ig rA 0 AMENDED I"X �C'd N. XXr TR - 4.1 C3 South US 41 Transportation !AUFAKILS T 6W(IMI U14 231 J Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) L�0%.VACAW,.m:4y� d, 3 of 3 Words underlined are added; words 5tFuck thmugh are deleted 08/08/23_mrm-dw I Packet Pg. 881 1 9.A.4.d COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO COMMENTS LETTER FOR THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT, County # PL20230000930 and DEO # 23-02ESR The proposed Plan amendment establishes density and height incentives, and economic development uses in certain locations along US 41 East (Tamiami Trail East) to implement, in part, the East Naples Community Development Plan, which was accepted by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners in October 2020. The Florida Department of Commerce's (DOC) and the Florida Department of Transportation's (FDOT) comments on the proposed amendment are below, followed by the County's response. DOC Comment (Coastal High Hazard Area Density Increase): Collier County proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 23-02ESR amends the Future Land Use Element to allow an increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area that, if adopted, would potentially adversely impact hurricane evacuation routes that are an important state facility in Collier County. The proposed amendment to Future Land Use Element Policy 1.9, Section V (Overlays and Special Features) and the Future Land Use Map establishes the US 41 East Overlay, which increases the allowable residential densities within the US 41 East Overlay area above the densities currently allowed by the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The US 41 East Overlay is located within the coastal high hazard area as depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map and Coastal High Hazard Area map. The proposed Amendment 23- 02ESR results in an increase in allowable residential density in the coastal high hazard area that would increase the population that would need to evacuate in the event of an impending natural disaster. The US 41 East Overlay is located along US 41, which is designated in the Collier County Comprehensive Plan (Transportation Element Map TR-7) as a hurricane evacuation route, and US 41 is interconnected with other designated hurricane evacuation routes (e.g., State Road 29, Interstate 75, Collier Boulevard, Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Davis Boulevard and other evacuation routes depicted on Map TR-7) in Collier County. The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR results in potential additional adverse impacts to the hurricane evacuation routes by increasing the number of potential evacuees that must utilize the evacuation routes and increasing the hurricane evacuation clearance times to safely evacuate Collier County. The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR does not coordinate the future land use map residential densities in the coastal high hazard area consistent with the protection of 1 Words underlined are added; words StFUCk th ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 882 9.A.4.d human life against the effects of natural disasters, including population evacuation, Q w U which takes into consideration the capability to safely evacuate the density of the 0a coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster. The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating that the proposed increase in residential density in the coastal high o hazard area is consistent with Collier County Comprehensive Plan Conservation and w Coastal Management Element Goal 12, Objective 12.1 and Policy 12.1.2 and Future Land Use Element Policy 1.4 (related to the following: ensuring public safety, health and D welfare of people and property from the effects of hurricane storm damage; M maintaining hurricane evacuation clearance times; appropriate mitigation related to CD Q 0 0 hurricane evacuation times; and that the Future Land Use Map shall be designed to M coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). N The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR is not based upon relevant and appropriate data a and analysis demonstrating coordination and internal consistency of the Future Land Use Element and Conservation and Coastal Management Element. The proposed LO Amendment 23-02ESR is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis N demonstrating that the proposed increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area is consistent with the requirements Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), CD > O 163.3177 (6)(a)2., 163.3177 (6)(a)3.e., 163.3177 (6)(a)8.a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1),163.317and 163.3178(2)(h), Florida Statutes (F.S.), for hazard mitigation and w the protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, including r It population evacuation, which take into consideration the capability to safely evacuate �l the density of the coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster. a [Statutory Authority: Sections 163.3177(6)(a)1, Section 163.3177(1)(f)3 Florida Statutes (F.S.)] Recommendations: Do not adopt the proposed amendment. Alternatively, revise the proposed amendment, based upon and supported by relevant and appropriate data and analysis, to ensure that the amendment will not adversely impact hurricane evacuation routes and that the amendment coordinates the future land use map residential densities in the coastal high hazard area consistent with the protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, including population evacuation, which takes into consideration the capability to safely evacuate the density of the coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster. Response: County staff analysis reveals there are 134 parcels in the proposed Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Overlay comprising 372.76 acres; of these, 87 parcels/198.68 acres are in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA); 31 parcels/129.97 acres are partially 2 Words underlined are added; words StFUCk th ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 883 9.A.4.d in the CHHA; and 16 parcels/44.11 acres are not in the CHHA. It is unknown how many v of these parcels/acres will be proposed for rezone utilizing the residential density bonus; how many parcels/acres for which a rezone is sought will be in/out/partially in 0a the CHHA: and of those for which a rezone is sought, where those parcels will be within the US 41 East corridor in the Overlay. Therefore, impacts to hurricane evacuation 0 routes and emergency shelters cannot be known at this time. These impacts can only be w determined at the time a rezone petition is submitted and reviewed by the County. The County has amended the proposed text of the US 41 East Overlay in the Future Land M Use Element (FLUE) to address the proposed density increase in the Coastal High Hazard o Area (CHHA) by limiting the maximum number of dwelling units via this provision to 900 0 dwelling units (1,458 persons based on the 2020 Census countywide persons per N household and occupancy/vacancy rates), which is approximately 25% of the maximum a potential density, and requiring hazard mitigation as deemed necessary by the County's Bureau of Emergency Services (BES) Division, as each rezone petition that requests a LO Ln density increase in this Overlay is evaluated. [Currently, small-scale Growth Management Plan amendments and rezoning projects located within the CHHA that propose to increase residential density are reviewed by the BES for impacts upon o>' evacuation times, shelter needs, etc., and when deemed necessary, mitigation is required. The County will codify this in the proposed Overlay.] w The County recognizes and acknowledges that the Regional Evacuation Study (Study), prepared by the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (RPC), provides for specific clearance times and evacuations of various populations; and includes shelter demand and behavioral evacuation rates for Collier County based on planning assumptions due to the effects of potential natural disasters. However, the BES Director advises that the RPC Study is a planning document and is not used for operational purposes nor does the Study reflect actual scenarios during an emergency event. The BES Director relies on the following considerations for evacuations and sheltering when evaluating projects proposing to increase density in the Coastal High Hazard Area: 1) Evacuations/Evacuation Routes a. An early risk assessment is completed for impending disasters to establish current census, including vulnerable populations, to determine necessary evacuations. b. Volunteer and phased evacuations are issued prior to mandatory evacuations to increase clearance times. Words underlined are added; words StFUCk th ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 884 9.A.4.d c. A warning system (Alert Collier) is in place to send mass notifications through v cellular devices, radio, etc., which improves public awareness and evacuation 0a times. d. The evacuation routes depicted in Transportation Element Map TR-7, and specifically those routes in the CHHA, have sufficient capacity to handle o evacuations based on local decisions regarding voluntary (early), phased, and w mandatory evacuations. 2) Shelter Space a. Current shelter beds are estimated at 31,000 beds (schools and community centers). b. It's estimated that approximately 15-18 percent of the evacuation zone population utilizes a shelter during an emergency event. (Storm event statistics: Hurricane Ian (2022) —1352 registered in 8 shelters, Hurricane Irma (2017) — 17,367 registered in 31 shelters, Hurricane Wilma (2005) — 8,127 registered in 15 shelters, and Hurricane Irene (1999) — 48 registered in 3 shelters). c. As more higher end construction occurs in the CHHA, a greater percentage of the population will shelter in place rather than evacuate to a public shelter in a wind event. a� d. The proposed amendment only allows increased density for vertical mixed -use 2, development, which would experience a higher rate of sheltering in place and w r lower evacuation rates to shelters (wind and flood events). FDOT Review Comment: The proposed CPA may result in an increase in project trips and impacts to US 41. As a result, FDOT determined the proposed amendment may have adverse impacts to transportation resources or facilities of state importance. FDOT Technical Assistance Comment #1: It is the Department's understanding that the impacted properties are subject to additional coordination, review and approval. FDOT requests that the County continue to coordinate with the FDOT with the review of future projects. Response: The proposed Overlay could yield a maximum increase of 3,644 dwelling units. As provided in the Transmittal documents (pages 4-6 of the Collier County Planning Commission Staff Report, dated March 16, 2023), the transportation analysis prepared by Jacobs Engineering indicated no significant impacts to US 41 East (Tamiami Trail) would result from this proposed amendment based on the total of 3,644 dwelling units. Nonetheless, the County proposes to revise the proposed Overlay to cap the density increase to 25% of the total (900 DUs). Collier County will continue to 4 Words underlined are added; words StFUCk th ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Packet Pg. 885 9.A.4.d coordinate with FDOT as these rezone projects are submitted. [Also, note above Response to DOC Comment.] Changes to Proposed Overlay since Transmittal: The County proposes to revise the Overlay to: 1) Cap the density increase to 900 dwelling units; and, 2) Provide an evaluation of each rezone petition requesting to increase density via this overlay for impacts upon hurricane evacuation times and shelter space, and to require mitigation as appropriate, consistent with CCME Policy 12.1.2. Amend proposed FLUE Overlay and Special Features text to read as follows: V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** K. US 41 East Overlay This Overlay is located along portions of the US 41 East corridor from Palm Drive to Greenway Road. It is comprised of three Regional Centers, four Community Centers, and multiple Corridor segments between those Centers, all of which that are depicted on the Future Land Use Map and US 41 East Overlay Maps. The Overlay is intended to allow mixed use development and economic development and to encourage a pedestrian/transit friendly development pattern. The Regional Centers allow medium to high intensity mixed use development, commercial, residential development, and certain economic development uses, and are located within Mixed Use Activity Center numbers 16, 17, and 18. The Community Centers allow moderate to low intensity mixed use development, commercial, residential development, hotel/motel at a maximum density of 26 units per acre, and certain economic development uses. The Corridor segments allow low density residential development, commercial development permitted by the underlying zoning districts, and certain economic development uses. A zoning overlay shall be established within one year of the effective date of this Overlay and include Regional Center, Community Center, and Corridor Subdistricts. The zoning overlay will provide for allowed uses, design standards, and increased density and/or height for projects in the Regional Centers and Community Centers that include certain design elements such as vertical mixed use. Breen buildine standards. and low impact development standards. Mixed use development within the Regional Centers and Community Centers of this Overlay will be eligible for increased density and/or height when utilizing Words underlined are added; words StFUCk th ugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal 5 Packet Pg. 886 9.A.4.d incentives outlined in the zoning overlay, and is subject to the following limitations: 1. The density bonus incentive is available only to multifamily development within the Regional and Community Centers and is limited to an aggregate maximum of 900 dwelling units for both Regional Centers and Community Centers. a. All Droiects located within the Coastal High Hazard Area and utilizing the density bonus incentives shall be evaluated for hazard mitigation from the effects of natural disasters by the County - Bureau of Emergency Services (BES) Division. b. If a project is determined by BES to have an impact(s) on emergency operations, including but not limited to, evacuations and shelter space, mitigation for those impacts shall be required. 2. Mixed use development within the Regional Centers is eligible for up to twenty (20) dwelling units per acre when utilizing the density bonus incentives outlined in the zoning overlay and is not subject to the density rating system. 3. Mixed use development within the Community Centers is eligible for up to sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre when utilizing the density bonus incentives outlined in the zoning overlay and is not subject to the density rating system. 4. For a mixed -use development pursuant to paragraph 1. or 2. above, only multifamily dwelling units are allowed. 5. The maximum height increase for properties within the Regional and Community Centers shall be limited to twenty (20) feet above that permitted by the underlying zoning district. Residential -only development, mixed use development not utilizing incentives outlined in the zoning overlay, and commercial -only development other than certain economic development uses, shall be in accordance with the underlying future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. This Future Land Use Overlay shall only be implemented through the establishment of a zoning overlay, which shall occur within two (2) years from the effective date of this amendment. Words underlined are added; words stru k thFaugh are deleted Words with double underline are added; words with double are deleted since Transmittal Q w U H 06 as O w 0 Packet Pg. 887 9.A.4.e Ron DeSantis GOVERNOR E4) FLORIDA DEPARTMENTa' ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY June 8, 2023 The Honorable Rick LoCastro Chairman, Collier County Board of County Commissioners Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Florida 34112 Dear Chairman LoCastro: Meredith Ivey ACTING SECRETARY The Department of Economic Opportunity ("Department") has reviewed the Collier County proposed comprehensive plan amendment (Amendment No. 23-02ESR), received on May 9, 2023, pursuant to the expedited state review process in Section 163.3184(2) and (3), Florida Statutes (F.S.). We have identified a comment related to adverse impacts to important state resources and facilities within the Department's authorized scope of review. The Agency's comment regarding these amendments are attached to this letter. The County should act by choosing to adopt, adopt with changes, or not adopt the proposed amendment. For your assistance, we have enclosed the procedures for adoption and transmittal of the comprehensive plan amendment. In addition, the County is reminded that: • Section 163.3184(3)(b), F.S., authorizes other reviewing agencies to provide comments directly to the County. If the County receives reviewing agency comments and they are not resolved, these comments could form the basis for a challenge to the amendment after adoption. The second public hearing, which shall be a hearing on whether to adopt one or more comprehensive plan amendments, must be held within 180 days of your receipt of agency comments or the amendment shall be deemed withdrawn unless extended by agreement with notice to the Department and any affected party that provided comment on the amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3)(c)1., F.S.. • The adopted amendment must be rendered to the Department. Under Section 163.3184(3)(c)2. and 4., F.S., the amendment effective date is 31 days after the Department notifies the County that the amendment package is complete or, if Florida Department of Economic Opportunity I Caldwell Building 1 107 E. Madison Street I Tallahassee, FL 32399 (850) 245.7105 1 www.FloridaJobs.org I www.Twitter.com/FLDEO I www.Facebook.com/FLDEO An equal opportunity employer/program. Auxiliary aids and service are available upon request to individuals with disabilities. All voice telephone numbers on this document may be reached by persons using TTY/TTD equipment via the Florida Relay Service at 711. Packet Pg. 888 The Honorable Rick LoCastro, Chairman 9.A.4.e June 8, 2023 Page 2 of 3 challenged, until it is found to be in compliance by the Department or the Administration Commission. If you have any questions concerning this review, please contact Matthew Preston, Planning Analyst, by telephone at (850)-717-8490 or by email at matt.preston@deo.myflorida.com. 7Sincer , I L Z. es D. Stansbury, Clil�l ureau of Community Planning and Growth J DS/s r Enclosure(s): Procedures for Adoption cc: Michael Bosi, Division Director, Planning and Zoning, Collier County Margaret Wuerstle, Executive Director, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Packet Pg. 889 9.A.4.e Comment (Coastal High Hazard Area Density Increase): Collier County proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 23-02ESR amends the Future Land Use Element to allow an increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area that, if adopted, would potentially adversely impact hurricane evacuation routes that are an important state facility in Collier County. The proposed amendment to Future Land Use Element Policy 1.9, Section V (Overlays and Special Features) and the Future Land Use Map establishes the US 41 East Overlay, which increases the allowable residential densities within the US 41 East Overlay area above the densities currently allowed by the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The US 41 East Overlay is located within the coastal high hazard area as depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map and Coastal High Hazard Area map. The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR results in an increase in allowable residential density in the coastal high hazard area that would increase the population that would need to evacuate in the event of an impending natural disaster. The US 41 East Overlay is located along US 41, which is designated in the Collier County Comprehensive Plan (Transportation Element Map TR-7) as a hurricane evacuation route, and US 41 is interconnected with other designated hurricane evacuation routes (e.g., State Road 29, Interstate 75, Collier Boulevard, Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Davis Boulevard and other evacuation routes depicted on Map TR-7) in Collier County. The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR results in potential additional adverse impacts to the hurricane evacuation routes by increasing the number of potential evacuees that must utilize the evacuation routes and increasing the hurricane evacuation clearance times to safely evacuate Collier County. The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR does not coordinate the future land use map residential densities in the coastal high hazard area consistent with the protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, including population evacuation, which takes into consideration the capability to safely evacuate the density of the coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster. The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating that the proposed increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area is consistent with Collier County Comprehensive Plan Conservation and Coastal Management Element Goal 12, Objective 12.1 and Policy 12.1.2 and Future Land Use Element Policy 1.4 (related to the following: ensuring public safety, health and welfare of people and property from the effects of hurricane storm damage; maintaining hurricane evacuation clearance times; appropriate mitigation related to hurricane evacuation times; and that the Future Land Use Map shall be designed to coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating coordination and internal consistency of the Future Land Use Element and Conservation and Coastal Management Element. The proposed Amendment 23-02ESR is not based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis demonstrating that the proposed increase in residential density in the coastal high hazard area is consistent with the requirements Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3.e., 163.3177(6)(a)8.a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178(2)(d), and 163.3178(2)(h), Florida Statutes (F.S.), for hazard mitigation and the protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, including population evacuation, which take into consideration the capability to safely evacuate the density of the coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster. Packet Pg. 890 9.A.4.e Statutory Authority: Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a)2., 163.3177(6)(a)3.e., 163.3177(6)(a)8.a., 163.3177(6)(g)7., 163.3178(1), 163.3178(2)(d), 163.3178(2)(h), and 163.3184, F.S. Recommendation: Do not adopt the proposed amendment. Alternatively, revise the proposed amendment, based upon and supported by relevant and appropriate data and analysis, to ensure that the amendment will not adversely impact hurricane evacuation routes and that the amendment coordinates the future land use map residential densities in the coastal high hazard area consistent with the protection of human life against the effects of natural disasters, including population evacuation, which takes into consideration the capability to safely evacuate the density of the coastal population in the event of an impending natural disaster. Packet Pg. 891 9.A.4.e SUBMITTAL OF ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR EXPEDITED STATE REVIEW Section 163.3184(3), Florida Statutes NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED: Please submit electronically using the Department's electronic amendment submittal portal "Comprehensive Plan and Amendment Unload" (httRs://fldeo.my.salesforce-sites.com/cp/j or submit three complete copies of all comprehensive plan materials, of which one complete paper copy and two complete electronic copies on CD ROM in Portable Document Format (PDF) to the State Land Planning Agency and one copy to each entity below that provided timely comments to the local government: the appropriate Regional Planning Council; Water Management District; Department of Transportation; Department of Environmental Protection; Department of State; the appropriate county (municipal amendments only); the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (county plan amendments only); and the Department of Education (amendments relating to public schools); and for certain local governments, the appropriate military installation and any other local government or governmental agency that has filed a written request. SUBMITTAL LETTER: Please include the following information in the cover letter transmitting the adopted amendment: State Land Planning Agency identification number for adopted amendment package; Summary description of the adoption package, including any amendments proposed but not adopted; Identify if concurrency has been rescinded and indicate for which public facilities. (Transportation, schools, recreation and open space). Ordinance number and adoption date; Certification that the adopted amendment(s) has been submitted to all parties that provided timely comments to the local government; Name, title, address, telephone, FAX number and e-mail address of local government contact; Letter signed by the chief elected official or the person designated by the local government. Revised: October 2022 Page 1 Packet Pg. 892 9.A.4.e ADOPTION AMENDMENT PACKAGE: Please include the following information in the amendment package: In the case of text amendments, changes should be shown in strike-through/underline format. In the case of future land use map amendments, an adopted future land use map, in color format, clearly depicting the parcel, its future land use designation, and its adopted designation. A copy of any data and analyses the local government deems appropriate. Note: If the local government is relying on previously submitted data and analysis, no additional data and analysis is required; Copy of the executed ordinance adopting the comprehensive plan amendment(s); Suggested effective date language for the adoption ordinance for expedited review: "The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If the amendment is timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance." List of additional changes made in the adopted amendment that the State Land Planning Agency did not previously review; List of findings of the local governing body, if any, that were not included in the ordinance and which provided the basis of the adoption or determination not to adopt the proposed amendment; Statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes not previously reviewed by the State Land Planning Agency in response to the comment letter from the State Land Planning Agency. Revised: October 2022 Page 2 Packet Pg. 893 9.A.4.f From: BosiMichael Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2023 7:38 AM To: MoscaMichele; SaboJames Subject: FW: Proposed CPA23-02ESR / Collier County/ FDOT Review / 06-06-23 Michele, For the file. Thanks, mike From: Suguri, Vitor <Vitor.Suguri@dot.state.fl.us> Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2023 4:43 PM To: BosiMichael <Michael.Bosi@colliercountvfl.gov> Cc: Reina, Bessie <Bessie.Reina@dot.state.fl.us>; Merkle, Tanya <Tanya.Merkle@dot.state.f1.us>; Babuji Ambikapathy (BAmbikapathv@VHB.com) <BAmbikapathv@VHB.com>; izaballero@vhb.com Subject: Proposed CPA23-02ESR / Collier County/ FDOT Review / 06-06-23 EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Good afternoon, Michael, Pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), Florida Statutes (F.S.), in its role as a reviewing agency as identified in Section 163.3184(1)(c), F.S., the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) reviewed the Collier County Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) package 23-02ESR. Collier County CPA 23-02ESR Request: Collier County CPA 23-02ESR is a county initiated proposed amendment which is proposing an amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the US 41 East Overlay to allow certain economic development uses within the Corridor segments; and, allow increased height and density, and certain economic development uses in Regional Centers and Community Centers through incentives, and amending the Transportation Element and maps to expand the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). Future Land Use Changes: The Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series, specifically to establish a new US 41 East Overlay for a segment of US 41 East, from approximately Palm Drive to Greenway Road (the Urban-Agricultural/Rural boundary), which will provide for increased density and height for vertical mixed -use developments within portions of the Overlay, and allow certain economic development uses throughout the Overlay; and, The Transportation Element to create a new map (TR-4.1) depicting the expansion of the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) from its present terminus at the Rattlesnake -Hammock Road and Thomasson Lane intersections with US 41 East, to the southeast along US 41 East to the east side of Mixed Use Activity Center #18 at the intersection M CV to 0 to 0 3 a� m O a u- r c 0 U L m 0 U Packet Pg. 894 9.A.4.f of US 41 East and Collier Boulevard; and, update the tables on the existing TCEA Map (TR-4) to reflect current conditions; and, amend Policy 5.4 of the Transportation Element (TE) to provide a reference to the new TCEA map (TR-4.1). Per Policy 5.4, the South US 41 TCEA may be exempt from transportation concurrency requirements so long as impact to the transportation system are mitigated using the procedures established in Transportation Element (TE) Policies 5.5 (development must provide for at least four (4) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies) and 5.6 (development must provide for two (2) TDM strategies and annual monitoring and in consideration of the following: A. Any proposed development within the concurrency exception area that would reduce the LOS on Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) roadways within the County by 5% or more of the capacity at the adopted LOS standard shall meet the transportation concurrency requirements specified in Capital Improvement Element, Policy 5.3. (X) = Plan Amendment by Ordinance No. 2015-11 on January 27, 2015 TE as of Ordinance No. 2017-25 adopted June 13, 2017. B. Any proposed development within the concurrency exception area that would reduce the LOS on SIS roadways within the County by less than 5% of the capacity at the adopted LOS standard and meets the requirements identified in TE Policy 5.6 are exempt from the transportation requirements of Capital Improvement Element, Policy 5.3 (Concurrency Management System). County Staff Analysis: The purpose of this Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment is to create a FLUE Overlay to provide for increased density and economic development uses along the US 41 East corridor as proposed in the East Naples Community Development Plan (ENCDP). The US 41 East corridor is a Florida Department of Transportation facility which currently has constrained segments. A portion of the US 41 East corridor is within the South Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA), which excepts properties from link -by -link concurrency. The increased development opportunities allowed by the Overlay could result in increased transportation impacts, most significantly on certain segments of US 41. Given the current modest remaining capacity on US 41 in this area, expansion of the TCEA is beneficial to the transportation network. The Overlay map in the support materials identifies seven different areas where increased density is allowed within mixed -use developments (commercial and residential multi -family) - three Regional Centers and four Community Centers. Density increases for mixed -use developments within these Centers would be allowed as follows: Regional Centers, up to 20 dwelling units per acre, and Community Centers, up to 16 dwelling units per acre. Landowners would have the option of developing a mixed -use project as provided in this Overlay or developing per the underlying future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. Intensity/Density: Residential • Adopted: o Community Centers: 3/4/16 DUs/Ac o Regional Centers: 4/16 DUs/Ac • Proposed o Community Centers: 16 DUs/Ac o Regional Centers: 20 DUs/Ac Note: The Overlay would allow a maximum increase of 3,463 dwelling units; this number reflects 100% participation for all eligible properties and at the maximum allowed density. County Staff anticipates a M N to 0 co 0 3 A! m O a u_ r c 0 U `m 0 U Packet Pg. 895 9.A.4.f participation rate of up to 25% to be more likely to occur in this area, resulting in a maximum increase of 866 dwelling units. Location: Generally located along the US 41 East corridor from approximately Palm Drive (road separating Walmart from Naples Towne Center) to Greenway Road (the Urban-Agricultural/Rural boundary) lying about 3.4 road miles east of Collier Boulevard Acreage: • Adopted: TCEA area of 976.09 acres • Proposed: TCEA area of 1,214.23 acres Trip Generation Comparison Review: The proposed change results will likely result in an increase in residential land uses. But a trip comparison could not be conducted due to the number of parcels impacted by the amendment. A transportation analysis memorandum was provided for two sample parcels each of which resulted in an increase in trips; however, redevelopment/infill has the potential to result. Review: The proposed change may likely result in an increase in traffic but could not be determined due to the number of parcels impacted by the amendment along the US 41 corridor. Further review is recommended as the increase in trip generation may impact state facilities. Check — Collier County 23-02ESR Criteria Yes or No Notes >50 Acres, or>100 Acres Rural Yes 238.14 +/- Acres (added acreage) SIS <3.0 Miles No Non-SIS <3.0 Miles Yes US 41 Adjacent SR 84 Approx 0.90 miles north of US 41 TCEA Overlay Increase # of trips >25% No 2% Significance Impact TBD Potential Needs Review Letter No FDOT Review Comment: The proposed CPA may result in an increase in project trips and impacts to US 41. As a result, FDOT determined the proposed amendment may have adverse impacts to transportation resources or facilities of state importance. FDOT Technical Assistance Comment #1: It is the Department's understanding that the impacted properties are subject to additional coordination, review and approval. FDOT requests that the County continue to coordinate with the FDOT with the review of future projects. FDOT appreciates your commitment to intergovernmental coordination and the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed amendment. Thank you, M N to 0 co 0 d H O a u_ r c O U L 2 G U Packet Pg. 896 9.A.4.f Vitor Suguri, Ph.D. Community Planner SIS Coordinator Florida Department of Transportation - District One 10041 Daniels Parkway Fort Myers, FL 33913 (239) 225-1959 - Desk (863) 221-1707 — Cell Clouds or no clouds, the heat of the sun can be deadly. LOOK BEFORE YOU LOCK ©° ^^a isvco / F�D�OTT- M N size=2 width="100%" align=center> W 0 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. > m O 0 U_ r c 0 U L 0 U Packet Pg. 897 9.A.4.g Cc &e,-r Co14-ilty STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: March 16, 2023 RE: PETITION NO. PL20230000930, STAFF -PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND MAP TR-4, SOUTH US 41 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA, IN THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] REQUESTED ACTION: This proposal consists of a single staff -initiated Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment petition comprised of two components, as follows: 1. Amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series to establish a new US 41 East Overlay for a segment of US 41 East, from approximately Palm Drive (road separating Walmart from Naples Towne Center) to Greenway Road (the Urban- Agricultural/Rural boundary) lying about 3.4 road miles east of Collier Blvd. The Overlay will allow increased density for vertical mixed -use developments within portions of the Overlay and will allow certain economic development uses throughout the Overlay. 2. Create a new map (TR-4.1) depicting the expansion of the Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) from its present terminus at the Rattlesnake -Hammock Road and Thomasson Lane intersections with US 41 East, to the southeast along US 41 East to the east side of Mixed Use Activity Center #18 at the intersection of US 41 East and Collier Blvd.; update the tables on the existing TCEA Map (TR-4) to reflect current conditions; and, amend Policy 5.4 of the Transportation Element (TE) to provide a reference to the new TCEA map (TR-4.1). The proposed GMP amendments are reflected in Exhibit "A" text and maps accompanying the GMP Amendment Transmittal Resolution. BACKGROUND: On February 14, 2017, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) directed staff to engage the East Naples community in a public planning process to identify and incentivize desired land uses and development along the US 41 East (Tamiami Trail) corridor. On April 24, 2018, staff and their consultant team from Johnson Engineering, Inc. presented the US 41 Corridor Study (Corridor Study) to the Board. The Corridor Study included four meetings to engage the public and solicit community input and resulted in recommendations that included: a community -based branding project, land use preferences, a strategy to limit undesirable uses, landscaping preferences, and transportation needs. Following the Corridor Study, staff received Board direction to prepare a community development plan for the East Naples community that would establish a vision for the area to guide future development and redevelopment. In January 2020, the consulting firm of Tindale Oliver contracted with the Board to Packet Pg. 898 9.A.4.g prepare the East Naples Community Development Plan. In October 2020, the East Naples Community Development Plan (ENCDP) was accepted by the Board. The development of the ENCDP included an extensive public input process culminating in a community plan that guides land uses and development, promotes various transportation modes, highlights the community's assets/improvements, provides follow-up efforts to address topics of community interest, and provides steps on implementation. The ENCDP prioritizes the development and implementation of a zoning overlay along the US 41 East corridor (Tamiami Trail East), specifically providing for its establishment within 5-years from the date of acceptance by the Board. An objective of the zoning overlay is to enhance the community's sense of place by providing guidance on future development and redevelopment projects that will expand employment opportunities, leisure activities, dining, and shopping to meet the growing needs of the community. In 2021, the County contracted with Johnson Engineering, Inc. to assist with preparing a zoning overlay (US 41 EZO) that implements the ENCDP. The community has been actively engaged with staff and the County's consultant in developing the US 41 EZO for the segment of US 41 East that generally begins at Palm Drive (near the Collier County government center) and extends to the east side of Port of the Islands, exclusive of that segment of US 41 within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. During the months between January and November 2022, the project team conducted staff team meetings, and stakeholder and community meetings to solicit input on the development and design standards for residential, mixed -use, and commercial development, and spacing criteria for commercial uses, in part, to address the undesirable uses identified in the ENCDP. STAFF ANALYSIS: The purpose of this Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment is to create a FLUE Overlay to provide for increased density and economic development uses along the US 41 East corridor as proposed in the East Naples Community Development Plan (ENCDP). The US 41 East corridor is a Florida Department of Transportation facility which currently has constrained segments. A portion of the US 41 East corridor is within the South Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA), which excepts properties from link -by -link concurrency. The increased development opportunities allowed by the Overlay could result in increased transportation impacts, most significantly on certain segments of US 41. Given the current modest remaining capacity on US 41 in this area, expansion of the TCEA is beneficial to the transportation network. Future Land Use Element/Future Land Use Map and Series The proposed US 41 East Overlay will implement, in part, the ENCDP. At the adoption hearings for these GMP amendments, staff intends to include the companion Land Development Code (LDC) amendments that will establish an implementing zoning overlay. The Overlay map in the support materials identifies seven different areas where increased density is allowed within mixed -use developments (commercial and residential multi -family) - three Regional Centers and four Community Centers. Density increases for mixed -use developments within these Centers would be allowed as follows: Regional Centers, up to 20 dwelling units per acre, and Community Centers, up to 16 dwelling units per acre. Landowners would have the option of developing a mixed -use project as provided in this Overlay or developing per the underlying future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. Regional Centers lie within the Mixed -Use Activity Center Subdistrict (Activity Centers 16, 17, and 18 as identified on the Future Land Use Map series). Certain economic development uses are allowed throughout the Overlay. As with the density increase for mixed -use development, the development of economic development uses is optional; landowners can choose to develop their property per the underlying future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. —2— Packet Pg. 899 9.A.4.g The table below identifies the present and proposed density allowances within the Overlay's Community and Regional Centers. Because the underlying future land use designations vary, the presently eligible densities vary. Overlay sub -area Present eligible density Proposed eligible density Community Centers 3/4/16 DU/A 16 DU/A Regional Centers /16 DU/A 20 DU/A DU/A = dwelling units per acre The Overlay would allow a maximum increase of 3,463 dwelling units; this number reflects 100% participation for all eligible properties and at the maximum allowed density. Staff is of the opinion that the actual participation, even over an extended number of years, will be far less; this is based on the limited number of mixed -use projects built to date despite the County allowing and encouraging such developments since at least 1989. Staff anticipates a participation rate of up to 25% to be more likely to occur in this area, resulting in a maximum increase of 866 dwelling units. Transportation Element/Transportation Concurrencv Exception Area (TCEA) — TR-4 and TR-4.1 Maps. The proposed FLUE Overlay (and Zoning Overlay) is designed to enhance the area by increasing economic development opportunities, improving the variety of housing options, and creating walkable, vibrant areas supported by a network of services. The proposed increased densities and uses align with the purpose of the TCEA by potentially reducing trips on the US 41 East corridor. Transportation Planning staff provided the following information to describe the TCEA and its purpose. "Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas (TCEA) is an alternative concurrency management system authorized by Florida Statutes to regulate increased traffic volume created by new development while also promoting affordable housing and redevelopment programs as well as development policies designed to control urban sprawl. These systems are used to manage growth -related impacts on transportation facilities on an area -wide basis rather than on a link -by -link basis. A TCEA is designed to reduce the adverse impact transportation concurrency may have on urban sprawl control policies and redevelopment. Collier County has one TCEA called the South US 41 TCEA. Development located within the boundaries of the South US 41 TCEA is exempt from transportation concurrency requirements so long as impacts to the transportation system are mitigated using Transportation Demand Management strategies enumerated in the Policy 5.5 of the Transportation Element. Commercial developments within the South US 41 TCEA that choose to obtain an exception from concurrency requirements for transportation will provide certification to the County transportation planning agency that at least four (4) of the following Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies will be utilized: a) Preferential parking for carpools and vanpools that is expected to increase the average vehicle occupancy for work trips generated by the development. b) Parking charge that is expected to increase the average vehicle occupancy for work trips generated by the development and/or increase transit ridership. c) Cash subsidy that is expected to increase the average vehicle occupancy for work trips generated by the development and/or increase transit ridership. d) Flexible work schedules that are expected to reduce peak -hour automobile work trips generated by the development. e) Compressed workweek that would be expected to reduce vehicle miles of travel and peak hour work trips generated by the development. f) Telecommuting that would be expected to reduce the vehicle miles of travel and peak hour work trips generated by the development. 3 Packet Pg. 900 9.A.4.g g) Transit subsidy that would be expected to reduce auto trips generated by the development and increase transit ridership. h) Bicycle and pedestrian facilities that would be expected to reduce vehicle miles of travel and automobile work trips generated by the development. i) Including residential units as a portion of a commercial project that would be expected to reduce vehicle miles of travel. Residential developments within the South US 41 TCEA that choose to obtain an exception from concurrency requirements for transportation shall provide documentation to the County transportation planning agency that at least three (3) of the following Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies will be utilized: a) Including neighborhood commercial uses within a residential project. b) Providing transit shelters within the development (in coordination with Collier Area Transit). c) Providing bicycle and pedestrian facilities with connections to adjacent commercial properties d) Vehicular access to adjacent commercial properties with shared commercial and residential parking." Required Data and Analysis in Support of the Changes to the TCEA: Chapter 163, Part 11, Florida Statutes, contains the statutory provisions pertaining to comprehensive plans (GMP), including the requirement for local governments to adopt a comprehensive plan, the elements required to be included in a comprehensive plan, and the procedures and requirements to amend the comprehensive plan. The statutory provisions relevant to most GMP amendments are identified later in this Staff Report ("Criteria for GMP Amendments in Florida Statutes"). Additionally, Chapter 163.3180(5)(h)1. a., Florida Statutes, provides that the County is to "Consult with the Department of Transportation when proposed plan amendments affect facilities on the strategic intermodal system" (SIS). Interstate 75 (1-75) is the closest SIS facility to the proposed US 41 East Overlay and TCEA expansion area; the other SIS facilities are in the east/central part of the county (SR29 and SR82). The County had their transportation consultant perform an evaluation of the traffic impacts to 1-75 caused by the allowed density increase under the maximum utilization scenario - the 100% density increase (3,463 DUs). The results indicate the impacts to 1-75 are negligible (please see the below table). [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] —4— Packet Pg. 901 9.A.4.g U5 41 Overlay AADT Comparison E{.UdSI Wd- y;l- Man@tee Rd Original APPraved 44,370 U541 Overlay 44,540 570 Percent 1.28% Collier Blvd Fiddler's Creek P Collier Bhrd Manatee Rd U541 47,780 48r6ZO 900 1.88% Collier Blvd U541 Rattlesnake Rd 15,0001 35,5Q4 540 1.54% Collier Blvd RattlesnakeRd Dav66Md 51A50 51,530 80 0.16% Collier 8lyd Davis Blvd 1-75 59,310 5%200 -110 0.199E I-75 SR 29 Eve lades Bird 37200 37,090 -210 0.30% I-75 Ever ladesslad Collier OW 57,fr49 58,2513 610 1.0d% I-75 Call ier Blvd Golden Gate Pkwy 901090 89r470 -620 0169% I-75 60 ld@n Gat@ PkwyPirm Ridge, Rd IGS,25U 106,DU0 -2,250 2.08% Rattlesnake Rd U541 Santa Barbara Blvd 21,710 21,990 i80 0.83% RattWsnakeRd Santa Barbara Blvd Collier Blvd 24240 24AE0 240 0.99% SR 29 US 41 1.75 5,010 3,010 0 0.00% SR 29 1-75 0d Well Rd 4,30d 4,Z80 -20 4.4736 i.I S 41 Go odlette-Ffank Rd Davis Blvd 73,2415 74,420 1.,180 1.61% .1 U541 Davis Blvd RertiesnakeAd Rattlesnake Rd 57,890 80,.540 2,650 4-53% Co11ler8lvd 43,790 46,710 21920 5.67% 41 Collier Blvd Manatee Rd 20,350 211360 510 2A5% AADT = Average Annual Daily Trips However, the evaluation indicated there will be impacts on portions of US 41 East. Collier County completed a [D1 RPM 2045] model run using the maximum number of multifamily dwelling units allowed by the Overlay. The model estimated that the most significant impacts (increases of up to 6.67% of the original volume) will be along US 41 directly. For this reason, Collier County recommends expanding the TCEA from its southeasterly terminus, approximately south of Rattlesnake -Hammock Road (CR 864), to southeast of Collier Blvd. (CR/SR 951). Consistent with the TCEA, the new Overlay is intended to promote redevelopment, affordable housing, and infill development. The Transportation Demand Management strategies required by the TCEA coincide with the goals and vision of the Overlay and provide a systematic approach to addressing the congestion in the area. The existing TCEA was adopted in 2004 along with two Transportation Concurrency Management Areas (TCMA). As a significant portion of the [at that time, proposed] TCEA was within the Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area aka Bays hore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B/GTRO), certain statutory and State Rule 9J-5 provisions were applicable pertaining to the amount of vacant land allowed, redevelopment strategies, etc. Thus, two tables were included on the TCEA map, one pertaining to vacant lands and one pertaining to land use categories. For the existing TCEA, staff updated the land use and vacant parcel tables using 2022 data from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office; please see below. Existing TCEA, Land Use Table (2022 data) Public Commercia 1 Residential 1 Total Acres 93.07 453.52 429.50 976.09 9.53% 46.46% 44.00% 100% Note: Percent figures do not sum to 100% due to rounding. 5 Packet Pg. 902 9.A.4.g Existing TCEA, Vacant Parcel Table (2022 data) ALL Count: 1725 (100%) Sum of acres = 976.09 PARCELS (100%) VACANT Count: 234 (13.6%) Sum of acres = 105.55 (10.8%) NOW Count: 1491 (86.4%) Sum of acres = 870.54 VACANT 1 1 (89.2%) Similarly, for the TCEA expansion area, staff created land use and vacant parcel tables using 2022 data from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office; please see below. However, none of the expanded TCEA lies within the Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area (B/GTRO), and statutory requirements are less than they were in 2004. TCEA Expansion, Land Use Table Public Commercia 1 Residentia 1 Total Acres 406.42 626.73 181.08 1214.23 33.47% 51.62% 14.91 % 100% TCEA Expansion, Vacant Parcel Table ALL Count: 640 (100%) Sum of acres = 1214.23 PARCELS (100%) VACANT Count: 106 (16.6%) Sum of acres = 171.39 14.1% NON- Count: 534 (83.4%) Sum of acres = 1042.84 VACANT (85.9%) Additionally, the County's sub -consultant for the preparation of the US 41 East Zoning Overlay, Fehr Peers, prepared a transportation analysis of the potential vertical mixed -use development on two [sample] parcels along the US 41 East corridor: Lowe's Plaza in the southwest quadrant of US 41 East and CR/SR 951, and St. Andrews Square in the northwest quadrant of US 41 East and St. Andrews Blvd. Both parcels are developed with commercial centers. The analysis considered partial redevelopment with vertical mixed -use (commercial and residential), which is one of the desired outcomes of the East Naples Community Development Plan and is one of the strategies to lessen transportation impacts. [see attachments: Transportation Analysis Summary 11-29-22 (Fehr Peers Memorandum dated Nov. 29, 2022), and Transportation Plan Review Summary 2-11-22 (Fehr Peers Memorandum dated Feb. 11, 2022)] Environmental Impacts: These amendments increase the allowable density and increase the intensity of commercial uses allowed for certain properties along the US41 East corridor, all of which are designated Urban and most of which are already developed or cleared of native vegetation. Redevelopment or development of these properties is subject to the environmental protection standards in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and LDC, as applicable. Public Facilities Impacts: Based upon review of the most recent AUIR, Annual Update, and Inventory Report, there are adequate public facilities to accommodate the allowable density increase (and additional commercial uses) proposed by this amendment (water, wastewater, solid waste, drainage, etc.). Transportation impacts have been previously addressed. 6 Packet Pg. 903 9.A.4.g 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 on surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a) The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b) The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c) The character of undeveloped land. d) The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e) The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f) The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g) The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. —7— Packet Pg. 904 9.A.4.g 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), or existing incompatibilities (e.g., presently allowed uses would be incompatible with surrounding uses and conditions). LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney's Office on February 17, 2023. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element and map series are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2 and 163.3177(6)(a)8, Florida Statutes. (HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20230000930 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. —8— Packet Pg. 905 9.A.4.h 04/25/2023 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing an amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the US 41 East Overlay to allow certain economic development uses within the Corridor segments; and, allow increased height and density, and certain economic development uses in Regional Centers and Community Centers through incentives, and amending the Transportation Element and maps to expand the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area, and furthermore directing transmittal of the proposed amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. [PL20230000930] OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners (Board) to review and consider approving the proposed amendments to: The Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series, specifically to establish a new US 41 East Overlay for a segment of US 41 East, from approximately Palm Drive (road separating Walmart from Naples Towne Center) to Greenway Road (the Urban-Agricultural/Rural boundary) lying about 3.4 road miles east of Collier Boulevard, which will provide for increased density and height for vertical mixed -use developments within portions of the Overlay, and allow certain economic development uses throughout the Overlay; and, 2. The Transportation Element to create a new map (TR-4.1) depicting the expansion of the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) from its present terminus at the Rattlesnake -Hammock Road and Thomasson Lane intersections with US 41 East, to the southeast along US 41 East to the east side of Mixed Use Activity Center #18 at the intersection of US 41 East and Collier Boulevard; and, update the tables on the existing TCEA Map (TR-4) to reflect current conditions; and, amend Policy 5.4 of the Transportation Element (TE) to provide a reference to the new TCEA map (TR-4.1). The proposed GMP amendments are reflected in Exhibit "A" text and maps accompanying the GMP Amendment Transmittal Resolution. CONSIDERATIONS: On February 14, 2017, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) directed staff to engage the East Naples community in a public planning process to identify and incentivize desired land uses and development along the US 41 East (Tamiami Trail) corridor. On April 24, 2018, staff and their consultant team from Johnson Engineering, Inc. presented the US 41 Corridor Study (Corridor Study) to the Board. The Corridor Study included four meetings to engage the public and solicit community input and resulted in recommendations that included: a community -based branding project, land use preferences, strategy to limit undesirable uses, landscaping preferences, and transportation needs. Following the Corridor Study, staff received Board direction to prepare a community development plan for the East Naples community that would establish a vision for the area to guide future development and redevelopment. In January 2020, the consulting firm of Tindale Oliver contracted with the Board to prepare the East Naples Community Development Plan (ENCDP). The ENCDP was accepted by the Board in October 2020. The development of the ENCDP included an extensive public input process culminating in a community plan that guides land uses and development, promotes various transportation modes, highlights the community's assets/improvements, provides follow-up efforts to address topics of community interest, and provides steps on implementation. The ENCDP prioritizes the development and implementation of a zoning overlay along the US 41 East corridor (Tamiami Trail East), specifically providing for its establishment within 5-years from the date of acceptance by the Board. An objective of the zoning overlay is to enhance the community's sense of place by providing guidance on future development and redevelopment projects that will expand employment opportunities, leisure activities, Packet Pg. 906 9.A.4.h 04/25/2023 dining, and shopping to meet the growing needs of the community. Q IL In 2021, the County contracted with Johnson Engineering, Inc. to assist with preparing a zoning overlay (US 41 2 EZO) that implements the ENCDP. The community has been actively engaged with staff and the County's consultant in developing the US 41 EZO for the segment of US 41 East that generally begins at Palm Drive (near 2 the Collier County government center) and extends to the east side of Port of the Islands, exclusive of that segment of US 41 within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. During the months between January and November 2022, the project team conducted staff team meetings, and stakeholder and community meetings to solicit input on the w development and design standards for residential, mixed -use, and commercial development, and spacing criteria for w commercial uses, in part, to address the undesirable uses identified in the ENCDP. Certain provisions of the proposed US 41 EZO necessitate the establishment of the subject US 41 East Overlay in the GMP and related TCEA expansion. O FISCAL IMPACT: The costs associated with processing and advertising the proposed GMP amendment have 0 been allocated within Planning Services Fund (131), Current Planning Fund Center (138326). w 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: The Collier County Planning Commission, acting as the Land Planning Agency and the Environmental Advisory Council, forward the proposed US 41 East Overlay and Transportation Concurrency Exception Area expansion Growth Management Plan amendments 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 (CCPQ RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC reviewed and discussed the proposed amendments at their March 16, 2023, meeting. The CCPC recommended that the Board approve the amendments for transmittal, per staff recommendation (vote: 6/0). There were no registered speakers. 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." s. 163.3177(1)(f), FS. In addition, s. 163.3177(6)(a)2, FS provides that FLUE plan amendments shall be based on surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of 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. Packet Pg. 907 9.A.4.h 04/25/2023 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 amendments for transmittal to the DEO and other statutorily required agencies, as recommended by the CCPC. Prepared by: Michele Mosca, AICP, Planner III, Growth Management Community Development Department, Zoning Division ATTACHMENT(S) 1. CCPC Staff Report _US 41 Overlay-TCEA expansion GMPA.FNL (PDF) 2. Resolution & Exhibit A - 021323(2) (PDF) 3. Transportation_ Plan Review Summary_2-11-2022 (PDF) A 4. Transportation_nalysis_Summary_11-Analysis-2022 (PDF) 5. [Linked] ENCDP Final Plan (PDF) 6. legal ad - agenda ID 25016 (PDF) Packet Pg. 908 9.A.4.h 04/25/2023 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners a Item Number: 17.E t9 Doe ID: 25016 c Item Summary: A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing an amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use a Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the US 41 East Overlay to allow certain economic w development uses within the Corridor segments; and, allow increased height and density, and certain economic Q development uses in Regional Centers and Community Centers through incentives, and amending the v Transportation Element and maps to expand the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area, and furthermore directing transmittal of the proposed amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. 0, [PL20230000930] L Meeting Date: 04/25/2023 d p Prepared by: U) w Title: Planner, Principal — Zoning Name: Michele Mosca U) 03/22/2023 1:17 PM 0 Submitted by: M CD Title: Zoning Director — Zoning c Name: Mike Bosi M 03/22/2023 1:17 PM N N J a Approved By:LO Review: LO N Growth Management Department Diane Lynch Growth Management Department Completed 03/22/2023 4:53 PM N 0 Zoning James Sabo Additional Reviewer Completed 03/29/2023 2:32 PM N W) N Zoning Mike Bosi Division Director Completed 03/31/2023 5:03 PM 4 W Growth Management Department James C French Growth Management Completed 04/04/2023 12:00 PM County Attorney's Office Heidi Ashton-Cicko Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Completed 04/07/2023 3:22 PM E N r Office of Management and Budget Debra Windsor Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 04/10/2023 9:16 AM �+ ca E County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 04/13/2023 9:21 AM E Office of Management and Budget Laura Zautcke Additional Reviewer Completed 04/14/2023 9:18 AM U) a� County Manager's Office Amy Patterson Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 04/19/2023 4:56 PM v Board of County Commissioners Geoffrey Willig Meeting Pending 04/25/2023 9:00 AM k Packet Pg. 909 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO ADD THE US 41 EAST OVERLAY TO ALLOW CERTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT USES WITHIN THE CORRIDOR SEGMENTS; AND, ALLOW INCREASED HEIGHT AND DENSITY, AND CERTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT USES IN REGIONAL CENTERS AND COMMUNITY CENTERS THROUGH INCENTIVES; AND AMENDING THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT AND MAPS TO EXPAND THE SOUTH US 41 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. [PL20230000930] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, tn was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and to N M WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier N County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and N le WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local v U governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to m amend adopted comprehensive plans; and ti WHEREAS, Staff initiated an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the US 41 East Overlay; and r WHEREAS, on , 2023, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, on , 2023, the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have (23-CMP-01147/1770759/1178 US41 East Overlay PL20230000930 02/13/23 Page 1 of 2 Words underlined are additions, words str1s1' through are deletions. Packet Pg. 910 9.A.4.i thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing, to Collier County its comments within said thirty (30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty (180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this day of , 2023. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA IN Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko a Managing Assistant County Attorney Rick LoCastro, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Proposed Text Amendment & Map Amendment [23-CMP-01 149/1769251/1126 US41 East Overlay PL20230000930 02/13/23 Page 2 of 2 Q a c 0 .N c sa. x w Q w L 0 w Words underlined are additions, words stftiek through are deletions. Packet Pg. 911 9.A.4.i PL20230000930 Exhibit A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (As amended through Ordinance No. 2022-28, adopted June 28, 2022) 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. 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. Policy 1.9: [re -lettered to reflect merger of Ordinance No. 2002-32 and 2002-54] Overlays and Special Features shall include: A. Area of Critical State Concern Overlay B. North Belle Meade Overlay C. NC Square Mixed -Use Overlay D. Natural Resource Protection Area Overlays E. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay F. Airport Noise Area Overlay G. Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay H. Urban -Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay I. Coastal High Hazard Area Boundary J. Ventana Pointe Residential Overlay K. US 41 East Overlay L. K—. Incorporated Areas V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES K. US 41 East Overlay This Overlav is located along portions of the US 41 East corridor from Palm Drive to Greenway Road. It is comprised of three Regional Centers, four Community Centers, and multiple Corridor segments between those Centers, all of which that are depicted on the Future Land Use Map and US 41 East Overlay Maps. The Overlay is intended to allow mixed use development and economic development and to encourage a pedestrian/transit- friendly development pattern. The Regional Centers allow medium to high intensity mixed use development, commercial, residential development, and certain economic development uses, and are located within Mixed Use Activity Center numbers 16, 17, and 1of18 Words underlined are added; words struck threu^" are deleted 02/13/23 mrm-dw Packet Pg. 912 9.A.4.i 18. The Community Centers allow moderate to low intensity mixed use development, commercial, residential development, hotel/motel at a maximum density of 26 units per acre, and certain economic development uses. The Corridor segments allow low density residential development, commercial development permitted by the underlying zoning districts, and certain economic development uses. A zoningoverlay shall be established within one year of the effective date of this Overlay and include Regional Center, Community Center, and Corridor Subdistricts. The zoningoverlay verlay will provide for allowed uses, design standards, and increased density and/or height for projects in the Regional Centers and Community Centers that include certain design elements such as vertical mixed use, .green building standards, and low impact development standards. Mixed use development within the Regional Centers and Community Centers of this Overlay will be eligible for increased density and/or height when utilizing incentives outlined in the zoningoverlay, and is subject to the following limitations: 1. Mixed use development within the Regional Centers is eligible for up to twenty (20) dwelling units per acre when utilizing incentives outlined in the zoning overlay, and is not subject to the density rating system. 2. Mixed use development within the Community Centers is eligible for up to sixteen (16)dwelling nits per acre when utilizing incentives outlined in the zoning overlay, and is not subject to the density rating system. 3. For a mixed use development pursuant to paragraph 1. or 2. above, only multi- family dwelling units are allowed. 4. The maximum height increase for properties within the Regional and Community Centers shall be limited to twenty (20) feet above that permitted by the underlying zoning district. Residential -only development, mixed use development not utilizing incentives outlined in the zoningoverlay, and commercial -only development other than certain economic development uses, shall be in accordance with the underling future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. L. K Incorporated Areas FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Activity Center Index Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps US 41 East Overlay Maps Words underlined are added; words struck threu^" are deleted 2of18 a IL 0 .N c a x w a w 06 0 w Q 02/13/23 mrm-dw Packet Pg. 913 9.A.4.i R25E R2 E R] 2012-2025 FUTURE LAND USE MAP C-.,C-W Fl-d. E R29E. R3BE RME RUE R33E RUr of r7- SIN 111111111111110 c J R25E I -E I R22E I R2BE R29E R3BE R31E R32E I R33E I -E Words underlined are added; words struek threygI4 are deleted 02/ 13/23_m rm-dw Q a 2 U C O .y Q x UJ Q UJ U H ca `m O w v Y) 0 M O) O O O O M N O N J d L LO W N M N O N LO N Iq U U m UJ ti E N r M N O N C O r 7 O N N R r E N C L E t U 3of18 Q Packet Pg. 914 9.A.4.i a IL DRAFT Exhibit A PL 20230000930 � US 41 East 0verlak- - Region-iI et1tei-_-Map 1 Collier C:ounrY. Florida RMF$ aTZ4-R C-4-GTZ0-MD y � C-3 RMF-6 Cti3-GTZO-Md PUd arrigmn Ian RMF-16 I I I I I ti Pic RMIF BZ0R1 � �Ibri RSF4-Bi6 R1 C-3-BZC-Ri RPUd AV - - RSF4l,-aZ0-R1 US P�4t A36 IC-3 CSC C;1 � ' LID: F-4 - PU[} I C-1-€310�t1 RMF�rBZ4-Ri '0-IRO MIH TTRVC A,'OP'TED-}xxxx 0 250 500 1.00C1 Feet L.EGE'SD (Ord. No.XXX) a US41East Oveday'- Regional Center Gbwrh Yir IGp�raN F■ +I u.—p"ba«,r c+.l«�o l,aa Words underlined are added; words struek threegI4 are deleted 02/ 13/23_m rm-dw a 0 .N c a x W Q W 06 0 t4 W T O CO) O O O O O CO) N O N J IL LO co N M N O N Ln N V V m W d O M N O N a O 7 O N O E m a O L d E t V 4of18 Q Packet Pg. 915 9.A.4.i DRAFT Exhibit A Y r • _ s r ME SO Words underlined are added; words struck threu^" are deleted 02/13/23 mrm-dw a IL PL 20230000930 c O .N C uG. W Q W ci 06 O c� w O CO) O O O O O CO) N O N J IL LO CO N M N O N Ln N c.i c.i m W *k d M N O N C O 7 O w E c c d E z 5of18 Q Packet Pg. 916 9.A.4.i DRAFT E ihibit A US 41 East 0-verlay - Regional CenterMap 3 C: DMel' C:ouuty, Flollida ADOPTED - )Cxxx 0 3130 600 1,2130 Feet LEGEND [Ord_ No. XKX) US 41 East O erl.ly - ¢..ean.Prrga.+�r Regional der" Words underlined are added; words struck threu^" are deleted 02/13/23 mrm-dw a IL FL 20130000930 � c O .N c a x w Q w t� 06 O w N O CO) O O O O O CO) N O N J a LO CO N M N O N ui N c.� c.� m w ll- M N O N C O 7 0 to 0 E m C m L d E t V 6of18 Q Packet Pg. 917 9.A.4.i Q a DRAFT Lihibit A PL?0"_30000930 � US 41 East Ovei,lay - C:ominunity Centez• -Tap 1 C 01 ier C:nunty, Flohda I I Pua I cc RMF-15 I I iGc cCC � G E c'. C RSF-3 PUn RPUD' �SceQI,_ I c ¢"� r G a' RW-6 12 R$F-4 f ' +I O eminole AVE 'Diamond LN c MF1 r{ — } TTfRVC Enchanting I GC BLVD Z ,3 Guy ard- RSFd RlhtF4 C-3 Gc # RMF-16 PUD 1v RMF ADOPTED - � xxx'. �00 40C- 80D Feet LIGIN-D {Ofd- No. XCY.I � LS 41 East oveday - Community Center Words underlined are added; words struek threegI4 are deleted 02/ 13/23_m rm-dw c O .y c ca a x w Q w c.� 06 d O W O M M O O O O M N O N J d LO LO co N M N O N LO N Iq U U m W M N O N C O 3 O N N t4 r E to C H C N E M V 7of18 Q Packet Pg. 918 9.A.4.i DRAFT EiihibitA PL 20230000930 ADOPTED - NXXJ4 (ord- No. US 41 East Clrep•lav - C ommunity C:entet' iIap 2 C 01hpi, County, Florida 0 20O 400 800 Feet. LEGEND 11 I ITI 1 I----- 0 La 41 East Jveday - 0, W lY1, 41R .:Gmn-uruty Center own r s omn,.ne rt, us 4 1 ftd mdrn.ti, �,..»r c� �a=Rao 8of18 02/ 13/23_m rm-dw Words underlined are added; words struek threygI4 are deleted Packet Pg. 919 9.A.4.i DRAFT F;tiin it A CS 41 East Ovei•la-, - C:ominunity C:entei- Map 3 Collier County, F Bach --' :°PIED -x�cxx C, 250 50D 1 IDOO Feet i £.GEND d- "D. �XX) �I I ITI I LS 41 East Oveday - -„ae.a Community Center G_xfi Y�n�y.n xd 9�aelwa 'Y J: +I C.�Onny:cnn�N. {e�loM.P}.not Words underlined are added; words struek threygI4 are deleted 02/13/23 mrm-dw a IL FL 20230000930 � a 0 .N c a x W Q W 06 0 W O CO) O O O O O CO) N O N a LO N M N O N Ln N m W M N O N a 0 0 1n 0 y a m L d E t V 9of18 Q Packet Pg. 920 DRAFT Lihibir A -US 41 East Overlay - Communiih- Center flap 4 CAbei, County, Florid lrn'da n K'ay' L N - i d�la n Ka JLJ Andrei I LIT N PUD m A Kathy LN C-2 FUD A MH{3� z PL 2023000930 Sandflaid LN I G8011 RD I C� 10 1 EWA ADOPTED - XXXX 0 200 400 800 Feet UGIEND Ord. No. XXX) US 41 East Oveday - Cbmmunity Center JS Al E,W C,-k- N,p Words underlined are added; words struek threygI4 are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw r- 0 ca LU LU 06 0 LU V— M Q Q Q Q cv) V4 Q CM —j (L LO LO co 54- ce) 04 Q N LO N Iq L) 00 LU E 04 Q 04 O to LL U 10 of 18 Packet Pg. 921 9.A.4.i DF 4FT Exhibit A PL 2023ON093D ADOPTED - ) X (Ord. No. ) US 41 East Overlay - Corridor Map 3 Collier Count}, Florida 0 404 900 1,600 Feet I'�.QrirC h� tlr� Ye -a A. L'f' I Y c,L I- . - a:..::;:.r.r �uanro.rarc Mc's y��� LEGEND US 41 East Overlay - Corridor 13 of 18 02/ 13/23_m rm-dw Words underlined are added; words struek threygI4 are deleted Packet Pg. 924 9.A.4.i a IL DRAFT Exhibit A PL 20230N0930 O k � � ttr� e e # ltltMW ft tF fj�'► tI#tl+jyi4If ��1111iIIIIIIIJI1111111111111J111� I�,'�►� '"� � •. 11 ��w1;L����eE�ti� ��IIIIIIIi111111111 � ��;�'��I111111���!1�l111111 ## #i1111111111111111111 k ��, iT1111111111111111111� **IAIur O.dw IM �I�rNl�l�� 1; ►111.. Ih►'�111� All All 1111'��►11+_ liplllr�llJ► Lwe +. 111'11111111111 ���I�II11<llll�IJIf11!IJIIL'�,Itfllr IIIInIfInuI11 �ItMl�nu E l � flllllllllllllllll �unuunl= = �, - � II}II1111111M1, ■ _ III III! �_ Words underlined are added; words struek threygI4 are deleted 02/ 13/23_m rm-dw a O .N c L2 X LU Q �LU♦ V 06 O c� LLJ 0 CO) O O O 0 0 CO) N O N J .a^^ YI Ln co N M N 0 N Ln N v V m uu I- d M N O N a O ip O N ft; E m a m L I- d E t V 14 of 18 Q Packet Pg. 925 ��Illlf�,,r� �I1�1} s 9.A.4.i a PL2023000930 c 0 Exhibit A TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT a x (As amended through Ordinance No. 2017-25, adopted June 13, 2017) w a w LIST OF TABLES/MAPS/FIGURES MAP Page > TR-1 * Cost Feasible Network Map — 2040 27 w TR-4* and TR-4.1 * South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area c (TCEA) Maps 35- 36 c 0 0 0 M N TR-5 Northwest Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA) Map -36 37 N J a GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES 10 Ln N N OBJECTIVE 5: N Coordinate the Transportation System development process with the Future Land Use 14 N Map v c.� w Policy 5.4: Pursuant to Section 163.3180, Florida Statues and the Urban Infill and Urban Redevelopment E Strategy contained in the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, the South US 41 Transportation W Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) is hereby designated. Development located within the o South US 41 TCEA (Maps TR-4 and TR-4.1) may be exempt from transportation concurrency N requirements, so long as impacts to the transportation system are mitigated using the procedures N established in Policies 5.5 and 5.6 below, and in consideration of the following: o *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** c m E c L d E t V 16 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck threu^" are deleted Q 02/13/23 mrm-dw Packet Pg. 927 9.A.4.i DRAFT Exhibit A PL-'0230000931 5THAVE S'I 1 Y-- 41 paws elvo`•- - - I 1 �Z -4 ll. Public Commercial Residential Total Acres 93.07 453.52 429.5 976.09 9 53% 46.46%° 4-4.00%® 100% �a uc: o p ° 41 � J n < ,. I THOMASSON 6R RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RG v arawOEo -xxx, ncxx 0 0.15 0.3 0.6 0.9 (Ord-No-XXXXF GIG MAPPING: EETH YANG. AICP mw o:a TR - 4 South US41 Transportation NIPmd Cu I=lras(Im%),G.—F-9r6.09000%) u—t:Caol=a34(13-6%);&m.=a-=io5-55I;o.e%;. Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) N^-va�,t Words underlined are added; words struisk threygI4 are deleted 02/ 13/23_m rm-dw a IL O .N C O G. K W Q W C) H O O c� W N 7 0 M as 0 0 O 0 M N 0 N J IL ui W N M N 0 N 0 N v v m w E a� 0 M N 0 N C O 7 O N d E M a O L d E t V 17 of 18 Q Packet Pg. 928 9.A.4.i Exhibit A g _ i THOMASSON DR RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD 0 �. V All �I r __—�'• F1,S1 � it � � .. . i `, 1 ' Lily Public Ca mme rciall Reside ntiall Total Acres 406.42 626.73 181.08 1214.23 33.47% 51.62% 14.91% 100% �� IF 0 U25 a.5 1 15 Miles ale ulwna aemv n, ap ais.m u Dw�m.m errs �umeen.a Q a PI 20_1300409N 2 I RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD c3 I rm a x �ti o f O LELY DR J r m r, J 0 ,. C7 i a' RMEHRED�%%%% Va= Parcels O TCEABouRy TR ' 4.1 ALL PAHtELS CM[.67C (1W9F Sum of a4res=121AP31U::E-.: ® NI—dmse AU" CW., Su'hda[dct South US 41 Transportation IVACAN7 I L—t 1f1G 116.E%I Sum o!acres=171.33 y'lA.". E.dsYngiraonrt Routes Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) NflN-VACANT Ld�rd.S153Aa1 Sunt o`3uf5 :1L'M1:. &1155.'i-: Artera'VCDIL=Rwe Words underlined are added; words struek threygI4 are deleted 02/ 13/23_m rm-dw N C O r 7 O N N R .-1 r E N C L E t U 18 of 18 Q Packet Pg. 929 Collier County Growth Management Community Development Department May 9, 2023 Mr. Ray Eubanks, Plan Processing Administrator Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Division of Community Planning/Plan Review and Processing 107 East Madison Street — MSC 160 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-4120 RE: Transmittal of proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment for Expedited State Review Dear Mr. Eubanks: In accordance with Chapter 163.36187(1), F.S., and the Department of Economic Opportunity's posted procedures, Collier County requests a Expedited State Review and has uploaded the transmittal package for the proposed transmittal of the addition of the US 41 Overlay East Overlay and amendment to the Transportation Element and maps to expand the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area, including all support documents, to the Department of Economic Opportunity for Expedited State Review. Petition PL20230000930 was approved by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) (local planning agency) in a public hearing on March 16, 2023, by a vote of 6-0. The Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved fortianm* ltheGMPAmendment by Resolution 2023-81, in an advertised public hearing on Apd125, 2023, by a vote of 5-0. A summary of this amendment is below. Additional details are provided in the Staff Report and Executive Summary to the Board of County Commissioners. PL20230000930 proposes County -initiated amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, to specifically amend the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the US 41 East Overlay to allow certain economic development uses within the Corridor segments; and, allow increased height and density, and certain economic development uses in Regional Centers and Community Centers through incentives, and amending the Transportation Element and maps to expand the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area. The amendment qualifies as a large-scale amendment pursuant to Chapter 163.3184, F.S., as it 1) is more than 50 acres and 2) involves a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of Collier County's Growth Management Plan. Collier County has previously provided the complete adopted Growth Management Plan, including amendments and support documents, to all review agencies listed in Chapter 163.3184(3), Florida Statutes. Finally, if you have questions or need additional information, please contact: a M N M Lh U_ 0 a m as Q. E 0 0 El Office of the Department Head • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, Florida 34104.239-252-2517 • www.colliercountyfl.g Packet Pg. 930 9.A.4.j C;0 ICT Ci01411.ty a Growth Management Community Development Department Mike Bosi, AICP, Division Director Planning and Zoning Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: 239-252-1061 Email: michael.bosi@colliercountyfl.gov Sincerely, Michael Bosi, AICP Division Director, Planning and Zoning Collier County Attachments: v Ln 1. Executive Summary 2. Resolution 2023-81 N 3. Transmittal CCPC Staff Report N 4. Transportation Plan Review Summary IT 5. Transportation Analysis Summary LL 6. East Naples Community Development Plan a 7. Legal Ad BCC April 25, 2023 C% m a E 0 a cc: Board of County Commissioners (copy of cover letter only) Amy Patterson, County Manager (copy of cover letter only) James French, Department Head Growth Management Michael Bosi, Director Planning & Zoning Office of the Department Head • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, Florida 34104.239-252-2517 • www.colliercountyfl.gov Packet Pg. 931 9.A.4.j EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing an amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the US 41 East Overlay to allow certain economic development uses within the Corridor segments; and, allow increased height and density, and certain economic development uses in Regional Centers and Community Centers through incentives, and amending the Transportation Element and maps to expand the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area, and furthermore directing transmittal of the proposed amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. [PL20230000930] OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners (Board) to review and consider approving the proposed amendments to: The Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series, specifically to establish a new US 41 East Overlay for a segment of US 41 East, from approximately Palm Drive (road separating Walmart from Naples Towne Center) to Greenway Road (the Urban-Agricultural/Rural boundary) lying about 3.4 road miles east of Collier Boulevard, which will provide for increased density and height for vertical mixed -use developments within portions of the Overlay, and allow certain economic development uses throughout the Overlay; and, 2. The Transportation Element to create a new map (TR-4.1) depicting the expansion of the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) from its present terminus at the Rattlesnake - Hammock Road and Thomasson Lane intersections with US 41 East, to the southeast along US 41 East to the east side of Mixed Use Activity Center #18 at the intersection of US 41 East and Collier Boulevard; and, update the tables on the existing TCEA Map (TR-4) to reflect current conditions; and, amend Policy 5.4 of the Transportation Element (TE) to provide a reference to the new TCEA map (TR-4.1). The proposed GMP amendments are reflected in Exhibit "A" text and maps accompanying the GMP Amendment Transmittal Resolution. CONSIDERATIONS: On February 14, 2017, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) directed staff to engage the East Naples community in a public planning process to identify and incentivize desired land uses and development along the US 41 East (Tamiami Trail) corridor. On April 24, 2018, staff and their consultant team from Johnson Engineering, Inc. presented the US 41 Corridor Study (Corridor Study) to the Board. The Corridor Study included four meetings to engage the public and solicit community input and resulted in recommendations that included: a community -based branding project, land use preferences, strategy to limit undesirable uses, landscaping preferences, and transportation needs. Following the Corridor Study, staff received Board direction to prepare a community development plan for the East Naples community that would establish a vision for the area to guide future development and redevelopment. In January 2020, the consulting firm of Tindale Oliver contracted with the Board to prepare the East Naples Community Development Plan (ENCDP). The ENCDP was accepted by the Board in October 2020. The development of the ENCDP included an extensive public input process culminating in a community plan that guides land uses and development, promotes various transportation modes, highlights the community's assets/improvements, provides follow-up efforts to address topics of community interest, and provides steps on implementation. Packet Pg. 932 9.A.4.j The ENCDP prioritizes the development and implementation of a zoning overlay along the US 41 East corridor (Tamiami Trail East), specifically providing for its establishment within 5-years from the date of acceptance by the Board. An objective of the zoning overlay is to enhance the community's sense of place by providing guidance on future development and redevelopment projects that will expand employment opportunities, leisure activities, dining, and shopping to meet the growing needs of the community. In 2021, the County contracted with Johnson Engineering, Inc. to assist with preparing a zoning overlay (US 41 EZO) that implements the ENCDP. The community has been actively engaged with staff and the County's consultant in developing the US 41 EZO for the segment of US 41 East that generally begins at Palm Drive (near the Collier County government center) and extends to the east side of Port of the Islands, exclusive of that segment of US 41 within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. During the months between January and November 2022, the project team conducted staff team meetings, and stakeholder and community meetings to solicit input on the development and design standards for residential, mixed -use, and commercial development, and spacing criteria for commercial uses, in part, to address the undesirable uses identified in the ENCDP. Certain provisions of the proposed US 41 EZO necessitate the establishment of the subject US 41 East Overlay in the GMP and related TCEA expansion. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs associated with processing and advertising the proposed GMP amendment have been allocated within Planning Services Fund (131), Current Planning Fund Center (138326). 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: The Collier County Planning Commission, acting as the Land Planning Agency and the Environmental Advisory Council, forward the proposed US 41 East Overlay and Transportation Concurrency Exception Area expansion Growth Management Plan amendments 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 (CCPQ RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC reviewed and discussed the proposed amendments at their March 16, 2023, meeting. The CCPC recommended that the Board approve the amendments for transmittal, per staff recommendation (vote: 6/0). There were no registered speakers. 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." s. 163.3177(1)(f), FS. In addition, s. 163.3177(6)(a)2, FS provides that FLUE plan amendments shall be based on surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. Packet Pg. 933 9.A.4.j 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 amendments for transmittal to the DEO and other statutorily required agencies, as recommended by the CCPC. Packet Pg. 934 9.A.4.j RESOLUTION NO. 2023-81 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO ADD THE US 41 EAST OVERLAY TO ALLOW CERTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT USES WITHIN THE CORRIDOR SEGMENTS; AND, ALLOW INCREASED HEIGHT AND DENSITY, AND CERTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT USES IN REGIONAL CENTERS AND COMMUNITY CENTERS THROUGH INCENTIVES; AND AMENDING THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT AND MAPS TO EXPAND THE SOUTH US 41 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. [PL20230000930] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Staff initiated an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the US 41 East Overlay; and WHEREAS, on March 16, 2023, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 2023, the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have [23-CMP-01147/1770759/1]78 US41 East Overlay PL20230000930 02/13/23 Words underlined are additions, words '^ 'tea Doug" are deletions. Page I of 2 Q M N G1 LL c a m d Q. 0 0 Packet Pg. 935 9.A.4.j thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing, to Collier County its comments within said thirty (30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty (180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. HIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this day ofA.0i" �_, 2023. CRYSTAL K. KINZEL,'•.C-LERK Attest as to Cheirmab*p C signatu`ra•�onlyl; „-,-t.�:. Appr ved as to form and legality: Heidi As ton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIE TY, FLORIDA By. Rick LoCastro, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Proposed Text Amendment & Map Amendment [23-CMP-01147/ 1770759/ 1 i78 US41 East Overlay PL20230000930 02/13/23 Words underlined are additions, words tfuc'�.�gh are deletions. Page 2 of 2 Q CO) N T LO LL 0 a a� a� a 0 U 2 Packet Pg. 936 9.A.4.j PL20230000930 a Exhibit A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (As amended through Ordinance No. 2022-28, adopted June 28, 2022) 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. 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. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Policy 1.9: [re -lettered to reflect merger of Ordinance No. 2002-32 and 2002-54] N Overlays and Special Features shall include: a A. Area of Critical State Concern Overlay B. North Belle Meade Overlay LO C. NC Square Mixed -Use Overlay V D. Natural Resource Protection Area Overlays N E. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay oP F. Airport Noise Area Overlay G. Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay U_ °a H. Urban -Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay I. Coastal High Hazard Area Boundary �. J. Ventana Pointe Residential Overlay c K. US 41 East Overlay Q L. K—. Incorporated Areas c� V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***** *** *** n K. US 41 East Overlay This Overlav is located along portions of the US 41 East corridor from Palm Drive to GreenwU Road. It is comprised of three Regional Centers, four Community Centers, and multiple Corridor segments between those Centers, all of which that are depicted on the Future Land Use Map and US 41 East Overlay Maps. The Overlay is intended to allow mixed use development and economic development and to encourage a pedestrian/transit- friendly development pattern. The Regional Centers allow medium to high intensity mixed use development, commercial, residential development, and certain economic development uses, and are located within Mixed Use Activity Center numbers 16, 17, and 1of18 Words underlined are added; words struel( threu^" are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw Packet Pg. 937 9.A.4.j 18. The Community Centers allow moderate to low intensity mixed use development, commercial, residential development, hotel/motel at a maximum density of 26 units per acre, and certain economic development uses. The Corridor segments allow low density residential development, commercial development permitted by the underlying _ zoning districts, and certain economic development uses. A zoning overlay shall be established within one year of the effective date of this Overlay and include Regional Center, Community Center, and Corridor Subdistricts. The zoningoy will provide for allowed uses, design standards, and increased density and/or hei hg t for projects in the Regional Centers and Community Centers that include certain design elements such as vertical mixed use, green building standards, and low impact development standards. Mixed use development within the Regional Centers and Community Centers of this Overlay will be eligible for increased density and/or height when utilizing incentives outlined in the zoningoerlay, and is subject to the following limitations: 1. Mixed use development within the Regional Centers is eligible for up to twenty (20) dwelling units per acre when utilizing incentives outlined in the zoning overlay, and is not subject to the density rating system. 2. Mixed use development within the Community Centers is eligible for up to sixteen (16,) dwelling units per acre when utilizing incentives outlined in the zoningoy, and is not subject to the density rating system. 3. For a mixed use development pursuant to paragraph 1. or 2. above, only multi- family dwelling units are allowed. 4. The maximum height increase for properties within the Regional and Community Centers shall be limited to twenty (20) feet above that permitted by the underlying zoning district. Residential -only development, mixed use development not utilizing incentives outlined in the zoningoverlay, and commercial -only development other than certain economic development uses, shall be in accordance with the underlying future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. L. K-. Incorporated Areas FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Activity Center Index Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps US 41 East Overlay Maps 2of18 Q c 0 .N c Q. x w a w 06 L 0 w U) D 0 M O O 0 0 0 M N O N J a LO LO N M N oP In U- c a m Q. E 0 0 5V Q Words underlined are added; words str el( thFe i^" are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw Packet Pg. 938 i o a O —: J Ra.E I R3.E RITE I R2- I —E R..E I RME I RUE I RUE I RUE Words underlined are added; words StFUGI( thFeu^I4 are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw CO) N C6 LL 0 IL a) a� a E 0 U a 0 L i O r Cl) D r E N C L E t U 2 3of18 a Packet Pg. 939 DRAFT EslLibitA PL202 00(10930 'US 41 East Overlay - Regional Center tap 1 Collier County. Florida RI B GTZO R CJ4M,- MCD 2 I w. ca � `+ RMF-6 C-3-CTZQ-MXD \ PUD RYF-16 7 C-3 f I � oc RMF 6 BZO R1 l8 PUD C 5 I / a�mbri ---coT RSF-4-BZo-R1 C-3-B20-RI �y j RPUD $ola��A RSF-443ZG4tl ' rao C� ` �l C� GC o RSF-1 PUD C-1-BZD-R1 RMF443ZO-RI MH-BZO-FU Mt TTRVC_ ADOPTED-XXxx 0 250 500 1.00D Feet LEGEND (Ord. No. XXX) U S 41 East Overlay - ,�„�,a Regional Center .vT Y.ry.n.•I C.P'sf.rf Words underlined are added; words stru k thf• wgl are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw M N T L0 LL 0 IL a� a� a O U a 0 0 to D I r E to C i H m E m V 2 4of18 Q Packet Pg. 940 9.A.4.j DRAFT Exhibit A PL 20230000930 • son��iA�i� it - m r 1 .. 5of18 Words underlined are added; words StFUGI( thFeugI4 are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw Packet Pg. 941 DRAFT EzhibitA FL 20230000930 1. i� Words underlined are added; words StFUG'( thFeugI4 are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw M N G1 In LL c (L m Q. 0 t) Q C d O i E c L 6of18 Q Packet Pg. 942 DRAFT Exhibit A PL 20230000930 US 41 East Oveflay - Community Center Map I Collier Count{-. Florida I r- PUD Gc RNF416 X GC C-5 10 i I RSF-3 PUS RPUD I&'AVE oil cc RMF-G fro SF-4 C-3 LPL W 4 Diamond LN TTRVc Enchanting E�I IND GC C-3 GC RMF-16 PUD RMF4 ADOPTED - XXXX 0 200 400 800 Feet LIGIEND (Ord- No. )(XX) US 41 E3st overlay - Community Center c- c— Mp,nd Words underlined are added; words stFuck thmug4 are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw ce) N T Lc) LL 0 IL E 0 0 0 E to E M IJ 7 of 18 Packet Pg. 943 9.A.4.j DRAFT Exhibit A FL 20!30000930 CS 41 East Ovei-lav - Community Centel- Map 2 Collies- Count-, Floiida ADOPTED - XJCXX 0 200 400 800 Feet LEGIE D COB- NO. 3 US 41 East Oveday - tiw.+bv..0,Y" •cr IZI Community Center M US 11"WO ft, c-W,: and 8of18 Words underlined are added; words StFU '( thMugl" are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw Packet Pg. 944 DRAFT EihibitA PL 20_3HO0930 Words underlined are added; words `+"6161( threugI4 are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw LL 0 a 0 U a 0 0 Cl) D r E N C i H C N E t V f� r n 9of18 a Packet Pg. 945 DRAFT Exhibit A PL 20230000930 US 41 East O`-erlas-- Community Center Map 4 Collier Count-, Florida ❑�ja❑�n!N Sandfield LN 00000000 Andrea PU D %1 M Kat y_LN z - J O MH(3) C_Z -A Cecil RD PUD ,' f A PM psi Ghee-ST \ TTRVC PUD a� J yer �t ,4 1 ADOPTED -xxxx Q 2D0 400 80D Feet LEGEND (Ord. No. XXX) US 41 East Overlay - ,a,,a Community Center 4'wn YnNnN Aanx�- � :1': 1 f Y Jnrl .:rern.rlr : •N' NAP �u1 Words underlined are added; words stFuckthreugI4 are deleted 02/13/23_m rm-dw ce) N T L0 u_ 0 IL at at !Z O U a 0 O O v D I .-r r E to C i I— �r M 1. M U tQ 10 of 18 Q Packet Pg. 946 DRAFT Exhibit A PL 20230000930 [IS 41 East Overlay - Corridor Flap 1 Collier County, Florida 1 ,I mow- ,. SO MEN MEN iorgLg1• t * -_ - T:T'UST �� s,�■ LJ�■lt■■■■■■■■■a■s�aat���aa�s, !MMIMM ec ADOPTED - XXXX 0 250 500 1.000 Feet LEGEND (Ord. No. XXX) Q US 41 East Overlay - tvA.eM trw rw nr:t• corridor G.rhY-�w��M nr USILY19--/O-tiwYYytn- Words underlined are added; words 15tFUGl( thFeugI4 are deleted 02/13/23_m rm-dw T LL 0 a a� a� 0 U a c� L i O r to I r E N C L E m U 2 r n Y 11 of 18 Q Packet Pg. 947 71� r.. RMFi 9.A.4.j DRAFT Exhibit A Pf, 202300009311 IMI 1 1 1111 L•�unwnnuuwN fl it ■� � `1'��1�1'��- Words underlined are added; words struck thFou^" are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw 13 of 18 Q Packet Pg. 949 ]RAFT Exhibit A PL 20230000930 SW 011%�m U5 41 East Overlay - Uorridor Map 4 Collier County, Florida A OF'"s f V OR% A m iu,ruwn� /� A ADOPTED -XXXX 0 400 800 1.800 Feet LECEKD (Old. No. XXX) ���_+ }—a + ► I a US 41 East Overlay - rryrr el .+ rw uc► CorCldor �.... [l.l..11.l.0[.11«..1. 1 Y L•• •• [an bnr�l G>•dl. Mp � n.tl i, Words underlined are added; words StFUGI( thFE)ug4 are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw CO) N T L0 LL 0 (L a� a� 0 U a c� L i O r t) _I N C i H �l E m V ilis 14 of 18 Q Packet Pg. 950 ",-JL I'� 9.A.4.j PL2023000930 a Exhibit A TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT (As amended through Ordinance No. 2017-25, adopted June 13, 2017) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** LIST OF TABLES/MAPS/FIGURES MAP Page TR-1 * Cost Feasible Network Map — 2040 27 O *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** w Iq TR-4* and TR-4.1 * South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area c (TCEA) Maps 35- 36 0 0 0 0 M TR-5 Northwest Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA) Map -3-6 37 N J d GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES 10 LO W N N OBJECTIVE 5: o� Coordinate the Transportation System development process with the Future Land Use 14 U- Map a a� a Policy 5.4: o Pursuant to Section 163.3180, Florida Statues and the Urban Infill and Urban Redevelopment v Q Strategy contained in the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) is hereby designated. Development located within the O South US 41 TCEA (Maps TR-4 and TR-4.1) may be exempt from transportation concurrency requirements, so long as impacts to the transportation system are mitigated using the procedures established in Policies 5.5 and 5.6 below, and in consideration of the following: O T- Iq i ac i N C L E t U 2 16 of 18 Q Words underlined are added; words stFuck thmu^" are deleted 02/13/23_mrm-dw Packet Pg. 952 9.A.4.j DRAFT F n zI r14, a c)i T O L v 0 0.15 0.3 0.6 0.9 Miles GS MAPPM. BEIH YANG, AICP ni r" a6o epa = -- 41 A x D N 0 m n I( IHOMASSONDR Ex PL 20230000930 DAVIS SLVD Public Commercial Residential Total Acres 93.07 453.52 429.5 976.09 9.53% 46.46% 44.00% 100% z Z A v RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RE) 4, T y AMENDED-%%% %%%% �i,d Nn XXXXI TR - 4 South US 41 Transportation AMP —is C {725(10'�M:9�.notam.s-9rero(ma v.G.u:ca.R.zx{{scAr.�+mo<�={assstra.eki =�� ua;^°•° Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) Words underlined are added; words stFuck threugI4 are deleted 02/13/23 mrm-dw Q CO) N T LO a_ 0 a a� a� a E 0 U a c� L i O r Cl) D _I t� N C L E t U 17 of 18 Q Packet Pg. 953 DRAFT Eihibit A PL 20230000930 4 1 1 N, RATTLESNAKE. HAMMOCK RD D > THOMASSON DR 0 RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD U IK4f 4.L.. z ",U-TURAL!ky4y'i'-, O Public Commercial Residential Total Acres 406.42 626.73 1 181.08 1214.23 33.47% 51.62% 1 14.91% 100% 0 0.25 Jl 0.5 Miles 0 LELY DR > W r it AMENDED XXXX t0d, ND XX)h ParoA C3TCEA Bm-mvy TR - 4.1 ��PAICILI 4"? bcaw � MxedAd"CmwSwvPn South US 41 Transportation IVACANT JLR-!: EkistnqTrrseRoLAm jN0N-VACANTjC�.1, �^83,41;1 0`-'s UW 8416.9%1 Arwj�;CDIectv Rows Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) t j 18 of 18 ;z Cn N T LO LL 0 IL E 0 fC fC (D E Words underlined are added; words stFuck thraug4 are deleted 02/13/23-mrm-dw Packet Pg. 954 9.A.4.j STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: March 16, 2023 RE: PETITION NO. PL20230000930, STAFF -PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND MAP TR-4, SOUTH US 41 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA, IN THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] REQUESTED ACTION: This proposal consists of a single staff -initiated Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment petition comprised of two components, as follows: 1. Amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series to establish a new US 41 East Overlay for a segment of US 41 East, from approximately Palm Drive (road separating Walmart from Naples Towne Center) to Greenway Road (the Urban- Agricultural/Rural boundary) lying about 3.4 road miles east of Collier Blvd. The Overlay will allow increased density for vertical mixed -use developments within portions of the Overlay and will allow certain economic development uses throughout the Overlay. 2. Create a new map (TR-4.1) depicting the expansion of the Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) from its present terminus at the Rattlesnake -Hammock Road and Thomasson Lane intersections with US 41 East, to the southeast along US 41 East to the east side of Mixed Use Activity Center #18 at the intersection of US 41 East and Collier Blvd.; update the tables on the existing TCEA Map (TR-4) to reflect current conditions; and, amend Policy 5.4 of the Transportation Element (TE) to provide a reference to the new TCEA map (TR-4.1). The proposed GMP amendments are reflected in Exhibit "A" text and maps accompanying the GMP Amendment Transmittal Resolution. BACKGROUND: On February 14, 2017, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) directed staff to engage the East Naples community in a public planning process to identify and incentivize desired land uses and development along the US 41 East (Tamiami Trail) corridor. On April 24, 2018, staff and their consultant team from Johnson Engineering, Inc. presented the US 41 Corridor Study (Corridor Study) to the Board. The Corridor Study included four meetings to engage the public and solicit community input and resulted in recommendations that included: a community -based branding project, land use preferences, a strategy to limit undesirable uses, landscaping preferences, and transportation needs. Following the Corridor Study, staff received Board direction to prepare a community development plan for the East Naples community that would establish a vision for the area to guide future development and redevelopment. In January 2020, the consulting firm of Tindale Oliver contracted with the Board to Packet Pg. 955 9.A.4.j prepare the East Naples Community Development Plan. In October 2020, the East Naples Community Development Plan (ENCDP) was accepted by the Board. The development of the ENCDP included an extensive public input process culminating in a community plan that guides land uses and development, promotes various transportation modes, highlights the community's assets/improvements, provides follow-up efforts to address topics of community interest, and provides steps on implementation. The ENCDP prioritizes the development and implementation of a zoning overlay along the US 41 East corridor (Tamiami Trail East), specifically providing for its establishment within 5-years from the date of acceptance by the Board. An objective of the zoning overlay is to enhance the community's sense of place by providing guidance on future development and redevelopment projects that will expand employment opportunities, leisure activities, dining, and shopping to meet the growing needs of the community. In 2021, the County contracted with Johnson Engineering, Inc. to assist with preparing a zoning overlay (US 41 EZO) that implements the ENCDP. The community has been actively engaged with staff and the County's consultant in developing the US 41 EZO for the segment of US 41 East that generally begins at Palm Drive (near the Collier County government center) and extends to the east side of Port of the Islands, exclusive of that segment of US 41 within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. During the months between January and November 2022, the project team conducted staff team meetings, and stakeholder and community meetings to solicit input on the development and design standards for residential, mixed -use, and commercial development, and spacing criteria for commercial uses, in part, to address the undesirable uses identified in the ENCDP. STAFF ANALYSIS: The purpose of this Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment is to create a FLUE Overlay to provide for increased density and economic development uses along the US 41 East corridor as proposed in the East Naples Community Development Plan (ENCDP). The US 41 East corridor is a Florida Department of Transportation facility which currently has constrained segments. A portion of the US 41 East corridor is within the South Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA), which excepts properties from link -by -link concurrency. The increased development opportunities allowed by the Overlay could result in increased transportation impacts, most significantly on certain segments of US 41. Given the current modest remaining capacity on US 41 in this area, expansion of the TCEA is beneficial to the transportation network. Future Land Use Element/Future Land Use Map and Series The proposed US 41 East Overlay will implement, in part, the ENCDP. At the adoption hearings for these GMP amendments, staff intends to include the companion Land Development Code (LDC) amendments that will establish an implementing zoning overlay. The Overlay map in the support materials identifies seven different areas where increased density is allowed within mixed -use developments (commercial and residential multi -family) - three Regional Centers and four Community Centers. Density increases for mixed -use developments within these Centers would be allowed as follows: Regional Centers, up to 20 dwelling units per acre, and Community Centers, up to 16 dwelling units per acre. Landowners would have the option of developing a mixed -use project as provided in this Overlay or developing per the underlying future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. Regional Centers lie within the Mixed -Use Activity Center Subdistrict (Activity Centers 16, 17, and 18 as identified on the Future Land Use Map series). Certain economic development uses are allowed throughout the Overlay. As with the density increase for mixed -use development, the development of economic development uses is optional; landowners can choose to develop their property per the underlying future land use designation and applicable FLUE policies. 2 Packet Pg. 956 9.A.4.j The table below identifies the present and proposed density allowances within the Overlay's Community and Regional Centers. Because the underlying future land use designations vary, the presently eligible densities vary. Overlay sub -area Present eligible density Proposed eligible density Community Centers 3/4/16 DU/A 16 DU/A Regional Centers /16 DU/A 20 DU/A DU/A = dwelling units per acre The Overlay would allow a maximum increase of 3,463 dwelling units; this number reflects 100% participation for all eligible properties and at the maximum allowed density. Staff is of the opinion that the actual participation, even over an extended number of years, will be far less; this is based on the limited number of mixed -use projects built to date despite the County allowing and encouraging such developments since at least 1989. Staff anticipates a participation rate of up to 25% to be more likely to occur in this area, resulting in a maximum increase of 866 dwelling units. Transportation Element/Transportation Concurrencv Exception Area (TCEA) — TR-4 and TR-4.1 Maps. The proposed FLUE Overlay (and Zoning Overlay) is designed to enhance the area by increasing economic development opportunities, improving the variety of housing options, and creating walkable, vibrant areas supported by a network of services. The proposed increased densities and uses align with the purpose of the TCEA by potentially reducing trips on the US 41 East corridor. Transportation Planning staff provided the following information to describe the TCEA and its purpose. "Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas (TCEA) is an alternative concurrency management system authorized by Florida Statutes to regulate increased traffic volume created by new development while also promoting affordable housing and redevelopment programs as well as development policies designed to control urban sprawl. These systems are used to manage growth -related impacts on transportation facilities on an area -wide basis rather than on a link -by -link basis. A TCEA is designed to reduce the adverse impact transportation concurrency may have on urban sprawl control policies and redevelopment. Collier County has one TCEA called the South US 41 TCEA. Development located within the boundaries of the South US 41 TCEA is exempt from transportation concurrency requirements so long as impacts to the transportation system are mitigated using Transportation Demand Management strategies enumerated in the Policy 5.5 of the Transportation Element. Commercial developments within the South US 41 TCEA that choose to obtain an exception from concurrency requirements for transportation will provide certification to the County transportation planning agency that at least four (4) of the following Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies will be utilized: a) Preferential parking for carpools and vanpools that is expected to increase the average vehicle occupancy for work trips generated by the development. b) Parking charge that is expected to increase the average vehicle occupancy for work trips generated by the development and/or increase transit ridership. c) Cash subsidy that is expected to increase the average vehicle occupancy for work trips generated by the development and/or increase transit ridership. d) Flexible work schedules that are expected to reduce peak -hour automobile work trips generated by the development. e) Compressed workweek that would be expected to reduce vehicle miles of travel and peak hour work trips generated by the development. f) Telecommuting that would be expected to reduce the vehicle miles of travel and peak hour work trips generated by the development. 3 Packet Pg. 957 9.A.4.j g) Transit subsidy that would be expected to reduce auto trips generated by the development and increase transit ridership. h) Bicycle and pedestrian facilities that would be expected to reduce vehicle miles of travel and automobile work trips generated by the development. i) Including residential units as a portion of a commercial project that would be expected to reduce vehicle miles of travel. Residential developments within the South US 41 TCEA that choose to obtain an exception from concurrency requirements for transportation shall provide documentation to the County transportation planning agency that at least three (3) of the following Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies will be utilized: a) Including neighborhood commercial uses within a residential project. b) Providing transit shelters within the development (in coordination with Collier Area Transit). c) Providing bicycle and pedestrian facilities with connections to adjacent commercial properties d) Vehicular access to adjacent commercial properties with shared commercial and residential parking." Required Data and Analysis in Support of the Changes to the TCEA: Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, contains the statutory provisions pertaining to comprehensive plans (GMP), including the requirement for local governments to adopt a comprehensive plan, the elements required to be included in a comprehensive plan, and the procedures and requirements to amend the comprehensive plan. The statutory provisions relevant to most GMP amendments are identified later in this Staff Report ("Criteria for GMP Amendments in Florida Statutes"). Additionally, Chapter 163.3180(5)(h)1. a., Florida Statutes, provides that the County is to "Consult with the Department of Transportation when proposed plan amendments affect facilities on the strategic intermodal system" (SIS). Interstate 75 (1-75) is the closest SIS facility to the proposed US 41 East Overlay and TCEA expansion area; the other SIS facilities are in the east/central part of the county (SR29 and SR82). The County had their transportation consultant perform an evaluation of the traffic impacts to 1-75 caused by the allowed density increase under the maximum utilization scenario - the 100% density increase (3,463 DUs). The results indicate the impacts to 1-75 are negligible (please see the below table). [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] 4 Packet Pg. 958 9.A.4.j US 41 Overlay AADT Comparison Original Approved US41 Overlay Expa fl QR, P' ,_ CollierBMd Fiddler's Creek P Manatee Rd 44,370 44,940 570 1.29% Collier Blvd Manatee Rd U541 47,780 35,000 48,680 35,540 900 540 1.88% 1.54% Collier Blvd US41 Rattlesnake Rd CollierBMd Rattlesnake Rd Davis Blvd 51,4501 51,530 80 0.16% Collier Blvd Davis Blvd 1.75 59,310 59,200 •110 0.19% 1-75 SR 29 Everglades BW 37,200 37,090 -110 0.30% I-75 Everglades Blvd Collier Blvd 57,640 58,250 610 1.06% 1-75 Collier Blvd Golden Gate Pkwy 90,090 89,470 -620 0.69% 1-75 Golden Gate Pkwy Pine Ridge Rd 108,250 106,000 -2,250 2.08% Rattlesnake Rd US41 Santa Barbara Blvd 21,710 21,890 180 0.83% Ra ttlesna ke Rd Santa Barbara Blvd CollierBlvd 24,240 24,480 240 0.99% SR 29 US41 1.75 3,010 3.010 0 0.00% SR 29 1-75 Oil Well Rd 4,300 4,280 -20 0.47% US41 Goodlette-Frank Rd Davis Blvd 73,240 74,420 1,180 1.61% U$41 Davis Blvd Rattlesnake Rd 57,890 60,540 2,650 4.58% US41 Rattlesnake Rd Collier Blvd 43,790 46,710 2,920 6.67% US41 I Collier Blvd IManatee Rd 20,8501 21,360 510 2.45% AADT = Average Annual Daily Trips However, the evaluation indicated there will be impacts on portions of US 41 East. Collier County completed a [D1 RPM 20451 model run using the maximum number of multifamily dwelling units allowed by the Overlay. The model estimated that the most significant impacts (increases of up to 6.67% of the original volume) will be along US 41 directly. For this reason, Collier County recommends expanding the TCEA from its southeasterly terminus, approximately south of Rattlesnake -Hammock Road (CR 864), to southeast of Collier Blvd. (CR/SR 951). Consistent with the TCEA, the new Overlay is intended to promote redevelopment, affordable housing, and infill development. The Transportation Demand Management strategies required by the TCEA coincide with the goals and vision of the Overlay and provide a systematic approach to addressing the congestion in the area. The existing TCEA was adopted in 2004 along with two Transportation Concurrency Management Areas (TCMA). As a significant portion of the [at that time, proposed] TCEA was within the Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area aka Bays h ore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B/GTRO), certain statutory and State Rule 9J-5 provisions were applicable pertaining to the amount of vacant land allowed, redevelopment strategies, etc. Thus, two tables were included on the TCEA map, one pertaining to vacant lands and one pertaining to land use categories. For the existing TCEA, staff updated the land use and vacant parcel tables using 2022 data from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office; please see below. Existing TCEA, Land Use Table (2022 data) Public Commercia I Residentia I Total Acres 93.07 453.52 429.50 976.09 9.53% 46.46% 44.00% 100% Note: Percent figures do not sum to 100% due to rounding. —5— Packet Pg. 959 9.A.4.j Existing TCEA, Vacant Parcel Table (2022 data) ALL Count: 1725 (100%) Sum of acres = 976.09 PARCELS (100%) VACANT Count: 234 (13.6%) Sum of acres = 105.55 (10.8%) NOW Count: 1491 (86.4%) Sum of acres = 870.54 VACANT 1 1 (89.2%) Similarly, for the TCEA expansion area, staff created land use and vacant parcel tables using 2022 data from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office; please see below. However, none of the expanded TCEA lies within the Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area (B/GTRO), and statutory requirements are less than they were in 2004. TCEA Expansion, Land Use Table Public Commercia 1 Residentia 1 Total Acres 406.42 626.73 181.08 1214.23 33.47% 51.62% 14.91 % 100% TCEA Expansion, Vacant Parcel Table ALL Count: 640 (100%) Sum of acres = 1214.23 PARCELS (100%) VACANT Count: 106 (16.6%) Sum of acres = 171.39 14.1% NOW Count: 534 (83.4%) Sum of acres = 1042.84 VACANT (85.9%) Additionally, the County's sub -consultant for the preparation of the US 41 East Zoning Overlay, Fehr Peers, prepared a transportation analysis of the potential vertical mixed -use development on two [sample] parcels along the US 41 East corridor: Lowe's Plaza in the southwest quadrant of US 41 East and CR/SR 951, and St. Andrews Square in the northwest quadrant of US 41 East and St. Andrews Blvd. Both parcels are developed with commercial centers. The analysis considered partial redevelopment with vertical mixed -use (commercial and residential), which is one of the desired outcomes of the East Naples Community Development Plan and is one of the strategies to lessen transportation impacts. [see attachments: Transportation Analysis Summary 11-29-22 (Fehr Peers Memorandum dated Nov. 29, 2022), and Transportation Plan Review Summary 2-11-22 (Fehr Peers Memorandum dated Feb. 11, 2022)] Environmental Impacts: These amendments increase the allowable density and increase the intensity of commercial uses allowed for certain properties along the US41 East corridor, all of which are designated Urban and most of which are already developed or cleared of native vegetation. Redevelopment or development of these properties is subject to the environmental protection standards in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and LDC, as applicable. Public Facilities Impacts: Based upon review of the most recent AUIR, Annual Update, and Inventory Report, there are adequate public facilities to accommodate the allowable density increase (and additional commercial uses) proposed by this amendment (water, wastewater, solid waste, drainage, etc.). Transportation impacts have been previously addressed. 6 Packet Pg. 960 9.A.4.j 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 on surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a) The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b) The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c) The character of undeveloped land. d) The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e) The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f) The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g) The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. 7 Packet Pg. 961 9.A.4.j 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), or existing incompatibilities (e.g., presently allowed uses would be incompatible with surrounding uses and conditions). LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney's Office on February 17, 2023. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element and map series are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2 and 163.3177(6)(a)8, Florida Statutes. (HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20230000930 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. —8— Packet Pg. 962 9.A.4.j FEHR�PEERS Memorandum Date: February 11, 2022 To: Laura S. DeJohn, Johnson Engineering From: Kathrin Tellez Subject: US 41 East Corridor Zoning Overlay — Transportation Policy Overview rU:iiW0181F/I Introduction The purpose of the US 41 East Corridor Zoning Overlay (project) is to develop a comprehensive zoning overlay for the Tamiami Trail East (US 41) corridor, focused on land uses and development standards that enhance the aesthetics, promote economic development and investment, and improve mobility choices within and connecting to the area. The project extents are generally the properties and activity centers abutting the Tamiami Trail East corridor, from east of the Bayshore/ Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency boundary to Port of the Islands, excluding a portion of the corridor through the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District. The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize relevant policies and plans that may support, conflict, or hinder the project goals. The specific documents reviewed as a part of this overview include: • East Naples Community Development Plan • Collier MPO Long Range Transportation Plan • Collier County Growth Management Plan, Transportation Element • Collier County Land Development Code • Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Guidance Manuals (Access Management and Context Classification) • FDOT Efficient Transportation Decision Making Manual • 2013-2017 All Crash Infographics Development, District 1 This memorandum is organized to provide a brief transportation overview of the study corridor, followed by a summary of key policies, plans and codes from the documented noted above that support, conflict, or hinder the project goals. 250 S. Orange Avenue I Suite 120P I Orlando, FL 328011 (321) 430-1151 1 www.fehrandpeers.com Packet Pg. 963 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn February 11, 2022 Page 2 of 8 Transportation Context The Tamiami Trail East (US 41) is oriented southeast to northwest and connects Miami in the east to Naples and Fort Myers in the north, and beyond. Through the study area, it serves the dual purpose of accommodating regional travel and local connectivity. Travel patterns along the roadway also fluctuate significantly depending on the season due to high levels of tourism and seasonal residents, with the highest levels of activity experienced from late winter to early spring, and significantly lower levels of activity during other times of year. Travel demand along the corridor is consistent between about 10 AM and 3 PM, with peak roadway demands experienced between 4 and 6 PM. The traditional morning peak hour of 7 to 9 AM is generally lower than other times of day, indicating that while the roadway does accommodate the traditional commute trips, its function goes well beyond that of accommodating peak period commute travel, and serves a wide variety of trips throughout the day. Much of the study corridor provides three travel lanes in each direction, with added turn lanes at major intersections and destinations along the corridor. The posted speed limit is 45 miles per hour (mph) in the northern section of the corridor, increasing to a high of 60 mph as you travel south along the corridor. Average travel speeds are typically within the range of the posted speed limit, with 85th percentile travel speeds generally around 5 to 10 percent higher than the posted speed limit. Vehicle traffic volumes in the northern section of the corridor are approximately 42,000 vehicles per day based on 2019 data available from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). Vehicle traffic volumes generally decrease as you travel to the southeast to around 20,000 vehicles per day around Sandpiper Drive and around 3,000 vehicle per day as you travel to Port of the Islands. The roadway network surrounding the corridor can be disjointed in sections, with developments taking access from US 41, but not providing connections to adjacent developments, forcing some travel that could stay on local roadways to the state highway system. Access control has been implemented along the corridor with landscaped medians and channelized left -turns, with full access, signalized intersections spaced at about half -mile intervals, which is appropriate for the current Suburban Commercial Context Zone (C3C). Bicycle lanes are provided along US 41 from the northern end at Bayshore Drive to south of Sandpiper Drive. South of Sandpiper Drive there is a striped area that serves as a defacto bike lane area, although it is not consistently provided. Guidance based on existing traffic volumes and vehicle speeds from the FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide indicates that for streets with daily traffic volumes in excess of 6,000 vehicles per day and a prevailing speed of people driving over 30 miles per hour, a separated bike lane or shared use path is an appropriate bicycle facility. Between 3,000 and 6,000 vehicles per day, and speed of people driving up to 30 miles per hour, a buffered bike lane is recommended. For streets with less than 3,000 vehicles per day and people driving less than 25 miles per hour, a shared lane may be appropriate. Based on this guidance, the Packet Pg. 964 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn February 11, 2022 Page 3 of 8 existing bicycle facilities along US 41 are not appropriate for the volume and speed of vehicle travel. Sidewalks are consistently provided along US 41. In some locations, they are separated from the roadway by a landscape buffer, and in some instances by a guard rail. In other locations, they are provided adjacent to a travel lane. While new developments along the corridor are required to provide a pedestrian connection from the development to the public street network, many uses were constructed prior to those regulations being in place and pedestrian access to land uses can be limited along some portions of the corridor. While sidewalks are consistently provided, marked and controlled crossing locations of US 41 are infrequent. Numerous transit routes operate along the corridor, with a major transfer point located at the Collier County Government Center, near Airport -Pulling Road. From this transfer point, most of the corridor is accessible via transit. Stops are spaced at about 1/2-mile intervals along the corridor. Some stops are near signalized intersections to provide protected pedestrian crossings to destinations on the other side of the street, while most are not located at pedestrian crossing locations, limiting accessibility to transit stops, and promoting mid -block crossings of US 41. In the past 5-years, approximately 71 people have been killed or seriously injured along this section of roadway, including 13 people riding a motorcycle, 7 people bicycling and 8 people walking. Although people walking and bicycling were involved in less than 5 percent of all collisions, they represent more than 20 percent of people seriously injured or killed. Collisions more frequently occur on the northern section of the corridor between Bayshore Drive and Collier Boulevard. This section of the roadway has the highest level of activity for all travel modes, as well as the greatest density of driveways providing direct access to land uses along the corridor. Plan Review The following summarizes some of the key findings from the review of plans that related to the development/redevelopment of the corridor. For each plan, a general summary of the document and key elements that support, conflict, or hinder project goals. A matrix with additional details is provided as an attachment. East Naples Community Development Plan The East Naples Community Development Plan provides the framework for the Zoning Overlay and provides the vision of balanced development, diverse and quality commercial, beautification and green space, and transportation options. The existing conditions assessment identified that many neighborhoods within the study area were not within a reasonable biking distance of many desired uses, such as libraries, parks, and schools. The plan conceptually identified potential new connections to US 41 and intersection improvements that would modify intersection Packet Pg. 965 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn February 11, 2022 Page 4 of 8 configurations to decrease pedestrian walking distances, slow vehicle turning movements, and increase overall connectivity. As the Zoning Overlay strategies are developed, the overall goals and visions from this plan will be reviewed as tradeoffs are weighed. Collier MPO Long Range Transportation Plan The Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) prepares a long range transportation plan (LRTP) every five years with a minimum time horizon of 20 years. The plan serves to identify needed improvements to the transportation network and a long-term investment framework to address current and future challenges. The plan is centered around 10 goals, with various specific objectives to achieve those goals: 1. Ensure the security of the transportation system for uses 2. Protect environmental resources 3. Improve system continuity and connectivity 4. Reduce roadway congestion 5. Promote freight movement 6. Increase the safety of the transportation system for users 7. Promote multimodal solutions 8. Promote the integrated planning of transportation and land use 9. Promote sustainability in the planning of transportation and land use 10. Consider climate change vulnerability and risk in transportation decision -making Most of the LRTP goals and objectives are supportive of the proposed zoning overlay to transform how US 41 continues to develop and be redeveloped. However, goals related to roadway congestion may be contrary to other goals related to safety, climate vulnerability, sustainable land use development patterns and system continuity and connectivity. It may be challenging to achieve some goals if the primary metric used to evaluate the transportation system is a driver perspective delay -based calculation. While it is important to maintain vehicle - capacity, especially on critical evacuation routes, transportation metrics that measure the efficiency of the system from the perspective of connectivity, accessibility, and safety outcomes, such as vehicle miles of travel and access by mode, may be more appropriate metrics to evaluate different land use and transportation network strategies along the corridor. Collier County Growth Management Plan, Transportation Element The Transportation Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan identifies the future system needs, strategies for providing intermodal and multi -modal transportation, and connects the transportation element with the land use element. Goals, objectives, and policies are Packet Pg. 966 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn February 11, 2022 Page 5 of 8 articulated that primarily promote the development of a transportation system that is based on the peak hour operations of roadways from the perspective of a vehicle driver. There are goals, objectives, and policies related to transportation safety, multimodal transportation systems, and the coordination of land use development and the transportation system; however, there is not guidance on how decision makers should balance the inevitable trade-offs between goals. For example, widening roadways to provide peak hour congestion relief can result in longer crossing distances for pedestrians at intersections, higher speeds for people driving at all times of day, and especially off-peak periods which can result in worsening safety outcomes, and development patterns that encourage more driving trips rather than walking, bicycling or transit trips. As development is proposed along the corridor, a traditional approach to transportation impact assessments may show that from the perspective of a vehicle operator, the plans are contrary to some county goals, although they would further goals related to safety, multi -modal accessibility, and land use/transportation integration. Additionally, adding more links to the transportation network may serve to disperse travel demand and change some travel modes for existing trips. This would accommodate land use development without significant increases in travel on the state highway system and future analysis should consider these potential shifts in travel demand and travel mode. Collier County Land Development Code The Collier County Land Development Code provides guidance related to parking standards as well as other development standards, such as sidewalk width, site design and development standards and transportation level of service standards. The parking requirements are prescriptive and set minimum parking standards that may not be appropriate for all areas of the County, especially areas that are transitioning to destinations that are easily accessible from adjacent neighborhoods via non -private auto -modes. Along the US 41 corridor, consideration should be given towards setting parking maximums with greater flexibility provided to developers to provide the amount of parking expected to be demanded by a specific use, rather than a prescribed minimum. Some jurisdictions allow for the first 1,500 square -feet of locally serving land uses to be exempt from parking requirements to allow for greater flexibility in the adaptive reuse of existing buildings and to reduce the development cost for new buildings. Some also allow all new on -street parking created by the project to count towards the code - requirement. For example, if a project eliminates 3 curb -cuts, which has the benefit of reducing bike/ped conflict points and can provide 3 additional on -street parking spaces, their parking code requirement would be reduced by three spaces. Some communities are also allowing golf cart/neighborhood electric vehicle parking spaces to count towards the overall parking requirement to encourage trips to activity centers in these lower -polluting, lower speed vehicles, as well as make more efficient use of constrained sites. Packet Pg. 967 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn February 11, 2022 Page 6 of 8 While there is a bicycle parking code requirement, it applies only to commercial developments and sets a maximum number of bicycle parking spaces that need to be provided. It also does not specify the type of bicycle parking to be provided. In bicycle friendly communities, employment centers often require long-term bike parking that is covered and typically more secure than a bike rack, as well as showers and lockers to encourage active transportation commutes. For residential uses, at least one long-term bicycle space is required for every new multi -family residential unit. The transportation level of service standards, as discussed in the context of the LRTP and the Growth Management Plan, have the potential perpetuate current development patterns and outcomes and changes to the approach are needed to help achieve the US 41 vision. The development code provides requirements related to site design, orientation, and other specific requirements. Elements of the code that could be refined to better help achieve the goals articulated in the East Naples Community Development Plan include: • Require connectivity and reciprocal access between adjacent developments as it would reduce the reliance on the state highway network to accommodate local trips, would reduce overall trip length, and would promote walking and biking within areas. • Prohibit developments with cul-de-sacs and where they must be provided due to a natural barrier, provide a pass -through for walking and bicycling • Identify pedestrian priority areas along the corridor and require minimum width of sidewalks greater than 6 feet. • Update the bicycle facility requirements to align with the FHWA bicycle facility section guidance FDOT Guidance Manuals (Access Management and Context Classification) FDOT has been evolving the approach to planning, designing, and operating the transportation system in response to worsening safety outcomes, and a desire to develop more multimodal transportation systems that move away from prioritizing high-speed vehicle travel. The Access Management Guidebook and the Context Classification Guide will be important resources for the project team to refer to during the course of this project. To achieve the stated goals in the East Naples Community Development Plan, a reclassification of the northern portion of the corridor, generally from the northern end to Collier Boulevard from the current Suburban Commercial (CSC) to an Urban General (C4) will be necessary. A OC context zone is characterized with mostly non-residential developments, large building footprints and large parking lots within large blocks, and a disconnected or sparse roadway network. Within the C4 zone, development is characterized by a mix of land uses set within small blocks with a well-connected roadway network, that usually connects to residential Packet Pg. 968 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn February 11, 2022 Page 7 of 8 neighborhoods immediately along the corridor or behind the uses fronting the roadway. Within the C4 zone, roadway connections are permitted at more frequent intervals, minimum traffic signal spacing on the state highway is reduced providing greater connectivity, especially for people walking, bicycling, and taking transit, and speed limits are generally lower, improving transportation safety outcomes. Coordination with District 1 staff to provide a planned C4 designation for the section of roadway from south of Collier Boulevard to the northern corridor extents should occur as a part of the Zoning Overlay process. As redevelopment occurs, it would be held to the C4 standards. The Access Management Guidebook will be an important resource to consult as concepts are developed for specific segments of the corridor that might involve consolidating driveway, adding new street connections, and eliminating excessive turn lanes that increase pedestrian crossing distances. Guidance is also provided related to driveway designs that may be more appropriate for an evolving roadway are also provided. FDOT Efficient Transportation Decision Making Manual The purpose of the Efficient Transportation Decision Making (ETDM) process is to incorporate environmental considerations into transportation planning to inform project delivery. This process supports the environmental policy of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to "protect and preserve the quality of life, and the natural, physical, social, and cultural resources of the State, while expeditiously developing safe, cost effective, and efficient transportation systems". The ETDM process is applied to roadway projects that add capacity and the screening process for Public Transportation projects with a goal of identifying potential issues that should be further explored during scope development, facilitate timely decision making that considers environmental quality, promote public and environmental technical advisory team participation, provide a link between the planning and Project Development and Environment (PD&E) phases, including the appropriate environmental documentation review, and incorporation of appropriate issue resolution mechanisms during the planning process. The ETDM does not provide specific evaluation metrics, which provides Collier County an opportunity to develop policies and standards that more meaningfully address the concerns of the community along and connecting to the US 41 corridor. FDOT Di Safety Review FDOT District 1 (D1) has placed an emphasis on improving transportation safety outcomes on roadways within D1. Within Collier County, most crashes occur on the CK network, followed closely by Suburban Residential (C3R) classification, primarily because these are the most prevalent roadway types within the County, but they are also the roadways with the highest vehicle volumes and highest speed vehicle travel. A disproportionate number of crashes that Packet Pg. 969 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn February 11, 2022 Page 8 of 8 result in a severe injury or fatality involve a vulnerable roadway user (someone walking, bicycling, or riding a motorcycle) and involve high speeds as a contributing factor. Most fatal crashes on roadways within District 1 are on roadways with more than four travel lanes and posted speed limits of 40 miles per hour or greater. Four, five and six lane roadways with a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour or less have the lowest level of fatal crashes within the district. Given these crash trends, the County's plan to evolve the land uses and transportation system along and connecting to US 41 align with the districts goals to eliminate serious injury and fatal crashes on our roadways. Conclusions Our overall review of the existing transportation and policy context along the US 41 corridor between indicates that most local and regional planning documents have policies that are generally supportive of the type of development and transportation system changes proposed as a part of the East Naples Community Development Plan. However, many of these policies and procedures also require an evaluation of roadway capacity from the perspective of vehicle drivers delay and may require an oversupply of vehicle parking. Incorporating development standards that might still consider levels of service for people driving, but also consider safety, network connectivity, overall travel time, vehicle miles of travel, and other metrics that more meaningfully measure the goals of the project would help the County Achieve the vision of enhancing aesthetics, promoting economic development and investment, and improving mobility choices within and connecting to the area. Please contact Kathrin at k.tellez@fehrandpeers.com or (321) 754-9902 if you have questions. Packet Pg. 970 9.A.4.j FEHR�PEERS Memorandum Date: November 29, 2022 To: Laura S. DeJohn, Johnson Engineering From: Kathrin Tellez Subject: US 41 East Corridor Zoning Overlay — Focused Transportation Analysis OR27-0077 Introduction The purpose of the US 41 East Corridor Zoning Overlay (project) is to develop a comprehensive zoning overlay for the Tamiami Trail East (US 41) corridor, focused on land uses and development standards that enhance the aesthetics, promote economic development and investment, and improve mobility choices within and connecting to the area. The project extents are generally the properties and activity centers abutting the Tamiami Trail East corridor, from east of the Bayshore/ Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency boundary to Port of the Islands, excluding a portion of the corridor through the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District. While no specific development is proposed along the corridor as a part of the zoning overlay, the zoning changes could increase the density and type of development along the corridor. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the results of a focused transportation assessment for two parcels along the corridor under project conditions, reflective of the potential for increased density. The transportation context of the corridor was described in a technical memorandum dated February 11, 2022. This memorandum is organized to provide a brief description of the hypothetical development potential for two parcels along the corridor, the trip generating potential of that hypothetical development, and the analysis results, which include intersection operations and an assessment of vehicle miles of travel. Overall, the analysis results indicate that infill development along the US 41 corridor in combination with improved walking, bicycling and transit access has the potential to result in development patterns that encourage more non -auto trips, and when trips are made in a vehicle, 300 S. Orange Avenue I Suite 1120 1 Orlando, FL 328011 (321) 430-1151 1 www.fehrandpeers.com Packet Pg. 971 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 2 of 11 they are expected to be shorter than trips made by new development in other parts of the County. Congested conditions would occur at major intersections along US 41 regardless of the project and focused development on the US 41 corridor would place fewer demands on other portions of the transportation system. Development Potential Two hypothetical development scenarios were developed under the proposed zoning overlay. One site is located to the north of Saint Andrews Boulevard on the east side of US 41 (St. Andrews Square) and the second site is located on west side of US 41 just north of Collier Boulevard (Lowes Infill). Under both hypothetical development scenarios, it was assumed that development would occur on existing surface parking. The following describes the potential development St. Andrews Square • Existing retail to remain unchanged (51,400 square feet) • New retail (7,200 square feet) • Multifamily dwelling units (10 units) Lowes Infill • Existing retail to remain unchanged (150,000 square feet) • New retail (24,360 square feet) • New hotel (150 rooms) • Multifamily dwelling units (42 units) Under the current zoning, residential development of up to 16 units per acre would be permitted on the St. Andrews Square through rezoning the existing commercial acreage to residential zoning. The Lowes Infill Site is eligible for 4 dwelling units per acre for half the site and 16 dwelling units per acre for the other half of the site under current zoning. Neither site has any existing entitled development. Trip Generation Trip generation typically refers to the process of estimating the amount of vehicular traffic a project might add to the local roadway network. In addition to estimates of daily traffic, estimates are also created for the peak one -hour period during the morning (AM) and evening (PM) commute hours, when traffic volumes on adjacent streets are typically at their highest. The traditional trip generation methods commonly used by traffic engineers can overestimate the vehicle trip generation of mixed -use developments (MXDs) in urban/urbanizing areas with a Packet Pg. 972 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 3 of 11 variety of travel options because the traditional methods do not accurately reflect the amount of internal trip linking or the level of trips made by transit, biking, and/or walking. This can result in higher development costs due to oversized infrastructure, skewed public perception of the likely impacts of development, resistance to approving smart growth projects, and designs that are oriented towards prioritizing vehicle travel which ultimately results in more vehicle travel that can diminish the availably and desirability to travel by other modes. To better account for the evolution of the land uses and the transportation system along US 41 project's as well as the overall County goal of promoting mixed -use development that reduces vehicle trip generation and supports non -auto travel modes, Fehr & Peers used a mixed -use trip generation model, known as MXD+, to estimate project trip generation, pivoting from published trip generation rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11tn Edition). The trip generation results are shown in Table 1 for the St. Andrews Square site and in Table 2 for the Lowes Infill site. As shown in Table 1, the St. Andrews Square site would be expected to generate about 460 trips per day. However, as the development would be within an existing shopping plaza, about 5 percent of trips are expected to remain internal to the site, meaning that someone patronizing the existing retail would also patronize the new development, as well as the potential for someone who lives in the new multifamily development also patronizing the existing or future retail. Given the existing surrounding land use and transportation system context, few people are expected to arrive at the site via non -auto modes — about 10 daily trips. This level of non -auto trip making could be higher as transportation system improvements are made to better connect the site to the surrounding neighborhoods. After the application of pass -by trips to the retail component, these are trips that are already on the roadway system and a visit to the site would be part of an already planned trip, in -fill development at the St. Andrews Square site is expected to generate about 360 daily vehicle trips, including 17 morning peak hour and 41 evening peak hour trips. Packet Pg. 973 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 4 of 11 Table 1: St. Andrews Square — Trip Generation Estimates Retail' 7,200 square -feet 390 10 s Residential — Multi- 10 Units 70 1 Family Low Rise2 7 17 24 23 47 3 4 3 2 5 Total Trip Generation 460 11 10 21 27 25 52 Trip Adjustments Internal Capture3 -20 -1 -0 -2 -2 -1 -3 Vehicle Trips Converted to -10 0 0 0 0 0 0 Walk/Bike/Transit Trips4 Total Driveway Vehicle Volumes 430 10 10 20 25 24 49 Less Pass -by Trips5 -70 -2 -1 -3 -4 -4 -8 Net New Vehicle Trips to 360 8 9 17 21 20 41 Transportation Network12 Notes: 1. Based on Trip Generation (111h Edition) trip generation rates for land use 822, General Strip Retail, from suburban locations 2. Based on Trip Generation (111h Edition) trip generation rates for land use 930, Multifamily Housing Low Rise. 3. Internal trips, meaning trips that have an origin and destination within the site including the existing retail uses, are expected to comprise 5 percent of daily, 5 percent of morning peak hour and 6 percent of PM peak hour activity. 4. Walk/bike and transit trips are expected to comprise about 2 percent of daily activity with minimal peak hour activity. 5. A pass -by trip reduction of 20 percent was applied to the retail trip generation after the application of internal and non -auto reductions. Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022. For the Lowes Infill Site, the infill development potential could generate about 2,800 new trips. After considering the amount of activity that would remain internal to the site, about 10 percent, as well as the potential for walk/bike and transit trips, about 2 percent, the project vehicle trip generation would reduce to about 2,470 trips. After the application of the pass -by reduction, the overall added trips to the transportation system would be about 2,240 trips, including 116 morning peak hour and 213 evening peak hour trips. Packet Pg. 974 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 5 of 11 Table 2: Lowes Infill — Trip Generation Estimates Retail' 24,360 (flare -feet 1,330 34 23 57 81 80 161 s Hote12 150 Rooms 1,200 39 30 69 45 44 89 Residential — Multi - Family Low Rise 42 Units 280 4 13 17 13 8 21 Total Trip Generation 2,870 77 66 743 739 732 277 Trip Adjustments Internal Capture -280 -9 -8 -17 -14 -13 -27 Vehicle Trips Converted to -60 0 0 0 -2 -1 -3 Walk/Bike/Transit Trips5 Total Driveway Vehicle Volumes 2,470 68 58 126 123 118 241 Less Pass -by Trips' -230 -5 -5 -10 -14 -14 -28 Net New Vehicle Trips to 2,240 63 53 116 109 104 213 Transportation Network12 Notes: 1. Based on Trip Generation (11`h Edition) trip generation rates for land use 822, General Strip Retail, from suburban locations 2. Based on Trip Generation (10`h Edition) trip generation rates for land use 310, Hotel, from suburban locations 3. Based on Trip Generation (10`h Edition) trip generation rates for land use 930, Multifamily Housing Low Rise. 4. Internal trips, meaning trips that have an origin and destination within the site including the existing retail uses, are expected to comprise 10 percent of daily, 12 percent of morning peak hour and 10 percent of PM peak hour activity. 5. Walk/bike and transit trips are expected to comprise about 2 percent of daily activity and 1 percent of PM peak hour activity. 6. A pass -by trip reduction of 20 percent was applied to the retail trip generation after the application of internal and non -auto reductions. Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022. New land uses that could be developed on either hypothetical development site under current zoning would generate fewer trips than could be generated by development allowed under the zoning overlay. Analysis Results To assess the effect of the rezoning on the transportation system, two types of analysis were conducted. The first is a focused intersection analysis of the intersections closest to the two hypothetical development sites: Packet Pg. 975 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 6 of 11 1. US 41 at Saint Andrews 2. US 41 at Triangle Boulevard 3. US 41 at Celeste Drive 4. US 41 at Collier Boulevard The second analysis is an assessment of vehicle miles of travel (VMT). This relates to how far people travel by vehicle on a typical day — the greater levels of VMT on a per person basis, the more likely congested conditions will ultimately occur as people have to travel long distances for employment, shopping, education, recreation, and other trip purposes. Intersection Operations The operations of roadway facilities are described with the term "level of service" (LOS). LOS is a qualitative description of traffic flow from a vehicle driver's perspective based on factors such as speed, travel time, delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels of service are defined ranging from LOS A (free -flow conditions) to LOS F (over capacity conditions). LOS E corresponds to operations "at capacity." When volumes exceed capacity, stop -and -go conditions result, and operations are designated LOS F. Collier County and the Florida Department of transportation (FDOT) strive to maintain LOS E operations at the intersections in the study area. Signalized Intersections Traffic conditions at signalized intersections were evaluated using methods developed by the Transportation Research Board (TRB), as documented in various editions of the Highway Capacity Manua(, for vehicles using the analysis software Synchro 10.0. Different versions of the HCM were applied to different intersections due to limitations within the Synchro software to account for the signal phasing parameters and U-turn movements at some intersections, with the most current version of HCM applied as appropriate. The HCM methodologies calculate control delay at an intersection based on inputs such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, signal phasing and timing, pedestrian crossing times, and peak hour factors. Control delay is defined as the delay directly associated with the traffic control device (i.e., a stop sign or a traffic signal) and specifically includes initial deceleration delay, queue move -up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. The relationship between LOS and control delay is summarized in Table 3 for signalized intersections. Packet Pg. 976 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 7 of 11 Table 3: Signalized Intersection LOS Criteria Progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. A ` 10.0 Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. B Progression is good, cycle lengths are short, or both. More vehicles stop than with > 10.0 to LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. 20.0 Higher congestion may result from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. > 20.0 to C Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level, though many still pass 35.0 through the intersection without stopping. The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result D from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high V/C > 35.0 to ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. 55.0 Individual cycle failures are noticeable. This level is considered by many agencies to be the limit of acceptable delay. These > 55.0 to E high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high 80.0 V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This level is considered unacceptable with oversaturation, which is when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. This level may also occur at high V/C F ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle > 80.0 lengths may also be contributing factors to such delay levels, and most cycles fail to clear the queue. Source: Highway Capacity Manual. Unsignalized Intersections For unsignalized (all -way stop controlled and side -street stop controlled) intersections, the HCM method for unsignalized intersections was used. With this method, operations are defined by the average control delay per vehicle (measured in seconds). The control delay incorporates delay associated with deceleration, acceleration, stopping, and moving up in queue. Table 4 summarizes the relationship between LOS and delay for unsignalized intersections. At side -street stop -controlled intersections, the delay is calculated for each stop -controlled movement, the left - turn movement from the major street, as well as the intersection average. The intersection average delay and highest movement/approach delay are reported for side -street stop -controlled intersections. Table 4: Unsignalized Intersection LOS Criteria A Little or no delays Packet Pg. 977 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 8 of 11 B C D E Short traffic delays Average traffic delays Long traffic delays Very long traffic delays Extreme traffic, delays where intersection capacity exceeded Source: Highway Capacity Manual. Existing Intersection Operations > 10.0 to 15.0 > 15.0 to 25.0 > 25.0 to 35.0 > 35.0 to 50.0 > 50.0 This analysis focuses on the weekday evening (4:00 to 6:00 PM) peak period when traffic volumes on the surrounding roadway network are the highest, and when the project generates the most vehicle traffic. Intersection vehicle turning movement counts were conducted in September 2022 on a clear day with typical travel patterns for the time of year. In addition to the count of vehicles traveling through the study intersections, a separate count of bicyclists and pedestrians was also conducted. For the study intersections, the single hour with the highest traffic volumes during the count periods was identified. To reflect conditions during peak season, FDOT guidance regarding seasonal adjustment factors was applied such that the volumes collected in September 2022 are reflective of peak season. Existing intersection operations were evaluated using the methodology described above. The analysis was based on the traffic volumes, lane configurations and existing signal timings obtained from FDOT and the County. Observed peak hour factors' were used at all intersections for the existing conditions analysis. Truck, pedestrian, and bicycle activity was factored into the analysis. The intersection operations results are summarized in Table 5, which shows the intersections in the vicinity of the focused analysis sites operate within the level of service standard. The relationship between the peak 15-minute flow rate and the full hourly volume is given by the peak -hour factor (PHF) as shown in the following equation: PHF=Hourly volume/(4* volume during the peak 15 minutes of flow). The analysis of level of service is based on peak rates of flow occurring within the peak hour because substantial short-term fluctuations typically occur during an hour. Packet Pg. 978 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 9 of 11 Table 5: Existing Conditions — Weekday Evening Peak Hour Intersection Operations 1. US 41 at Saint Andrews Signalized E 16 B 2. US 41 at Triangle Boulevard Signalized E 40 D 3. US 41 at Celeste Drive Side-SStpreet E 1 (20) A (C) 4. US 41 at Collier Boulevard Signalized E 69 E Notes: 1. Existing intersection traffic control type (Signal = Signalized, Side -Street Stop = Side -Street Stop control) 2. Whole intersection average delay reported for signalized intersections. Side -Street Stop -Controlled intersection delay presented as Whole Intersection Average Delay (Worst Movement Delay). Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022. Project Conditions To assess operations of the intersections with the proposed land use intensification, the project trip generation estimates were added to the existing traffic counts and the intersection operations analysis was updated. The results are presented on Table 6, which shows that the additional traffic generated from the infill development potential would marginally impact intersection operations along the corridor and all intersections would continue to operate within the established level of service standard. Table 6: Existing with Project Conditions - Weekday PM Peak Hour Intersection Operations 1. US 41 at Saint Andrews Signalized E 16 B 16 B 2. US 41 at Triangle Boulevard Signalized E 40 D 43 D 3. US 41 at Celeste Drive Side-SStrreet E 1 (20) A (C) 1 (21) A (C) op 4. US 41 at Collier Boulevard Signalized E 69 E 70 E Notes: 1. Existing intersection traffic control type (Signal = Signalized, Side -Street Stop = Side -Street Stop control) 2. Whole intersection average delay reported for signalized intersections. Side -Street Stop -Controlled intersection delay presented as Whole Intersection Average Delay (Worst Movement Delay). Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022. Packet Pg. 979 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 10 of 11 Future Conditions An assessment of future year conditions was also conducted using the regional travel demand model to estimate growth in future travel in the area based on projections of land use development in the County and within the incorporated cities. Overall, the population in the County is expected to increase over 40 percent in the next 30 years, with an almost 70 percent increase in employment, resulting in an annual increase in range of 2 to 4 percent in traffic volumes along the corridor. This is expected to result in more frequent congested conditions and some intersections are projected to exceed their level of service standard. It should be noted that these are development projections and likely may not be realized as envisioned in the travel model. While infill development would contribute worsening congestion along the corridor, it also has the potential to reduce trip lengths and in the long-term encourage some people to walk, bike or take transit instead of a personal vehicle. Vehicle Miles of Travel An assessment of the amount of vehicle miles (VMT) of travel within the county was conducted using the regional travel model to estimate the amount of travel attributed to development within the county. For this calculation, all travel with both the trip origin and trip destination within the county was accounted for in addition to half of the travel with at least one trip end within the county. All regional through traffic — trips that pass through the county but do not stop — was excluded. Using the base year regional travel demand model (2015), it is estimated that land uses within Collier County generate about 7.2 million miles of travel per day, or about 20 miles of vehicle travel per resident per day. This accounts for travel on all roadways within the County and all people regardless of if they drive. In the future year, this level of travel is expected to increase by about 20 percent on a per resident basis, indicating the future development patterns in the County are planned to be more dispersed than current patterns with future residents needing to travel farther for goods and services based on the planned location of residential developments combined with the location of other land uses. Land uses along the southern portion of the US 41 corridor tend to generate slightly more vehicle miles of travel than the regional average due to its location in the southern portion of the county, in the existing condition. However, the amount of travel generated by land uses along the corridor in the future is projected to decrease, meaning that development along the corridor is more location efficient that other planned development elsewhere in the County. Conclusions Overall, the analysis results indicate that infill development along the US 41 corridor in combination with improved walking, bicycling and transit access has the potential to result in Packet Pg. 980 9.A.4.j Laura S. DeJohn November 29, 2022 Page 11 of 11 development patterns that encourage more non -auto trips, and when trips are made in a vehicle, they are expected to be shorter than trips made by new development in other parts of the County. Congested conditions would occur at major intersections along US 41 regardless of the project and focused development on the US 41 corridor would place fewer demands on other portions of the transportation system. Please contact Kathrin at k.tellez@fehrandpeers.com or (321) 754-9902 if you have questions. Packet Pg. 981 ram. at`. 0 R.r =I MM e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo V 0 ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLpeuv n 2 Q � ■ IL / \ \ IL k •f _ f \ _ § \ \ § \ \ S e .\ \ u \ \ C 2 ° 5 / � .M LLJ } E . E cx ± > @ E3 \ o C007 \/ E > § o •§ 3% S / § � ® 9 § \ < \ / m m « % �� k § » § cx ƒc l { A 2 \ @ \ \ 2 » % m k § 3 0 ° / � ± \ 2 3 6 2 .A \ — / § / / k 6 f \_ f � \ / G COO� ƒ CS '? \ _ \ $ f 7 6 a •° \% 7 7 E\ 2» S\\ a § f 7 § QLA E ƒ 2 LLJ 7\/ eƒ/± te e= % , 3=\ \ 7 ƒ Q } 0 = \ 'a a -- = 2§ 2 v/ 7 y@ @ 2— %«\ 2§ 2 o e g o = o o> t o o—_= 7 e 2 u \ % : L § / k \ / 2 / 7 ._ / \ \ 2 3 e 3 > a / G _ $ / \ \ / \ k ( / \ o / CMf \ \ \ ( 7 / % 7 \ F e z < ^- e a n< e& o%/ C-2< 2 a- co 2< m I< n¥ > z ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo d WO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoejjv le v 00 Q m a W a v > r M LO r— r CM CO 0 IL a -6 U C Z 0 O V U W v w � J � d � Q Z f6 H V1 Q Q "' +J v C V N C U N V) N D Q N C N � N ' � C N O Z o w W Cn CIO,) O I V Ln L� ~ Z m > W Z O Z W i N V O _V O Z O Q p Q O Q V -a-0 ~ Q C3 C~C Q Z C= y = Y LLJ O Z Lu C' E 0 0 W G Q = C/D CSW Z > v a�i Lr Z Q O a Cr >CM o io is Z W Q Cr G CM V C-5 Y J Q Cam- V •c c � O O O O O O W r N M M C6 C/3 a H ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo d O ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv N N M ;I- LO (D lfl N M 't Ln N .--1 -1 M Ln (D m N O -1 M M M M M M M It It LO rl -q -1 N I � L.L V co O > O L N N Ln � EL c6 2 Q L Q ? +' v Q Q N u O O ca Z ca Z(13 O O o O N > N p cn X ca N u0 t� U)� .0 : w O N N w (6 +J (a d v Q Q t bA _a V) I I N Z C T C n O O Q Q T I I -� _ T o :e u .< U U U : L1 J W O C O C O a1 V >> (o aJ u +' N 7+ m f� Z a O O Z u C O C O N E E O U U U O ,� U tom.) O O v�i Q U N N C O (D C u O v cn co O w Q m co O w C m mL L U (n i Ln +' N (n d' Z d' N a) (p 2 2 X O O bA O v co - OL U U N m M to M i6 ca in C 6 m m W J a) d V U .--I -1 a1 (n 41 (n a) a) a) aJ a) = T c r1 V O L +., Q L ,� �, Q a! C v v +L.+ Y � +L.+ y Ln 2 N 2 N 2 a) aJ N 2 a) O c6 C O C C N N C a1 C a, U C E N L 2 (O tO a'' 'O N U U U U U E a1 O O N C r .m C V -0 cT6 bA N O N O c6 a1 J U N co w J a) C +V.1 +j aJ L L N N O v O O O O m U s X LO LO CL > 2 A u 2 2 2 H +J H H I-- H d (n LU a d Q-a N to -p N fl- S N N M N N� C � io N N I� N W N 6i N J O r4 M M N M M M � M M LA- +C•' (n *x W v Q ra J N C W .x v W Q co J O_ O bi - 2 w L a1 L a) L O w w L L aJ L w L W L a) a1 v L L a) L a) L aJ L CO 4 N T M � (n CO T r— CO m O 7 L =3 Q 7 O 7 O 7 D 7 =5 M 7 7 I-- 1Z CL !Z Q 1Z CL f? f? a bA W W Q W bA bA bA W w w u p bA bA N2 m m� cO r6 ca ca ca p LL 11 M O I.L LZ(6 L = LZ E W EE E ofI..L LL —1;E:2 (n (n cV Izi: (n Cl O .--I r-I (n 1- .--I M ItT It (n CD 1l- 07 W m O 1-1 CV CV N r CV cV CV CV CV CV M M cv 0 a1 > (a V c o C E (a (0 ra > N I I L i1 U C C CL Q \ = Q to O @ d O :Y d O L a..i (6 i C O N O C Q a O U U > O V L- Q U 41 41 +n V)i 0 v r u C v C +� C) bA (a (a O aCi a 00 m p O U O U u (n N d w' Z to : N O U a) aJ u C O X O O C T > O U)� L L C WU n C n Q uca u Q Eu O O n O O O p Quuu L JO O E E E va, n Ln E E d vap o N D- Cc)E O O O O O m cv by bE0 C C C C C 2 2 2 E O O N O O o N Q O N � 1 C - 'L a--� m L O V C CJ C Z Ln (a - -' N o co co o � a) T �- r1 r 1 co O z = C: a a) a) v a) v cm: N N N d � a) u N a! C al al a) V (n N U, N (6 (d (6E (6 f6 O E N U= O =) =) O M w v + - O Z Z Z Z Z �i 7 T E v uj 0 N L W, D w O E Q (n (n v v 'p c � OC -6 � o p p o _Lyn v �; v v 2 v v 0 v v a, w .O :- +J U c0 O O aJ (n (O Ln .O O O N a1 (n (n > (n N V) T (n N > `ri > (n co (n X L L > a) U > m Z 3: D z- a% z:) Y ai O > m a w d d O of > > LV L; cV M (n CO ti CO Ol T -1 -1 -1 -1 .--I -1 -1 u .-I r1 -1 U N N U CM a) L a) L v L a) J L N a) L v L v a) L L v L a) L a) L (1) L v a) L L O a) L v L v Q a) L v L a) v L a) L w L v Q C/! bA bA bA bA co bA bA qA UO bA bA bA W L bA W Q w w L C) bA W M C o bA bA L v J iL iL iL iL w �L iL i.L LZ ilz m E i.L i.L i..L LZ 0 iL iL a iL iL LL U iL iL d ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;a!dwoo `ddWO AelaaAO wvsfl !e;;!wsueal :}uawyoejjv v Q � ai •N 00 m Cb a m �a a Q c04D LJ H V LJ X W ISe3 �v sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad Ojeldwoo `ddWJ AeIJGAO vvsfl leu!wsueal :;u9wLioeuv �C W F a) ion ro `C e J u D m u L Ln 0) Ln .p— tA C� C Q ti 00 rn a a am Y V R d ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv > C) (6 C >. N C cv (6 N t C a)C 00 V) L i U C14O L t6 N +, N +� 0 E 0 IT 0 0 p N N 0 C E 0 0 N Li C L N p + N +> r0 O_ "O O N O U '+, b 0 0 N N p c � 0 to v 0 N> 0 Ln i 0 co C to + O 7 pE CZ 0-0� 0 L v > 0 E U C •- O 0 0~ N i �O O v-0 >' +-' O _ Q C E Q E N � 4! Ln i 0 lJ � O N N •N N a, N C +N-+ O U J 41 ,� f6 N �--� +�-+ O v +-� U *' N O cp M 0 N ` N N N 0 0 u N p N '' -p 0 �_ O 0 iv 0i O +� N N u v 0p 00 p Q 0 m E 0 .x 'v N u 0 p '+ > -p i "O N` OU -p C a0J c6 ra N 0 ro O0 Q t6 E 0 N O N o C N N E N Q 7 a..' •i N bA v N V C 7 +' N i C o O' fa N ON 0 +•� = o a-•' 5 0_ Q c/i -0 0 .N t N >' N N v �' 0 c co > N E >, 00- O O N V p N 0 u0 7 O +J 0 N O 6 .� v 0 0 p � U 0 V .� C N 0 Q p qMfu p O O N N > C ,� +-+ +� 41 am., v u C L N C�C v +' O Y C N ,} >+ 0-0 U O v c6 N 0 Q v N 4J 0 00 E O 0 O O N �'� L N-0 C/D N T 0- -p E O 0 0 Lo c E u v E N 2 -p 0 m N +, 0 t>A W .0 UA m ° w> Y-0 0 p O n v o OU p +>-- M co v oU p c" m o °n' E �o c a� -0 0 p O i! .N O y, N o f6 N Q N L >, - 0 -0 0O 7 C C N Q O LLII 4J - 0 u-0 E 0_ -m-0 Q O N O N C-0 t' f6 0 Q t6 'R O N+ 0 O C �' +-� L~ f6 C b.0 C O LN v `~ E L% N 4J QJs +�-+ N v N bA i i bA 0 >p 0 0 0 u v- ,O U m C C +-� v N v O "p v =p E. N 0 V 0 0-0 i N O a 'in N 0 Y >, O p 0 �' N m v O v N� U L O J C J (n N N N /\ 6Lll 4J .0 Q 0 �..' fd 0 +-+ 0- WE o cn c _0 a O .� 0- o 3 0, ° .� ° • . • 0 00 00 m 6 a m �a a s ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv 4 v N O � C N N v m 0 ro C N v C m C m m Q D L cr 3 00 > m mo O C fO CVf i d Q 'O G1 sd N w c v v v OD N 01 U1 Q U E m Q m L 7 0 c m c c a to c c c m 'm m U c v a .E o. N E O O Vn C > C (a > O E a) o E 0 7 O fl O O +_T' v o Q z p- u0 +' Q >, O � E +-' t �O E E p„p aJ � dA O po p O m O +' c6 (0 L N V N C Q p p M O v, > a� aJ (6 N C N � O i T -0 O 0-0-0 n O a1 N -a m cu a) U M E v ab E CL Ou bcD- tv a1 m Q C p v U C (O v, U -O O C N -� U a1 v (O o- C O -O O ?� ate., c6 O� -O L 0 O N a) c m E O a) (6 -Cc) E -O -6 O 0 a p Z N y aJ Q c O O O O E N aJ V) bA N in M +, C aJ N (o L C U N L +, E (O O O aJ +-+ v S N a1 0.—-0O E E m aJ v o v u C O v� °N' C� cE E ao= c EL�nv��pU v �°�`°� +,V) a,+� v E p L N 0 C C) m O E Q OL N t E a1 0 U N p +� N ,} E L� 000 v E� ) E v Ga E Q N���a�O f6 N c '�' L ��o�, v -6 L a1 ,n v U O N L Ou C u, N -O O N •C O +� a1 O L .N >, a1 O 7 +� +� U +' L f6 v C o v+, > 2 +' g -0 v v > a�Um u�. (o (o a, f6 > m —w O � 3a'N a) +J v, c L N +, of m � c6 L U p +� aJ bA C a1 E n O a) > OL N -p N a to L u •u, -0 m N .— c >> = O u Wz cz -O OE E O a1 (A NQ a) a Cuy .M LN Q N C14 E 76 N -O Q 0 O C A CO O aJ E O O O> O CC) OM E O -0 "0 a) Eo O L -OEa-O >, � m M N -O 0 N > N v o -a� E OO O�� � aiii O>+ p N C (O 0- m -0 N i Of a) 0-O • 0- E M- a a- E m � 0 L C� G V I W cD W W ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv ►_ LLJI L2 M L2 L" cn a Q -6 N N N v O '" CE O ~ L u C O 4J (U6 •� C -00 U � C- � 0 C -6 •— Q R N C - v O Z � :" [ N +� 3�N ~tea 0 N 0 (aN bA-O bA co O C �� U 6 M +� 0 N O V c v v T u Q o i U N•�CLC.O v a•' L C >,4 O p +-. C C N .— U N C N •— U 7 N O t6 c u -O i M GJ N N v O C N N G! bA-O O C L° o °� v� w v O E GJ i •E 4, u 1 E C y c6 C 'N O i E R N v a O '6_ O o O C •L N w G! +' O aoo,E �cEc.'r3��c GcipapNE�'nOQ'ss 0 U C 47 .a .••� > ar h N _0 0 v- p O. 0 d'o y W Z N v N £ S �+ � GJ fl-N �=3 ea E yr G=,o 7 O E� v+, o cL3-o -0 �� O'c E� O _2 O w c co 3 X O Vl VJ II x Lo - _ > U '— co 0 in CL c3 'a = 0 0 -O Gl OU c-0 = f0 N O = v M•- u 3 c C�Ovv�Oya EuXyE�O•coO'a N �--EEO vONfl .0 E O y p Nv>uEcco m -ECa2wE0 0W'o-0 0 Cam. :3 ■ m v�a LZ cu 0 c to v o.�'ac vv O x a'N ca C p c E ` O v N Oro �E "00mW00mmc°a, O u _O ' .� E w N N Y j E O M E n. N N 000 O p E p� � E ccv c _v LLL O 2 29 ou E ao Ou (U m o O c 'O N — X Q 0 C C]. 'v1 fG o ar " a+ 00 0 m w O 0 a c E M c A a+ 7 7 L EO 00 O E a2_.0 o`G G, o c a of°�c c 'a ECi v ON Q u O O N U > O c . rG G1 c oG C � 0 m oG c �v c E 4/ OQ m 0 c E N 0 — E c v > E O m c > G) u H fO 'O ai ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv 0 Cn N Q � O 6 N Q O y Ln fV v fl. E vi +' 00 W p W N U- Q 4 C1 o Q ti v a c o (� Q a LO LAJ W r— O V) N N v T a --1 'O v J u U U Q a U Z m E 0 c w y Q Q 0�(n C r OC U N m 2 D o a W O N C/i O • • • G r cn W 'r+ v W W +T' O +J o aci o f6 ao E c (6 v N E 7 O O U L � N y p t "O U C Q m T N •tn p I N U T a M cz O N U — ti N _ N O -a c N _O i C O (O 'p (� o a� .0 i � v •- m v C � cv N N E •cc c,,E E O N Q N N +--� w N c O U +� N N m N O c N U L 0) N i (a N CM a)w O O bA v Q N LO X_ Ln F T Z N t "_ vvi v E -O ca G N x Z +J 0 V C U Z N E c O_ a, m c-O m Q u-0 0 u 0 z O �. 72 Q, N c m L H (a .- X N c -a m C)0- O z a O L O b N N -0� b.0 N N N +•� O m -O C U O O u > C (v �; �O u a) S o bbA 0 p v t c C o c t O o_ -o C7 T U •C � C) c .� ao u C)� •> +, Z (a c C `6 C)+' E Q C)N U O hN0 C C co N U,qA (n C C D > O Cn �O C ap N o -o N o f Q •� o a c o v u u c u c J O (�6 N C +:; o f +-+ C -o N •N N 'i -0uO-�O O N v m vN o N v 0QZ -0 a a) ca ; C) c o-0 o UN a H i .-4 N N >O O Z \c N U Q +� Cl- N cu Z i (a N Q !6 C i� W U (n Z a ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO AeIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv y W � � O Q w M b0.0 o O ° LZ a)O OLL O a Y o Q N O � b0.0 fu = v a o ° N a o r2 O O Q Q Y z � v c -a c= N v a Q ti N 0 O 6 N 0 T r HCM u a 0) a Q m u o w 0 O O o Q 0 �i M a a r OC U M W a W O N VJ oQj V) cn W `% W W O cn � v C i — O v u u � +� O o o00ac c O Ln -o — ° Q i N a !�6 N V v v vv�? Qa vOi a1OOE iO Naomi CJ bA u' N u C a N u (6 �n p a� ca)Ln EOv+ O x 2 O v c u ca ao'- CM - v •- O o v c t = N> uviai +, c� bA'- cv 0 3: O c 0) u a z Na=0) V),u�a 41 C7 CLO O 0 m-. V O u u cn ca} o co�u>- O W O O O N_ _0 C2 ro 0 a) - o x b�D W M= >,c Ox j C � 0-=o vcn a-0 0 CL v ns° u z a N C � 41 L � N >, N C v O O O v o o -a Z N V) Uto U .._ N C •N ro n C NE O 4.1 V) n = v co o a� u � � O - Q) E '0 vCL v > u N -0 N - -0 C co u V)f6 Q1 L ate-+ a) .0+' n' N � bA C i O �. C •?� f6 •� N Q 7 v V) o NCo V O a C) c c c is t � N L v N> C -6 � r0 W= O V1 3 O m ou � d .O = Ny to m 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv y W v 1— O � uyw O ~ bA ti v O O O o LZ a o Qcd v a 0 o c� Q o QLL } +' +' a zL'i v c c= a CU/� V)O O 6 (A V) a) a) C)L a W o Q y Hof a a U O O LU m O W O p c2 Q E W Z W u 1� W a G N v CQ G cn W `% W W V) C O C v L � a N C O U v N Q C OV V O +� F O L -0 O n + > (v C m a 'O 4J U bA E co O VOj tL6 cp CO OU •i ta.0 O ++ Q- L L ca O p o O O C_ x_ /) U v= f6 N H m 0O -0 N bA S O- U m a-+ m V)cm V, C: L a +� cv $ a M J C O N C C? O •� - LO v O > i U Zw O V)X a o U = O C7 'O E v +O O x cn M a c > a� .� O � O up > a— W a� v 0 0 N C.Q a O N cm O n v N O tv Z Z Q _ L V) V) a V) 1 L O V N C ._ +� L N E _ O N -0v too > O N to O = U = b.0 Co O cm O p C O N L+ O c7 m N -O +� .N C cm Z a"' C C O M C N C bA 0 � N "O CL CM .� 0U O CU a O 1 N ..O O > p C a f6 L C O v NO E O O cm O sO Q) C v C V -O Q J _� C o c a) C)a C)N v N ao X +� Q (A V ca ca c N a) O C E C c O a O v Q f6 a= C-L Q bCA N C V a L 'N � R .� +J a)C O N +-+ L -O � C L V i1 v a G. Z X N W-0 O C � C)E O U C >,+J ui U C C N (n V) N M Z a e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLi3euv \ - \ = 7 5_( w ° C) ° k/ j % e= E 2 \ 2 u \ a fe — u=§ o �._ _ — g 2 �._ ��k�2��f(J �\\ / \ $ / 2 E § / 3 \ \ \ 7 / % § / \ E § 3 c— o\ 8± 6 t �) @ a u 3 m o# m o.§ _ u y@= o 0 0 E u = o= u_ 3 #. = \$ _ 7 = 3 = �. \ u= u\/%/ o 2 E o u E g 0- m=§•- Q E =2®~==E25's±m�=*® \= F s=® w o u u= 2/ /-2• E c 2/\-0 —0 e _� �»�/\5& §{}» V) =®\== z 22/.A .20 N%Co 7g/_ 0 5uku\o®2 a � •N _ = 7 _ _ _ _ e m - 3 o u = LLJE-0- m o ®— e® u\ 2# 2-_ m® ® r E V) sm=3=®oz G \/(/ t 9= 3\ t t C_� J{£ 2 m o u=Q) E$ u&/ E E E G� 3 E= = 3#m±=00- 0"0 U 0 I�§\ n -0 CL r- —6 0 -0 u \ s t 7 a g s= V) 8@$$/ M V) \% 7 u W e% 3 7 e=223== Z =3E2=nf=3 7 /n=2 C� G CI I _W r L% W W ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv iz C (10 f6 50 N N U +� C L V1 V, a) v � o. oo s V) aA N C C O L O O N 3 _ c $ o co i O u C '6 ~ 0 -O b.A m a) +'.� � ate•+ a1 U N N i (L6 N Q N U a� 0' O C C '- i +� +J +� O = O .v O a a E i C �' Q OU (6 C Q N O O C L N U a) a1 O O N E -O a Q 72 W L` L C M V) +' N -O -O O O N fd 7 — N f6 C N N a) O p E p .E ~> p +� N v +� -a E E o w v x a� L 0 N 'O Q C O N D C Q U !6 N O C N t ca U U.)Q L'A N cv N O OL bM 0-Q N aJ aJ � "O E + N E> E a) m a, ° t Q N O co .o- a! L.L a: — Q N Q 9a) U N ISe3 �v sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad Ojeldwoo `ddWJ AeIJGAO vvsfl leu!wsueal :;u9wLioeuv Y i .0 } 5Q 5` /rw V i W H V W W Alt T T T I CQ G C/D W W W ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO 6vsf1 lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv t%) Z O Q G Z W L W J Q Z O 0 G Q v t 0 s a� `n v C/3 N N Cm c6 bOA � N O O 00 cLAJ + +J N a) O +N, oN C c Cn c O N E ap c6 � L N N +' a) m by U o W E w c "= H j t N 2 O p p Q 0 Ci N aJ -O N -p a•.' N ._ c Q bA p O ca O C' to c a) U N> 0 p a U N Q- a) LO +�-+ b0.0 aJ Q m N E (i aJ C c C/3 O C7 ' H O O LE V) — � aa) O v vact -O CO O J Q m O M o ca U +� u � o c bA O +� 00 O L c bA .E 7 c L U+ N O c aJ O E N +� N co co C 6 v E O 10 > E •= aJ c 2 E O Q m O O O b00 i c cca ,ui, u o c6 O Ln O a) = -0 IZ V O N v O v- O � y N c C: a=•i aJ +_ E Ul _O o bA E E O E p E N O O E > a) N _O fd a) c a) oura'> N v N O L Yra c c v O Q Q H J d U Q U N bA a) O u c O Vi i a1 a1 i N V b!] Q i N O +J T c- • N N> co 6 O .c N N bc0 0 O to N ou O v 6 U O Q O O 7 a) a) x O a) c c �> a) U � +-+ a V)LnV z L C t r d m N I— Q' M Q '6 bOA v :� O c N _ a) m c Q bo— cn E in N c O C) O N p 0 fl C cNo v *' V N U Z ri6 �' N > Q Q O N p w N E O C)) +-+ R 'U V N C"M i- v Ln }' -O c m -p +-' Q) a) c6 a) C) d -0 0 N O_ N aJ -O " a O -0 C) '� L c0 Wi z,,, c6 4- " 7 N N c a) N c— N E Z w u", V v N - u o 0 0 +, L o >— a) a, o m O a, N co c +� c +� N +� a) E ca V Q E E v E Q N L,) W a �) an x_ a, N c v n� .a a) O C D a, E v ca - O �) c7 o c bo O Q c N E Q u O O a c U 'c a, w vi Z c +J bA c ti z+ C) c b0 0 O-0- CD- p cv U O J ca v) 'v) i6 W m cn ? N O a) U a) i a1 W O c +� v .O N C:� N U •� v E +N, H- N H > c c U N 'Q M bA E � ;N N c L.L. a) .� +� c c J E u n -p C) L d N-0 0 +T+ N -O L a) Ci > O c 0 "6 O L.L. -0 o 0 +-•' -O v M a) U C) bOA r° O +� >o Q coo v O N 'v) c G c Q u c v v Q E -o N c ao p v a a c u O i N t +� v> u ca d +J N v C T O cv o .E v v O o o p c +� co co c O o f c i v W +, cv >, N c E Z v .� > Cr +' C) v 6 O c a) v C� N 0 N O N N u Q c Y O 0 v G O i O Q j IWL v 2 Q c f6 0 '� o p E ra C� t a) c ca +, C7 0 n a c Q E o �o co CCi� f° a) p v o ° E o Z +� i E an c c Z o a" 0 a) bA cm E E v Z u u c c6 N .N N a) O ' p O p V v u i L7 T- •E -0 -a aJ Z OU b.0 cc6 W .E v V l06 i) I� Z 1 V U a) ca O i i V s O f/i > c a) oWc C) v° °A -O c g c au) = •c ° n u �' n W a) o u0-0 o - v c' co co u w a 0 m co = m3: co N N ca 0 CSC 2E3: N co 2 ca ca 0 e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLi3euv � � ± ƒ / / _ / �77/ E n (A E > = m I= »0G» & /¥\§t/ } \E \f $3 ° 0 2 2 = m u 5 u 2 3 a o _ a o•- /{Eeeƒ v.) °E �: k j ƒ \ k E = 7 E 0\//S 2 L % / / e @ o = Q) /(2 G) ( � 5 o \ \ 2 : Ln #_"__� _ � o m = - � 7 e 0 0 % u % u CL m Q) 2 o m e @ 3 & m m $ E z / § = e � _ G) ± 2 m %cz 'E t $ E w 2 _ 0_® E % -0f % 3 S / 0 3 a E / e G \a > t 0 u 'B 2 � = 0 o 2 c > / q .- : E E § 0 \ { ƒ . ƒ 0 g \ / E 0 0 / E V $ § �2 E 2 E § S� �\ 0 0 0 \ / 7a E 0 & \ 0 - ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ_ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv v r ru 4 . i 4J N C s W •2 O _O N E _ E O ar Z5 u ..- C)� ■ Of • m -p O C E v v 4' Q C N v u N 'u O U N u a) N v N Q H Z) • N O :E T W C uj C C m O iJ-O N E O +' "O C N co 41 N c6 O '_p N 'O c v 0" O 'p p +, L Z p v u +� C Z V N .� `� N C > QJ O ` +� Q N O N > O- O 4! ro N O Q E O aiS N 41 C N C N O- C c6 N = C > +� -O O v N N C u C N ia.p O t% C `� N a v a� -0 o n Q +� @ N Q Q p .S 0 L > bA O O O U N a) E i m E O O C p o N v p U _ _ Q1 bA .� �' N fl_ C �O i f6 U N V �O U 76 v d rz V) -p O O C N E Q U f6 Q p_ L N N = N v Q N +' m •M C -p O 41 a•' L O- N +, E _ u t6 m >, U x i C 0 +� M dJ i v C. N C i Q N u O O E_ N tt-_ = -p bA C pp p C cv r cp r-I N y t O +•, d E O- y Q O C O O Q y cv 4! u N O L +, C Z N v bA v �, ea Q N G O i Q O R p O 0 +� U Ln No O O •N -p 3 N °' ;, M O N O C +� N O -p c` -p -p !C C 'O U v{ > p ++ u +J O co to C O a+ N +J C C C N to C hA to Y •C N > N 'O u vi -O O R U > O '� v = `� uj O >, O o O qA >, E 4J tN0 E- COC O N i (6 "a N S N N N N +�-� r N N •� w 00 N C Q N cO +t-+ O Q N m N R O -O LO i N N E O N>1 co N O- O y O O N z of Y a O N a a o v bZ o O C Q ON y C .� G c -p U O to -_p u N 0 O u E �O N O U .Ln O cv co ' 4J -p a•'. N u .- Z O ui L Ou N N M N N C C ,} N N N bA R C aA h.0 N C i 2 tv N C N O p C u p O O = N N O O O Q-0 N O i N O N O C a i E O C C m C = E O O N 7 u N Q p p w •i C p i O- C +� 0 N > C C +' t�J N "p •p t+'J C !6 2 V O C .2 V p C C N , O p C t C co to v O O v 4J > C .N y O v d L W Q IZ m W N O O +T' d p W O t r ro Q Q Q Q U u N tN 0 > N u co Q +� N O +� > N i ma L N 0 to +� 0 0 e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ] Gd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO �vsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLi3euv \ o m � u _ _ 7\/mEc 3s t E E 3 u 5 f / m $ 52=/0 2 =��o t / � 2 0 E m 2 e v = 2 ®t a > W= 2 w c o 0 \)\t t k > > ( k \ k / / / / ƒ2$/5®\ = u m = 3 t E $ 2 / / /\ /0-0 _._._ __ g lCL � a p -0 = m m ±•\/=2§/ %a�7�32 -0 Ln \ R > \ \ ) ( % �@. e0-">\ t&�m3(a / m f f > u _ E e u £ t _ En2g = e em®gg=2 2/\§3�\ %(.0 \ o c g » e = E E / E / 1 ) /� ¥ / = 3 e e W u / \ 2 _= t c u w o » E 7 3 3 $ 3E23\\% LLuw # C- U ru D kA D cl:� L7d ,q � � � Q C0 V con Q. Q W Q W 0 N ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv @ a T J V j � Cf) m d m z r N Y ZO ? N @ C Y z @ J m `m •uni @ --@a s N m E o Z ami J 3 0 m _L O o N �_ T 'N o d m L N Y 'T' N y ® J W = d W _ z U x W cn U` d m (n U O_ U ©'~ Y 0 - y y y a• O iJ10 Alemeuma� ad�9c J e � .Ilop K ".Al m a a � E N N � g O y I N A_j J7`y lO I': g —q,eg ueg o rr yb, _ m V O 0Y.�0 > 2i weg /yuno0� - _ i'n � Ea9Ye OW Y m 3 pba a © Treviso BaY BLVp m A `o _ , ?E,d 2 LL � N Yl K i�j N � o a m o Z A,3 7 s6uiN � O N OA18 PoomoHel - = C d-a0. w 3 C o U 1_1 O a Q O - N e L o b o y a aio E � $ N i > c6 E cL L O N O O N co rn O- 7 C co N EO O C. O -"'0'2 a--. L N D 0- a+ � -0 R w Q O L O N +N-+ L 4! y � W> -0 (a }' C E O_ Q� 0= L O v 6 E U u° c u O u O O � r .N +' S6 CC,, v OO.G :5 N ° Cl 6 +' .0 48 o v +N o > o O --o i 0J Q 6 o c c cn p1 Z 6 >o W o R y 0 u-0 c-o u �' Q f�0 C L E m O� > O qA W Z .2+ . V) ° 6 N c6 .E -0 Q- c +J io 4� >, C) b0.0 N i �O � � v -6 N aA E N O taA > O n O +� Y 'O O N L O N 0> N C m N O N 4 i t/1 O to 6 v> (Va z 6 .+E L ++ ++ 7 oO !6 -6 N � i V) C ca E v 'C pOp N 6 -6 Ou N C E o o v .6 O O v p Ln ° c ° c ° E 0 0 6 E o ° y V)Ln E 0 a u ca O s > a o .�>- 7 L G! 0 bA O . co N +� y t +� V)O 6 v 6;+6—+ i m 6 O O V)� n E v v E +' O to 6 ++ -a u — E to .Ln N v U to N O N u 1 = N E O >, = N Q 0 0 6 O- v +.+ .— X N *' O +� O E v> o 020� > o v v N � p � �_ � 'p � N � O O - ty V) Q- O -6 +' L ° fd ,� E V i v L O c CL t v L coa > v v v •— E c ~ n 0-6v E E �E o v� a �.�EE_ �oQ>> o o ° v +' a, °' ° c E �-6o 0)t n u an — O o in 0-v c i N N -6E O n con u v) E S ew In ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv i O -0C Ln co `0 ri � O o- "cam Ot c U N U C: C N O N 0%40� U G Z 0 con Q Q W Y W O N 0 0 kA 0 C) -r C W fJ7 � CK db 0 z S�9 U- un CD LL ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsuej.L :}uawyoeuv i-•� � L L v0} uo�E 000 W+� " E c a0, �-0L�E 0_ vt > O aE'��a, 0�t Ev c E `6 > L N O T in � — M Gl v 2 O '6 C: -0 a-•/ b+ •� c O +wj um U L L i L N m E d u 0 0 c w l7 Z E 'O m "O • O N 16 O +' O C i+ E + C) D N 1= L = Ln 'N N L ° E is E Z T c c p OCL ai eo E E 0 0 . O > N 'w V+ N a,0 in a 0 N N +J N o •O u E -a = +� 0, ¢ wqo Q 2 E E p o W m co ,- 1- O o- Ou ' = o is— E Q A C > v H m:5 E w a E '� *' ? 0 L >O �p M W c 0 O_ W ai o L 0 o cms ,v c-o ° 0' m 0 0 m-0 0 w w c n n Q o m 4J 76 0 U cG O O `U ® T R T T [U�Yj T T T T T T T I0 oa }� �p fO I OATH PO° "I J E T sEb w N O T O N c6 N 0 N c +� L O c E }' u to N -0 E !6 bA v N yf6N i E 6 0 U O E bA O v +L fo N 0� 'v1 \ .0 Ln > N E Q f6 Q NLn O to �+ O Q N !6 E v Ln c E cv � u +, N 'E t u N c° E>� v aa) ;a v + u E c 00 '� +� `L° > ca io .N +_. 0 c x +� v 0) L +o n u Cl L O v E v; s o °1 f 6 E c co r 'N L �--� Q N N N L -O N fO aV-+ t c U N 0 N N N c L -O j Q a-•� f6 N u v +� a0 c '�0 un 41 O co Q' E O 0 N Z E 0 m N C +� ,N v ac, N v E v U T, o a E °' v N Q a, 0 v m 0 0 o E a ,, 0 c v o 0 v v� E� w�� L y a E w� 0 0� c U c U g '� v -0 a c 0 `° a, E `° o o� a= o v N `6 a r o w 0 ao u +, 0-0 _ o v .f6 o f a>', o a0, v E '> 3 y o N v .c_° fl c ao c o L U c 0 o o CL cNo C n n 0- v C u N N t t '� a, C O " CL O N u) vi ut v Q A c w E c n .� p O t -0 C>, c c L 0 i p m -0-0 v) v) !6 O Q O E v a O M R� N c N O Q N a, N +� O O O N l6 U R N L (�6 E N +�-+ 7 0 c6 Q !6 Ln 0 O E N N v) 0_0 O N aJ _0 V N �O c V C. U m� + + M O O IL d Y V a ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo d O ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv N ) m o z N N O E N u W N 0-0 O v +O L a� p +, > O Z5 •- o c v v W-2 O -0 o-0 �m ca Qm+J v °' i c u c p N +� N N 6 -d N ca u i u a N O i N p ra U1 s N ei u O o 0 E mO O -p N a o 0--0-0 > L U Q- v O s" R m m N a+0 W E E w o c co o v> v L m o= >,g Q Qa :L u V p� z E •C� O V>V U O C cnO N N N a� v L O a L N O N 4! N p_ C c0 a" f6 .0 +� N ULn (a .� C _0U L O > c Q v 41 U C to p_ .- O c L .N N U N �O N N 7 cv � -O •� E N O N U O 0 U N OL N v O O C O Q 3 o Z Ocu ° v Q o l2 �_ a� � •f6 a c N (6 u O O Q! +O c N Qz N .X +; c M° o o E E o 3 +- L U •� E O -O U N Ou c Ln E a>, v a -0 v an y J N W .- 3 E ru O U L O J El._ _0 cu c '+, ) ter• J + Cro L U Q ~ w c v E N e Q O +� > .. (3) L � O .._ O :l it •< i I .17 l N � N c p +� E ti) .c '00 U E O N N L E U r—I O fa Q (6 f Nc v V s u O Q co N V) N Q O00 W p +' v O O L N ,u L - m N +� Q) E U �O N O -0bA N O tv > c .N +•/ i V N > lL6 N E M � Q OL � N" 7 p Q f6 Q w a)N G/ V L cz N CA V N 41 n _ L Ow v "0 LD ;a E Q ca +., .0c v L a o y L a v N R �O _0+� c +n u Ln p -0-0 O O c *' O L> cp O 0 m O O O ++ a) O a)O N Q 'i Q� -O N V � L L N w Q N e6 -0 O V O Y O t v 4J Q +' 6 L (6 Q UD N p V � +' 'N C C'c v o v O 2� T 'r a rO+ N O O N M Q 41 > u V N O �O �p O + -a°1 o u aci too �-0 v a b.0 v N > O O + N c v o ao O O C to + N O O N +'L O c o c1.7 v a� . O z7� E E -0 v 0 0 d d Y a ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv L a) N L V, a) i �o N fd } C C V, O O cv L 0 N `ti v O C V> p f6 •N ?> a-+ � N cz Q 'O O i O C 0 mp O } •� N _ U) L 'p bA N aJ v Co -0 a) Q O 7 E N U a, t c 'p >,•X .. 0 bA '} aJ� E � 0 O 0"N O� N o -O � U +�-� N Q a) •:: m N (a C -0 a) Q Q , Ln - N p E E bz v i -p c ra C co v v a) 6-o E N '� c >+�•c o o Two o +' N O c` o ra w v u co cp u c c . bA 7. C t -p N O •v I +J +' co � U Q O v p v c s >, �s Op btpA E L u -O mO uC i A N N E QC 6 _bb RN Q -0 -W C a) )O p U v E a) E y Z/� O ap Oc O nvy C O"O E N E 0 N V O iv'O O- p C. vi E O T •7Cy1 ,Z V) o � EE E 0 E o uNa) O O C O D N E 7 N Z O N p O i E 'R °�' ac, V) a) v 0 � O +. +� U a) -p r C C L W N M o co > O �, E U � N> N C. ai o > E — +� } v c N L O_ d 3 O Ou O •U O > a) rl E N �t by E ,F N L .� m a) t� •N O E a) N mo T N a) 7 E O— N bz — O -O i In m C w D .0 u f6 s 0 0 E u N > N-0 Q C. E Y c u p O '6 aJ a) a) `a C c 0 co c aD +_� v= 3 ++ E � a) by -• O � c Q O c6 O V 5,70 E L .1 t c ,� -O a N cz m .� C y�,I u o Q a, w a. " c a) O .� Q" N p_ Q V 0) a) !6 C O *' u t > (d ,� 'O co O a) ,� ?� v c6 = Va)j N N y E N +J !6 a) Y v1 E -p O i bA u W L N a O +� an C E E E m > ai O a) ,� v Y T c Lo E ap a) N vi v- Q Q o a, o o E a+ C. C -a O- U o Q •u = v 0 a0 'aj v c p E t E T y� .� C) N -0 Q N Q N i a) C �a Q o E v +J c- o aoi C u 0 m a) O m m u n C -a ca a, -0 ,,, C m N C O O O r6 O O ,O m a) - Q O CL C X t4 *' bu0 > E c N m a N a -a) M C) a) 0 .c M N � N N � �+ O N O c6 s N 0-0 V)i O `, � f6 t ' �' O C. a) >, +� E a) O u E a 6'X N a) 1p to O W O E Co m N> a) u O by u IA O � -O 't 0 -Q aL--+ � •i N> U N V> N bb4 '0 c "� co to 0- O y O O N to by 4) Z bp Gl L N p N v O - Eo o .— E voi N N W- O U ro O mcwE 'O R O O "O N ,C O L v O N 0 m L C ea 0- •— E a) m o Q c`a as +'' a) O p ° +� (a bA CZ o o o v� co v 2 .. s .E O co N co z- u LO 0 0 d m Y V a Ise] �v S n 0C6000OCZOZ d:V9 99Z CZ-6-9 ]Q d mm d woo Vd W 9 AeIJGAO vvsn-ieu!wsuej-L:iu9wLioeuv tj� / 0 o c / 6 @ b _ r- e @ 2 ro E c � • � � � k ® � ,\ 5 2 �a @ � '§ CL u E IAF Z _O � � � Q Q LLJ tbe � } LLJ � O N irro 0) GJ . § t u ra m aj � /ƒ m= o g - s E rMLq �- 2 (V 2 w o o x m wi mo tw'a @ c IF 2 0 a \ a e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLi3euv / \ \o // n > \ / \ 7 ._ \/ƒ\ ®//�/\\ � a ± / .� % \ 0 \ EC, ® \ \ 0 U C, !E# ° \ \ k E ) \ 0 k \ $ E # 2 $ ± 2 ± _ { o\§ 0//\ u 2 n _ e g m m \ \ 0 z/\ a�\m /e2•I = o / S s ± $ § 3 3 0 G E 0 0 Ln E / o\\ o E\ 2 E/ 0 0 5 /oE%±3 // } \ 2 / cz G, / n u m CL z e— 2± 2 8± _ M o-0 f t m @ e z e •- _ » 7 2.S a w �/° k 3 E 'mge-ac \C�f\{S¥\2o }%{}( E a 2 c G 2 0 0 _ ® u 26/;/ \»0$2/3/ 3) o e 2: ± \ _ % / 7 _ C) 0- - _.o u 0 M\2: k\��\�/ / w0w ��k\//\\ _ � e o = o a \°2#k 2\/E/\/§ \ E / m / $ E %220-={#± 3 2°* o—=e ± u )._ = 2 g = 3 @ / / u / / e / \ c %et E ta : uf uLn ƒ �\\ Ul0) »/im 7ƒ3\ 0 0 a \ a ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO AelaaAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv cn +; C ? L C bo �Ln a) CL� c _0O X Q- '7n m C -p ,.� L a) L O -O a) O `~ •L ;,� O — L i•- .Q ate+ Q v"-DE0M�EcLuov +�0Eo > 7 C cO L 0 0 Mc 0 0 m O a1 1.6 O G 9 U 4— C do U H 2-o aJ H O •i O � O O O L C O �- — x Q- 'vj lD e C -� O aj E L O � p a) L p M a)O i 0 to C w • i+ O �- L U •6 _ �+ O l� L L io Q c U m • N aCCJ �O QCCJ 0- _ u Q 4. O C N h0 O i : m ;� G L M C N N aJ �" H OL O U v a) c ra E. v O c O vQ O n3 O i L E vy -0 c6 7 E i U .(6 d G U bA U H aJ O Q-0 N C ° v to Q 0 U E U a) a1 M a) CD-_ + • • • EC O -0 > aco O O v .v a a) E =o c O f6 E c OoU�X O O > a) Z W fd a) c v ° �' a) a) c •� f0 O �' C C v N n u +J u >,`� `~ o M C L Q Q N O +� `a Q- o 4 J a>i v Q O O a O Nc a CE n c Ev a) Ltan >N Q u . � W N(ZEN = LL of c M 6° a N t v `a E.� c N 0-E N> m 0 -O E a) 6 E In L E � E o E O O °:5 C) u +O� E C > O 0 U iJ E u f0 a1 L 0_ a) N O c V C) a••' i Q N p ti ¢ O? v E a-% L .- > E O v t6 - Ou -0 bC0 0Ln 2� v bCA 0 O to p N O .' E v OtZ a) -p in L+°�) -aE a)C U O l6p C O U O No O ,•L E COO N p E OC > M u a O p > O O C p _ a) -C"- CU Cc6 )E U�cCV�O6!I 0- E O Ro Qc o >o° EW W Ln E � Qa) 0- In NC c O� O N_ -O M c ° p`% >` O > V1 au a a a a)N ,T)1A c O 5 O O0 a) �yGZQZQJ�� > '•}NaaOLo>-) E CC v O a CDNC N ac � W _t�A*°NVOc' Ln Z3 O ° a1 p >, Ea aooL 0) ° c E C C c�-c L O O a) O O N C •°`v OL0) V V X O e tv!L6 E o O te v+vOLo7�) bA a Ul) +> o v O a, o 0 Lf)0O CbLcCNaCcaoo a) a) a) p¢ ° E _2 O °(A° �,.�Lo—n N m¢ c a E u O E E a ¢ E 0) a) Oc 0 R'.+7Ua_��) °C bD oD u aco Ln a) :EM E u 0 0 0 • ¢ o c- O n ¢u cC) w u ci 00 0 0 d m Y V ca a ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO Lvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv LL a o 0 0 0 0 0 0' a N U-) (N CO LN M I G a O N O C N O o ,C3 v 0- o a ca a v a v a (1) N r3. v o � v ¢°, L^ O In N ��N v a 'o bD cLa 6 J bD cLa J bD J a a C 6 0 Q'L O O 0� O O 0� O p 0� a C v o U -6 fca n 4 4� — a) Qj v a� a cco a ca v Q u v 7Ei C v °%- s Ln N Z U +J4- aJ c � ON N u a O E v E a Q v v E c '^ Ln cn ca :G O 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 O r o O N 4 NMM NM�t -4 Cl ay.. N V)M N i p i v O a 0 In u "0� N v 4- v O ¢�, V)o v s v v Y N t +� N a i i bA co 6 bA Co 6 bA co O O +- 0 a) 0 0 �� 0 3 L 0 v E O 0� 0� 0� a E $ a u`, cL o cx a a a v m -0 � 3 v O °Q' o o r L O � z o _� a Y v L v °p s rn � L U H O i O u V)IVy CL s Q z V o (> v O + i `ti c t a) v v -r3 v 3 Cm Qj a In 2 z oG � Z)= I� O � O v O r L N L O +� -a c ti 0 O 0 O E E C c 0 _0 O C �O O a) p C 0 O U N O O is +� N Ln Q O C N p C ti U aJ p O v 6 O cv L L O V) O O v� v o O E O a) N L O — n +J r0 a1 C4 N +J V M In +J V) .L C O L 7' to a) O v .. L V1 -6 t O C N C co N O N +J 6 O~ 6 O 0 �+ aJ -w a) ro O cz .X E N p O ra -O N 0 L O C N v O 0 0 i£ ca p— /� N aJ ° .0 N aJ Q N N u c0.� N L iv v: can .L O_-0 �' V C E VI 0- +6 E L v O N tv p_ C p E °J v G� O v _0 E v C u O_ T O v m E p v C m ca U�— E > �n V O '� v LU N bA N E v Q 6 L O N p C +J U O ap '� as+ 0 O m Q N C U t L L% > C -6 -0 O E O in t > ro C +-+ -6 O C '+� N Q O a) M O E U 0 .6 +' '' O M U o W E Z V O 4- a) N a) — V O -0 L O +� L O T v L rI O t m = N > N m W V L L O C a) 0 0 0 ;C 6 L p +6 o C C a L �, a, E E a, -a +� 'X w o v 0 V o c c c a� o- E° u aCi E °; �' a °° -0 E- 3 0 o a1 vim, N 7 7 r a) >, c0 -6 N O_ L a) v +� bA v 0 w E In 3 0 C v W iv �; O O E c — —` in ca n v ao c i i v V) E v� E ,n ° E E o a v c v E C o o 3 o o ar H U O C } ro co C o v C a) o +, a o a) , a) +� a, R p X S u Ou 6 O �_ co U a° E °' C a, aA v N tL0 co t C `� N C 0 O o_ O f6ul) X `6 C �' O a0 L E E~ ^ n C o u-0 n ao > E E E v O O N p' o !a C L Q O 0 X ra x c0 X +_' O t f 6 U C O °' 6 O N N . N E E C O U Q m ca C 7 O +J E O LO > Q� +� T O c2 N C C, E ar N ra v) a) -6 a) v 0 0 L u -6 0 a! U an N O E cxa N O Q w -6 E .— a! U v C a _6 C `n0 'yL bA a w a) .— Q C C v C C p 3 t v 3 E-0 O a, L + C M H v. • • c6 6. m U H a) L • • +L H to n rn 0 0 d d Y v cC a � � � W C-2 Z O � L.0 � � � Z Q � O ll� e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLi3euv � 0 z � � C040 LLJ a � z � 44* � � o G =®EE® ± e a) m \ a •E sumo=u� o = _ _ » t o 3� @ _ (z G !E u 4� } 2 E (5 ® oƒ e f a§ 0 f { \ � / \ \ ${/SS/ƒ7 Cn ///-0u3: o � ° b.0 0 '/ z a= E k/ 2 =3 wM u we ® n'3=ems \ E = F- \ E 77z�3§3f/ \/rE\@\ � /22/"rou G \ / \ u § ® '4 / @ % / ®$ f & _ - m m Q) G \ ° ®° a e / § e � ®11 � u $.§ E 0 U U± /2y\/P\/(/2 .s��®=-9? C, 3//\$/2S= .2 0 - . f ®° / / W § \ # f / 2 2 / ƒ > g _ W _ & m E o = E_ •E e® S &% a §�§//k�/(\// a 2± e os m®> o 7< a\% e 2 ±3/\32/±\ \ 3 / M % ° ¥ ° e 222222�/®=�® \\\\/3/ / (A 9 ® ° 5 d u e a- z% n g </ E£ f e a a 5 a m 1 O_ Cr W Z L7 W Z C/! C H c� co co W p LLJ Cn Q J LLJ O o CM 1 cN W a N LU z W O J LU LU W in 0 0 0 C v'c N N O O Q E LJ O O ti v Q } _0 W N N 0 Q Q } E C C LPL N L N 41 N of j V Q E O W E X X V O O 3 a a c = Iz u S.S ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv C/) H x C9 cm x x Z 0 rn W 0 0 Z Q W C/3 G Z Q J H a W v 0 W Z J r 3 v v v a v a 1 4- U U O C� u, a v 0 bD ° o OU a, y 0 ° � cl-0 a CU 4— a, o fl_ u o co O m v EO Ou u cub l6 0O vt E QN vYi OL ti +.+ -0 a1 i .� cNat'`—p' v O v N N co to b�0 an E ca E O n �L p s a� v' c v N.X c n a o v v V) v o +� O i>, p ++ v N N ,vi x p N Q> ca N+ a1 V ca +L-+ V 7 Ln N o Y =d, N V Ev 000� v O W Jo a •Loii n- ° -cc E0- u x i o on c E M )v mV — Ln + in 6 Q co vi O ru O O O ca > p vi v d N> O L -O ra O L i (13 aJ T' O N '+-+ Q L� c ca p n c +coJ O sN ca}ca aA cnOO O c aVO O E -0 � ZONo ~a� o m m O a) v o� c aA c n co v�i Ou N n c�a ca ON O c? u m c + o p w E c vca V Nc° o a ) a ap va v°v a, _ E p Z3 -0 F, -° N O C p p ca Y n p p O , u C n a) w N aO i O ii ° E F Co ca L y '.1 +, a! ca c 0 N Q p +� X C aJ v> + ca c �ai Oo Eo> oo v a) s v E _0 c a� ca E c> v- ca a, p o m> o o a m N aui �o Q Q > E v a n E v +� c > vp V °O Otn tn Z w 76 co vE Q a� Qu a u r ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv O W W 0 Coll z O c.12 z O a 0 O 0 J_ m O W 2 H O +� tli awn e.o n-6 O tLo N N ti O ,�-, ,�-, O -a U O N L C c +, — � L O N O tot N O a� `� 0- aoa�'i N N i N O E00O L =5 N to +, U O N � L (o L ti v O t6 u'i,N,-° bA E a c Ul v a o N a o U v L v ° E��U �.N °N' 6 LZ C) a ca v �o:3C) N Q o 0) 3 Q o v n E to -o 5 t° z o -a L f p L t O o 'Q O M O �O bA ra Q ,., u ra O Q L +D N Q% Q N O +0-' — L o C +, ao o 'N +, N tLo w N N j L N--0 +, ° N 75 H o to ,, .- of O 2-0 °u M CD d d Y V a � � � W C-2 Z O C-2 w C003 � � Z Q � O ld� e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:ju9wLpejjv w �A AF6 4 ir wk7� �le C.2 0 � � � � LLJ �:e ocz z CA) LLJ � � � � � CA) � ±/ �r 7 Cc, a) e o = & u o Of u \ \ \ / / / ( > = n # * ¥•- < ¥ e 55�E/®a=t o LE \ / \ / o o / = n ®± a= m g g � o V 2 m _ \ CL A. / \ E f / \:2 \ \ n o o 4 2 z f @ a§ 7 2\ u% cm Q} 7$ J 2 0- 0 0 # E z> 0 0 2\ k = $ E = 2 \ 2 \ a \ / (t R o=» t o u= Lazo®®M0C�= J y±2 y°&± /== / 5 / »-z" 0 COOD o act LLJ m V Z C-D O C-3 o LLJ Z LLJ LLI O � M CL 2 2 § \ * 7C. C C � � Z 2 7 � � \ < � LU z $ \ / 0 \ C G\ ®� % % E \ C 2 7 < £ \ \ 3 < < / / ƒ a '/ in \ � o CL E / i E y i / % LO 0 � ` a ' Di cs \ ] u & a a § g a % \ k / \ qj � , § / } § � 7 + \ § \\ \ \ / & \k k\ r e » k\ ;[ /G tt CS § / ; C, ` t >/ /� c u § « \ & c 7 ,t3 §£ �m \ \ ) ( ,\a z \�\ // jet ®t uC3/ §� rl jam xu was \\\ /. QJ E / /\k k\ j� In -rl ai Q\ � B e \ « /7\ °� �2i r «-Z \\kk\w 8 \ § ± £ E 7 e ` -r3 w a ƒQtkae A2�28\ A $) $ a o a'j e®-� / f ? & ,=o rz QJ r3 �uo��A _ ±§2ƒ\t t-C3 § 0iZ3 QjC3 8%(aK$ § E 2 23 § G\22f \ ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv v p L O � O N L (a -p +� L p a, v o > + o°+�' ai rho v .> �_ ai -ICN N C v tio N .O Q M O p N O N v O N O E •� +� L Q O C c/7 fl- ` Q U �- O O N Q V v �' vNi v m Z m� v Q v to �> O OL `t C M N c=7 J _ N d' N -p O L N U v (O N }' 7 4! 41 cl to 4J -(a N •i w 52 L GSA Q_ UI = C �O +� (6 v ca « C N +�' L m O L N +� ai ,N _ .� U 7 ta0 U L% NN QN 0 0 E p O Z cn CQ O N N > E O v J o v bA L N 0 Z u d p V v N p+ L W o a� a� 0 °' N L `� N v� Q bA t6 •O' c '.1 u o C T i U 1 N v Cm to bA •— c Z u U iJ Q v VS WQ C C bA -6 J O p co t N N O N O p' L + 0 0 '6 Q s > (L6 p v (o Q 4J O = C v z N +N-+ bA *' C L1 C Q co N � C G to co N i O y L .X OA C Q N N p 1 N O �"O O O O L tlA Q N pppl LL V v a-- O N CD tv N d -d 2 (n u +-+ J a .— = a Q L (n O v 0 Z Q� G Z c; • • 0 • 0 0 0 • • • • � � � W C-2 Z O � L.0 � � � Z Q � � e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLi3euv � E2 � 0 � � 0 a � 0 0 m LLJ 0 u 7 (1) 9°�e/$ >-0,(V0 C� /%�/Q\2\� L,) G5M2\/ .d\/�3m\/\V) %germs\=/�.g %CN —00 20/% 0W UCL 3M-\E g=e=22G\g@ o� E 3 $ / & # 5 a)-6 LL a) o— eeM� n _ asc777/y�3 \S ®/ e\ a ®e o m £.-.d = _ }/\//��7k -0 era=nm •- o .- e o % / -L) V) 2 \ ± ±y66�t�� _&o££=�®#�# e/»b°= \//C)-g222\0 e 0 m u-0 —0 u � � � W C-2 Z O � L.0 C003 � � Z Q � ll� e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLi3euv w � � z LLJ C-3 LLJ z � 0 I-- z 0 z � z � � LLJ _ 0 a \ a Z W ' w LUJ O_ W z L% W Z � O O W p C/D J m Z W Q � J Lu O o M m 1 1 cn w a w z w a O J LU w 0 0 o NV) O O T r- r- o 0 ti ti aLn EN LU O Cl r-I v a Q L v _0 a v V) Q Q LL v V) N o E E O w E U O O a a ,r3 = i= a a v a 4° o v a � v a- � v v a v v t Q v o 3 � � a• o `^ Qj o v Ln C3 a v _a o c a a c a, v Qj v a v u c o o � 0 °c a. c Ln Qjo 0 m m v - a _ a a � °io a o 00 a � o r, a v O o � t Q +. v 0 0 a G 'y N � a c "r3 a � 0 3 a O Qj G v v � a a E v ka U o � � � � C-2 Z O C-2 LLJ C003 � � Z Q � O ld� e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLi3euv cm k � � -i k k � � / ( / �/ 2 E # \ \ § \ g $ a) o / \ G u o n 2 ) { § / \ / \ 2 } \ f / E \ $ u @ ° Q �� $ ° u 3 3u =# o ƒ= a - / bD 333 �% m §e= =u.s »E_ § / \ 3 % 5 \ / b \ 0 2 / e2 /° j c / 0 3 3 2 / / S 0 wwC0 ® \ $ [® t ( 2° m 7 z / a o/ 2 u=§ 7 9 n \_ >•- 2 e m m =a 2�� EE��ux3 —g #± 2\\% f y t V.2V) 3\ w o E 'x §/ Lu u= 2 w 3 n w ¢ m.§ om E z 2 r$ Z;'$\ u /\\\ k - ° / \ / \ S§ate ' 0 ca_ 7 2 u / / / \ u &E2m=®3 ru = S'@ & ®° > ¥ ca � k E 0 � \ \a770�/® 2 = ° e.m 2 % _ / $ / y g.\ o S2 E /uR/§ ® 3 0 @.L m y \ o79E/32a 2 ru _ �y73 o o f/ 7# O\> 2 bD f§{/ƒ\ , \ \ 0 \ \ LU ± = / (a2 2 o#±# 2 E u/ ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv U- an-! v C C):2 0 m N v u C O t t CO 0 0 N� U� > C+�-3"oar LLI 00 v LU t ++ +-' cv U o 0 N v C M •i N N Ln 'a b.A.- v O t6 c O n Q CO u uI W m 6LZ o-a u \vOi C2 �u 0 >L�O C� = Oo p a0 > 3 a+, �v flo�— v o �.�. m-0 u �z 0-0 �t� v._v "v H _ C O- o o G "O n u y •N O R J r6 O 0 .- V)i N O C O to JpC bA 0 M N' n N in LU J i m N-a : L N -O �' Q N= -0 ,Vn W-0 y N 7 �=� C LE C O S o No ci O H O m +�.-of O2-0 u N O d d Y V a ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo d O AelaaAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv O C M i ° 0 a) Q > C} a) N N CO N C C DNA i OU O C O L1 ' N -0 O a"� a) C l6 N v co 2 n j +T, 0 O Q C O .� n V)i -0 (j O ra 0 �6 O O X O M O 00 N *' V v in 0 Ln O c m° -O > u n3 c6 N v j 0 .x S a) E O N a1 ro v v E� v U n o cn o v n o N n v_ o t p v +t p a) N nz ca a) a) +� bA , , 0 C U a) N C �-�° E 0 0 -' C C C �_ co ca bA a) C c6 M C a) p N r ° N ro a) a) v C V a) R E a) ON c U (d •N d O+ a i a) L `° ° a) aEi M y -0 -p 00 N N .� N ca v N v 0 Ln 0 U "..E c i ` a) v -0 •E C � +- O -0 N an p o u> O n U O �o a, �_ U �, `° c v ? O w g) n a, a, x O :5 bA o L +-+ 'o E J 6 v> +� i a) a O° •� i O_ C c6 N p E v O 0 v N N bA v +, N '� n3 c v +� + - 0 n ° a) + N+ O O O E E C C x + O +� +' O .- — C O 0 O co N L is O C V) m 3 _O E Q o ca '� � C C u co V W a.o ° w E '� 0 •� +-, v -d 'O +� .to `> O O O a) 6 cn Q '0 +-� v~ n O .0 v= W O U U H v v Q v N Q v �' N C C O S C 0 ' N O W -O cN C vpi E E 0 a O a�i j U v -O .� v v u +�-. M C 2 0 0= + a) O C w 0 0 +, 0 bA a) u rp a) 0 a) V bA i y bA a) � O v C ca 0 co C H 0 0 V -LA a1 L! 0 U _ _ o J M 0 a) L D- +•' aI bA O U> x_ bA i C E '� O N a) O E O '� '0 N E bA C N J L p N C co a) i p C C T ,� 0 '� i 0 i i t o m ca v L 0 0 N O +-+ Q U ca + .- 0- O W -0-0O W a a) N bA co H+ U co C .- 0 N 0 U v a) `� to +, Ou Q d u to p +.+ R "6 Q +.+ C O -O N uu 0 -0 ° n a) ° N V) O co N C +a' ti c v +� tao C a ao + +� a) Q ca '+ C U -0 -0 c° ~ W v E u E .S v v f6 C C o u u N a, ' $ n ac6, E o to E 'o aui o E .� o c° N .E E a v bm c N o o O� �' o L o a' o Q -0 Vj Q i O O C +� T C -p 'O bA l6 Q a) a) U Co u ca a) U C `} ° "0 rz C C V) v } N v _n O aa) — bA'7n U N u E v a) n °' ca >+ a) ca V O W fl- a) a) V t �6 U > C a) a) L a) CD M cd N N O cn fl_ "O cn ,, N *' E L N v0i -0 N V ca •� '0 C O M N 2 C° CZ 0 O o ov J o C)- co>° oa�> co o_ v Q v a +_ v an w N -a N Ln a' bA •E a, '`-' a ? W a) v f6 ca oFli a) ' u'` v n _n c E a) o o �° n C S E V) O ao —_ a) co > C v C v W C +J U v .bA C>+ O} v c — Q a) a) a) a C ca a' a) Z a) o "o a) Q L W C (n C E - U bA a) -O W i •i C i C N n E o bA m O v Z Z C E X� 0 +J = a) C° au) ° •0 v a bA T 7 >' C U C i `` M 0 'O +' C i C c6 a1 41 0 V C V bA -0 .+' L �O 0" -0 0 0 p> -0 O n T N v C 0 L to u N •� E +�-+ E +� 'O a) M v 0 0 L "� C L c0 a) +Jcz _ �.' CV o f +' C i cd i N 0 v C n N -0 p V Q 0 p o cLa O O N W .-: -0 C +J 0 0 N N -0 i o E O p u C O bp '+� E +, a) a) Q m .D 0 CO i— c6 v c6 n3 O 0 n a) C O +� O U O Q E 0p N C nz E C +' t u E C N n3 U M O V 0>-0s + V)i nz v Q C v C O C cz> -0 u vi t C v— C N E +� C E co '_ E } E C o Q a) c° a) a) co .� ¢ ;° v i o v v +� - co .� v a, o v o a) � v N O C o C 2 n T 0 n U U a) L _ U cd a) E o C O +J .cn t0 W a, E>? 0 'n ,0 C O C S O 0 O° 0 +0.� 2 t c0 0- 0 C - +� ro E Q Q n Z W bA , C Z O U+ i to > Z m U U � +� N V F + O -000 av •C viN C/� C " ° a.., E N _ Q) C i m Q N 'Ote°O N a) C v j n Op� O f O_O 0 0C Ua� M O C -0 - 0 0 p p O n O nz Z "O .L N C v N 0 N O N M p} o U 0 U ca Q m co L a) V > N J a) can c6 cn i .0 i1 a) Q NO }' _T U T C N N �O n a) W i Q M C N 0 xLLI_ C O O U C p i i C w N( C E .� 0 E V a) O C O O C C C "0 C d 0 6 RS N`> N O u V U c0 �° > J° p a t v ao ° 0-C cn o v v C/� v bn E oC E 2 . a) a) coo Q • ,� co nz — S M j aL-+ •C +J uj a) a 0 t L E N X N= O +J o -0 ul .0 O O '- Q 0 0 N '0 Q C bz -° b0.0 c0 O C O +' Q -O p a0-' = N 'O N W OC aa)) v n c - _ '`-) ccz �� bOp c vEi C ca E Q Q E E u 2 ru N u L1 a) v ° y E `�r-q o E W u o 0 v w a) O C/a � E a>i w -a p 2 0 3 c n o v �o _0 o ° o cn -0 y N u C� - -a ca o z z— U cn �° " a) t S o? 0 C co z o a) c N E ca W nz n 0 o 15 z .-' = a) ° a) -� C v' U m co C°� v> o� In o� c° � E y ° o cn a - .- u a, 0 E o u a) O a r .-, a) +� C tea, .E N a) U v N -° C 7 _o �� o W a) a°Ji E o a) a) O •C ? X -0 E LZ cn .0 ~ u° c O ? ru c O O H E v O w cn C N v N W C 0 +' co N t N O +� x +-+ bA p p 0 Z +� >, v x cm CQ v v W w o a o .i ou i) Q a �) v E v bn o-j� E a) n 6.L� N i +.� a1 A = z CJ C t > 7 ° O- C +V-+ a) •� 'i C Q > L76 +' C a) N M cCo 'u u `° C v a¢ V) o� (z u-0 v .E w V) °� n � t7 a>i o° t N N O d d Y V a ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv p a O _ C o O Z) N Loti •L N O O •� Q m OI ate••+ C C ate+ v o .fl .X v v ou Cn• 0 aO-� a) -0-0 v a) —n� c a) > c 6 V O a X +� c0 `� C u -p L N N Q v C -0bA C � + m�, cu E T - aJ i E U f6 N Nco i y v N v C E � � U a�i a`ni O_ a O a) L -p T ca -O -O cz >,t6 t0 o O_ N > +' !n -a M C i 0 v .� .� O U O -p V � O -0 O N Ln — � C f6 O C •N J OL - � Co C a-•� N !6 O_ L O N 'C o O -p 7 +� Q (a N -0 +- -a a) C f6 -O = cp N a)C -O a) N •EL U -O •> L L a) U a� N c aj Q a N CL E L L U X .0 i a) O C O Y fa •� N -O _� co co aJ C a) >+ wu to ca U CL Q-0 EO Q N x � N O 'O 0 N Q N N O O N N N H C L E O Li L L U H N E E O_ u C T U C • C LO c0 u T �+ tL6 O O j '6 Q p +-bA as-� p • co M aJ c0 fO v a) E� O_ O +J > 4) N m 'p 'O u L u ,C •� O +J a) O v N N v C U C L co ao a1 o Q O a) E � U ca E ca + > O O 'O Q v fl 0 Ou ca ra N NO 00 p N c tv N OLO .fl i V N t6 u +, Q +L O v O N ++ O v v O L a� E u C L LS b�0 b�0 O m - v N c 0 p a) O-0 aL L O c C "— N _ l.) C _ -p (d UA _ f6 U +J L O O N y v 0 O Q v N N C 0 X +� Q au U N N to N a) R a) -O X u 0 u N v O C N 1 L O bA O -p +-C•+ `� N C dj C N +� u a) aN� c6 bA CL R cu is v u Q Cl V C O E c a) ,a_ L a) a) a c N C L S bA O O m i a- +' _ a) V O C = N L a) O— M -O _Q a) (6 p- p- ''-' i i 'a E N a) ca Q -O a1 N N ca bA T C C O O_ O ao C a� N �_ v U Q aJ W p +s EL -E +� E � =p C E O- UA O E X C C N N -O Q o U a OM 0 a) N O .p � a u v 0 O. L +Q N O v .N Z a) -O � C O- U +L•+ u~ - Q E .E' E co o ff �'? E n -6 E O y u i N N Z�5 o T c6 O C C t IV N O O O !E C f6 O T C aO N t C7 ca O O C U O M -O u a) +' T C "O N E Q-0 N C c-a C N `1 a) '— Ln -0 C v N U m -p+c'maoaCamL -Oc Qp3-O-o=aOccam NLT a•' ca a) �, •C O_ t O CaA N N 00 N a) u O E M c L 0 a) u o +- o a) o X ,o O N ca ro Q L Q Q V v v _N L v C Q L Q p-R C C E 2> ca co C _O O m 6 Q u 0 E u O O cp co -p C '� ca `0 L a) c ca o u •� ao>•o N v a o _U" U u p C p u L a1 .O o +; CL O Q L E p m i v- C y C N O O a) -p ca L E C n u +, C v� a) u C C U C T V a, — O a) aO m 0 a, U E°cz E E N N E c u w i5 bA c i CL O +' w v C U j, C v v t= O ?+ a) CO > L O CL O Q) O v i N T Q iJ v 'O O C ap -O L p aL, N N 7 +./ C u C •— 4J Q (p U N a) c a) c ca co N .0 •� > U) O v T E 6 O -p O >, co c p c O L M a) u c6 fd m i (O bA L E N '0 U C a) C u N i 'E +O•+ 1 o E co C +� .� -a + O O C > O L O o E o ic ccc6o .- 3: i ,a TN - >OUC aC C N +EO-� s� CQ U y +W .-0E a� O ri O U - c U N ca p D It a) V C N a- m •v ao 0- x° U.4-• ou N Eo (n v- E c - o s a� N +J N -O C E N L C U -a " C O ca O E a) E o �, bA L C c s O E u N co O ca p > U O O c a) X O X_ C M N v E 0 C :, E C _ O M> a) L �, C o a) E .- a) U L ou U O Q E 6 O o Q V N UO -p ca v o a) 6 N a) c > p L E n v E c`o �' v o O v L L N v v— a) (Z -O N ca " N C X u +' E T u "O L O +' co v a) a� a) N Q� +-+ qA an v L U a) C a) C +� •E -0� �' +' -O +' C f6 N C ,E C a) N L c (6 -O cm N a) aN+ E C -p L u O i m, X N _ Z- aN-+ N 'O X t a�i ai t o an o X� E E n a v y Q +� U aA E Ln E N u. LL v v N o o a E V E E -a -o C u -a -o v) c s U N "O N O C C a) E O L wt C O -p aJ 1 ca *' O O +' E. � O O p 2 U C 0 'o C 6 + a) '� O cu OC Q C?A O O N N o E p a o Ln O Ln oO o Ln OOO O Lna)p c 0) CL N C CL aa)_ E 0O C -0 p t:Lo_ u0 /l Cv O N O N O p O C �"6O O vU '6 "O O C>O 0O � O•LCacCfLd) COO u u M U Ln n Ln >O aC✓ CO a) O th (a � ,+OL UpLO -O-p E -p u a) v o c6 c Oa-p uv -o M c c +uU' aC pLn a) } N c 0 D V O O u) 0 u) 0 cd Uv a - Ln L C Ln NCNE a) v �U-0 a cm o - a 0 a u u 0 LnC E a1 ti 0 N U 0 `� O O R `� Q O O -O L O C .� .O OyC 1 T Ln (6 T C (a T C a) >' Ln a--� cd T C m T C N O L O �..L� c6 v Mp u w o LWi 2i C N ) 7 C O C N a) ' - 7 O cOi> E +� O� �� _Q �O O �� Ln c N L O N E c N m v� s Ln 00 �� N Y� O f0 L �+ — m E M -0 N N +' L U +� N - L p an O U fd c0 Q L.L -0 . C),= v 0 Z c N C .� c .� O C am+ v � .� c .� v 2 E u> uO on + E y C E v E °' Q L C/J o ,i O (n +J a-+ N ._ C a) t Y o - C +� .E C bA .E = C bA N C .E .E N o o J ° co x N .0 .E M +' v o Q cEa o C .� .� - cuo .� .� O Ln a -O C7 aJ U M N m aJ N T_ N W t c t D O E Co.) H • 0 • N 0 0 0 Ln C cv V) O M N O d d Y ca a COO W L% '0 V W J ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv L v o N •W LL -0 0- N Q) aa) � � -O V) bA a1 '� O oo �_ Ln ++ O C 'p �, Q O V) Na) O i 0 Ln Ln C i +J C •V) bA V) C w E Q-0 - N O C u 0 Ln C Ln •V fa -O C T> N i v N to w 'nLn `� O O -O U O O N 'O c a, V) � v o v cLo;n 0 anw c E +o - c bo Ez N O -O Ln ,O Z O E i Q-a O V) C Ln ul Ln V a1 C, N V) C v u �� o v a c 'n V C � `� N bA w -0 N +•1 O ca +--� N Vj •N ra E aJ O C x t aJ T N N 0- a, to . a1 , a1 +' i aJv V c M c E V Q i 7 V C Q- t E v .� °J C 41 O ° 'E V) C U O u cLa N aJ v '� N c O N N O O_ N N `n N> O V) T fa la L c +' a••+ Ln C V -C vOi u v aJ -p " O L (Vm p .v O in E 0 0 C)-0a O O O -O aJ +, > W a1 p N 0 ul •� -a a C C E p m N p w 0 u M O r I Lf ) p C� p Nca N tL0 N v U •� L O i 0 V) CO a) a) ca bA Q ca N " O "6 -C N `�C E v) w C C m W c `� 0)-0+� Vl a) fa O O N i1 '7, p C t p t C ut > -p N C O° ca N v vi O u 0 ra s ra bOA C NcC 0 u N ON O Qc -CO +W C 0O-O aOA OO +O aJ> O c p "O -CcOa V i N u N C)m 7 fl- Wc ca t V) C •vf V) w ra C) Q O L U a) (a a) O _c �..� M Lo V) U 0 d Vl M .w o p v) a) C 00 C to+7 a. mod' au E • N V •<a E O a) N a1 a1 -a vi of to i ca CL u N 0 c U c a) +� v) c m w � = O '° v) v W c a� O O c�a v O c v O _O v +, V) C O C N U � y +, ca N j O C ca bA i E O i U�° V)> m C +� u •> N v i N aA O '6 +J N d � C E u O aA u •� +' O N bA N- w v to L 0 C C -a •u W O N 0 t V N V) aJ ,� a -0 N i C u U-0 O C . D a! C N i pp V N N Q N !a +.., +' -O `" O C ,c C +-� aJ a 0 O" O •x aJ E y 'O V) N i C 7 U > um ° W-0 U C Ln u W E v- Vj fat f6 E E aJ N OU RZ 0 O O Q '+ c ca O Q V) >, O y O O bA v v O 7 O i Z A +� N C O O- O O ti O ca C ra v 0 C Z w d N C 0 0 n v = C c u a) O O N p N> O U N aNJ bNCA C O LL T EO a0ca�1 O Ln aV) O O O O v Hc +c v Ti v a- - WOV)a)Qp E OE> O C r �u p O V Q p O O O m U m O G� N C a) (VZ �E Gp aOc x Ln aJO E E c aO cz N E i V O a1 -p ru Va1 -p u VEC pa) •}, t ° c�a o c o o o v V) cn �° v v a>i Q +' ° E Ln L i a) a) N C +�•� Q Q +-� L iA a) J N _ ,E y >j a) N Z W C a) > a"' v N u w O- a) +T+ aJ J aJ u N N O bA O C O Q v > cUa v N Z C: (n U C E> Co w Es cn c 6 E d aJ d 00 c6 c to Cc: _ 0 0 Q QL O ° L u C C N O C� M x 0 v �, E c6 aJ C N ra N N w .� p L Q 0 W 0 0 N V) bA V T U Q) v N O_ O o N v a) a) W aJ t O� N 6 m U m > Q O M Q ai 0 0 (V 0 L p O x 0 R +� O v +� a� a�i u ca a c u +� 0 O O ni G H ca c�a O ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv N N x i E cu O ° -0 c: +� p Q-' Q � O_ Q O m N O Q -— O +J t 0 a) N 0 Ln cv T a c> o o a n In O U,c af6i a) V) c o aj a) u > ca v n L u-aa) v L M v W o .0 a '� bo •°° o o t C bA C o a) N L c6 +� 0 N > co +o U o E 0 , O N 'i V bA N v c cn cLa o O Q •— t' O +N O a) > +� a) bA O cy O E co L co L° O - t co aa'oE bAo E�.E+�t v L 'L Ui �--' N L t }' O a) C Q 00 7 v C d N U .E U a c E L u C X N O C ° O , L> o 0,C ai OC"LN Q C)a E � Q0> o 0 O O '+Q' •+O o wC) 00 > -O u) a) O_ o >, CaEJ) .0 OL c6 O N ,O, +U 1'4 L-0 N� va- m M a) •' a�6) .n E C u 2 bO'O O-O N V) v) N a) v C c6 '+L -0 > C Q N Vl a C O Co L cn v N o Q c t •b.° Q- Co a) u v O Q 6 V O O N ca `6 Ln c f0a) Cl v c v cLn a) z3: L 0 0 L L a)} > ° aNi v v E v ca O 3: 'Q — c ; >o c E 0- o u w0 '= .� , cN oM N O> O v U,+� a >, E N O> T bA V_ a) ru bA X o C E T tO O O L +' O O a) N O bA O" O N L N r V Q a) � .E C) +�-+ ov v0) E a i v v) `n `• 0ca~) C°vaOb).0 Va) -+p, Ua) Va) ` +CcO' •— i E "0Na, atN)) a) n N LU -0 UC o aT)+ M CO .O N a) 0 O '_ vi co ENL uQbcCA -�++0N QE a ° o-0-o ti co nEo -0 bm O 0° U O N O c m N-6Qv) U OOOC 0T U n A i1 M U E a1cz C N c u n a) O Qca E V) v N O CE E�"-0 o o O c o _0 O�LQT> 0Nc0a) V)tC) bt +L c vl °c OtX c O O bA + Lnc z a) 0-0 aO-OC cia �ca)a) 3: -0 W la a=LEL_O W > cn <n E > C Q O O O V v) G) O -0 Qa) ca c Zv E s v a) c6 Z c E v V> ra E_ cL° ~ a) c p x N U -O - E c C L Q u ui +.+ a) O u Q to '6 +J > +� v u L +-+ a) Y N w +-' co 'L fl- O cm O y QLIJ O E + a) L vN -OabA uCN c .a) N bA Qv QE O>Oyca N NW Cl > X -O Q J � W a) W O n OH> VCOO.) ON > >E p N O-OQ- K — u O (Ea a L ca OOQ ++J 'vCinQv a"v In p c _0_°�_O w> a) O O _N v6 U z XO il �W _ oE > o O C_ -a U u O 0ti O dp U W.— 0- a) m a) �O Q C°NNW� -0 O 6 'X V O Q 6 >° °> v n c° c >c >caO o a) C , aW OR v d o aa> O w O c 0 O 6 oO p t M E E tE > Q O- N O d d Y V IL e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:zu9wLi3euv \/ 0 �2 /\§ <®$ �f \ =2 »\/ / y.\ \e% z=o /\/ k0 /JCL $\\vi § 0+, 9 2�� =5EE $ }\ Epee 32/E ±2 �� n E @� ° E.2 G yam±= //\ % $&�ƒ 2 e o m _@ f # 3 % §\® ._mmE #\c= t=== /QV)\ 2�u §c T § =&cu -Iqqq ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv t � � v > c0 Op Ou +1 M 0 0 L N u p a) L a) L O_ u t p s u C E c -0 +' v 0 O o 0 N C to C C q0 � V) O V)+J M (p N a) v p cTo is o a v L L 0 tP) E O i QC a) E Ln O C +- c O •c a) C O C O O aL O v Q W O O V) N Z co 3 cn -O c O Q L 0-0 U +, L c N O c n a) }? (o L O a) V) p 0 O O o t c E U E om m E C N r O O (o Q n3 C E O t t C'4 �. .- U N (N i C) J O > E L` .E O co O co >,N a=•/ 'a cp �, C N T -0 L Y � V)O N laA O J O M , .Q- O O zO a c E 3 E t > a..'— n3 _I_-O�� (o (D n N v O+ C U U 4-= W a) -O cn L +� co v_> (o O (o -O uo N -O � CO -6 v o w wv a to �, v i a J (o -LT O E c • a) L m V)LnM E+' L 0-C i Ln a) N a N cv co C M r— Z 4) W N aj c Q Q N Q" O vi aO) v a) E ? a) ap - .O o 3 s (a ma) c CO U- +� +H C-U c O E +2 -0 V) C O LL LL L -O (o a) co O L +•� •CL v as L L L (O N "O w O O N co C a"L C v LO i Q i G 7 i Q o c6 U N (a ,41 Ce3 t:LoL in" L (n O py N O O Ln ct:� tin > u v taA M (p L Z tao N r Z O Uj C C'V vj V)t v> v o co m T C V)}' u N U n a o p a, c E a= v t 3 O c co av 3 ul v V )) n a) V +, t v v o = '> ate) 6 C a) v v N -O v 1 V) +.+ O t O Z c C a) u co V E N +� � }, •u T . f: O w = (o U O taA (a n3 O_ co to _C Z uu a) E ;+, .0 u V) C .� N M v Q C c0 E O +V) V (o co E +� -O Z 3 O O 'ccz 0)_ _ .v _ O_ 3 N ut Q v V> L O O_ Y -a p T v O Z Q V) O U L Z a) (a C) +� o a) - 3 v u m -- co � a) E � _ n N o v a) E o (n +� �' c O 3 w u an VI _ v LO c>6 C a) u -O ,p N 'a >T N co N0 -0 C N N ,c Ou •c cn Q M_-o O +' O ; a O C u n3 fl co C: c N o c C cLo O y �/j -O o N •U L > m� 1 E O ti-C m v C +�-+ lrpJ 0- a) C M~ Y_ LLB s L L co +J > O T S (o a > .L M @ N- ca O Q T N i .3 0 Q aJ 0 2 41 (Y c0 O °�° N �, T (o a) Q o u L V— O C3.. LLI v o m (Lo a, - a) >, v(a 3co 3 >� 3 o a; Z l� Q a) V' C O N J T L co 0 o m 3 m �o +� 3 C C' E >' •i Q. LU O w c a) >, N v t0 3 — O U -a — c c0 LO c c -c N 'O a) a) C N +J (13 +, L a) C 7 T T C O C po E .� O > u u .. L +� O m E E }, O UA N O_ C2 Z 6 o E E C +, co nz Y (a O a) v L O L O R c (o C V V) L N L •+' C V) a' CO J U J J (7 .O O V v T>E E O to EO O T m co 3 O v u • • • • • • • f6 Q U u O Q Q co W a) (n 0 E a u co v ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv zl O O N bA a) V 6 *O +N, } L N v a, v -p C �•``L°+' v U o�0 0 -p p > +J O C LO c O C a) a+�.o iO O > p Q + N p + N �, L N i N E N, +� C ) to L.L. C Q L p C 41 + a) v i v a) > s p u Q a) aA n a1 > a) C Q N p a) N C N +' L C C N o Fa m v �O *' O E N E -0 - N C v o O Q O L L V L O U O . v U l_l Ou U N E N C -p E O_ C O +j O E E p L bA pu o p C +� +� V v p 0 L �O •— N ON a) o O C o" o y0 N N Q a) p- +, > N o p a) L N WJ C M L C > C U C a) 1 p_ L= o a) L.L. C f6 U C N> N v L +J a) +J C) °+� > v 2 O u N ° ca +J `�� �+ N C ca L n 0 aoao o m '- LLD Z N a) +� E } u N N C r t o m In cm O �.) > E O N a; T bCA O0- CCQ co 0 N u N .N N `� a) m +� N X -p C +-+ N E a) Q o bA + N N N O '- C) H m v N u a v aJ C Z Ou 0 U U u m a) 0 U vi N v E V c�6 CO N N `t6 ao.+ N a) v -6 -p b.0 C +� L u +, C U O O co O "O Q N x N� v O E C aJ C O_ >� +o-+ vOi L LL. m 0 v CO O a)� �C`� V �N+�-+-+ >`N IZ 0 0 wu 0-U.= Z ,O o O ��- o a cc C O C K a) E O a) .T 0 N N>,� L) a) L bA-O ON L a) E C ~ :2 .E j C E +, 0 Q"p >' v. V a � CL o +� Q tp 0- v M U +� O + C +� c �N, u 0 �Ea)��—' a,v cn.rac� QEE�� Qv��� �'.o0�Na,U cm N O L O (n N co bA U O V O O n- a+�) O � c� � • • • L- N -0 0 V Ems' e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:iu9wLi3euv � E 0 w � 0 t Qj / U � q � � t ul< � zi .9 iz Q)o E $\a/ ee22// /\%2 o�@ 2 x—± e ® u co 2 E G& \ a 2 2 22=3af-0W C) /��\ \ $ _ § 2 e 0 \ C,/ o-/ f \ / = \ E $ s ,2 \ / / - ® \ \ \f�3\1§%33/7 s \77� e a/\ E& \) / M e 2 6± Z (m 2\77a— Eme Eoi$ cm /\{/3§\ : 0-/( �/ \ _ E E 7 m J E a f§/8�7/2/\\§ e o a/ n 5\/\ m= m m �•- 7 � w � 3°°° ° \ ° a, o � 7 \ \ \ \ } 2 _/ o� e 2 k) ®{/ U\ E 2 o R w@ k p 6 g\ Z / § 5 \ S ® E M 9 % / \ / 3 \ \ / _=7=geo=5/2 >E �a=®= ==a e o n� \ 7 / \ \ ( % w / V O 32) C)u \/// \\\/ E e a\ 7 E 2 2 k 2 e /$ 5@± ! q 0 a \ a e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:� 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd maid wo as e■w wsu� } ew oq ,o �dWg I 0�#Snl 1: � � « �� — • f � \ ` � — - jv t t I ■ /4 . } cu } / ( \ � . � o — ° ` * o - / u %ƒco^ _ ? § # £ i k $ \ --- - / ] $)\2}& k ® Q CL _ cc § ( � / 2 m § - � cu/\CL �/ � q m E 0 \ _ � q _ q . %Ln - 0 2 " % CL- & � m W: — k � k .— f� § - § � Z § 0 O_ 2 _ § © k f ® [ 2 ® p -ej§2� };CL222 — § k \ \ ( kqv' § k 0 3=>£ >�m� f CL b $ S a E § g u E» . E 3,. \ - I I 1-h ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv W LLJ LLJ cm N O � a-T, o C N f6 CO ro E a>i O U C L7 C b.0 L 41 C m p O > �.� O O L v a� tD CL + O NV) a L C +� N N N O fa 0 U E u y' v O T cu vi +� > 0 u O fd C C C 7 0 O U O' 0 N v E 0 -0 N ou . v N L E ro tv Q O > N (d u C "O U C 0 0 Q L 'Q O IO Cl+- Q U- uu � +> .- o ul L U 0 U O m N v �_ N C O L L N N N O ca a)N C C cp L 41 > .� C D -O •> O u O v O N b0 bA i UO L L >` c6 L L N C cuo Y N 'U u C_0 N C O p E 0 O 0 -O v O C Q u m u E O +, Q, = 0 E O N O E -0 E O a°o 6 U an o v C O O E u c `C' °J L to L N L ro N C ro c N to >, O M E N +� O Q� cp O -6 > C V) u v O O v u N L1 L .0 C L+ U U N v 'i u v u-0 a .N N (n u N C •- U O- m O 0-0 0 E Q N y C u +N N 0 0 C a 0 C N co 0- a� 0 N > N a a� a)> C N i 'i -0 N u U 4J C a a uca OO O v a � OEE0 w E 0 aN L "6N" N E E L an O� X co"O' u aC 0 O N N O C N O L + a1 > C C a C V u ''C (a -O d N fU6 N 'C C N C (n O Vj C L -6 v L L CL C +� C !6 N C In 0-0 u} co ca �, p C C J Q d N U O_ N .0 0 •� N �O w .0 N O C C v '� O L C Q! v L N O N +� N d i O bA (C6 +� Q N w CL m E> ~ u N 'V N C a E Q C •� d p -O C O L O O U" N ,� OJ N N U D-0 L O-C C-0 Q N Q u r0 U1 E c6 C N N O m U C p 41 Q Q u N N N -O v N N+ v. E m. E U W v L N 0 R f0 4J a 4J O U +--, Q N C f6 t cv v � g ca L N N N CO 0 H .E C C C L v Y •� 'ro fl' O bA N t/7 v N 0 0 0 0 .� !N Q E N O v N O V) C) CZ CO 0 � E� o v° E O o o aui w C u v o o !6 v- Q > 0> J (7 C .� uA -O +' o L m v O U bA C C C -0 -0 O -0 O N Ln N � bA O 0 N +, N U E m N.N C N o bnCL C:v E ao E E c +� 6_0 v _0 u ao Q °U E ao o cCo E m a n O Q .E = E. y G z ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv a) N o•E O O Qv E O c p N aO an O p C=OaJ to N aJ E _ -=UnN N O E E Ln `° toE v co E E a cv a: E cN E o E v v v T _ o o o N = +� tea) o O v >o uO °vi ov N 4 4-10 a= NOU o N N O - = '0 C) -t O o p N O -O +v,. 0OoE 7 aJ p N N L N 7 t 'p N N E N H N i +� N N W C O_ W •vl N m O `1 N O O v Z E bA O N O>> —00n .i tL6 i O E '6 Q O �..' 7 O x =— E 0 _ = a1 O N a1 O_ p" O O _p b.A 'i p N +J N a) .O u Q T" U- Q. N = x- CD bA Q U u t�loO r6 a) `� N bz O p L _= + _ v •> O- O U E Q u E .N 0 O E Q- O O O N + 0 0 O +� 0" ,N +J Q O E L= w co O >, O O Q t p= W O_ = O .E u i O bA Q Q ._ O +� v = U +> .E Q o o a C,_ Na� i C) LL- L u O= � O Nx Np O O OE E O CD-00OI� i m-0 cno ' L O Uv c Ea = ON =C: N ' > O u wE w cmO Oa1 a2 u O O E T 0oE0 a) u -O~C) -OOn = L O_ N aJ a! N C= C: 7 E ?� v u O c6 O -O == O N 3� = O_ E0 ca > N bA O te J 0 bA vi .E +� Z Q= O a= a Co� Q M U Q? "O v .E > = v N a, E °1 O .� cp p a1 bU c6 O o 3 O = Z +J i6D a) Q m ti Oj L a1 v _ — +� _ p w O > O U o C a1 O p co L = O C vl U u +� o a, °1 a� •� = t M o N O O- v >' T •E '� bA N = = O = v u - = o p Q o+.7,M y n co+ Mv u w - o O T O tL0 N N Q O bA — tv = p f6 •— N N U v U N E u v ca N o E a) i i N U a1 V `� > O _ J C O O v= O u -p N b.A v +N-+ _T v OU � °� N v U6 N c>o o_ v O p T p U E N = -p=O E d _ T N= v� N O a..' N E 0 Cl- M 30 0 N-0 a � � O O w a � E u 0 a O a` a, G w N o E _ O' O v_" ao +� X O O OvN 'Ul_=vi=qp�6 EEE`°-0E_=uo. Oa== My �puu N N E= c° ca >_ E= E w E a, o f ro U) o +� E `a v o a +v _ v = = +� O a� R +� Q O_ co o N "O 0 O O O = O N m= O Q 'E = N +M O O w= ro O--o a u 0,-, v_ _ - O v E a, v p o- Q N E u= _ +' O v� i t6 O m U fl- _ , = O v v >, ca n -p N = o Z N i ,N U N Q. v � O .N N �' N 00 '> N > +� +, _ •N _ '> ra u W LZ N O= N +, a1 (O '�' bD N O > u O a `-6 = O U L N O >> p N CL `i 'O (Np _ _ cp i aJ = O .E N L ' i O Q ._ E N U p = U E LLy v U~ p U L aJ cm -M-WO �O = '6 Z N U M N N O M -O C c�i� -p +�-+ p_ U Q p= d U +J aJ N L '— v O +' v= u= O �- N to to =� O Z N o u N ao = E c N oA as ca r° v z v> W u v M>� O t = ao c ,= = Mu > V E W �° E vi v a , W o aE, o N-0 �° ao o o� Ln c U LU GC hU0 ao.E N f° o ao *�' _ _ N T H vNi i� ' ' `° '� N L� 0 p N co = N U O O o O (a cv N c •_ u= O +� N O = N N °+' N= Q ® u- r° E x s t v aa) m-o - v� o= N N °�' o o O '� u a, o W -0 O - O E v= O O N¢ +O' > 4J m Q- N C 'N bA -p T '� L > -O Q -0nV)o�ON_0v�t:Lo a)u U>.LNai�°�wO 0�o'�Er- va,+�sa'_ c=a t >, `L° v .o y a=i a o o o u v W ."-' of 6i _ a, n E �i C: C -O � f6 = U E O uw ' _ U O N O !6 !2 = E N O_ = J v _ - N = Q Q N �N� LU cLa N Q� a'���LH Ez N E �' N co v U b0 N a1 O N to u O " U co O O O O p I.IJ t ca .= to N E L:S CC, m 'i .� E a1 O d' E P- , = M N a! , .E •> M U CD V '+� U = H Z a = -o 3: •+ e] L# Sn OC6000OCZOZ d:V9 5 Z CZ-6-9 ]Qd meld woo Vd WO ABIJOAO wvsn-iewwsuej.L:zu9wLi3euv Z \e= 02 2\2 Q 4d/2S\// / 3 UO /\f/2\ƒ: Z e�%a/3/\J 0-0 6 3= e ->, E / S \ 0 3 \•E \ _CL , ° 00 CD•- v LLJ 0 f S > 3§ E% C E _ _ /57\/0/3.{2 § � � Q 0C) Z §UV) V)/fib/ O_ ME] $ e f / \ g $ / a ¢ 5 — Ef2�0wEco C-2 cm k/\\/) Q v -0Fo \ ¥ / t � # n % 2 / \ 3 2 3// 2 ®$ {= E Q 2 _ = e _ > ± % = 2 Le o= 3 m m mQ- 2= co— q 0 a \ a ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo d O ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoejjv le M � O O U v .Q -a -O 0 ,� -p uI ca d 0 d -0 O <'`� UOn ON O T N co N i v N am) O_ -O +T+ '� -p p t6 ++ 0 O E i O O O O L0 0 N c O t N Ln U +� a. Cc > U m +-� -0 (D 0 O a1 +�-+ W Ln Co C O UA o C O E fa LL E a, � t i O �0 c a) _ co s E } u � o o, c u o c aE, a N o Ln o -0 a 6 Z v o o Z Q O C v Ln-0 u c, o n > o on -Oa -0 C o f �, g +' 0 +� 0 0 F Q W v' Ln O O T v C co O v O N C C C amp CO C 0 0 O Q `a v +-' c : o-0 o c (n v ) •c Q v 'c v m c L, r z O v v O O C 0 C L QL N> E n c C C •E p 0 0 N a� _ Z j o ca o u O O ,� 0 c m u� O� �; c� � c� � o .N � Q LL O u O N a) i Z v� Q U O U N j o +., u a� o Q O- O a M *> Q w a O E O v N Z~ r L 0- C N L u ~ do U >, + ` a -O O "6 tao co C O d LL �J CW W a O .� +V) E O o O fl O O to coo O O -00 v N > O 0 C i Cl- C C C to C C ++ C V C C W -O -0 (v U w O C .0 .O O N O~ J �� ~Q O O b0.0 O �_ cv aJ •C bA O C Y U >' C T c c Ln N E E o by Q O v 0 m 0- v_0 w E v m v +_' + -p •� } '� u 0 to aL .� ~ O r O T O c v O Q O E C n Z +� N O ) O N N p :� y o o d d coo a>� � fl °' n u � n E vu, a o c ca = E •c u� -o v 6� `�° .E E. v o V .W o .E v`ai . u. -0 a c`a v n Of � m� m n C) N v ao -0 V) n N C O C a1 C as'"' r -6 C O_ u LL C O y "c C p a) p w O Q a) O CO Z C r -O m W -p N -O cn >o v a) C Ln o u O ao c c o a C) �- C ao a) m E n: - E, v a�i 6 7 v v a a' V) > v -p •2 N •+' N C N N +� bZ U = LU Q O -O 'cv 'co E C t ca N c> 0 a, E-0 o o V) t Ln n O c m w z O n U a ^ a, �, f6 a) +- C aEi `- >� a E c a a v N ao a E C� LLjOTC o v o c c .E E o v °n' o DC L °' o v�i 00 �° Nc E o +� o" ~ Q g a� H LE n a) v +� v, +� m E v o o c C u w �o Q W o o C E' c O= c c bn .� v -o v E u c o n E G O co: c a� a) Ln +J O v a= u o °� G R v Q O .N '� t o ca n d Lt7 3 U t .� E> M cn =p O 0 �n Z C p +-+ +' r E O Y = +-+ +� C O r >, E N C v w E C vNi O_ Q �. O v .0 O N T C +� O o v an v `� > o a>, o c E a>, E C G v E v u +f6 E L �_ - +� a> > vi +� Z Li- v m Q m W m 0-0 -o J W t n v Ln v C p +' 'E v- o Q a�i LU c c c '� O o a� an v> Z CQ > T E co n O C> N (6 T O M �C G 0 7 U 0 c N C cp Q G v 0 T •L i +� no c �t �� a' aa�0i E E E now v� aC013 � v E E aU, •� o a�i a, N v n E C p E O N p o X `L° 2 L� o > i to — L to i. +� U 7 O +� L.L CO U U Z an d 'p N a) E L� -i O Q Q W W J 0 cc; ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO btisfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv ca 'O 'O C O O O> C � N m b�0 -O a, C Ln +_ >O CO zj-> ) 0 U U cv >+ a, �, 0 E O °V -O L N L �N > O O_ O T N M ,� C C 0 0 •� L t N O T w N 0 Ci V 2 O" > O OL �' c6 Q C t E O (13 U O -0 a L u -> N M 0 C > �t4 O a Z C 0 u- a O s N Q- C a-•+ U _O L C C C E c O !N/1 •+'' U U O Q -0 U a N� O- c vL O Q 11 ca -O +J C O Li •� C N LU -0 C (6 L u o �' N L lx0 d -O a1 C O +.+ O ,Ccz O EO Q cz Q. '°d bb o N O N Z W .--� n �' N v cNo N V N a, C O i a..1 U L m ate--+ 'O O Q-0 >T > H v` U N +T+ -° N ca 'u O>>to Nu u+ O O > O N a) O m LLFI -O N N v ca O N o -O N N co +' LL L E c O N-0 bn " a W t6 N *' N CD- 0 a) a, U uVi J bA ' cCa > °n — o' �' L E v E N N-0 a, Q =O LC7 c a, N o 0 v a° o a>, ° c E v n o o a tea, •� °�° o= Q ro Q E N C N E ti O L H E .� Z CS O N bA m E co > 0 0 M ,C ui ca -0� •— ' t N E-j O E -6 E d 0 L4 p V co v v E -O O O E Ln U°- N c6 C L Q bA -0 -O W v C d N t -6 C?A -O v a1 r6 E� N v E +; N v u -° a ca v N a, m T E +� i O Oa ca, = s}vv E cN a, c i °bz cca aO � Q0 O� o Oo E O L Oo aLO � c 0- o ao- o-vv o o L' -otep0co a Wcr Lu O aU O O vi Lp V � O Q m N J a T ca C o v a, o Q t $ m O +J N N �b_0 v � O as o O L L ° C co0 Qv Q c ro > vi +N, C U >, N T C a) O N > T U -O -O i.ti L U a' c o�t.cia.v a+L'� aJ L L +•� C C T E a ca N o c u Q ro E a, +, °- co v C U c-c E m °" a, U U CL -a N C V �o Q E E Q c v w N Q O N N .O > 0 0- c0 ,o •N C)-a � o L 0 -0a, N a� u tL0 E CD -a, t U a O c6 E �0 i C O C Q ++ U .{'' N bA U Q O U U ! •Q p ,� N >O •� O C- .� 0 �' U ca 'L + O_ cp 76 N Q teO N ,� a, co Q w 7o a, -0L E v 0$ O + c C O D a! GA +, +� C Q V 7 U C U Q� >> U U .E mu .E u c°o T L 41 C N y d C Q, C ° N H M o c6 ca N J b-0 C O L ., > p w + c Q v U O N C O ° coo C oU• Na 0 o L O + > L cv N C m CiL U a, C M m O w N W QCO tw O N O ra N C to M 'O C 7 c6 O V i v U o O o } N ro E n� o L C N J C C Q> a, O li +J C OLD O E v +' Z Q c a o > is c c v C O C E �..+ (p N L O O ao c c Q v to U d O L d aN•' �' aU-+ 0 N 0 0 •- — > Z C N O aE N aa,, c O N N O O a, ro a••+ C E 0 U ° � '— L m 0 0-0 o O CO N C m N? 00 0 O V) v N O a, � 0 L Y o T u v c m o i Iz a, O C O V 0-`� O O a, U M U N o L L Q L cz N m = c v Q O c ca c v a, o E L a O n cJco O +, .o O L 0 E LL N +-� Q , Q LL + V) C N a1 u a, U E 0 a, o cz +, Q Q O co N C)L nO C C)U N 0 a LL- vo� L .a� -O O U c to .c a>, C N M by O L u bA N ru V a-•1 v c 'L .� 1— c t a, L .a' C U 'O O O N N 0— {Cn O d O to Q N d C co v E m f6 E c0 + L N T O L o -C 'O O r6 !E aNi O O a� i t m U N a v L W•O Li- T E N C r6 N •c bbn T v R LE s N o 'Q o LO M O d d Y V a ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO btisfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv IR a N O 4- O v v r M v zs iz Z Q W C G W J C� C 0 cc; O Ln c O V a) V) a .� w bA C a cLa c m W C c 00 +J C v E v bA 7 O U • N O 0 U� N C Q Q O u V V N 0 O V) C N N N C O O C � � O O a) c E O E O O U E v O T 0- +' L L O N N > +J O C N a) Q. E >, a1 � V N V) i bA > O O O t C -d O C o a1 M E O O Q E N v C r- 0 0 f6 +� O > bA a) c } N C Z3 O O E C C v ca Maa) v > O Z O U u r N N E N Q � O u O > n v � C � (6 L J � � a) m E C Q- O d a) N � E N v a) � N L •N c O c L 0 O x O w Q N C O .7 N N bA O N c NV, C O Q a) N a) N M a) V c N L L O C O O E N C O Q �+� O U N N U A C +J :3 C O v E L V L y N N V � N C •� a, E � n c o � L > O w N -O a, vOi v E � v x_ E v L O .Ln bA N O C Ln N _N E N Q + Q C N a) 0 O E L O O O .- � v O a V v v U -0 N c � v C N } O E ,, n a) O � U � V o C O N a1 � C C c v a) v u O v +� _0 c -O v � V N Un3 x � 0 • 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 • 0 iSe3 6v sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : tiS99Z) £Z-6-9 dad ejeldwo3 ddWO ABIJOAO 6vsf1 Iemwsueal :; owtveuv IF 0 Q t— Z CW G W J a O Cfl M C O u a� N (n 4, Q a) u C O V a) N O 4� � c c a1 E CL 00 C � O > 0-0 E bA Q = a1 4-1 O� N C >> CaJ i E a)O aJ ++ >+ O f° 0 > 3 o� '0 v o � O � 4 c +1 N c O- O O E 4J O.� E CaO+ 00 �E = O ca O- > +' aJ � 4- C 4� EL -p to c� Qi c E 43 � N O o u C a) a� v E� o_ CL O O aJ a) NO_ O O O c a� C .w m— c , a� a- Q W N a� Ecw aj a' aD O- �O c � L L t v 3E O o o u .a g c O aP u a) N tf O_ O_ N bA C C u u m Q N c ai L c m N 4• c w E tf tla C C fa; a) t E 0 V) a) E O u 7 O a; cv U ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv y N v v v v V V to v d O T N N N O T :5 > o fo 0 d •L L L L T O CO J -O T T J J U J 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 a C O M c 0 v N N c N E > O a E 0 v N c c 0 u c N v fl_ C v u T v O O U N C C 0 U 00 M O T- Ch d d Y V IL A ■ 11 �� '��► ri I s0 o W N Z N � 1 1� �) O _ W O � N O ■/ � O y(�SLv J O Z W O V W O J z V Z N d 9.A.4.j East Naples Community Development Plan: Public Involvement Plan September 28, 2020 Introduction Public and stakeholder involvement is integral to the development of the East Naples Community Development Plan. Involvement is understood in this process as comprised of two key parts: outreach and engagement. Outreach refers to the efforts made primarily to spread awareness about and promote the project; community members and stakeholders cannot be involved with a project if they are not aware that it is happening and what the opportunities for involvement are. Engagement as used in this process refers to the activities undertaken to exchange ideas and information once community members and stakeholders are made aware of the project and are participating. The East Naples Community Development Plan is being developed under unique circumstances given the coronavirus pandemic occurring across the country as of early 2020. This plan has been tailored to provide effective public outreach and involvement while also ensuring the health and safety of the public with regards to the virus. The following Public Involvement Plan (PIP) lays out the approach for outreach and engagement activities that will be used during the planning process, with a focus on general community members, department and agency staff, and elected officials. The final section of this plan provides a tentative schedule for these activities. Outreach Raising awareness about a project is important for getting robust participation in workshops, meetings, and online engagement tools. This effort is particularly important for to reach community members, especially those who may not be in formal social networks that may facilitate the communication of information. The following details outreach methods that will be used during the project. Email Notifications The consultant team will develop and maintain an email list for project promotion and information sharing based on community contacts from previous outreach efforts, additional contacts identified by the consultant team in coordination with County staff, and contact information gathered as part of outreach and engagement efforts undertaken during the project. The consultant team will prepare County -branded email blasts with a project -specific email to send to the project email contact list to announce the public workshops and postings of major new project information and/or engagement tools to the project webpage (described later in this plan). The consultant team will contact various organizations in the community (e.g., churches, community service organizations, service providers, non -profits, bike/ped clubs. Car clubs, etc.) via phone and/or email to raise awareness about the project and encourage organization members to join the project mailing list. East Naples Community Development Plan: Public Involvement Plan Packet Pg. 1040 9.A.4.j Digital Web and Social Media Outreach The consultant team will post a still advertisement for the project to the local group on the NextDoor application prior to the first public workshop; County staff will also be provided this advertisement for use on the County's social media platforms. The consultant team will run digital ads on select websites and Facebook and Instagram social media platforms to advertise the project and second public workshop (see below) to people visiting those websites within the East Naples study area. This outreach is intended to help reach community members who may not already be connected to the project via existing organization email networks, all while observing social distancing measures. Other Outreach The consultant team will prepare an article to raise awareness about the project for distribution to local media outlets. Engagement Collective Public Engagement Events and Surveys The following public workshops will be held during the project; these workshops include a virtual platform for participants to join remotely and observe social distancing measures in relation to the coronavirus pandemic. • Hybrid Virtual/In-Person Public Workshop 1 (June 2020): the consultant team will plan and facilitate this workshop to present via PowerPoint presentation draft baseline information and findings from Task 2. The workshop will be held on the GoToWebinar digital platform to observe social distancing rules; attendees will also be able to view and participate at the Collier County Commission Chambers. The team will provide the opportunity for the attendees to discuss information with the project team and provide comments during the workshop; the team will also solicit feedback through a digital survey and the project email address (see below) on the preliminary findings, project aims, and project approach identified and summarized from the review of recent planning efforts already undertaken for the area in conjunction with Task 2 analysis findings. This effort will also solicit additional information needed for use as a basis to draft land use scenarios and other recommendations that will be developed in Task 3 of the project. A pre -recording of the presentation, static presentation materials, and the online survey will be made available on the project website (and for broadcasting on the County YouTube account/Collier TV in the case of the recording) in advance of the meeting to gather feedback, especially for those who cannot attend the live workshop. The project email will also be available for additional questions/comments. • Hybrid Virtual/In-Person Public Workshop 2 (September 2020): the consultant team will plan and facilitate this workshop to present via PowerPoint the preliminary goals, recommendations, and land use concepts for the plan based on content from Task 3. The workshop will be held on the GoToWebinar digital platform to observe social distancing rules; attendees will also be able to view and participate at the Collier County Commission Chambers. The event will allow attendees to discuss options with and pose questions to project team members; the project team will solicit feedback from attendees with polling, verbal questions and comments posed during the workshop, written questions/comments submitted through the webinar platform, East Naples Community Development Plan: Public Involvement Plan Packet Pg. 1041 9.A.4.j and the project email address. Feedback will inform revisions to goals, recommendations, and land use concepts. Presentation materials will be provided in advance of the workshop on the project website to gather feedback, especially for those who cannot attend the live workshop. The project email will also be available for additional questions/comments. Project Webpage and Email Address The County will develop, host, and keep up to date a webpage on its website to share project information, updates, host the online survey, and solicit contact information to develop the project email list. The County will develop a project -specific email address to provide on the project webpage for community members to send general messages. Commissioner Briefing One briefing with Commissioner Fiala will be held via teleconference to provide a status update on the project and solicit feedback. Stakeholder Interviews Five stakeholder interviews will be conducted during Tasks 2 and 3 to gather information on existing conditions, community needs, and considerations for the development of goals, recommendations, and concepts in Task 3. Stakeholders may include but are not limited to County department staff and other public agencies, such as the County's transportation staff and representatives of the Florida Department of Transportation. These interviews may also be conducted as meetings and used to meet with other project stakeholders, including representatives of the local developer community, the East Naples Civic Association, and local non -profits. Plan Approval Meeting The County Commission approval meeting for the final plan provides a final opportunity for public and elected official consideration and comment on the plan. This meeting will include a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the final plan for comment to be considered and addressed in plan revisions Project Coordination Calls and Milestone Meetings Throughout the project planning process, the consultant team will coordinate with the lead staff from the County overseeing the project. These efforts will include coordination calls at a rate of up to one every two weeks to provide a project status update and discuss next steps; there will also be a project kick-off meeting and two additional meetings (which may be GoToMeetings) to discuss considerations and needs for the Technical Memorandums. East Naples Community Development Plan: Public Involvement Plan Packet Pg. 1042 9.A.4.j Schedule Project Kick -Off Meeting February 12, 2020 Coordination Calls Throughout project Stakeholder Interviews February through August Post Involvement Materials Related to Workshop 1 Late April/early May Workshop 1 June 29, 2020 Complete engagement related to Workshop 1 Early July Draft Technical Memorandum 1 Submittal Mid -July Project Milestone Meeting 1 July 17, 2020 Final Draft Technical Memorandum 1 Submittal Mid -August Post Involvement Materials Related to Workshop 2 Early September Workshop 2 September 10, 2020 Commissioner Briefing September 16, 2020 Draft Technical Memorandum 2 Submittal Mid -September Project Milestone Meeting 2 September 23, 2020 Final Draft Technical Memorandum 2 Submittal September 29, 2020 Draft Final Development Plan Submittal September 29, 2020 County Commission Approval Meeting October 27, 2020 Addendum: Outreach and Involvement Outcomes The following graphic included in the final plan summarizes the engagement activities undertaken and the number of participants. A summary of findings from these activities is included in the appendices of supporting documents Technical Memorandums 1 and 2. East Naples Community Development Plan: Public Involvement Plan Packet Pg. 1043 9.A.4.j Analysis Et Research Demographics Land Use and Development Community Asset Inventory Existing Document and Program Review Public Engagement Survey: Workshop 1 Material 600+ Workshop 1 91 Workshop 2 166 East Naples Civic Association 10+ (2 Meetings) Local Non -Profits 3 r Developers (2 Meetings) 4 County and FDOT Transportation Staff I 4 k The following summarizes outcomes from outreach activities: • Project email list: total of 637 subscribers by September 25, 2020 with more than 60 community organization contacts included (e.g., faith -based organizations, civic and business associations, issue -based organizations operating in the area, etc.) • Digital web and social media advertisements: o Date range: August 24, 2020 to September 6, 2020 o Total opportunities to view ads (impressions): 306,218 o Total clicks on ads: 608 (click rate of 0.2%) o Specific statistics by advertisement platform: ■ Social media (Facebook and Instagram) post: 102,583 impressions, 139 clicks, 0.14% click rate ■ Website banner ads: 203,635 impressions, 469 clicks, 0.23% click rate • Media coverage: while the news article developed by the project team was not picked up by any local media outlets, the project was featured in two different media pieces: o Donna Fiala (September 14, 2020) Good to be back!, Coastal Breeze News, https://www.coastaIbreezenews.com/articles/good-to-be-back/ o Patrick Riley (August 24,2020) Collier to hold public workshop seeking input for East Naples Community Development Plan, Naples Daily News, https://www. naplesnews.com/story/news/government/2020/08/24/col lier-county- public-workshop-seeking-input-east-naples-plan/3099882001/ [This article was also advertised as a link in other articles featured on the Naples Daily News site.] East Naples Community Development Plan: Public Involvement Plan Packet Pg. 1044 EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Technical Memorandum 1: Background Et Needs Assessment November 18, 2020 Prepared for Coo*eY Ciommty Prepared by Tisdale (Oliver East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1045 9.A.4.j Contents 1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................1 2.0 Summary of Findings..........................................................................................................3 3.0 US 41 Corridor Study Overview..........................................................................................5 4.0 Demographics....................................................................................................................8 5.0 Land Use and Market Analysis..........................................................................................14 6.0 Community Assets............................................................................................................41 7.0 Policy Review...................................................................................................................62 8.0 Public/Stakeholder Involvement......................................................................................71 9.0 Appendices.......................................................................................................................75 Figures Figure 1: Residential and Non -Residential Share of Square Footage Built by Decade in East Naples.........................................................................................................................................17 Figure 2: Just Values of Single -Family Homes..............................................................................20 Figure 3: Just Values of Condos...................................................................................................21 Figure 4: Share of Single -Family Homes Built or Significantly Renovated by Decade..................24 Figure 5: Location of Single -Family Homes Built or Significantly Renovated by Decade .............25 Figure 6: Median Square Footage of a Single -Family Home in East Naples by Decade ...............27 Figure 7: Existing Land Use Categories Capturing Desired Commercial Uses..............................28 Figure 8: Commercial Development Preferences from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study ....................75 Figure 9: Residential Preferences from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study............................................76 Figure 10: Live/Work and Mixed -Use Preferences from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study ..................76 Figure 11: General Urban Design Preferences from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study...................77 Maps Map 1: Study Area and Area of Influence.....................................................................................1 Map 2: Study Area from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study.....................................................................6 Map 3: Activity Center Recommendations from the 2018 US 41 Study........................................7 Map 4: Population Density in the Study Area and Countywide.....................................................9 Map 5: East Naples Housing Unit and Population Estimates through 2040................................11 Map 6: Median Income for the Study Area Census Block Groups...............................................12 Map 7: Median Age by Census Block Group in and around Study Area......................................13 Map 8: Existing Land Uses and Roadways in Study Area.............................................................15 Map 9: Location of Housing Types in East Naples.......................................................................18 Map 10: Residential Just Value per Housing Unit in East Naples.................................................22 Map 11: Residential Just Value per Acre in East Naples..............................................................23 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1046 9.A.4.j Map12: Housing Burden............................................................................................................26 Map 13: Location of Existing Desired Commercial Categories....................................................29 Map 14: East Naples Commercial Square Footage and Demand Estimates through 2040..........31 Map 15: Location of Commercial Leasing Opportunities in the Study area................................32 Map 16: Future Land Uses in East Naples, including Mixed -Use Activity Centers .......................34 Map 17: Vacant Commercial and Mixed -Use Lots with Potential for Commercial Development35 Map 18: Existing Commercial, Excluding Specialized Uses..........................................................37 Map 19: More Likely Redevelopment Areas for Desired Commercial Uses................................38 Map 20: Public Facilities in East Naples.......................................................................................42 Map 21: Travel Time from East Naples Fire Stations to Locations in Study Area ........................43 Map 22: Sherriff's District Boundaries........................................................................................44 Map 23: Driving Time to Reach Community Parks in East Naples...............................................47 Map 24: Driving Time to Reach Regional Park in East Naples.....................................................48 Map 25: Existing and Proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities in East Naples Area ................49 Map 26: Findings from Naples Manor Walkable Community Study 2010...................................50 Map 27: Areas within Walking and Biking Distance of East Naples Libraries..............................51 Map 28: Areas within Walking and Biking Distance of Public Schools in East Naples..................52 Map 29: Areas within Walking and Biking Distance of Community Parks in East Naples ............ 53 Map 30: Roadways with Federal Functional Classifications in East Naples.................................55 Map 31: Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Cost Feasible Roadway Improvements..56 Map 32: Transit Routes in East Naples........................................................................................58 Map 33: Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Transit Cost Affordable Plan ..........................59 Map 34: Summary of Major Planned Facility/Infrastructure Improvements in the Study Area ..61 Map 35: Future Land Uses in Study Area....................................................................................63 Map 36: South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area............................................66 Map 37: Zoning Districts in Project Area.....................................................................................69 Map 38: 10-Year Potential Improvements for East Naples Area.................................................78 -ab1E. Table 1: Use Preferences from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study...........................................................7 Table 2: Existing Land Use Acreage and Share of Acreage in Study Area....................................16 Table 3: Residential Square Footage Built by Decade and Housing Type....................................19 Table 4: Residential Units Built by Decade and Housing Type.....................................................19 Table 5: Commercial Square Footage and Acreage Increases Needed by Benchmark of Residential and Non -Residential Shares of Square Footage........................................................33 Table 6: Build -Out Scenario with No Intensification of Commercial Uses...................................36 Table 7: Parcel Size, Count, and Acreage for Parcels Valued between $10,000 and $1 Million ..38 Table 8: Build -Out Scenario with Intensification of Commercial Land that is Vacant or More Likelyto Redevelop.....................................................................................................................39 Table 9: Average Response Time (Min.) to Calls for Service by District.......................................44 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1047 9.A.4.j Table 10: Public School Grades in East Naples............................................................................45 Table 11: Major Future Land Use Categories and Allowed Densities in East Naples...................64 Table 12: Table A. Affordable Housing Density Bonus (Additional Available Dwelling Units Per GrossAcre)..................................................................................................................................70 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1048 9.A.4.j 1.0 Introduction Collier County has contracted with Tindale Oliver to collaborate with the East Naples community and create an East Naples Community Development Plan. Map 1 shows the general focus area for this plan, including a Study Area for running data and spatial analysis for the study, presented later in the technical memorandum. The project team also recognizes the importance of accounting for conditions and development in the surrounding area and will note aspects of this Area of Influence during the preliminary analysis that will affect outcomes (e.g., major retail development, roadway connections, etc.). Map 1: Study Area and Area of Influence This project intends to follow up on the US 41 Corridor Study completed for this area in 2018 (discussed in more detail in Section 3.0). Accounting for findings from the 2018 study, the purpose of the East Naples Community Development Plan project includes the following points: • Establish a community vision • Guide future land use and development in the area with the following: o Encourage desired uses and discourage undesired uses East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1049 9.A.4.j o Evaluate commercial development and redevelopment options to promote desired commercial uses o Create and build consensus on land use concepts for the area • Inventory community assets and services • Provide high-level options to promote multiple methods of transportation, such as walking and biking. This Technical Memorandum provides findings from the background assessment which will serve as a basis to develop goals, recommendations, and land use concepts in the later stages of the East Naples Community Development Plan process. This assessment includes data -based and spatial analysis; a review of existing plans and documents related to the area, including a review of the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code; and engagement with the public and specific stakeholders. Findings from the assessment are organized in the remaining sections as follows: • Section 2.0: Summary of Findings — provides key takeaways from the Background and Existing Conditions Assessment. • Section 3.0: US 41 Corridor Study Overview — summarizes the process and key outcomes from the 2018 corridor study that serve as a basis for the East Naples Community Development Plan project. • Section 4.0: Demographics — analyzes available data on population and related characteristics as context for later analysis in the Technical Memorandum. • Section 5.0: Land Use and Market Analysis — compares land uses and development between the East Naples area and the broader county, with additional sections specific to residential and commercial development; the commercial development section looks at how to benchmark and increase desired commercial uses in the project Study Area. • Section 6.0: Community Assets — inventories current assets and services and documents performance and planned improvements. • Section 7.0: Policy Review — summarizes key points in the existing Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code that may be areas of focus for implementation options analyzed in later tasks of the project. • Section 8.0: Public/Stakeholder Involvement — summarizes process and findings from public and stakeholder involvement, with analysis on how these findings will be incorporated into the project. • Section 9.0: Appendices — provides additional related information: o Appendix A: US 41 Corridor Study Development Style Preferences o Appendix B: Additional Transit Improvement Information o Appendix C: Online Public Survey Summary o Appendix D: Public Workshop 1 Recap East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1050 9.A.4.j 2.0 Summary of Findings The following are the key takeaways from this preliminary Background and Needs Assessment on the project Study Area and Area of Influence: • Key aspects of the vision for the area based on public outreach for this project and the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study included the following: o Balanced development: making sure that any new development is of good quality and does not overwhelm existing assets and natural places in the community. o Diverse and quality commercial: the community is seeking more commercial options of higher quality that allow for a broader range of places to shop, eat, and have fun. o Beautification and green space: part of balanced and quality development is ensuring that the development is visually pleasing and that there is ample green space and natural spaces maintained in the community. o Transportation options: future efforts in the area should ensure a range of safe options, including non -motorized options such as walking and biking, with improved connections between neighborhoods and local destinations. • The area generally has good coverage by public facilities and services but would particularly benefit from improvements to provide better transportation options, including non -motorized options such as walking and biking, for localized travel. • The area is generally underserved in terms of non-residential uses, with only 11% of current square footage built as non-residential relative to the unincorporated county as a whole that has a share of 15% non-residential square footage. Some community members expressed concern about adding more commercial development to the area, likely linked to concerns about over -building and crowding the area. The points in the remainder of this summary will help define how to guide future development to moderate it and achieve desired development while limiting undesired development. • The area may already face some potential limitations to adding more commercial uses, which may moderate the amount of development that could be reasonably anticipated. While this planning effort did not involve a comprehensive market analysis, it did include some preliminary outreach and analysis to identify possible limiting factors to development in the area for further consideration: o Roadway connections: there are a limited number of connections between the large residential areas, particularly at the center of the Study Area, and larger roadways that contain most of the commercial businesses in the area. While this land use and transportation pattern can help buffer residential areas, it also can create challenges for neighborhood residents to access commercial and other local destinations, particularly by non -motorized means. It can also limit the East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1051 9.A.4.j locations where new commercial businesses might locate and be compatible with surroundings. o Population density: East Naples is similar to Collier County as a whole in that most of the area is relatively low density (4 persons per acre or below); an interview with representatives of the development community noted this may be a limiting factor to having a local residential base that can support local commercial uses. o Seasonal population: East Naples is also similar to Collier County as a whole in that it has a high estimated seasonal population; this analysis estimated seasonal households at around 60% of total households, based on homestead exemptions and the limited share of rental units relative to total units. This finding indicates there may be some limits to the population that is in the area year-round to support local commercial uses full-time. o General market demand: there may be other factors influencing the market demand for commercial space in the area; while the County does not have control over the private market, this analysis evaluated ways it might influence market demand to attract desirable development. • An important starting point for ensuring desirable future development is to implement limitation on undesired uses and ensure that new development being built is a desirable use for the community. o Limit undesired uses: undesired uses include several auto -oriented uses, such as car washes, fast food establishments, and gas stations, and warehousing. Certain limitations are already in place or are under consideration, such as spacing requirements for gas stations and design requirements in C-4 commercial districts to incorporate warehousing into mixed -use development; this study will look into other ways that these uses might be limited. o Attract desirable uses: desirable uses as identified through outreach from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study and efforts as part of this plan identified several desirable uses that tended to be commercial, including: retail/shopping, mixed - use and live/work units, restaurants, grocery stores, hotels/resorts, entertainment, services such as healthcare, and businesses that create jobs; respondents to the public survey for this planning effort indicated that restaurants are a particular priority. o Additional comments from the public survey for this plan indicated a desire to ensure ample green space and natural spaces in the area. • Development and redevelopment options to provide additional desired commercial uses should focus primarily on the US 41 corridor and nodes, as well as viable opportunities along Collier Boulevard. • Design is a critical component of desirable future development for the community, based on input from the public survey. Key points of desirable design to incorporate into East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1052 9.A.4.j land use concepts for the East Naples Community Plan include the following, based on visual preferences from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study outreach efforts and the public survey for this plan: o Buildings set back from the roadways with landscaping o Potential for a range of heights from one to low multi -story, being mindful of concerns about overbuilding o Park once at a cluster of establishments and walk between them; walkable development concepts (e.g., an open mall) • Preferred implementation methods also influence the approach for attracting development and anticipated outcomes. Based on results from outreach completed as part of the 2018 US 41 Corridors Study and the public survey for this planning effort, more moderate measures of a marketing campaign to promote the area and incentives, such as fee reductions/waivers and expedited permitting, has more widespread support relative to more robust measures, such as allowing and encouraging more intense commercial and/or residential development. 3.0 US 41 Corridor Study Overview As mentioned in the introduction, the US 41 Corridor Study completed in 2018 serves as a basis for the East Naples Community Development Plan effort. Map 2 shows the corridor segment of focus for the study; note that the East Naples Community Development Plan expands on this area of focus to include surrounding neighborhoods and other major roadways. The 2018 Study aimed to determine public preferences for future development types and uses along this segment of US 41 so that those types of development and uses could be facilitated and incentivized through Comprehensive Plan policies and Land Development Code updates. Findings were based on input and polling results, including results from visual preference surveys, from three stakeholder meetings and three public meetings held as part of the study. Findings and recommendations emerged from the study that touched on the themes of land use, urban design, transportation, landscaping, and community branding. The East Naples Community Development Plan will build on these findings, focusing particularly on the preferences for land uses and development style as a basis for a vision for the built landscape in East Naples and related activities; these ideas will be incorporated into land use concepts developed later in the East Naples Community Development Plan process to create concepts tailored to the local community context, along with regulatory and incentive options to implement these preferences in future development. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1053 9.A.4.j Naples Keewaydin Island Map 2: Study Area from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study Q Palm Street/Commercial Drive C Naples �- Botanical RatakarLA. Hammock W. Garden L v. : 4 / j\ N ies Manor M r Lely Resort Price Street The most desirable and undesirable uses that emerged from the Study are shown in Table 1. Commercial development preferences included strip malls, destination shopping, and hotel/lodging styles; residential development preferences included multi -family options. Preferences also included live/work and mixed -use developments. Appendix A includes more details on the preferred visuals, as well as general urban design preferences. The Study also included support for nodal development, including existing activity centers, as shown in Map 3 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1054 9.A.4.j Table 1: Use Preferences from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study l Shopping/retail variety Mixed -use, live/work Restaurants Grocery, wholesale club Hotel/resort Self -storage Gas stations Map 3: Activity Center Recommendations from the 2018 US 41 Study Collier County Government Complex Activity Center W1r. Thomasson/Rattlesnake Hammock Activity Center i �1 St. Andrews Square Activity Center •� i OPPORTUNITY j Vincentian/Eagle Lakes Park Activity Center 4 ' , OPPORTUNITY 41?' ` Collier Blvd/US 41 Activity Center East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1055 9.A.4.j 4.0 Demographics Population The Study Area has an estimated permanent population of 50,000, about 14% of the estimated total population for the unincorporated county at 364,000. However, it may face potential challenges in terms of specific population measures, such as population density and seasonal population changes. The population density is generally limited throughout Collier County apart from certain pockets shown in red in Map 4, including parts of the Golden Gate area, coastal communities such as Naples and its surroundings (adjacent to the Study Area), and Immokalee, among others. Much of the Study Area is at four persons per acre or less, which coincides with certain density limitations in the growth management plan due to factors such as the Coastal High Hazard Area where density is limited (see Section 7.0). Interviews with representatives of the local development community indicated that low density could be a limiting factor to achieving certain aims in the Study Area, such as increasing the amount of desired commercial uses, as discussed more in Sections 5.0 and 8.0. Additionally, the area has a sizable seasonal population, like Collier County as a whole. Approximately 57% of non -rental households in the study area are estimated to be seasonal, compared to approximately 53% countywide. Since these residents are only in the area part of the year, they are more limited in the extent to which they can support local businesses. This analysis used properties claiming the homestead exemption (which are owner -occupied, primary residences), based on 2019 Florida Department of Revenue data, to estimate permanent population. While this measure does not account for rental units housing permanent residents (rental units cannot claim the exemption), increases in permanent population from rentals are likely small since traditional multi -family units that are typically rental do not make up a sizable share of total units overall in the area. In the Study Area, there are 2,000 traditional multi -family apartment units, equaling 6% of the total 31,000 housing units in the area; Countywide, there are 22,000 traditional multi -family units, equaling 10% of the total 221,500 units. In the unlikely event that all these rental units housed permanent residents, the seasonal household share estimate would be approximately 54% for the Study Area, 48% countywide. In this case, roughly half of all households would still be seasonal. Some degree of additional rental units may occur in other housing type categories. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1056 ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv C f0 J N m f0 C (0 c E m O J N + f0 9.A.4.j Regarding future population, the Collier Interactive Growth Model (CIGM) is one method used for population forecasting based on Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs, see Map 5). The model forecasts that the number of housing units will approach 40,000 and that the population will reach just over 61,000 by 2040; note that the possibility of this growth in the Study Area depends on the land use regulations and future build -out for vacant areas and redevelopment of existing residential, including if more multi -family is built. The Study Area has seen multi- family units being built, as discussed in Section 5.0; however, there are certain limitations on allowable density in parts of the Study Area due to restrictions in the Coastal High Hazard Area and Urban Residential Fringe subdistrict that cover large portions of the Study Area containing sizable amounts of the 187 acres of remaining vacant residential land in the area (see Section 7.0). Depending on these outcomes, there may be some degree of additional permanent population concentrated within the study area to support aims of the East Naples Community Development Plan such as increasing desirable local commercial uses, offsetting some of the effects of lower population density and higher shares of seasonal population. More information on forecasts from this model for commercial demand are provided in Section 5.0. Note that some of the TAZs extend out beyond the boundaries of the study area, yet mainly towards the southwest coastal area where there is a lot of land protected from development; as a result, the increase in dwelling unit and population estimates beyond those strictly within the study area boundaries are likely moderated. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1058 ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoejjv I" 0 w Q J w C3O H� to = LLi w Z 0 < �jw Quo w(Q)Z LL 'n z rn-11 �w00 ZJ Q 0 zU 00 JtL j 7 O a ad aa,9aa�n�, a N an aa. y s N ail Hue,j-aua�pao� rn d m Y V l4 a a c m E m U L U N H c _N o a � a) E 3 0 o � Q Qj E c E i O a U N a) U n m U Z L a) Ln LU 9.A.4.j Income In addition to population, income is an important factor to consider, particularly in terms of discretionary income available to spend at local shops and businesses. The study area has a sizable median income overall that is comparable to the unincorporated county ($52,679 versus $57,600, respectively). Map 6 shows the variation in median income levels in different parts of the study area, with some falling below the East Naples overall median income to the east of the area and south of US 41, while other areas range up to well above the county median income at nearly $66,000 and $100,000. Mop 6: Median Income for the Study Area Census Block Groups F� m H.,,,.,;,. Is eLVD o c..p,� J Median Income m $65,676 todf $19,075 - $35,000 ❑ v 2 $35,001 - $52,679 m - m $52,680 - $65,675 NIS 100 000 r E N 7 dr $65,676 - $100,000 m s r $100,000 - $250,000 10 East Naples Study Area a City Naples m _ Parks/Managed Managed Land CRA Boundary m T masson DR Rattlesnake Hammock RD � r ❑ mP �" S0�J0 m r ��P°ate d e� Sabel Palm RD 41 !i $32,001 to $52;P680 to $52�,679 $657675 G C 6 i I O 9 N A0 0.75 1.5 Miles I I I pate So . Cotter County. Cdr., MPO. FDOT, FGDL and US Census Source: American Community Survey 2018 5-Year Estimates Age Map 7 illustrates that there is a range of median ages (a middle measure of ages in an area, indicating a typical age) by census block group in and around the Study Area. The community includes working -age residents that may have children at home still, as well as retirement -age residents. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1060 9.A.4.j Map 7. Median Age by Census Block Group in and around Study Area �`� J ■ � r`- 1 y ,�.. g1' vMedian 15 Age df , r` 53-54 rCity of Naples C A. i 1 - , r. I� Source: American Community Survey 2018 5-Year Estimates East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1061 9.A.4.j 5.0 Land Use and Market Analysis General Overview A general review of land uses in the area (Map 8 and Table 2) indicates that vacant land in general in the Study Area is limited, at only 6% of overall Study Area acreage. This finding suggests that the area is primarily in a redevelopment mode as opposed to a mode where new development is going in on vacant lots. The configuration of land uses with roadways is also critical to highlight, particularly when analyzing existing commercial uses and considering approaches to increase desirable commercial uses in the Study Area. As Map 8 and Table 2 show, the existing amount of vacant and existing commercial that serve as a starting point for development and redevelopment opportunities is limited at 11% (2% for vacant commercial, 9% for existing commercial), if specialized uses such as golf courses, tourism sites, and parking lots/mobile homes lots are included; however, some of these specialized sites may have more involved considerations for redevelopment (consequently, we have not included them in our more detailed opportunity analysis later in this section). Much of the land in the Study Area is used for residential and utilities (a combined 66% of the total acreage); utilities is used here in the context of map designations to indicate utility and other general right-of-way, groundwater recharge areas, extraction areas (where applicable), and other similar uses (not necessarily public). Additionally, the Study Area lacks a grid pattern roadway network, limiting access between residential neighborhoods at the center of the Study Area and the major roadways, as shown on Map 8. East/west through travel is limited to Davis Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road, with US 41 cutting diagonally. North/south through travel can mainly use Collier Boulevard as the direct route (again there is also US 41 cutting diagonally); many of the major collectors providing north/south travel do not continue through the entirety of the Study Area Additionally, there are only six intersections between local and major roads. This land use and roadway configuration could ultimately be a limiting factor for certain project aims such as attracting additional desired commercial uses since commercial thoroughfares are lacking in the heart of the Study Area, yet later stages of this project will evaluate opportunities for improving access between neighborhoods and existing commercial corridors for multiple transportation modes including walking and biking. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1062 9.A.4.j Map 8: Existing Land Uses and Roadways in Study Area Existing Land Use Vacant Resdendal Swpb Farmty de Ltaboe 11on1e dfl Mdb•Fa"(�10 Unas) Condo CoopRewement%fisc lift IAWbTa" (>10 Units) Vaunt Com &m I dil Connrnerwl dr Parkmgrrounst Attramn GO Course Vacant Industnal Induslnal 41 Vacant lnsm venal 41 Institubonal dFI CountylSlaWklmtery 4F schmi No Date IV EastNaplesStudyAroa Cdy of Napes de ParkVMaMged Land 42 CRABdundary _ 11 # MaiwCollector or Arterlal l.4 a `r, CocalNaJor Road intersection Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 with some exceptions to reflect more recent conditions. Calculations based on existing land uses for this report rely on non -adjusted designations in the Florida Department of Revenue database. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1063 9.A.4.j Table 2: Existing Land Use Acreage and Share of Acreage in Study Area Existing Land Use Vacant Acres 421 % of Study Area 6% -Residential 187 3% -Commercial 175 2% -Industrial 42 1% -Institutional 16 0% Single Family Residential 2,851 92 39% Multi -Family Residential Mobile Home Commercial 1% 184 3% 362 1% Industrial 266 4% Institutional 47 1% Agricultural 149 2% I County 649 State 50 Utility/Other 1,691 Public Schools 142 9% 1% 23% 2% Colleges 80 1% Golf Courses 250 3% Tourist Attraction 78 1% Parking Lot 11 0% Total 7,351 - Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019, note: total acreage may differ slightly from sum of individual use acreages due to rounding. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1064 9.A.4.j The predominance of residential uses over other uses is not unique to the Study Area, but also characterizes the county as a whole. The amount of square footage built by decade (Figure 1) illustrates this point; additionally, the shares of residential and non-residential in East Naples are currently 89%/11% respectively. These shares are currently 85%/15% in the unincorporated county, which was used for comparison since it is made up of areas in the county most similar to the Study Area. These numbers suggest that the predominance of residential may be more severe in East Naples than other similar parts of the county. Figure 1: Residential and Non -Residential Share of Square Footage Built by Decade in East Naples 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Pre 1960 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s Residential SF —Non-Residential SF Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 R9% 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 / 11% Unincorporated county share of non-residential: 15% The following sections talk about residential trends and commercial trends in more depth, with the section on commercial exploring in more detail the relative lack of non-residential square footage and ways to address this issue. Residential The land use analysis reviewed several factors of residential uses, including housing types, values, age and redevelopment, and affordability; findings are detailed by each of these topics in the remainder of this section. Housing Types Map 9 shows the location of different housing types in the Study Area; while single-family residential is widespread and takes up the greatest share of acreage as noted in the previous section, there are pockets of mobile homes, multi -family housing, condos, and other housing. When housing types are reviewed by square footage and number of housing units, multi -family residential, including condos, is the dominant type, with a total of 34.6 million square feet built from before the 1960's through the 2010's (compared to 28.5 million square feet of single- family residential) and over 18,000 units built during the same time period (compared to 11,406 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1065 9.A.4.j units of single-family residential). As a result, this area is not unfamiliar with housing types that are typically denser than the standard single-family home, even if it is generally a low -density area as noted in Section 4.0. Map 9: Location of Housing Types in East Naples Radio RD a1-75 S 175 N Residential Uses dF Vacant >� Single Family 9 dF Mobile Home 0 'VaAles Multi-FamilyfOther --�� — Ai BLVD p � Nertta9e bq Condo >.. EastNaplesStudli m p 9 City Of Naples m Parks/Managed Land ' .1 CRABoundary (�1 o .:rz . o Tl nos., biS � �F l $ ie nake ammack R — - �_ �_ Fifa o j F f }l awn I C'� _.�!9A� c� ■o V� �'.. Sabal Palm RO C[ c Aa 0 75 1.5 Miles N I Data Sourres'CollIB, county Collier MPO_ FOOT, FOOL and OS Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1066 9.A.4.j Table 3: Residential Square Footage Built by Decade and Housing Type Pre 1960 116,979 2631324 2,186,013 3,590,598 3,934,337 10,137,697 8,270,704 28,499,652 8,429 1960s 52,641 1970s 3,047,442 4,872,235 5,963,871 6,460,394 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 5,389,127 25,794,139 Total N/A N/A I N/A 93,356 N/A 394,029 20,408 304,406 2,202,570 148,504 2,517,865 111,412 4,051,440 67,592 8,792,283 1,119,299 Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 Table 4: Residential Units Built by Decade and Housing Type Pre 1960 78 1960s 165 1970s 1,087 1980s 1,567 1990s 1,712 2000s 2010s Total 3,950 2,847 11,406 Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 174 N/A 8 N/A 11 N/A 57 125 2,225 N/A 482 387 I 3,950 9 85 253 3,832 690 34 99 3,934 542 15 74 1,593 654 3 50 15,719 1,895 684 988 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1067 9.A.4.j Housing Values "Just value" provides an estimated value of residences based on property appraiser data (note that this estimated value is typically lower than what the current sales price would be). Figures 2 and 3 show just value for single-family homes and condos in the Study Area Compared to the county as a whole. The figures show that single-family home values are like those countywide, with the exception that East Naples lacks as much housing at the extremes of the values (very low and very high). Note that parts of the county such as Naples tend to have housing values that are high enough to be uncommon among a lot of communities. In terms of condos, East Naples values are similar to the county's, except that East Naples lacks extremely high value condos and has a much higher share of condos in the $100,000 to $150,000. Figure 2: Just Values of Single -Family Homes 40% 1 Note that these higher 35% valued properties may not be typical of many 30% communities. 25% .20% 15% 10% 5% Ll 0% — ■� Less than $50,000 to $100,000 to S150,000 to $200,000 to $300,000 to $500,000 to $1,000,000 or $50,000 S99,999 $149,999 $199,999 $299,999 $499,999 $999,999 more ■ East Naples ■ County Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1068 9.A.4.j 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% �M .. Less than $50,000 to $50,000 $99,999 Figure 3: Just Values of Condos $100,000 to $150,000 to $200,000 to $149,999 $199,999 $299,999 ■ East Naples ■ County Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 Note that these higher valued properties may not be typical of many communities. I I L-I m. $300,000 to $500,000 to $1,000,000 or $499,999 $999,999 more The discussion of density is also important in terms of tax base and taxable values in an area. Areas that may have lower just values on a per unit basis (Map 10) may still have a strong just value per acre measure (Map 11), which is likely due to greater relative densities in these areas. The opposite can be true where higher per unit value can relate to lower per acre value, likely due to lower densities in an area. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1069 ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv 0 0 0 0 0 to N N 0 r-I M ICT r-i 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O M ' LO c I M c-I ri i O O O O O p � O o g a 9 O O O O O O O O Lri to 4 w Sw _o N 4 Z 0 LPI i/} i/} (6 cr3 a ci %F O O O N _O N ri O M r- N L Jc Pig kt p 1 alip Imla—, �. 7:7 RU is�� � W;niam IFNI' ,eg �G r 0 r- 0 d m Y V l4 a E a0 C m O E m U L U m a Q O N 0 E E 0 U N Q Z (0 LU n ;se3 Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-1d : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo ddWO AelaaAO wvsfl lewwsueal :;u9wLpejjv T U a a� o (.o I:t .-1 rn ' r1 rl m rn a. Z O°c 0 0 0 o O L.n oo I- O O m 9* O M rl rl I 00 � O O O � O 00 0 rl 00 � OLnLr rn r� ri c O th +h th [0 Ln rl O rl rl � 00 00 ° o a r 9.A.4.j Housing Age and Redevelopment Redevelopment can help maintain housing values and improve structural quality where needed. The age of housing in terms of when units were built or significantly renovated may provide an indication of structural quality and whether units are typically in a condition to be ready for redevelopment or not. Figure 4 shows when single-family homes were most recently built or significantly renovated; most units (60%) were built or updated in the 2000s or 2010s, so they are likely in good condition. However, there is still a sizable share from the 1990s or previous decades that are approaching an age where redevelopment may be needed or that have already aged to that point. Figure 4: Share of Single -Family Homes Built or Significantly Renovated by Decade 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Pre1960 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000S 2010s ■ East Naples ■ County Year Built or Significantly Renovated Pre 1960 Units 80 Per Year N/A 1960s 165 17 1970s 1,100 110 1980s 1,600 160 1990S 1,700 170 2000s 4,000 400 2010s 2,900 290 Total 11,545 - Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 60% of single-family homes were built in the 2000's and 2010's. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1072 9.A.4.j Figure 5 shows the decade single-family homes were built or significantly renovated by location. Some of the older homes are along the US 41 corridor or in the western portion of the study area, indicating that there may be a need to renovate or redevelopment to improve structural quality in those areas. Newer units are also located in these areas, but also are significantly located in the eastern portion of the study area. Figure 5: Location of Single -Family Homes Built or Significantly Renovated by Decade R.J. RD 1960s and Prior HIVD nlp k. F4.,—,k RD p m 01 T _ 9< 80 AD 2 5 5 Mlles I I I Deu 5—cef C~ County. Gooey MPO. FDOT. FGDL — I JE r. Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 RM. RD 1970s HLVII Ranl kw I/ rk RD p _41 165 Units RaO 200`O s w HLV11 4 4r. & RD r� 4,000° Units R.a]in RD 1980s HlVD ?a�`b5nt �i RO C41 ..' f 1,100 U,n,i,ts RS7 o RD 201Os . I'.xc�snawc 'lammx•. RD . � 4 2, 90.0, Units o Single -Family Home Housing Affordability Housing burden is a measure that provides a snapshot of current affordability conditions in an area, for both rental and owner -occupied units. A household is typically considered burdened if it is paying 30% or more of its income on housing and is typically considered extremely burdened if paying 50% or more of income on housing. Additional considerations to keep in mind when thinking about this measure is the absolute numbers of renters or homeowners in an area (which can indicate number of people affected by rental or mortgage burden), as well as absolute income levels. A household that is paying 30% of income on housing but making $1 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1073 9.A.4.j million of annual income is in a better position to pay for other living expenses than a household paying 30% of income on housing and only making $30,000 in annual income. Map 12 shows the share of existing households in the community experiencing rental and housing burden, both at the 30% measure and 50% measure, by census block of the Study Area Traditional multi -family housing units that are typically rental make up about 6% of the housing units in the Study Area, as noted earlier; Map 12 indicates that rental burden tends to be more extreme (higher shares of households experiencing burden at the 30% and 50% thresholds) than mortgage burden in the Study Area. However, sizable shares of owner -occupied households (10-25%) are still experiencing mortgage burden, an occurrence widespread throughout the Study Area at the 30% burden Map 12: Housing Burden threshold. These findings suggest a need for more affordable options for households in the community, particularly for rental units and households falling below the median income. One factor changing dramatically over the years and that may influence housing affordability is housing size. Figure 6 shows how the median square footage for a single- family home has steadily increased since the time prior to the 1960's, roughly doubling in size. This finding may signal intensified housing affordability issues if housing prices increase due to size increases. Percent Burdened 25.1%-35% Median Income (2018) 100 35.1%- 55% Collier County - $62,407 10.1 io -25% - 55.1% - 100% A Q EastNaplesStudyArea o i 5 3 Mi Managed Land Source: American Community Survey 2018 5-Year Estimates East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1074 9.A.4.j Figure 6: Median Square Footage of a Single -Family Home in East Naples by Decade 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 Pre 1960s Approximately Doubled 1960s 1970s 1980s 19905 2000s ■ East Naples ■ County Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 2010s Commercial As noted in Section 3.0, participants in the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study wanted to encourage more of certain desirable commercial uses along the corridor, including shopping and retail, mixed -use and live/work development, restaurants, grocery stores and wholesale clubs, and hotels and resorts. As noted in the beginning of this section, the Study Area appears to be underserved by non-residential development in general. As a result, the following analysis focuses on the amount of desirable uses already in the Study Area, reasonable benchmarks to gauge and increase the amount of desirable uses, and approaches for how to move towards those benchmarks. Existing Amount and Location of Desirable Commercial Uses As noted earlier in this section, the amount of commercial in general in the study is limited to about 9% of the total Study Area. Figure 7 shows the land use categories that capture desired uses noted in the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study. One-story retail or shopping centers make up most of the desirable commercial categories in the area. Note that some development types may be measured in different categories; for instance, restaurants may be captured in the shopping center category, the mixed -use category, or the restaurant category. Map 13 shows where these categories are in the Study Area, mainly along US 41. There are certain additional developments just outside the Study Area that capture certain desirable uses. These developments are in the Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) located to the west of the Study Area and shown on Map 13. Other developments are located further south along Collier Boulevard and to the north near the Interstate 75 interchange at the intersection with Collier Boulevard. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1075 ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv s` 4-J 1 tao c v V c W1 � Y � f0 �^ J CL O IW N CO O O V i 0 0 N 0 M • M 0 IZT M 0 Lr) 0 r- 0 Ict 0 r-I Lf) Q) LD Ict M N N r-I N c I ri ri L 4 r_ a) oc U 0 +-+ i Ob to p C i N am m ca CL 0 v 0 v) -2 O 2 vi Qj Q N � L � O > +O a) O Q- U U bM N O _ Q L 4-1 N � N N N N ^ Q� U V) Zn ++ N L f6 +J v O v L O U aO+ a Z N u 0 9.A.4.j Map 13: Location of Existing Desired Commercial Categories Radio RD 1.75 S 1-�5IN L�=- e 5 B I o � Y vis BLVD Nape$ Heritage DR m J� B m n C COmmerGdl Parcels East Naples Study Area ¢ - 6 �-�, �_ - City of Naples o — — 0 1' --` e x Parks/Managed Land r. CRA Boundary m T mass Rattlesnake Hammock RD ♦ Vol'Sol,, Sabal Palm RD ,41 .py •._ Ci 1 a � O rV � � ti ♦ 1 OP N �. A0 0.75 1.5 Miles 1 1 1 A o, Dare Sources GoImr County. Co1Wr MPO, FOOT, FGOL and US Census �1 Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 Commercial Benchmarks The beginning of this section noted that the share of total square footage that is non- residential, which would include square footage of desired commercial uses, is currently 11% in the Study Area this compares to a 15% share in the unincorporated county as a whole, which represents areas thought to be most similar to the Study Area in Collier County. In view of this difference, the project team began to analyze how the Study Area might move towards closing this gap, with a focus on increasing desirable commercial uses. In thinking about benchmarks for these increases, it is important to keep in mind some of the constraints noted in the previous sections of this memorandum. The lower population density and high estimated share of seasonal population (60% of residential units estimated to house seasonal residents) may make it difficult to attract additional commercial uses to the area (Section 4.0). Additionally, the current land use and roadway configuration may limit the areas where new commercial may locate and how accessible the businesses are by neighborhoods (Map 8). East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1077 9.A.4.j However, if the population growth estimated by the CIGM (Map 5) for the area in coming years occurs and is accommodated, it could lead to increased density in the area. The possibility of this outcome depends in part on land use regulations and incentives implemented by the County, discussed further at the end of this section. The CIGM also estimates the commercial square footage and demand for square footage for the area, shown in Map 14. The amount of existing and planned commercial square footage is estimated at more than 3.3 million square feet and remaining steady over time, while the demand is estimated to increase to nearly 6.6 million square feet by 2040. As a result, it is estimated that the demand for commercial square footage may outpace what exists and is planned in the coming years. In addition to reviewing these estimates for commercial demand in the long-term, the project team also looked at a more immediate, on -the -ground gauge of market demand for the existing commercial spaces in the Study Area by looking at current vacancies of these spaces. A high- level review of existing commercial leasing opportunities in the area from listings on the internet service LoopNet provides an approximate vacancy rate of 7%, based on listing as of April 15, 2020. This suggests that there are existing commercial opportunities not currently being filled by the market, many of which are spread along US 41 (Map 15). The County is limited in its control over the private market, yet it can work to influence the market through regulations and incentives, discussed later in this section. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1078 lil ;se3 Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :;u9wLpejjv U a Y U a W Q J YW OC FO to = W O Z2 0 Q V~1 W W W0 QVQ QJ OWaU yZL TWO ZJU Q J J u QU UO 0� W fA O L) �it ait d J A m a v N �Gs[ri to �a- a Z w r. z a� a o N as W-11" f u / 'J I 9.A.4.j Map 15: Location of Commercial Leasing Opportunities in the Study area iM ♦• �► - • It a T Source: Commercial leasing opportunities posted on LoopNet.com as of April 15, 2020 In view of these considerations, reaching a full increase to a 15% share of non-residential square footage may pose a challenge; yet even getting partway to 15%, such as 12-13%, is a potential target, particularly if the increases are mainly from increased desirable commercial uses. Table 5 shows the amount of additional commercial square footage and corresponding acreage needed to reach 12% to 15% shares of non-residential square footage relative to the overall square footage. The acreage is based on typical square footage built per acre for these uses in the unincorporated county. These estimates assume the current amount of residential square footage and that existing vacancies in built commercial structures would be filled. Estimates range up to 3.4 million square feet or 270 acres of commercial uses for the 15% benchmark. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1080 9.A.4.j Table 5: Commercial Square Footage and Acreage Increases Needed by Benchmark of Residential and Non -Residential Shares of Square Footage 88% 1 12% 1 1.3 million 1 1 99 87% 13% 2.0 million 157 86% I 14% 1 2.7 million 214 85% 15% 3.4 million 270 Source: calculations based on Florida Department of Revenue 2019 data; note: these numbers assume the current level of residential square footage and square footage/acreage added in addition to filling vacancies in existing commercial buildings The remainder of this section will explore approaches for progressing towards these benchmarks. Commercial Development and Redevelopment Opportunities The following analysis focuses on likely locations for new desired commercial uses. To begin with, Activity Centers (Map 16) are areas formally defined in the Collier County Growth Management Plan that are intended for more intense and mixed -use development relative to single-family residential areas. They cover 530 acres, or about 3%, of the Study Area. The project team then looked at on -the -ground development patterns to understand how the current development landscape and potential future opportunities compared to these target areas. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1081 9.A.4.j Map 16: Future Land Uses in East Naples, including Mixed -Use Activity Centers Red. RD F 9 fL O ws RLVD g f Naples Hant ge DR ® 1-75 S 1-75 N Future Land Use m Collier Blvd Community Facady Subdist CI m m Conservabon Designation o m Po dr HlN—s Residental Intill Subd.1 ,\ m -� m dr Resltlennal Density Bands m Henderson Creek MU Subd,st m MU Acwty Center Subtllt \ J 11) J df! vut.ntum MU Subd.st U a � Urban Coastal Fringe Subtlisl mP Urban Residental Fringe Subtlest sson OH O Rattlesnake r Hammock RD Urban Residental Subtlisl East Naples Study Aru:i � City of Naples '\ O Parks/Managed Land \ �P 'sa,.: e`Jp m CRABoundary 2 �dt0N 41 � fi Sabel Palm RD �a OP K U � TIC S � o n rr 'O �q V� C� 8`� *,low N A0 0.75 1.5 Miles 1 - '� l I I P 0 Data spaces CoNrr County. CNW MPO. FDOT FGDL end US Census Source: Collier County Aside from filling vacancies in existing commercial buildings as discussed previously in this section, the most straightforward areas to encourage new business and commercial uses are vacant commercial and mixed -use lots; they are already zoned for desired uses and do not have existing buildings. Map 17 shows that there are several existing vacant commercial and mixed - use properties, primarily along US 41 and around the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard. There is a total of approximately 137 acres of vacant commercial lots and 54 acres among vacant mixed -use lots with potential for commercial development; note that the Hacienda Lakes mixed -use site in the northeast section of the Study Area is vacant based on property appraiser data, yet it is likely to be developed without commercial uses so it is excluded from Map 17 and the acreage count. While there is sizable vacant mixed -use acreage, typically only 10% of mixed -use land is used for commercial, based on an analysis of how these parcels are typically developed in the unincorporated county. Additionally, many of these properties are along major thoroughfares which helps buffer residential neighborhoods from the major roadways and allows those neighborhoods to remain East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1082 9.A.4.j cohesive residential areas; however, as noted earlier, this can also make roadway access between neighborhoods and commercial uses challenging. Any efforts to develop these sites need to promote access to the new developments. Map 17: Vacant Commercial and Mixed -Use Lots with Potential for Commercial Development 1-75 S 1-75 N ► 137 Acres Total Vacant Commercial - ► 54 Acres Total Vacant Mixed -Use* vis my_ D j _`es Heritage DR L y t rn o @ m � East Naples Study Area 8 E City of Naples ParksJManagetl Land F • '� l7 Vacant Land dp Commeroial rs b3 Mixed Use m7 A r ��- ` IL CRA Boundary as y a m � 41 Sabal Palm RD • ^ U `'• — -► Q — Or _ N � Op A0 I 0.75 1.5 Miles N I I P 0 0,iw Sonic C.14., County, Collier MPO. FDOT. FODLaM US C... Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019; *note: does not include large mixed -use Hacienda Lakes parcel; typically less than 10% of mixed -use land is built out for commercial, based on an analysis of how these types of lots are typically developed in unincorporated county. If the County could employ a strategy to influence the private market and achieve a full build - out of vacant commercial land and a more moderate build -out of vacant mixed -use land for commercial (based on the typical 10% build -out in unincorporated county), the Study Area could achieve the 12% non-residential square footage benchmark (Table 6). Existing vacancies in built structures may make it harder to fully build out vacant lots; incentives and other strategies may help. Achieving the higher benchmarks would require additional intensity on vacant commercial/mixed-use land or on existing commercial land that is redeveloped. Again, the ability to achieve this build -out depends on market demand and the ability to influence it. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1083 9.A.4.j Table 6: Build -Out Scenario with No Intensification of Commercial Uses Source: calculations based on Florida Department of Revenue 2019 data; note: vacant mixed -use acreage used in this scenario based on 10% commercial build -out typically seen on mixed -use lots in unincorporated county. Aside from new development on vacant lots, existing development can be redeveloped to update structures and provide additional commercial opportunities. Commercial development, particularly that which is already zoned for desired uses, is the most straightforward (Map 18); note golf courses, tourism uses, and parking/mobile home lots are excluded since there may be special considerations when trying to redevelop these parcels. For the purposes of this section, these uses are referred to as "specialized commercial uses." The project team attempted to identify more likely redevelopment opportunities among these commercial uses based on value and size of the parcel; less costly and larger parcels are easier to redevelop. Map 19 shows non -specialized existing commercial uses valued between $10,000 and $1 million that the project team considered more likely to redevelop since they are relatively less expensive (note that values below $10,000 were excluded to remove any abnormally low values that may not accurately reflect the true parcel value). Most of these parcels are located along the US 41 corridor. The project team also filtered these parcels based on those larger than an acre in size, resulting in 16 parcels with a total of 30 acres among them (Table 7). East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1084 9.A.4.j Map 18: Existing Commercial, Excluding Specialized Uses Radio RD c m a vis BLVD p� Y N C_ m s 01 % O R; - ® M_75S1�I5 N i �Y Naptps Heritage OR _ - df Commercial Parcels East Naples Study Area City of Naples Parks/Managetl Land Hammock � _ CRA Boundary r , J U Saba[ Palm RD =_ � r N 4 � A0 0.75 1.5 Miles N 1 1 1 p O Oats Sources Corh rCounty, Collier MPO, FOOT, FGDL and US Census Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019; note: these commercial parcels do not include golf courses, tourism uses, or parking/mobile home lots since these uses may require special considerations when exploring the option to redevelop them. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1085 9.A.4.j Map 19: More Likely Redevelopment Areas for Desired Commercial Uses Rai7in RD ® 4-75 S 1-75 N Parcels approximately valued between $10,000 and $1 million These parcels are 15% of total existing commercial vis BLVD g ""Heritage OR o to m a o - 8= .. N 3Y ..� � 0 - •. f s to T mason DR w.� .O Rattlesnake Hammock RD L 11 0 0.75 1.5 Miles I I I �,Ia Sources Collier County, Collier MPO. FDOT. FGOL and US Census S — 0 -W" df Commercial Parcels East Naples Study Area City of Naples Parks/Managed Land CRA Boundary SabaI�RD Source: calculations based on Florida Department of Revenue 2019 just value data; note: these commercial parcels do not include golf courses, tourism uses, or parking/mobile home lots since these uses may require special considerations when exploring the option to redevelop them. Table 7: Parcel Size, Count, and Acreage for Parcels Valued between $10,000 and $1 Million Parcel Large (10 or Larger Acres) 0 -. Acres 0 % of Total Acres 0% Medium (3 to 9 Acres) 3 13 25% Small (1 to 2 Acres) 13 17 32% Very Small (<1 Acres) 53 22 42% Total 69 53 100% Source: calculations based on Florida Department of Revenue 2019 data; note: includes commercial parcels valued between $10,000 and $1 million in just value with desired commercial use categories and excludes golf courses, tourism uses, or parking/mobile home lots since these uses may require special considerations when exploring the option to redevelop them. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1086 9.A.4.j To get an increase in commercial uses, more intensity would need to be added to these sites. Certain existing commercial could also be redeveloped at the existing intensity with a focus on desired uses through incentives. Table 8 illustrates a scenario in which the County successfully engaged in more robust approaches to encourage additional commercial development, including additional intensity, on vacant land and commercial land identified as more likely to redevelop based on value and size as described in Table 7. If the County allowed and could successfully incentivize an additional 25% increase to existing intensity, the area could achieve additional commercial acreage needed to achieve the 13% benchmark. Note that the table does not account for existing commercial that may redevelop since it is gauging only added uses (and not those that are replaced); however, incentives could be used to encourage redevelopment of existing commercial uses towards more desired commercial uses at the same allowed intensity. Table S: Build -Out Scenario with Intensification of Commercial Land that is Vacant or More Likely to Redevelop Source: calculations based on Florida Department of Revenue 2019 data; note: vacant mixed -use acreage used in this scenario based on 10% commercial build -out typically seen on mixed -use lots in unincorporated county. Approaches for Influencing the Private Market Given the potential development and redevelopment options, what tools are at the County's disposal to influence the market to produce these outcomes? Some tools, such as a marketing campaign and regulatory/incentive adjustments within the existing parameters of lot sizes and allowed amounts of development, provide a more moderate approach. These tools can be used first to see if they have the desired effect without larger changes. If more robust measures and East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1087 9.A.4.j incentives are needed, other approaches could be explored such as adjustments to lot depths on the corridor and an evaluation for increased allowed amounts of commercial intensity and incentives to achieve full allowed build -out. This approach can also be explored for residential uses in the area to allow and encourage more residential units and provide a larger local customer base for local commercial. The following provides an initial list of implementation options to explore further for recommendations, which may include regulatory changes to the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan, incentives, funding tools, and capital/non-capital investments, in Technical Memorandum #2 of the plan: • Marketing campaign for area • Adjust regulations for site requirements • Evaluate and adjust amount of commercial development allowed (this can be paired with incentives to encourage full build -out) • Allow/encourage adjustments to commercial lot depths • Evaluate and adjust amount of residential allowed to increase residential units and customer base for local businesses (this can be paired with incentives to encourage full build -out) • Incentives, including but not limited to: o Design flexibility o Expedited permitting o Fee reductions/waivers Tax increment finance funding was also mentioned in a stakeholder meeting with development representatives as a potential incentive to support development and redevelopment in the area. Note that this is already in place in nearby areas, such as the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area to the west of the Study Area and in the Innovation Zone to the northeast of the Study Area near the Interstate-75 interchange. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1088 9.A.4.j 6.0 Community Assets The project team documented community assets, including public facilities and services, in East Naples along with their performance levels and planned improvements to support community branding and marketing and identify facility/service provision considerations for future planning efforts. Information is based on spatial data files from the County, the Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the Fiscal Year 2020 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and the most recent plans for specific topics (e.g., transportation, parks, schools, etc.). The following summary includes maps that show the location of major facilities, services, and other assets in the Study Area and its surroundings, as well as more detailed descriptions on assets by types, including information on performance and planned improvements. Map 34 at the end of this section shows the location of planned improvements for all the assets reviewed in the summary. To begin with, Map 20 shows that location of public facilities including libraries, fire stations, hospitals, police stations, schools, parks, and non -motorized transportation infrastructure. The following provides performance information on the public facilities shown (does not include hospitals). East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1089 9.A.4.j Map 20: Public Facilities in East Naples Lorenzo Walker Institute m cal Park r 1-75 S 1-75 N © �ibranes East Naples apleS✓tertapeOR 44 Fire vIsBLV� Shadowlawn m H Hospital/Clinic > "Rich King m m Memoriah Greenway Police mr p m 3 r Elementary ce Fn a - - ., - r Middle - �� r High Avalon Th mas R tl sn ke Hammock ftR - Lely Park Type �. —�ti Nelghhorhood Q Community x© e O Regional P S a tP�dke'gs c O U 5, East Naples Study Area 4t C Shared Use Path Gresnways rLely 3 Paved Shoulder Parkside - —Bike I-anss m ��( — Sldewnik C City of Naples ParkslManaged Land aCRABoundary " 4 N �P A0 0.75 I I 1-5 Mlles I oafs sources. coiner Ceunty, colr,r k1P0, FooT, Fc©L and us census a Source: Collier County and Collier County School District *Rich King Memorial Greenway is an existing greenway,• amenities include multi -use path for walking and bicycling, exercise stations, and benches. Libraries Libraries include the East Naples Library and South Regional Library; no major facility additions or improvements are noted in the AUIR or CIP. Fire There are eight fire stations in and around the Study Area; all of the Study Area is within a ten- minute travel time from a station (Map 21; note that areas shown in white do not have any roads for assessing accessibility). East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1090 9.A.4.j Map 21: Travel Time from East Naples Fire Stations to Locations in Study Area . m Radb RD RD NaP�es Lv0 Hemage DR �1 1 m o I lA� 0 1 m Ratt a cl— \ , / \n\ bal Palm RD � at s� TPt P Travel from Fire Station 5 Minutes tr to Minutes L• ; Fire Station 9 Cy 111112 East Naples Study Area City of Naples ParksIManaged Land A0 I 2 Miles ,,�. CRABoundary Oa::-...-. ry Ccue�::our (. PO, FOOT FOOL 1r USCe— Source: calculations based on facility data from Collier County Police The Study Area lies in the revised District 3 for the Sheriff's Office (Map 22). No major new facilities or expansions for this district are noted in the AUIR or CIP. Table 9 shows average response time to calls for service have increased slightly since 2011, similar to many other districts, and that the average response time for 2018, 11.3 minutes, was between those of the more urbanized areas such as North Naples District (District 1 at 9.4-minute average response time)and more rural areas such as the Everglades District (now District 5 at 12.2-minute average response time). East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1091 9.A.4.j Map 22: Sherriff's District Boundaries Source: Collier County Fiscal Year 2019 AUIR Table 9: Average Response Time (Min.) to Calls for Service by District 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 D1- North Naples 9.0 9.1 9.1 9.2 9.2 9.1 9.5 9.4 D2 - Golden Gate 8.2 8.7 9.7 9.9 9.7 10.1 9.6 10.5 D3 - East Naples 9.5 9.7 10.0 10.6 11.0 11.1 11.8 11.3 D4 - Estates 11.0 10.5 9.9 10.1 10.9 11.2 11.5 12.0 D5 - Everglades -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.4 12.2 D7 - Everglades 12.8 13.6 13.8 12.8 12.1 12.6 12.4 -- D8 - Immokalee 6.0 5.9 5.8 6.3 6.5 6.5 7.3 7.3 Response times represent average time in minutes from dispatch -to -arrival for citizen -generated calls for senrice. Districts 3 and 7 boundaries changed, created a new District 5 in November 2017; District 7 no longer exists. Source: Collier County Fiscal Year 2019 AUIR East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1092 9.A.4.j Schools There are six elementary schools, two middle schools, and two high schools in and around the Study Area. Table 10 shows the school grades for 2018 and 2019. All schools are maintaining at least a C grade, and most maintained or improved their grades between 2018 and 2019 except for two. The Fiscal Year 2019-2038 Capital Improvement Plan for Collier County Public Schools does not note any major facility expansion or additions for the Study Area. Table 10: Public School Grades in East Naples Avalon Elementary Calusa Park Elementary C C B B Lely Elementary Manatee Elementary Parkside Elementary Shadowlawn Elementary C C B B B C C A East Naples Middle Manatee Middle Lely High C B B B B B Lorenzo Walker Tech A A Source: Collier County Public Schools Parks The following parks are in and around the Study Area; amenities and needs from the analysis and public outreach completed as part of the 2018 Parks and Recreation Plan (PRMP) are noted, with updates where available on certain improvements planned or completed more recently. • Eagle Lakes Community Park East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1093 9.A.4.j o The park's new community center and pool are completed. Nearly $60,000 of improvements were programmed for the aquatic facility in Fiscal Year 2019 (AUIR). $3 million total is planned over the plan's 5-year timeframe for the Eagle Lakes Community Center Expansion, adding indoor gym/courts to the existing building; the improvement will be funded with impact fees (CIP). o The PRMP documented over -use of the soccer/multi-purpose fields; installation of artificial turf is anticipated to increase field capacity and accommodate field users from East Naples Community Park after conversion of those fields for pickleball use. o Other needs noted from outreach and/or analysis from the PRMP included: ■ General maintenance, including fields and invasive species management ■ Use of space behind the community center ■ Free STEAM camps for kids and more education programs • Sugden Regional Park o This park currently offers an inland beach and water sports. • East Naples Community Park o The park is currently used for pickleball and pickleball sports tourism, including the US Open Pickleball Championship. A Master Plan was approved in 2019 laying out 2 phases of upgrades for new courts, facility buildings, parking, and other general improvements to the park. The CIP includes nearly $2.1 million for construction of a new East Naples Community Park Welcome Center, which will replace the restroom building and the pro -shop, as well as a new maintenance area. o The PRMP documented high use of soccer/multi-purpose fields; the fields are planned for conversion to pickleball courts, with the artificial turf installation at Eagle Lakes Community Park anticipated to increase capacity of those fields and help accommodate current East Naples Community Park field users that will be displaced. o Other needs noted from outreach and/or analysis from the PRMP included: ■ Upgrades and general maintenance ■ More gymnasiums, parking, and a maintenance barn • Rich King Greenway Regional Park o Currently offers the greenway. • Cindy Mysels Park o Currently offers little league fields. • Naples Manor Neighborhood Park o Current offers a playground. o General need for facilities noted in the outreach and/or analysis of the PRMP Maps 23 and 24 show the driving time needed to reach community and regional parks. Most of the Study Area is within a 15-minute drive of these parks, and other areas are within a 20- East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1094 9.A.4.j minute drive -time or less (note that areas in white do not have any roads for assessing accessibility). As a result, parks are fairly accessible by car. Map 23: Driving Time to Reach Community Parks in East Naples Radio RD m ram. ! r m - - - BLVD g C, r1l 1 � m Rich King, i Memorial I �Greenway* m 1 �a U �m � I 1 i Al r/ - � r r 0 1 1 i A 0 I 0.75 1.5Miles I I -r Data Sources. Comer C-1, Cone, MPO. FDOT. FGDL and US Cenws ,, 1 Naples Her'.ge OR I �10 I N Walking Distances Half Mile Two Miles Drive Time to Community Parks till 5 Minutes 6 - 10 Minutes 11 - 15 Minutes dfl 16 - 20 Minutes Park Type Neighborhood o Community ORegional 1112 East Naples Study Area City of Naples Parks/Managed Land 0 CRABoundary 6abal Palm RD Source: calculations based on facility location data from Collier County *Rich King Memorial Greenway is an existing greenway,• amenities include multi -use path for walking and bicycling, exercise stations, and benches. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1095 9.A.4.j Map 24: Driving Time to Reach Regional Park in East Naples 9 Radio RD m ' Walking Distances • � � Half Mile I Two Miles vis R11 D Na""Ientage OR Drive Time to Regional Parks p m 11 5 Minutes � m 6 - 10 Minutes ONO-' 11-15 Minutes 7 Rich King �E df 16 - 20 Minutes Y I Memorial m" park Type Greenway*— _ @ v � Neighborhood d 0 Community ` m@ O Regional I m p � East Naples Study Area Rattlesnake Hammock RD City of Naples �. 0, k_ o Parks/Managed Land CRA Boundary SU den Q 0 e9e Regional Park " P o-0 T c la+ > m C O l �6 d L �P N A0 0.75 1.5 Miles I I I A D Dab Sources Collier County. Colby MPO, FDOT, FGDL and US Gnsus Source: calculations based on facility location data from Collier County *Rich King Memorial Greenway is an existing greenway,• amenities include multi -use path for walking and bicycling, exercise stations, and benches. Non -Motorized Transportation Infrastructure Map 25 shows existing and proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities as of the 2019 Collier MPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Several major thoroughfares in the Study Area have a designated bike lane, with one proposed for Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The local neighborhood roads typically have sidewalks and/or paved shoulders. Note that first tier priorities from local walkability studies, one of which was conducted for the Naples Manor area within the Study Area in 2010, were included in the needs assessment for this MPO Plan; Tier 2 and 3 priorities are not yet completed. Map 26 shows the Naples Manor area on which the walkability study focused, as well as the Tier 1 through 3 priorities from the plan and associated recommendations for these roadways. Note that the AUIR and CIP show line items for general sidewalk improvements in the county, with an associated budget of $10 million over the 5-year East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1096 9.A.4.j capital planning timeframe. County staff is currently planning sidewalks on Catts Street, Carlton Street, Warren Avenue, and Carolina Avenue. Map 25: Existing and Proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities in East Naples Area Legend Designated Bike Lane ^/ Connector Sidewalk Low Speed/Low Volume Road Proposed Facilities Sharrow Shared Use Path Greenway Paved Shoulder Source: Excerpted from the 2019 Collier MPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan CS/Safety Study Corridors Greenways with SUPs Proposed Enhanced Facility ® Proposed Enhanced Crossing East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1097 anv Svx31 Vs -e 9.A.4.j Maps 27 through 29 show areas within walking and biking distances (a half -mile and two miles, respectively) for libraries, schools, and community parks in the Study Area and its surroundings Walking and biking was measured specifically for community parks since they provide a certain level of amenities and are more widespread relative to regional parks that draw from larger areas. Many sections of the Study Area are outside of these walking and biking distances, indicating they may have to rely on other means such as cars to get to these amenities. For areas within these distances, methods for facilitating walking and biking may be explored. Map 27. Areas within Walking and Biking Distance of East Naples Libraries _Radi, Ro 1-7b s l-�_ _ C � m o :T"ot,vis - - BLV❑ - NLIt R tlesnake Hammock Rp Q Libraries East Naples Study Area 41 CP l Z `�. - Shared Use Path Fx Paved Shoulder _ Pike Lanes d � ✓� }I Y k. T�! Walk Distance HalfMile l J 2 Miles prim n City of Naples m -- ParkslManaged Land � _ o CRAPoundary 0 0,75 I 1.5Wiles I N .. I oars s, c,11e, c,ry, coir Mvo, Foor, rcor aid us ce p 0 - .� 7 Source: calculations based on Collier County facility data East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1099 9.A.4.j Map 28: Areas within Walking and Biking Distance of Public Schools in East Naples dla RD 1-755 I-75 N I, h L m t - vii. BLV❑ al les Nerifage OR 2 o � m 3 Y � n U � a T asson ❑ 9 O R tlesnake Hammock RD Elementary j Middle High P 1 East NapleS Study Area - 41 �P � - Shared Use Path - WY\ o o` Groenways N x 3 Paved Shoulder 2 -Bike Lanes 7. Walk Distance o Half Mile a- �_. s 2 Miles City of Naples m q ParkslManaged Land u � �C/yy oEg CRABountlary /1 0 0.75 1.5 Miles 3 �J I I I A 0 Data 3ourcee. Collier County, Collier MPO, FDOT, FGDL antl US Census - )�l Source: calculations based on Collier County Public Schools facility data East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1100 9.A.4.j Map 29: Areas within Walking and Biking Distance of Community Parks in East Naples r�a' j Ra N J— 7Sjl T`�`�+ Jr— l; ) vis BLV ❑ � aPlE�S Her(taga pR �{ ' I l m T 1 I a t199n9ke Hammock Rp I w:. 12 1 0 0,75 1.5 Miles 0 Dais Source: Cclli�r County, CO- MPO, FDOT, FGDL and U6 Census Source: calculations based on Collier County facility data Walking Distances dF Fiali Mile Two Miles Park Type • Neignbornaad Q Community ORegional East Naples Study Area City of Naples ParkslManaged Land CRA Roundary Saba[ Palm Rp Ir MI East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1101 9.A.4.j Roadways Map 30 shows the roadways in the Study Area with federal functional classes. The Level of Service analysis in the AUIR does not indicate that any major roadway segments in the Study Area are deficient based on the minimum adopted standard. Notes on improvements from the AUIR and CIP include the following: • US 41 between Airport Pulling Road and Rattlesnake Hammock Road is expected to become deficient by 2027; the AUIR notes that this is in the South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception area and plans to monitor the situation. • Segments of Collier Boulevard south of the Study Area are expected to become deficient in 2028; the AUIR notes plans to widen the roadway between Wal-Mart Driveway and Manatee Road and monitor the situation to Mainsail Drive (see Long Range Transportation Plan Cost Feasible discussion below for additional information). • The AUIR also notes an intersection improvement for Airport Pulling Road and Davis Boulevard from Fiscal Year 2018; the CIP also notes nearly half a million dollars' worth of improvements for Fiscal Year 2019. • The AUIR notes the Wilson Benfield Road study and right-of-way considerations; the CIP mentions nearly $3.5 million in funding forecasted for Fiscal Year 2019 and $2 million for Fiscal Year 2020 in roadway impact fee funding (see Long Range Transportation Plan Cost Feasible discussion below for additional information). These plans also mention funds for general improvements, such as road resurfacing. Map 31 shows the Cost Feasible roadway improvements from the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan; note that this plan is currently being updated for 2045. Improvements in and around the Study Area include the following: • Davis Boulevard roadway improvement - partially funded in Cost Feasible Plan • US 41/Collier Boulevard interchange improvement - partially funded in Cost Feasible Plan • Collier Boulevard roadway improvement, south of US 41 between Manatee Road and Tower Road - funding programmed for 2026 to 2030 • 1-75/Collier Boulevard interchange improvement, northeast of the Study Area — funding programmed for 2021-2025 • Benfield Road roadway improvements, east of Collier Boulevard — partially funded in Cost Feasible Plan There is also one Congestion Management Systems/Intelligent Transportation Systems (CMS/ITS) project identified at the edge of the project area near Airport Pulling Drive and US 41; CMS/ITS projects are moved to the Cost Feasible Plan as funding becomes available. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1102 7eaL Sn0 6 000 Z Z d:VIS 5 Z £-69]Qd mmdmoo ¥dWOA NOA O�vsn-ie wsuej-Lwowten¥ � $ > m > m e § w / E E 2 n o ® ' 0 0ƒ q / 9 2 % 2 \" v/ w y 2 L E ° E o t E y Co> m$ ƒ > v m # § q d ƒ a �ƒ ® E z o v/ 2 § 2 u g± , , § , , ,0 » « Lei � w ■ , a 2 E � k 2 Inc « LL ¢ i 2 E � $ § w S CC � : & / / 0 ■ 0 o | o | s | ■ | ( / § E a. \ a 9.A.4.j Map 31: Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Cost Feasible Roadway Improvements 2040 CAST FEASIBLE NETWORK MoN-l; RAA*,E 1 ff ? Q..lY&POR TAT;QN FLAN 1 f L 1 1 i 1 �ytl ,SF E ON Ihd',;FfT I I a wa�, sLuft A! N InW4VlmaIvI ijvpHir I 81aftM 0 blArdhsrmpos Flyokw Near InueuRhen ifWaly,r�r.�+! W r Intirw%cbon InWarirrwd Imr¢'rMtr►�RrrtT n-.r'uly Pad Th+o4o;h C-onstrmtxm � N*t Fuly FyriOod. The-*uo wuckh am= FiWs propet Source: Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan; note: map cropped to highlight Study Area. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1104 9.A.4.j Additionally, a 2014 Collier MPO Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Study found that the segment of US 41 between Commercial Drive and Guilford Road, and the segment of Airport Pulling Road between US 41 Avenue and Estey Avenue were high pedestrian/bicycle crash corridors. Part of the US 41 segment identified is in the East Naples Community Development Plan Study Area. Based on the findings from the 2014 Study, the Florida Department of Transportation conducted a follow-up Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety audit in 2015. Cardno prepared this safety audit and summarized the findings and follow-up implementation undertaken in a March 2018 presentation. Key observations along the high crash corridor segments of US 41 and Airport Pulling include the following, excerpted from the Cardno presentation: • Heavy traffic • High Speed traffic • High bicycle and pedestrian activity • Bicyclists mostly on sidewalk • Bicyclists and pedestrians were sharing the sidewalk • Bicyclists riding with and against traffic flow • Pedestrians crossing mid -block • Appeared to be commuter users versus tourists Summarized improvements include different bicycle facilities types, speed reduction measures, improved site distance for side streets, driveway crash countermeasures (reduce driveway conflict points, reduce turning radii, crosswalk markings, etc.), intersection improvements (crosswalks, signal improvements, etc.), mid -block crossing improvements, and general corridor improvements (narrower lanes, wider sidewalks). Non -capital and design measures included enforcement and education measures. Funded improvements noted include those at Commercial Drive/Palm Street, Airport Pulling Road, Courthouse Shadows/Espinal Boulevard, and Calusa Avenue/Great Blue Drive. Fiscal Year 2019 landscaping capital projects noted in the CIP include Collier Boulevard between US 41 and E Marin Circle ($1.8 million), Davis Boulevard between County Barn Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard (nearly $373,000), and Santa Barbara Boulevard between Rattlesnake Hammock Road to Davis Boulevard ($1.6 million). US 41 landscaping is also generally noted (nearly $71,000). East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1105 9.A.4.j Transit Map 32 shows the current transit routes in the Study Area, along with transit stops. Many of the major thoroughfares have transit service, with stops located along these thoroughfares. Due to the land use and roadway configuration in the area discussed in Section 4.0, the stops may be difficult to access easily from central residential neighborhoods in the Study Area since access to the thoroughfares is somewhat limited. Additionally, the frequency with which the transit services run (headways) ranges between 1 and 1.5 hours, which poses an additional challenge in using transit. Map 32: Transit Routes in East Naples 1 IL aples J Heritage DR — O m 11 m o m ` m gY N m I 7I— QIm~ o P O V IL `Podia C Sabel Palm RD �r 41 r A �m • r Y�i-1= m y7 ti • � � U 4 • ✓ - o m ' '• Transit Stop o ` OWE risling Transit ROule \,- EaslNaplesStudyArea iCity of Naples Packs/Managed Land 0 1� pP � CRABoundary n A0 0.75 1.5 Miles N I 1 I p 0 Data Sources. Collier Counly. Coll- MPO. FOOT. FGOL and US Census Source: Collier Area Transit However, improvements to Routes 17/18, Route 19, Route 29, express service between the Government Center and the airport, and express service between the Government Center and Lee County are in the Transit Cost Affordable Plan for the Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (Map 33). Additional information on transit improvement can be found in Appendix B. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1106 9.A.4.j Map 33: Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Transit Cost Affordable Plan 2040 TRANSIT COST AFFORDABLE PLAN 4 'rMLONG RANGE 4;,6 j'IRANSPORTATION PLAN 1XIM-ra SEE'NSET I I '---___--� SET I INSET I M � l-4- 21140 Transit Cost Affordable Plan Fixed -Route Service Needs Merca-VMJ v=_ RaGEsrakakiammo... ■i� F■ trnsu ri 1.1 R1 urns 1 P+1 B Express Service Needs - Ci illri t?rw C: nrrrr rii SSVF rllraorUFS•YC Coiner--e=_ Coun}• Unnedn, L 7' Exlsting TPamsf=_r •-' RCut: 1v "cal]nnlort ■ ■ ■ Gerte• ,IE d,�=_ PA aria E[Iff11ng TTansf'_r r1cirr. itur. loon krill-')F-F+ne 1qb90 riou S. RCac ■ ■ ■ RCut=_ 2E Lia'I EM] � Rlt�n Trn�fer _ F'rinM-'r,1•-N -kid} ClFculal-cm Noo& f ESI7tinQTrm5f-rPort Ecu Ch to SCaaar.C'fla FubirE TrangPr P C-ot�le'.t-�renk airt voaaanal El cm, FuNn�arK-h -Ride fLC E33 Route Eusbi y --AT Ruules ■ Increase Frequency [o 3W 4b nilnutes" ■ Expand lorvicc until 10 PNI 0 ' Nol shown on map Miles " Exclude Routes 19. 12d. 125. 302, and 30 t Source: Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan; note: edited to remove inset maps for clarity. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1107 9.A.4.j A Brief Note on Other Infrastructure Other infrastructure related to drinking water, stormwater management, wastewater, and solid waste are not a primary focus of this plan, yet it is important that these services are adequately provided for current and future development. Highlights of improvements noted in the AUIR and CIP are noted here. County utilities staff indicates that there should be no major stormwater capacity issues in the area assuming current stormwater design criteria is followed for development and redevelopment, and there are no encroachments into the natural areas or storage areas. Capital stormwater improvements noted in the AUIR and CIP include those in the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project area, Old Lely, Naples Manor, and Griffin Road (south of US 41 near Barefoot Williams Road) areas. Regarding water, staff does not note any pressing capacity issues at this time, and the CIP notes funding for pipe replacement in the Old Lely area. Regarding wastewater, improvements include updates to the South County Water Reclamation Facility; County staff notes that there is a phased project underway to transfer wastewater at up to 4 mg/day from the south plant to the north plant to address stressed sewer capacity. For solid waste, the CIP shows funding for improvements for the East Naples Recycling Drop Off Center. Staff notes that they have done an initial review for potential sites for a new recycling drop-off center in or near the community given interest from business owners and residents. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1108 ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv a ,u cc m a o N v v° a m 'v o O N O � a � a Q 'a o = N a > a t Q LL c � -o v° U � z a a c a Z a o � v o a u � � a a V) a c a c a In 3 E a c m 0 E m U U N 9.A.4.j 7.0 Policy Review The following provides an overview of key considerations from the existing Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code. Growth Management Plan The following are some key takeaways from the density analysis and general review of the Growth Management Plan: • Major Future Land Use categories of the area include Urban Residential, Urban Residential Fringe, and Urban Coastal Fringe, as well as the Mixed -Use and Interchange Activity Centers (Map 35 and Table 11 for related maximum densities). • Key portions of the Study Area, including the US 41 corridor, lie in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), which formally limits density allowances generally to 4 dwelling units per acre (DUPA; see Table 11). • Mixed Use Subdistricts allow for the redevelopment of C-1 through C-3 zoning with a mix of commercial and residential, although note that areas in the CHHA are still limited to 4 DUPA (further details are in Sec. 4.02.38 of the Land Development Code). • Mixed -Use and Interchange Activity Centers are allowed the maximum densities of their respective subdistricts, although several of these areas are also limited by density restrictions in the CHHA and Urban Residential Fringe subdistrict limitations on densities. • As of the current Future Land Use plan, additional residential density in the area would need to be considered for areas generally north of US 41 and west of Collier Boulevard. • There is general support expressed for "Smart Growth" (e.g., walkable, mixed -use development) policies in Objective 7 of Future Land Use Element. • Part of the project area is also in a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA, Map 36), which can allow for more urban -style approaches to managing transportation needs and level of service. Note that an ongoing Transit Impact Analysis for Collier County provides the following preliminary recommendations: o Consolidate the TCEA and the Transportation Concurrency Management Areas (TCMAs) into a transit -oriented infill and redevelopment district, adjusting the transportation review process to incentivize infill and redevelopment in support of transit and non -motorized modes by simplifying the Transportation Impact Study requirements while retaining certain requirements to guard against adverse traffic impacts of large-scale development. o Adjust requirements and strategy options related to Transportation Demand Management strategies applied in the TCEA and TMAs for increased effectiveness. o Allow density increases in the established activity centers and mixed -use corridors. Note that certain activity centers in the project area may face certain °' E limitations due to location in the CHHA, as noted previously. U r a East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1110 9.A.4.j Map 35: Future Land Uses in Study Area Interchange Activity Center #9 B m O \" Mixed Use Activity Centers A 0 0-75 1.5 Miles l oBla 50urces Lal69r Goan IS'. Lpagr MPp, FOOT, FGDL .MF U5 Lerl$u% Source: Collier County Future Lana Use Callief Bl:d GommuniN `Kitty SuWisl CAnSenRliOn Designation dr Him— RemdenSal Intl Subdisl dr Relidenlal Density Bands dr Hend—.n CBek MU Subd'6t dr Mu Acti>71y Cenler Subdist V ncenban MU Svbdlsl umam Coastal Fringe Sebdisl Urban Resitlernlal Fringe SdbdW Urdan Residemial Sebdls! CaastaE H gn Haxem East Naples 81udy Area elty ➢i mpi➢ s Af ft*. damped Land t 42 CRABvundary ¢ Roadway Classification UndeAned i IAPeClOf Local ■ 1 — MNwr Anada! East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1111 iSe3 6v sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : tiS99Z) £Z-6-9 dad ejeldwo3 VdWO ABIJOAO 6vsf1 Iemwsueal :; owtveuv a N N a i N 0 oC a+ 4U a C U 4J L t]A aN+ � � p � tB �° •� Cp a, a� N �_ N c 0 L O bM N VI (n +j i ap 41 N O f6 t 4- L QJ p E U O Ln + O L M p O +� f0 LO N O } O O U ++ L ° 0 U C N V) E O C O 2 N 41 U i f6 a — v�i C) V) *� CO N _ Qj O 0 v (UO C C p U° L v U in C M L U L `� X N C to a N O O 7 N 4- 3 D *' 3 ° o N s D_ v ° a1 o 0 ' Q v a D C° m N 0) Q Li c�i� `� 41N V N o N C lD +O O4-1 O L N O Q LO a- Q N N U nj a i U 4J X— L QCJto fE L (6 N Mro a••+ CC G 0 ° � CCL D 4- V)U U a- E C 4J C N aJ U 4N O p O LnJ W +J N p Q a a L U a V O �C fN6 U lDO v o v C v a L Ln V) a Nv O U t O (6 0 Q ++ Q N W N O 4-10 U Da O' E O U L L > 4J �° N p O NN XO _C + C: > l0Q n � 4J X a+ -_ . U 6 V c co °° cc L j 4-1CU E a) in _ cv� C C ' C �O N � m Q41f6 -aO O>O 4 O U a) 4 E E 4- x C X X � O O+ U f6 4—Da 0 E 3 a UN a a D o D o rl 76 fE 4j 4.1 N W � � L L L D E 0 E 7i mo U ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO AelaaAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv 2 v v LJ C C U C (U t C6 VI 3 , 3 z O O V U O — n (J N V) c (Uo � 4-1 Q � c ai N 4.1 v O v 0 Ln ,) in +� OU 0 00 0 4J O N E a, ago � v � E L v .� O N O N cI -0 i 0 aJ Q L.L a 2 L U Q N co U C D Q U a v o M a, -- U m -0 > � +J N f0 U Q l0 N N > c a1 v O _0 E vi in N � E v ca uo Q - i aJ Ln m x Q + _ E G C E o QJ Q a, c CL a -0 O (u f0 aJ L bA GA ?� 4-1s a) 4-, o � +, a, 0 0 — U !Em Q F a 0 E m U L U N tw O L.L � f0 t C6 N _ v U Q (U u m U f6 O O Z) 7- U 9.A.4.j Map 36: South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area J L a r s 0 0.15 0.3 0.6 0.9 Miles oAva sew - ' Public Commercial Residential Total Acres 92.96— 540.58 429.49 1063.03 8.74% 50.85% 40.41% 100% O c m — 41 8 SON DR RATTIESNIV(E NA4MOCK RD _— —_ Ww MW o <•••. �. TR - 4 South US 41 Transportation wn•mi•..♦r s.n r.u..•�H.i re ".i Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) Source: Collier County East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1114 9.A.4.j Land Development Code • Much of the Study Area is zoned as Planned Unit Developments (PUDs), which carry zoning regulations specific to each development (Map 37). Provisions for Mixed Use PUDs and Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Center PUDs are contained in Sec. 2.03.06, yet these provisions do not include required ranges for the mix of shares of commercial and residential (the latter in fact includes a maximum share for neighborhood commercial). This finding may hamper the creation of truly mixed -use developments if these types of PUDs are used in the redevelopment of the area; typically mixed -use developments in the county include less than a 10% share of commercial development. For further analysis on how these have been built out and vacancy opportunities, particularly for new desired commercial development, see Section 5.0. • As mentioned in the previous sub -section, Mixed Use Subdistricts allow for the redevelopment of C-1 through C-3 zoning with a mix of commercial and residential, although note that areas in the CHHA are still limited to 4 DUPA. Additionally, relevant commercial categories, mainly along US 41, are relatively shallow, which may constrain commercial development, redevelopment, or mixed -use development through Mixed Use Subdistricts (see additional discussion in Section 8.0). Lot depth may be considered to help stimulate development and redevelopment of these commercial areas. • Tractor Trailer -Recreational Vehicle Campground District areas along the corridor may also be evaluated for mixed -use, with consideration of transitioning existing users of those sites. • Design criteria for undesirable uses: o Sec. 5.05.05 includes separation requirements (currently 500 feet) and other special design standards for facilities with fuel pumps; evaluate the current separation standard and also the placement of pumps at the rear of the development, away from the main facade and main roadway frontage. o Public outreach activities from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study indicated that there was a desire to limit self -storage uses in the area. "Motor freight transportation and warehousing (mini- and self -storage warehousing only)" is a permitted use in C-5 and a conditional use in C-4 (Sec. 2.03.03). A proposed amendment to the Land Development Code is under consideration to address concerns with the self -storage use by allowing it in C-4 commercial districts only in combination with other permitted uses as part of a mixed -use development and if it occupies less than 50% of the total area of the first floor. The East Naples Community Development Plan process will document these efforts and evaluate other appropriate options to adjust the Land Development Code to discourage and/or obtain more preferable design for new uses of this type. • Design criteria for desired development: East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1115 9.A.4.j o There are already design criteria for Mixed use Subdistricts (Sec. 4.02.38) that include screening provisions through landscaping and off-street parking placement at the rear or side -street of the buildings, which can aid with creating a walkable environment. o Sec. 4.02.01 includes setbacks for commercially zoned properties; setbacks for C- 3 through C-5, commercial zones prevalent in the Study Area, are typically 15 feet or above. Evaluate these setbacks to support walkability while also meeting design desires established through public outreach activities. o Evaluate commercial -to -commercial buffer requirements in 4.06.00 to support more accessible and walkable commercial development in the Study Area. o Evaluate placement of off-street parking in the rear for commercial development, which relates to parking standards in Sec. 4.05.00; this may be targeted to certain areas, such as in an Activity Center and along certain segments of major corridors. o Note that access management for Mixed Use Activity Centers is regulated in Sec. 4.04.02 and the associated Access Control Policy; these provisions can be evaluated as needed in relation to access of commercial development in Activity Centers by non -motorized means. o Sec. 4.02.23 includes provisions for development in Activity Center #9; these are mainly focused on architectural style and landscaping. • Table 12 recreates affordable housing density bonus regulations in the code. • Additional zoning regulations will be evaluated as needed based on project analysis and public engagement outcomes in the initial stages of the project. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1116 LG Q w z Z � W z U a v a H 0 cD iv cn Q c� ch n > Z Q U~C7 cn M Y `n a U= d O u a w v u LL LL v u ¢ w Zm M M z W W X MQ� W W M w x w a4 6i — CIA�9 eJe(IJeg Vueg 0 J m > Of o G�ea - 1 du _ ii o, y Y �cz cc 7. QG Q. leg Alunoo CIAIS Pooxa�ej -�I LIZA c o _ 14 E I ��� 9.A.4.j Table 12: Table A. Affordable Housing Density Bonus (Additional Available Dwelling Units Per Gross Acre) Maximum Allowable Density Bonus by Percent of Development Designated as Affordable Housing 1,1,1 Product (% of MI) Gap (>120—<_140) 4,5 Moderate (>80—<_120) 4 Low (>50—<_80) Very -Low (550) 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% F 80% 90% 100% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 F n/a n/a 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 6 7 F 9 101 11 12 12 12 78 9 10 11 12 12 12 12 12 ' Total Allowable Density = Base Density +Affordable Housing Density Bonus. In no event shall the maximum gross density exceed that which is allowed pursuant to the GMP. 2 Developments with percentages of affordable housing units which fall in between the percentages shown on Table A shall receive an AHDB equal to the lower of the two percentages it lies between, plus 1/10 of a residential dwelling unit per gross acre for each additional percentage of affordable housing units in the development. s Where more than one type of affordable housing unit (based on level of income shown above) is proposed for a development the AHDB for each type shall be calculated separately. After the AHDB calculations for each type of affordable housing unit have been completed, the AHDB for each type of unit shall be added to those for the other type(s) to determine the maximum AHDB available for the development. In no event shall the AHDB exceed 12 dwelling units per gross acre. 4 Owner -occupied only. 'May only be used in conjunction with at least 20% at or below 120% MI. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1118 9.A.4.j 8.0 Public/Stakeholder Involvement Public and stakeholder involvement included two calls with members of the development community active in the local scene, a preliminary meeting with the East Naples Civic Association Board, and a public survey along with opportunities for comment as part of a public webinar and via the project email address. The following summarizes findings from these activities. East Naples Civic Association The project team met with East Naples Civic Association Board members from 3:40 to 4:30 pm on February 12, 2020. The meeting began by reviewing some preliminary findings from the project team's analysis, which was followed by a question and answer discussion. The following key takeaways from the discussion are listed by topic area. • Study area: o The Civic Association has a larger boundary than the project study area. o There is interest from Civic Association members in expanding the study area further east to Manatee Boulevard. Staff noted that further east on 951, the land use designation changes to rural fringe, which informed the boundary for the study area; the rural fringe area is currently under its own re -study as part of an in-house project. o There was a suggestion to add an area north of the current study area, up to Davis Boulevard and 1-75. • Relevant planning studies for reference include: o Bayshore CRA plan o Activity Center #9 planning o Golden Gate City plan [note: after review, the project team found some differences between the land use and transportation configuration of the Golden Gate City area when compared to the East Naples Study Area which may limit applicability of this plan to the Study Area.] • Concerns/Interests: o The concentration of low-income housing in the area is a concern; the Civic Association is interested in data on this point. o The Civic Association expressed concern about school quality; it is interested in data on schools and performance. o Storage uses on vacant commercial and car washes were noted as concerning land uses. o Interest was expressed in attracting redevelopment and commercial/restaurants through incentives; note that there are some uses outside the current study area that might affect access to commercial (e.g., outlet mall south of US 41 along a Collier Boulevard). E U 2 r a East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1119 9.A.4.j o Interest was expressed in funding mechanisms for infrastructure and incentives (e.g., MSTU); there was a proposal for Michelle Arnold from the County to speak "M OTA1.11i1M • Transportation: o The project team noted the analysis would be high-level and information taken from other plans. It would include transportation considerations to support connectivity and recreational opportunities. o There was a recommendation to add Santa Barbara to major thoroughfares/collectors Development Stakeholders The project team held two calls with various members of the local development community, on March 25, 2020 and April 9, 2020. The following are key takeaways by theme from these discussions: • What the market will provide is determined by supply/demand and the economics of projects. A good amount of commercial acreage is already approved, and simply allowing more intensity will not result in more commercial acreage built. Look at vacancy rates for existing commercial structures to get an indication of current market demand. • Rezoning is always a barrier and entitling small properties is often not worth the effort; having zoning to support desired direction is helpful, but there is still a need to make projects more cost-effective. • Doubling intensity to meet the target will be challenging; construction costs are high. Additionally, some lots on US 41 have high prices even though they are small parcels. • The planning process needs to focus on incentives to make the developments more cost-effective. Appealing incentives include: o Flexibility on development standards o Expedited reviews o Waiving impact fees (aside from the standard credit process) o Tax increment financing investments (note that tax increment is applied in nearby community redevelopment area and in the Innovation Zone area to the north east of the project study area). • It was noted that there are possibly only two truly mixed -use projects exist in Lee and Collier County; mixed -use is very limited. Mixed -use would require intensity to make the numbers work out and would need residential for immediate returns. • The area needs to redevelop to have more dense areas in terms of residential; this is a major limiting factor. However, the area is seeing more apartments going in. • Seasonal population and the associated market can also pose a challenge; a high seasonal population can limit the number of people frequenting establishments for part of the year. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1120 9.A.4.j • Depth can also pose a challenge, particularly on an angled roadway such as US 41 that may create lot shapes that are more difficult to work with; this issue posed a challenge at Courthouse Shadows. Adding depth can help fix the geometry of a lot. • It was recommended to check the build -out of existing Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) to understand opportunities for commercial. Other locations with development potential included: o The south side of Rattlesnake Hammock Rd north of the hospital could be a shopping area. o Shopping center with Goodwill and former Lucky's has multiple owners but is a good opportunity. • No specific uses were identified to target; there is a need to look at incentives for both residential and non-residential uses, especially to support mixed -use developments. Redevelopment and new commercial and mixed -use development are all types to encourage. Summary of Public Input The following are key themes that emerged from input from the general community and public, primarily collected through an online survey that collected responses between May and June 2020 and a public hybrid in -person and virtual workshop that was held June 29, 2020 with over 90 attendees. Community members could also submit additional comments to a project - specific email address. More detailed summaries of input received are in Appendices C and D. • There were some questions about how the Study Area Boundary was determined, and the inclusion of other surrounding areas. The boundary was informed by the District 1 Commission boundary with some adjustments for land use and transportation patterns. The project team added a surrounding area of influence for consideration to accommodate aspects outside the Study Area and intends that this plan can guide development and redevelopment efforts in other similar parts of East Naples and the county. • Much of the survey responses came from a demographic that lived at least part time in the study area, did not go to work or school, and were at least 30 years of age. • The area has great access to amenities and provides great value in terms of what is offered for the affordability of the area, although some community members are concerned about adding more affordable housing to the area. • The area has potential and could be better developed, but there are concerns about over -building and losing or not having adequate green space and natural areas. Maintaining an aesthetically pleasing appearance for businesses and neighborhoods also emerged as a priority. • Many community members expressed a desire to rebrand the area, particularly with regards to naming, such as "South Naples" instead of "East Naples". East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1121 9.A.4.j • Limiting undesired businesses was a need identified in the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study outreach and continues to be cited as an issue for the community in these current outreach efforts. • More quality, well -designed, and diverse commercial businesses are desired; some respondents felt little additional commercial development is needed, potentially aligning with concerns about over -building and desires to maintain quality. Restaurants were noted as a priority among a variety of desired uses. Business types included both big -box, functional retail and small businesses • Survey respondents preferred to focus on major corridors including US 41 and Collier Boulevard to evaluate for additional commercial opportunities; US 41 was a corridor that the project team also found to have more potential opportunities through its analysis. • In terms of implementation approaches to increase desired commercial uses in the area, marketing and incentives tended to have the most widespread support, including considerations to try a mix of different approaches. Marketing and fee incentives were also some of the more highly rated implementation options from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study outreach. • Managing traffic flow and general congestion was a topic that emerged from the survey, as well as promoting non -motorized options including biking and walking; most survey respondents recognized the importance of thoroughfares for automobile traffic but were willing to consider compromises to accommodate other transportation methods. Survey respondents also indicated a preference for walkable commercial concepts, such as parking once in a cluster of establishments and walking between them. • In survey responses, most public facilities and services for the area were rated as mostly satisfactory or as neither satisfactory nor unsatisfactory, falling in the middle; the exception was non -motorized pathways, the public facility/service rated as mostly unsatisfactory by survey respondents. This aligns with findings from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1122 9.A.4.j 9.0 Appendices Appendix A: US 41 Corridor Study Development Style Preferences Figures 8 through 11 show development type preferences from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study based on those types that received a preferential vote from a majority of people participating in the public involvement polls. The percentage of preferential votes received by the choice is shown below the images, with percentages in green indicated the share of preferential votes when "all of the above" votes were included; note that "none of the above" was also a response option in these polls. Note that all images are sourced from the Study. Figure 8: Commercial Development Preferences from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study Strip Mall Hotel/Lodging 51% Destination Shopping Destination Shopping 79% 59% East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1123 9.A.4.j Figure 9: Residential Preferences from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study Figure 10: Live/Work and Mixed -Use Preferences from 2018 US 41 Corridor Study Live/Work Building IPI�n� u ^ , 11 42% Mixed -Use Note: the 2018 Study grouped the two mixed -use visuals here together in the analysis of the share of support for certain mixed - use types; the summary of findings indicates strong support for mixed -use of four to five stories. These similarities in building height may be why choices were grouped as such. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1124 9.A.4.j Figure 11: General Urban Design Preferences from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study Building Scale 65% Building Placement 71% Appendix B: Additional Transit Improvement Information Map 38 shows an excerpt from the 2016-2025 Collier Area Transit (CAT) Transit Development Plan (TDP), with potential improvements for the 10-year planning period. Note that this plan is currently in the process of being updated. Potential improvements identified in the project area include the following, with services providing broader countywide or regional connections noted in addition to local service: • Fixed route service: o Route 17/18 extension along Davis Boulevard; costs for this improvement were estimated at $1,298,568 and implementation recommended for 2025. o Route 19 realignment to Ave Maria; costs for this improvement were estimated at $940,432 and implementation recommended for 2025. o New fixed route service proposed for County Barn/Santa Barbara, connecting the CAT Operations Center and the Government Center along Radio Road and Davis Boulevard, with a loop on County Barn Road and Santa Barbara; costs for this improvement were estimated at $505,349 and implementation recommended for 2025. • Express service: o Along US 41 between the Government Center and Everglades City; costs for this improvement were estimated at $446,461 and implementation recommended for 2025. o Along Davis Boulevard between the Government Center, airport, and Florida Gulf Coast University (Lee County); costs for this improvement were estimated at $334,846 and implementation recommended for 2025. • Flex service: o South Naples flex area; costs for this improvement were estimated at $334,846 and implementation was recommended for 2025. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1125 9.A.4.j Other improvements proposed near the Study Area include new service between the CAT operations center and Creekside Transfer Station and the Collier -Lee County express service As of the 2018 TDP Annual Progress Report, no improvements to the fixed -route services in the area were implemented. Map 38: 10-Year Potential Improvements for East Naples Area New Fixed -Route: CAT Operations Center to Creekside Transfer Station ..-XW Express Service: Government Center to 1 airport and Florida Gulf Coast University Route 19 Realignment Ave Maria New Fixed Route: County Barn/Santa Barbara Route 17/18 Extension W Collier Lee County Connector 0 South Naples Flex Service Express Service: Government Center to E413 Everglades City Source: excerpted from the Collier Area Transit Transit Development Plan (2016-2025) East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1126 9.A.4.j Appendix C: Online Public Survey Summary The project included a public survey to gather input from the public on the vision, desires, and priorities for East Naples. The survey received responses from the beginning of May through the beginning of July 2020. The following summarizes findings from the survey; the total number of respondents is noted in parentheses for the question on which the information is based. The summary of findings is followed by a copy of the survey questions. Respondent Characteristics • 607 total respondents • At least 300 respondents for each question, except for questions providing an option to provide additional comments as a follow-up to certain questions • 79% are full- or part-time residents of study area (of 603 total respondents) • 70% of do not work or go to school (of 602 total respondents) • Nearly 100% of respondents where older than 30; 60% were older than 65 (of 604 total respondents) Common Terms to Describe the Study Area and Area of Influence Currently When describing the area, the most common theme survey respondents shared was that the area has potential, is underdeveloped and underutilized. They view the area as critical and important with a desirable placement in the county. They also describe the study area as inconsistent, lacking a true identity or cohesion in the type and style of commercial and residential development. Many respondents noted the area is unattractive or felt the area could be beautified or improved to become a more desirable area within Collier County. In this vein, many respondents felt there has been little or poor planning for the study area, poor zoning guidelines and too much of the wrong kind of development. Respondents most noted the study area lacks a variety of retail options, fine -dining or more upscale restaurants, and other service -oriented businesses such as entertainment venues and hotels. Most respondents also noted the study area has too many gas stations, fast food restaurants, storage facilities, car repair and car washes. Many also noted many vacant commercial properties that are in the study area, which they would like to see redeveloped first. Others still noted they would like to develop and/or maintain a local flair to the area in spite of a desire to see more well-known brand stores as well. More than half of respondents describe the area as a mixed area, and responses were evenly favorable and unfavorable. Some felt the area is eclectic and diverse, and attractive for tourism with leisure and recreational activities, affordable real estate and an area that is up and coming and improving and less congested than North Naples. They described the area as their community and home. Others felt the area is overdeveloped describing it as low to middle - income and felt it doesn't reflect the middle to upper middle -income residents who live or work in the study area. And others described the area as convenient and sufficient. Some descriptions of the study area were more contradictory. Respondents both lauded the study area for its affordability and low density, while others felt low density was an issue and East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1127 9.A.4.j that the study area represents a dumping ground for low-income housing and the homeless in greater Naples and Collier County. In the same manner, respondents equally described the area as overdeveloped and underdeveloped. Some described it as convenient, safe, quiet and peaceful, while others equally described it as disconnected, crowded, run down and noisy. Of respondents who mentioned natural resources and wildlife, many felt it is a growing concern that needs to be strongly considered in the planning and development of the study area and would like to see natural lands and habitats preserved and more parks and connected bike trails. Some stakeholders also expressed concerns about traffic and congestion increasing in the area. Of respondents who mentioned housing, some expressed a desire not to see any more residential development in the area while others expressed a desire to see less condominium homes and fewer multi -story units. Common Terms to Describe the Top Three Favorite Aspects of the Study Area and Area of Influence Convenience, and easy access to amenities and services including the beaches, downtown and area businesses were the primary aspect survey respondents like the most about the study area. A majority of respondents also highly appreciated that the study area is less crowded or congested than other areas of Naples, and still has open spaces, low density and lots of natural environment. Many want to keep the natural environment at the forefront of the community planning process, and some mentioned a desire to see more landscaped medians as a beautification effort in the study area. Many respondents also noted the affordability or value of the area and its safe, community feel, and the good condition of the roadway as the top reasons they like the study area. To delve deeper into the nearby amenities residents appreciate most, respondents listed parks, green spaces, sidewalks and recreational paths, golfing and the Bayshore area with its artist feel and the botanical gardens. Some respondents expressed a desire for the development of an arts center and more restaurants in the Bayshore area (which is outside of the study limits). Some respondents expressed a desire to see greater connectivity throughout the study area, particularly for recreational paths. Some expressed an interest in connectivity between Sugden Regional Park to the Botanical Gardens and Bayshore CRA, and others expressed concerns about the rise in gated communities and how those landlocked areas make the study area less bikeable and walkable. Some respondents noted the diverse population and middle-class neighborhoods as one of the aspects they like most about the area, and some respondents appreciated the planned communities such as Treviso Bay and Lely Estates. They noted the study area is friendly and supportive as well. Most respondents also mentioned the potential growth of the area, including its potential to attract a new mix of upscale retail and new restaurant amenities. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1128 9.A.4.j Common Terms to Describe a Desirable and Attainable Vision for the Future of the Study Area and Area of Influence In describing a desirable and attainable vision for the future of the study area and area of influence most respondents mentioned a strong desire for more mid -to -upscale restaurants, more shopping diversity and beautification. An ongoing theme was controlled development, with more of a focus on retail and shopping and less new residential. Respondents mentioned not wanting anymore strip malls and a desire to see existing commercial areas modernized and brought up to date or rezoned. One respondent mentioned permitting guidelines should be critically evaluated for long-term value rather than only short-term tax increases. Respondents also expressed a desire to maintain the existing setbacks and a strong concern for maintaining high standards for stormwater runoff and management. Some also mentioned retaining the old Florida feel to the area and ensuring that there are affordable amenities and entertainment venues for seniors. Another important theme across all responses is the desire for balance in maintaining low density and land preservation with attracting future businesses and having more robust commercial centers. Some respondents would like to see bigger box stores in the area such as a Target or Costco and perhaps a movie theater and post office, while others would like to maintain a small business feel to the community with unique independent restaurants and retailers. Others still expressed a desire to see mixed -use areas like Mercato in North Naples, or concepts that have more square footage per acre with retail and restaurants on the ground floor and housing on the second and third levels. Respondents expressed a desire to have a place where they can live, work and shop that is safe, convenient, and beautiful. Respondents also mentioned ensuring the study area is diverse culturally and socioeconomically, but with an effort to remove or update blighted, low- income areas. Better public transportation, more connected non -motorized pathways and green spaces for walking and biking continue to be a strong theme throughout responses. Traffic management and controlling congestion was also a concern for many respondents, with one respondent suggesting widening the main roadways, and another suggesting parking garages similar to downtown Naples. Respondents also expressed a desire to see a reduction in crime and improved safety throughout the area, particularly at US 41 near Shadowlawn Drive and the Bayshore Community Redevelopment Area (mentioned in Question 8 responses). Some respondents expressed a desire for community input to be an ongoing part of planned development for the area. Business -Related Information • 77% of 600 respondents visit businesses along US 41 several times a week or more, indicating that most survey takers are very familiar with this business area. • Top 5 issues (percentage of 378 total respondents): o Quality (88%) East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1129 9.A.4.j o General site/building design and aesthetics (73%) o Mix of types (60%) o Type (57%) o Amount (50%) o Other comments received related to issues with commercial businesses included the following: Respondents recommended developing regulations to require a consistent look and aesthetic for area businesses. They expressed a desire to elevate and maintain the appearance of properties and to have much needed beautification of the commercial corridors and to have more walkable or strollable business and residential areas. Overall, they expressed having a strategic plan in place to guide the aesthetic vision of the area and also a plan to attract a diverse mix of higher -end retail and services to the area. As part of this, some respondents mentioned a desire to have a no -high rise policy for new development. Respondents expressed a desire to have more of an upscale feel to the area and suggested first redeveloping areas with vacant commercial spaces before allowing any new commercial development. Stakeholders suggested providing incentives for redevelopment, and rezoning areas to attract the kind of businesses desired in the community. Respondents also suggested lowering taxes, requiring fewer fees and limiting regulations to attract better development. However, they are concerned there should be a scaled approach to growth and redevelopment of the area so that as new growth is planned, there is time to evaluate and assess the growth of the area as it progresses. While respondents strongly expressed a desire for more retail and upscale dining options and entertainment venues, they also want to see unique dining concepts, owner -operated concepts and fewer chains, particularly chain restaurants. A small group of respondents expressed a desire to attract healthy -concept restaurants and grocers and sustainable retailers to the area. They suggested establishing microcenters with tropical vegetation and outdoor dining, emulating 3d Street or other areas of downtown Naples. Some also mentioned targeting retail and restaurant concepts that offer a better value than Fifth Avenue sites and coordinating with the hotels and resorts near the study area to develop a shuttle service to US 41 businesses in East Naples rather than downtown. Respondents expressed interest in having a Target or a Costco as a large retailer in the area and having an anchor business who could be a large, year-round high -wage employer. Alternatively, some respondents expressed a desire to have a destination mixed -use center with dining, retail and entertainment similar to Mercato in North Naples, but with more affordable options. They recommended the US 41-Collier Boulevard area as a location for an anchor retailer or a mixed -used retail center. In describing these retail areas, respondents suggested having more strict guidelines for new development to build in a way that is more aesthetically pleasing to the end user and have more site awareness. Some suggestions included parking areas that do not East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1130 9.A.4.j face the US 41 corridor, requiring businesses to better situate or plan their footprint, having outdoor dining face a retention pond rather than parking areas for example. They also mentioned increasing the availability and access to parking and incorporating design and aesthetics into those areas as well. They also would like to see shops and restaurants more set back from US 41. Respondents were also concerned with possible overbuilding and how that may cause increased traffic congestion in the area. They expressed interest in having more mixed - use developments with residential and commercial components and having more transportation options including public transportation and non -motorized pathways. In addition, as the area continues to grow, respondents want to see improved traffic flow, reduced congestion, and more signalized intersections especially at entrances for large gated communities. Many expressed a desire to maintain greenspace, whether that be requiring more stringent setbacks for businesses along the US 41 corridor or having more landscaping to soften the structures and generally make business corridors more attractive from the roadway. Land preservation and very controlled development was also an undertone of these comments with bicycle and pedestrian access and more green pathways and recreational lands. Respondents also expressed a concern regarding low-income neighborhoods and no longer allowing development of low-income housing in the area and establishing a plan to phase out existing trailer park communities. Other comments included establishing a business improvement district and having one website representing all of the businesses in the study area, bringing a charter school to East Naples, and a post office to the area, as well as a fitness center and a lighted dog park. • Ranking of businesses identified as desirable during the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study (based on 368 respondents) o Restaurants o Stores for goods (e.g., clothing store, hardware store) o Cafes/coffee shops o Grocery Stores o Stores/offices for service s (e.g., dentist, salon) o Business/retail on same site as residences (e.g., mixed -use, live/work units) o Hotels/motels o Other common themes from additional comments: More than 170 respondents shared other preferences for the type of retail or business. Some shared that they would like to see more walkable retail areas and would like to see a balance between large chains and small, local companies and community needs. Many suggested mid- to high -end elder housing and healthcare services, and strong employers such as research and development companies. Respondents expressed an interest in seeing unique concepts like a progressive eatery & market or food hall similar to the Timeout market in Miami. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1131 9.A.4.j Respondents expressed a desire to see more parks and preserves or more small retail businesses and cafes that have quiet, green outside eating areas. Respondents also expressed interest in a specialty garden center such as Driftwood Nursery. Respondents expressed a desire for a large or small open mall concept like Mercato or Vanderbilt Shoppes in North Naples as well as a wholesale store such as Target, BJ's Wholesale, Costco, or Sam's Club. Other concepts respondents favored included specialty stores with unique offerings including specialty food shops, butcher shop, bakery, seafood shop, gift shops, artist studios, doggy day care and couture shops. Areas for entertainment were also strongly favored including sports entertainment centers, such as a driving range or bowling alley, sporting goods stores or sports bar. Respondents also voiced interest in family -oriented entertainment centers, a more modern movie theater, or indoor activity center, such as Sky Zone, or art venues. Nightlife was also a theme with respondents expressing interest in nightclubs, music venues, pool halls, a playhouse, a comedy club, brewpubs and wineries. Fitness -oriented businesses were also favored by respondents including gym services and fitness concepts such as a cycling center. Other concepts respondents mentioned included a book store, a community center for afterschool care and organized youth sports such as a YMCA, upscale spa, preschool recreational facilities, private schools, clubs, museums, art galleries, performing arts center, and artistic workshops including glass blowing, jewelry making or pottery shops. Some respondents mentioned liquor stores and casino gambling centers. Respondents called out specific well-known retailers they would like to see in the study area including Home Goods, Bed Bath & Beyond, Ikea, Crate & Barrel, Burlington Coat Factory, Talbots, Barnes & Noble, Whole Foods or Trader Joe's, or local concept Food & Thought and Oakes Farm Market. Many respondents reiterated their interest in higher -end restaurant chains suggesting well-known brands including, Seasons 52, Brio Tuscan Grille, Cheesecake Factory, and Ruth's Chris Steakhouse. • Preferred locations to evaluate for new business opportunities (based on 339 total respondents) 0 58% of respondents indicated a preference for US 41 0 42% of respondents indicated a preference for the Activity center at US 41 and Collier Boulevard o 40% of respondents indicated a preference for Collier Boulevard o 34% indicated a preference for the Activity Center at US 41 and Rattlesnake a� Hammock Road E U 2 r a East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1132 9.A.4.j 0 Site preferences 0 65% of 371 total respondents preferred parking once in a walkable cluster of establishments and walking between them; walkable concepts, such as an open mall, were also highlighted in comments about business issues. o As mentioned previously in this section, additional comments throughout the survey indicated a preference for controlled development that ensures land preservation and green space. • Preferred Strategies to Increase Desired Businesses (based on 349 respondents) o Note that this question allowed only one strategy to be chosen; no strategy had a majority share of support, but top supported strategies included: ■ Marketing campaign to attract new desired businesses (24% of respondents) ■ Incentivize new desired businesses through expedited permitting (20% of respondents) ■ Incentivize new desired businesses through fee reductions/waivers (12%) o Nearly 14% of respondents did not support any options to increase new desired commercial uses in the Study Area. o The additional comments indicated that several respondents would have preferred to choose more than one option. o Other comments are summarized as follows: Quality of life for the residents and the visual appearance of the community and roadways remains a common theme in respondents' comments. Also, of critical importance is fostering controlled growth while limiting any increase in traffic and maintaining a quality to the design and construction of new developments. Some respondents felt very little new commercial development is needed in the study area. Some said they were more in support of mixed -use developments with park space, or streetscapes like in segments of Tamiami Trail North. Some felt mixed -use developments would be helpful in balancing high -end housing for residents in these new communities in East Naples with housing options that are affordable for the service workers who will work in the restaurants and shops the higher -end communities desire. Others echoed that any new planned development should be balanced by efforts to protect green space and the natural aesthetics of the area. Many supported all or most of the suggested incentives, but some said that incentives should only be offered to types of businesses that are most desired by the community. Some felt that marketing and any incentives should go hand - in -hand. Many respondents felt significant marketing efforts, especially marketing the study area as a place where year-round residents live, would go a long way to help attract a better mix of businesses. Part of this would be rebranding the name East Naples to another name, and one stakeholder East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1133 9.A.4.j suggested Naples Bay or South Naples or SoNo or Naples East Township. Some supported expedited permitting while others were not in support of fee reductions, waivers or adjustments to lot depths. Another respondent suggested enforcing and updating zoning laws. Yet another suggested temporary tax breaks of 3 to 5 years for businesses that are opening in existing vacant storefronts. Some respondents felt that design reductions or waivers may result in a substandard look and decrease overall values in relationship to other areas of Naples. With any of the incentive options listed in the survey, respondents felt strong oversight was needed and a streamlined process in place for any new development. One respondent supported commercial growth but only in Zone 2 — the existing activity center outlined in the County Growth Management Plan. Another respondent felt that it depends on which centers/zones are the focus, where if the area of focus is only the US 41 corridor mixed -use development would be desired. One respondent suggested marketing to draw new businesses by using demographic data including residential housing and income values especially near Zones 2 and 3, which are both existing activity centers outlined in the County Growth Management Plan. Some respondents expressed that the plan and survey seem to be set up more as a commercial development plan than a land use plan. Another felt that meeting the commercial benchmark of 12 percent to 15 percent similar to the rest of the county is an assumption about East Naples, which is more unique, and those numbers may not be true of the study area. Transportation • 56% of respondents indicated that US 41 and other major roadways are important thoroughfares for automobile traffic, but some compromises are necessary to improve other ways of traveling (such as biking, walking, and/or transit) and access to places along the corridors (based on 332 responses about US 41 and 329 responses about other major thoroughfares). • Additional comments in the survey indicated a preference for the following: o Transportation options and walkability o Improved traffic flow and lower congestion Areas Outside the US 41 Corridor • Top three issues based on 344 respondents: o Amount of traffic (47% of respondents) o General design and aesthetics (42% of respondents) o Type of development (34% of respondents) • Comments on questions related to this topic echoed many of the themes seen elsewhere in the survey responses: East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1134 9.A.4.j o Limit undesired uses o Beautification o Concerns of overdevelopment o More green space and parks o Manage traffic and promote more non -motorized paths • The comments are summarized in more detail as follows: Respondents shared there are too many undesired businesses in the study area, and more thought needs to be given to the type and mix of businesses for a cohesive plan. Respondents communicated that there is a significant need for regulated and organized beautification efforts of both new and older commercial and residential areas. In particular, they felt beautification of the building aesthetics and landscaping should be a priority. Respondents are concerned about the long-term poor image of East Naples and feel rebranding should be a priority. Many are concerned and wary of overdevelopment and want to make sure low density remains a priority as the study area continues to grow. Some respondents felt there is a significant need for more green space and parks, including a lighted dog park. One respondent felt it would be ideal if a park could be developed abutting a microcenter of shopping with a cafe and retail options. Some respondents expressed desire to have alternative traffic control devices other than signalized intersections with wide intersections and dedicated turn lanes. Some feel that more signalized intersections or other traffic control devices are needed to help maintain the flow of traffic. In particular, one respondent noted heavy traffic congestion at the Triangle Boulevard and US 41 intersection as well as the Triangle Boulevard and Collier Boulevard intersection. Other respondents expressed a desire to have more biking and walking paths. Some other issues of note include using Saint Andrews Boulevard, a residential road through Lely Estates, as a cut -through to get to US 41 from Santa Barbara Boulevard. Respondents feel greater traffic enforcement, or another solution is needed to discourage cut -through traffic. One respondent expressed concerns about pedestrian and bicycle traffic safety when crossing the intersections at US 41 and Rattlesnake - Hammock Road and US 41 and Thomasson Drive. Another echoed that marked crosswalks are of limited value because turning vehicles don't see bicyclists and/or pedestrians in the crosswalks, and would like to see an option for designated "safer" centralized crossing areas and routes/trails that lead to those crosswalks. Some respondents feel there is too much housing development and that it is outpacing roadway planning to meet the demand of new residents using the roadways. Also, some respondents feel non -motorized pathways need to be improved. In addition, some respondents felt strongly that setbacks should not be reduced, to help with stormwater absorption. Another respondent mentioned that Hawaii Boulevard floods frequently during heavy rains and that the neighborhood needs better drainage. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1135 9.A.4.j Public Facilities and Services 'm More Satisfactory Fire Service Roadways Libraries Police Service Emergency Services (Based on 300+ responses) Middle Parks Schools Housing Affordability More Unsatisfactory Non -Automobile Pathways General Survey Comments More than 70 respondents shared additional comments about the preliminary project findings. Many echoed early statements regarding discouraging low-income housing, undesired businesses and limiting rental complexes mentioned early in the report. Others echoed filling up or attracting new businesses for the vacant commercial centers and ensuring a new type of business mix other than storage units and gas stations. Two respondents noted a need to maintain housing that is affordable in the area and commented it should be along the US 41 corridor. Some stated that there are homeowners in the HOA communities within the study area who would support the higher quality retail, services and hospitality businesses that could be developed in the study area. Some respondents continued to voice concerns about the need to enhance green space requirements for new developments so that abundant landscaping is required. A part of this is a serious concern of overcrowding and overdevelopment as they feel areas of North Naples are overdeveloped. Many feel that development should not infringe upon natural lands and wildlife habitats as the open green spaces are a major draw for many to the study area and area of influence. Respondents also felt, especially with the older population in the study area, that activity centers need to be accessible for citizens with mobility issues and should be open enough to be walkable or bikeable. Some respondents continued to lobby for more green space, parks and walking trails in the study area. Others felt that traffic patterns and planning needed to be looked more closely to reduce future traffic congestion as the area grows, as well as plans to increase pathways and safety for pedestrians and cyclists. Other respondents requested more shade trees rather than palm trees. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1136 9.A.4.j Timing of the signalized intersections, particularly along US 41 at Collier Boulevard, Rattlesnake -Hammock Road, Lakewood Boulevard, and Airport -Pulling Road need to be re- evaluated. Respondents suggested renaming the area from East Naples to another alternative. Some respondents suggested South Naples. Many respondents feel that with its proximity to downtown and the beaches, they area could develop very well with careful planning. One respondent lobbied for the development of an advisory board to help guide the community development and planning process. Another respondent strongly suggested a fitness facility and another requested improved landscaping for the center island at Thomasson Drive. Outside of the study area, respondents felt that the Arts District and the triangle at Davis Boulevard and US 41 need to be further developed. Some respondents wanted more information regarding how the study can be expedited and wanted to know what the timeline is to begin implementing the plan as well as next steps. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1137 9.A.4.j Cof;er County Collier County is working with the East Naples community and consultants from Tindale Oliver to create a Community Development Plan for the East Naples study area (see map below). A US 41 Corridor Study completed in 2018 included public outreach for communities along the US 41 Corridor in this area and provided a set of recommendations. The East Naples Community Development Plan will build on these recommendations and those of other relevant studies (e.g., local transportation plans) to provide more detailed options to guide future land uses and development. You can check out some preliminary findings and a suggested project approach from the project team here. The following questions gather additional information and feedback related to these findings. All 25 questions are voluntary; you can also share general comments and questions at the end of the survey. If you need immediate assistance or would like to join the project email list to receive notifications on project events and updates, you can email us at ENCDP(@colliercountyfl.gov. You can also visit the project webpage for more information: http:llcolliercountyfl.gov/EastNapiesCDP. Thank you for your input! East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1138 9.A.4.j Q d 2 0 c 0 .N c a x w Q w t- 06 L Q LLI T O M O O O O O M N O N J IL LO LO cc N M N G1 LL c IL m m Q. E 0 t� Q IL c� c� L d 0 r Cn _I E M L d E t Q East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1139 9.A.4.j Co er County 0 Tell Us a Bit About Yourself The following questions help us understand your relationship to the study area and area of influence for the plan. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1140 9.A.4.j 1. Which area below best describes where you live? Within the study area (full-time or part-time) Within the area of influence but outside the study area (full-time or part-time) Outside the study area and the area of influence, but within Collier County (full-time or part-time) I have no full-time or part-time place of residence in Collier County. 2. Which area below best describes where you work or go to school: Within the study area Within the area of influence but outside the study area Outside the study area and the area of influence, but within Collier County Outside of Collier County I do not work or go to school. 3. What is your age? Younger than 18 18-30 31-65 Older than 65 4. If you do not live and/or work in the study area, which of the options below best describes how frequently you visit the study area? Several times a week or more A few times a month A few times a year or less I do not visit the study area. Not applicable - I live and/or work in the area. 5. Which of the options below best describes how often you visit businesses along US 41? Several times a week or more A few times a month A few times a year or less I do not visit businesses along US 41. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1141 9.A.4.j 6. Which of the options below best describes how often you travel along US 41 to get to/from work/school? 0 Several times a week or more OA few times a month OA few times a year or less O1 do not use US 41 to get to/from work/school. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1142 9.A.4.j Co er County What Does this Area Mean to You? A Vision for the Future. The following questions help us gather fundamental ideas and language used to describe the study area and surroundings currently, as well as what makes the area great now and in the future. These responses will provide a basis for a general vision for the area. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1143 9.A.4.j 7. What top three words/terms would you use to describe the study area and area of influence? 1st: L— 2nd: I 3rd: Other Comments: 8. What are the top three aspects of the study area and area of influence that you like the most? 1st: 2nd: 3rd: Other Comments: 9. What are three terms you would use to describe a desirable and attainable vision for the future of the study area and area of influence? 1st: i 2nd: 3rd: C Other Comments: East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1144 9.A.4.j Co er County Business and Retail Findings from the US 41 Corridor Study indicated that participants wanted expanded commercial offerings and less storage and gas station uses. We'd like to gather some additional information for more detailed land use and development options in the East Naples Development Plan. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1145 9.A.4.j 10. What are the top 5 issues to address in terms of businesses (e.g., restaurants, shops, cafes, etc.) in the study area and its surrounding area of influence? Amount Type Mix of types Access, including transit and non -motorized access Quality Affordability Parking availability/access General site/building design and aesthetics I don't think there are any issues with businesses in the study area or area of influence. ❑ Other (please specify) 11. Please provide any additional comments to explain your choices from question 10. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1146 9.A.4.j 12. Rank the following options below in terms of business and retail types to encourage in the study area and area of influence (1 being MOST preferred and 7 being LEAST preferred option; note that you can drag and drop options into your preferred order). r f Cafes/coffees shops r Grocery stores r R Hotels/motels r R Restaurants r w Stores for goods (e.g., clothing store, hardware store) Stores/offices for services (e.g., dentist, salon) r V Business/retail on the same site as residences (e.g., mixed -use, live/work units) 13. Regarding question 12 above, are there other business and/or retail preferences you would like to tell us about? East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1147 9.A.4.j 14. Which option below best describes your preferences for accessing retail? Park in front of each retail establishment without having to walk between establishments. This option provides visible, convenient parking at the front of each establishment; larger parking lots may be required fronting the roadways and may make storefronts less visible from the roadway. Park behind each retail establishment without having to walk between establishments. This option allows for store fronts to be more visible along the roadway; larger parking lots may be required and may not be as visible from the roadway. Park once in a walkable cluster of establishments and walk between establishments. This option may allow for shared parking and parking garages that may take up less land and may allow for storefronts to be more visible along the roadways; visitors may rely more on physical activity such as walking to move to and between establishments. Access establishments by methods other than a personal car, such as transit, walking, or biking. This option may provide more access choices and allow for smaller parking lots and more visible storefronts along the roadway; visitors may rely more on physical activity to access transit and/or an establishment. Other (please specify) y� Redo ❑ � , Ea, Neon s,�y e, Activity Centers Rwtlwy Glassificalion 3. "tl Major Corridors MFwnnw s Residential 2 1 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1148 9.A.4.j 15. Which of the zones (1-8) shown in the map above would you like the project team to review for opportunities for additional desired commercial uses? (Choose all that apply.) Zone 1: Existing Activity Center designated in County Growth Management Plan ❑ Zone 2: Existing Activity Center designated in County Growth Management Plan Zone 3: Existing Activity Center designated in County Growth Management Plan ❑ Zone 4: Major Corridor — US 41 Zone 5: Major Corridor — Collier Blvd Zone 6: Major Corridor- Rattlesnake Hammock Rd Zone 7: Major Corridor -Davis Boulevard and County Barn Rd Zone 8: Existing primarily residential areas 16. Which, if any, of the following options would you support to achieve an increase in desired commercial uses in the Study Area? Create a marketing campaign to attract new desired businesses to the Study Area Incentivize new desired businesses through flexible site design requirements Incentivize new desired businesses through an expedited permitting process Incentivize new desired businesses through development fee reductions or waivers Evaluate and increase the amount of commercial development allowed on sites Allow and encourage adjustments to commercial lot depths along the major roadways Evaluate and increase the amount of residential allowed on sites to increase potential customers in the area for local businesses I do not support any options to increase these commercial uses in the Study Area. Other (please specify) 17. Please provide any additional comments to explain your choices from the previous question. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1149 East Naples Community Development Plan Survey _ •» Na lles4 F Ikk� �- .�` 3 , Study Area _. =� Area of Influence �% tip.`" -.. 1 T.. .! .. .� .. 9.A.4.j 18. For parts of the study area and area of influence that are NOT along the US 41 corridor, what are the top 3, if any, issues? Amount of traffic Traffic speed is too slow Traffic speed is too fast Roadway connectivity and access to destinations Non -motorized connectivity (e.g., connections for walking and biking) and access to destinations Type of development Mix of development Coverage or quality of community facilities (e.g., parks, community centers) Performance of infrastructure (e.g., drainage) General design and aesthetics Landscaping There are no issues in the study area and area of influence NOT along the US 41 corridor. Other (please specify) I 19. Please provide any additional comments to explain your choices from the previous question. Transportation East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1151 9.A.4.j Please refer to the map below for questions 18 and 19. 20. Which statement below best reflects your vision for US 41 in the study area? US 41 should be optimized for all automobile traffic, including minimizing travel time for as many automobiles as possible, even if this makes other methods of travel such as walking and biking more difficult. US 41 is an important thoroughfare for automobile traffic, but some compromises are necessary to improve other ways of traveling (such as biking, walking, and/or transit) and access to places along the corridor. Appropriate development intensity and mix to promote walking, access to properties, and local connectivity should be prioritized along US 41; minimizing automobile traffic and travel time along these roadways is less important. Other (please specify) East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1152 9.A.4.j 21. Which statement below best reflects your vision for major roadways aside from US 41 in the study area? These major roadways should be optimized for all automobile traffic, including minimizing travel time for as many automobiles as possible, even if this makes other methods of travel such as walking and biking more difficult. These major roadways are important thoroughfares for automobile traffic, but some compromises are necessary to improve other ways of traveling (such as biking, walking, and/or transit) and access to places along the corridor. Appropriate development intensity and mix to promote walking, access to properties, and local connectivity should be prioritized along these major roadways; minimizing automobile traffic and travel time along these roadways is less important. Other (please specify) Facilities and Services 22. Which, if any, of the following publicly provided or supported facilities and services do you think are provided at a SATISFACTORY level in the study area and area of influence? (Choose all that apply.) URoadways 1-1 Non -automobile pathways (example: sidewalks, trails) Libraries Parks Schools Fire service Police service Emergency Services (such as those responding to a medical emergency) Housing affordability All of the above None of the above Other (please specify) I East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1153 9.A.4.j 23. Which, if any, of the following public facilities and services do you think are provided at an UNSATISFACTORY level in the study area and area of influence? (Choose all that apply.) Roadways Non -automobile pathways (example: sidewalks, trails) Libraries Parks Schools Fire service ❑ Police service Emergency Services (such as those responding to a medical emergency) Housing affordability All of the above ❑ None of the above Other (please specify) L East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1154 9.A.4.j Co er County NaplesEast • Development Additional Comments and Contact 24. Are there any additional comments you would like to add related to the preliminary project findings and approach that you can view again here? Any additional general comments? 25. If you would like to join the project email list to receive notifications of upcoming project events and postings to the project webpage, please fill out the blanks below. Name: Organization (optional): Email: NINO NNW East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1155 9.A.4.j Appendix D: Workshop 1 Recap A public workshop was held June 29, 2020, providing the ability to participate either in -person at the Collier Board of County Commission Chambers or via an online platform. The workshop had over 90 participants. A brief presentation was made to the participants, then the project team discussed questions and comments submitted by participants for the remainder of the workshop. For questions and comments not addressed directly during the discussion period, a follow-up recap of submitted questions/comments and responses from the project team was created. This recap is provided in the remainder of this appendix. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1156 9.A.4.j EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Public Workshop 1: Response to Comments and Questions Thank you to everyone who joined us for the East Naples Community Development Plan public workshop held June 29, 2020! The following summarizes comments and questions received during event, along with responses from the project team. We will incorporate this input as we move forward with the next stages of the project. Project Study Area Project Study Area & Area of Influence Map East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1157 9.A.4.j Collier County Commissioner Districts Map s District 3 — Commissioner Saunders E �L?r•:• ni1n •.•k.)I-:.. L3•;nit., District 2 — Commissioner gig Cypress Re se—t io n ..... .. :.: is-. Solis Fh rid a Pan the r Nat' I .. ,..,. ilr.11if- Rif f-.. District 4 — r,,;1 , '5 Rltip l District 5 — Alligator Alley Commissioner Commissioner Pic Taylor a str. re��+ unaabD McDaniel District 1— ,;oN-Commissioner 5eminoR Stain Par' Fiala Ten 11--w Is Nad Wildlife R.f U11 Comments/questions on the Study Area boundary: • What guided the study boundary? Was it Zoning/FLU? • Why does the northern boundary of the study area exclude the area between County Barn and 951? • Davis Boulevard is a natural boundary without regard to arbitrary district boundary. Development should be focused on serving people without regard to political boundaries. The Study Area for this project (shown above) is used to run data and spatial analysis and was primarily informed by the District 1 boundaries with some adjustments for land use and roadway patterns; we are also looking at the surrounding area to account for major developments, improvements project, and other factors outside the Study Area that may influence the project. We anticipate that this plan will provide analysis, approaches, and recommendation options that can be referenced and easily adjusted for use by other areas in East Naples and the unincorporated county given many of the similar issues and land use/roadway patterns in these areas. Is this webinar strictly concerning the US 41 corridor? East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1158 9.A.4.j Part of the webinar covered information primarily relating to the US 41 Corridor, including a 2018 study focused on the corridor and possible opportunities for commercial development/redevelopment which are primarily located along this corridor. However, our project focus area and outreach includes surrounding areas and other major thoroughfares, so we are conducting analysis and gathering feedback on those points, as well. See the project study are map shown above. Other areas mentioned for consideration: • Does the study include Marco Island with East Naples? The commercial needs for East Naples will also serve Marco residents. • Also take into consideration to North Naples. Having commercial businesses that are only there presently creates an inordinate amount of traffic, particularly during peak season. There would be significant decrease in overcrowded roads if some of the commercial businesses have a presence in East/South Naples. • Your developer input seemed to have concern about a lack of density. But there is tremendous additional population around the eastern area within a short drive. Would highlighting the areas of Winding Cypress, Collier Preserve, Reflection Lakes, Fiddler's Creek, etc. help make development more desirable? These developments are already online and expanding. We will account for how surrounding areas influence the Study Area, as mentioned above. Part of the consideration of how surrounding areas support existing retail in the Study Area or in other locations and how they may support any new retail that may be built relates to market demand dynamics; this plan will not include an in-depth market analysis, but as noted in the comments above, we have talked with members of the development community to get a general sense of what may be feasible for the area. Vision Et Branding So far, I am not seeing anything that indicates a vision to a design for improving the area; the project is just going to move along with some minor improvements. This first stage of the project really aims to identify or validate the existing understanding of what needs to be done in the area and establishing some foundational ideas to create forward -looking development concepts with renderings and options for an implementation program in the second half of this project. Comments/questions on specific marketing/branding ideas: • There is a negative perception of East Naples, and there is a desire to rebrand the area, particularly in terms of the name; "South Naples" is an example of a possible rebrand [Several comments mention a desire to rebrand the area with a new name, although one comment indicated a desire not to rebrand]. • Rebrand the area and signage based on the existing built and natural environment; an example of a new name for the US 41 corridor is the Naples Everglades Trail as a connection of Fifth Avenue and the Beaches with the Everglades, Fatahatchee Strand, Big Cypress, Rookery Bay with a Collier County History Museum in between; there are also the blossoming Bayshore Arts District with the Botanical Garden, the Wang Center and the Bayshore Gateway East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1159 9.A.4.j Triangle Redevelopment Area 17-acre development yet to come, as well as parks: Sugden, Donna Fiala, East Naples, and Bayview. • What do you have in mind for a marketing agenda? We will document the issue of branding and marketing in our report, provide some foundational vision themes and land use concepts that can serve as a basis for more specific future branding and marketing efforts, and note some high-level guidance for these future efforts; this information will be developed in the second half of the project and presented at the next public meeting. Please don't make East Naples as crowded as Florida's East Coast. Concerns of overbuilding and overcrowding were key themes emerging from the initial survey responses, aligning with this particular comment. We will take this theme into account as we development land use concepts for the area for review and feedback at the next public meeting and related online public engagement. Land Use Ft Development Comments related to attracting additional commercial development: • Please explain if commercial is already at 11% and 7% is not being used, why would we want to increase to 15%? 1 may not be reading this correctly but there is a lot of commercial buildings that are not in use up and down the 41 corridor. This is an eyesore on the community surrounding. • Why would the Board allow more commercial development when we have so many commercial areas that are not viable? Case in point is the Outlet Center on 951, and up and down 41 there are empty store which are just an eyesore on the community that surround them. We have noted an estimated vacancy rate for existing commercial properties (7%), as well as the share of non-residential square footage built of total square footage built during the last decade (11%). Since 11% is lower than the 15% we observe elsewhere in similar parts of the county, we are showing that this area is underserved from what we might expect based on similar areas. The 7% vacancy rate in existing structures indicates the area is further underserved since these vacancies are not accounted for in the building square footage measures. We hope our analysis shows some benchmarks that may be useful to think about the current amount of existing commercial and some potential feasible approaches to attracting more desirable uses, yet this analysis is merely a starting point for discussion. In addition to attracting tenants for vacancies in existing buildings, approaches include encouraging building on vacant lots or redevelopment of existing lots that are already targeted for commercial uses. These approaches do not have to include any increases in intensity from what is already allowed, yet increased allowances could be reviewed as a way to attract development in locations where the current allowances may be a constraining factor to developing or redeveloping existing sites. In this regard, we are relying on community comments and survey input to indicate the degree of additional commercial desired to help inform the ultimate approach to pursue; preliminary comment and survey results did not indicate a strong preference for pursuing approaches that involved increases in allowed commercial development. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1160 9.A.4.j A lot of businesses went out of business in the area. Big box stores have a colder character and are not very homey; boutique and mom-and-pop stores are nicer. Many survey responses indicated a preference for functional and anchor retailers as well as smaller local businesses; the project team can account for these different types of retail and what approaches might help make them sustainable in the area. What to do about updating older housing stock, including older condos? In most instances, we rely on the market to address the redevelopment of housing units, particularly for multi -family. If land supply is constrained and/or the older housing provides a geographic advantage, developers will reinvest in an area. If there is a lot of new housing being built with similar access to jobs/amenities, reinvestment may take much longer. Grant programs are available through the Community and Human Services Department. Questions related to the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area Plan: • There was a plan to put in a cultural center off Bayshore Drive. Any update? • What is happening to the land at Davis and 41? • The area along Davis Boulevard and US 41 from the Triangle area heading east has unattractive strip malls. Any plans for those specifically? Plans for the areas along Bayshore Drive and Davis Boulevard/US 41 are addressed in the recently updated Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area Plan; you can get more information about this area and current efforts on the redevelopment area website: https://bayshorecra.com/. For strip malls and strip commercial along US 41 east of the redevelopment area, the East Naples Community Development Plan will provide land use concepts to help guide redevelopment of sites such as those along US 41 in the future. Is there not data that says unkept commercial properties are more apt to fail than those with a reasonable management that constantly improves the property? Activating vacant lots and support for upkeep and beautification of properties are commonly included in approaches to redevelopment and stimulating local economic activity. One example is fagade improvement programs, which are often used in redevelopment areas and business districts. Research on fagade improvements based on outreach to a selection of downtown businesses in Wisconsin suggests that the businesses perceived some economic benefits after making fagade investments (https://fyi.extension.wisc.edu/resiIie ntdowntowns/files/2016/06/Final- Report. pdf), although note that many factors can affect the economic performance of an individual business or area. Based on the preliminary findings presented, are there specific businesses being targeted for marketing a presence in East Naples? In terms of desired uses, regulations and incentives will likely focus on general categories that capture these desired uses; future marketing efforts that build on this plan may be an opportunity to target specific businesses and retailers mentioned in comments and survey responses. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1161 9.A.4.j Have there been any large year-round employers that have expressed interest in establishing headquarters or office space in the study area or area of influence? In addition to retailers, such as, HomeGoods, Burlington Coat Factory, etc., an Amazon Distribution Center will be locating to the East Naples area. Comments on green spaces in the community: • Need to have more open space and public golf courses as most come here to enjoy the outdoors. • Consider East Naples Community Park for the activity center at the Rattlesnake Hammock and 41 intersection. Having ample green space was a key theme emerging in general from the initial survey results, aligning with these comments. This point will be considered as we are developing recommendations in the second half of this project. What is meant by Activity Center at [US 41 intersections with] Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevards. Would that be a casino? Activity Centers are areas formally designated in the County's Growth Management Plan that are intended for more commercial intensity and mixed -use allowances relative to areas such as single-family residential neighborhoods. Preliminary survey results indicated that these are areas the project team should further evaluate for opportunities for desired commercial uses identified from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study and further prioritized through preliminary survey results for this current planning effort. While casinos are not explicitly part of the list of desired uses we identified from the 2018 study findings, entertainment and nightlife uses were mentioned in the comments from our current survey efforts. Any plans to purchase the Riviera Golf Club? There have not been any discussions at this time to purchase the Riviera Golf Club. Add car washes to the list of undesirable uses. The project team will note this use as it looks at strategies for limiting undesirable uses in the second half of this project. The gas station on US 41 broken down from Hurricane Irma still there! I asked about last year and was told it was waiting on permits. What's going on? These comments have been referred to the County's Code Enforcement Division. Why is a storage unit being built on US 41 next to CVS just east of Collier when residents made it very clear we did not want one? Storage units have clearly been identified as an undesirable use, and a proposed amendment to the Land Development Code is under consideration to address concerns with self -storage uses by allowing these uses in C-4 commercial districts only in combination with other permitted uses as part of a mixed - use development and if it occupies less than 50% of the total area of the first floor. The East Naples East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1162 9.A.4.j Community Development Plan process will document these efforts and evaluate other appropriate options to adjust the Land Development Code to discourage and/or obtain more preferable design for new uses of this type. Comments/questions on a post office for the area: • The outlets on Collier would be the perfect place for a post office and a draw store ... it would increase other businesses and help the area. • 1 continue to be concerned about the lack of a United States Post Office in our area. Family pharmacy has a corner set up inside for this service. Can we look to develop postal service center in our area? Thank you for addressing the post office question. I am originally from Stony Brook NY. The original Stony Brook village surrounded the post office. Formed a village green surrounding it. Feels like home. We also need the service in the area! I travel to Marco Island. South Naples would be great! Collier County has limited authority over the placement of post offices, given that these are part of the federal government's jurisdiction as part of the United State Postal Service. Questions/comments on specific anticipated developments: • We heard Home Goods, Burlington, and Planet Fitness are going in Freedom Square ... when is this happening? • When will Publix be going up on 41 east of Collier next to Fiddlers Creek? The County is not involved with leasing agreements and opening timeframes of storefronts, so related information is unknown. The Publix store at Fiddler's Creek is now under construction. ransportation Comments/questions on the US 41 overpass: • There is a tremendous amount of development east of Collier Blvd on 41 so a fly over would be helpful for transportation. • What is the plan for the fly over at 41 and Collier Blvd? This project falls primarily under the jurisdiction of the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), a regional transportation planning organization. The US 41/Collier Boulevard overpass is shown as a need in the MPO's 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) but was not included in the Cost Feasible Plan (this latter plan indicates those projects with programmed funding). The MPO is currently updating the LRTP and extending the horizon year to 2045, so the plan regarding this project may change. What are the plans for Davis Boulevard and Collier Boulevard? While these roadways are under the jurisdiction of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), the East Naples Community Development Plan will account for programmed improvements and coordinate with FDOT as needed on proposed local transportation options as part of the planning process. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1163 9.A.4.j Based on FDOT's Work Program for 2021-2025, Collier Boulevard south of US 41 approximately between Manatee and Tower Roads is undergoing lane addition/pavement rehabilitation. Collier Boulevard north of the East Naples Community Development Plan Study Area between Golden Gate Canal to Green Boulevard has activities programmed related to widening/resurfacing of existing lanes in 2024. Improvement activities along Davis Boulevard between US 41 Radio Road were programmed in the 2015-2020 Work Program, and included activities related to widening/resurfacing of existing lanes, adding lanes, landscaping, signs/markings, lighting, and resurfacing, depending on the section. Some of these activities are noted as ongoing as of 2020. Comments/questions on the FDOT north/south toll road: • Is there any update on the proposed FDOT toll road from Polk County south to Collier? Will that impact the design for East Naples? • As the planning for East Naples continues, it is important to consider changes that are occurring outside of the proposed planning area and the impact those changes may have on our community. One such change, could be the FDOT North -South Connector Toll Road. If this roadway does in fact terminate in or near to East Naples, it will change the amount of traffic, commercial businesses possibilities and demographics of the community. I am not suggesting this is a positive or a negative just that items of this nature should be part of any long-range plan for our community. Nearly $750 million was included in the State's budget to study and design the three M-CORES toll road projects including the Southwest -Central Florida Connector (previously referred to as the Heartland Parkway). The alignment for the corridor has not been determined at this point (another task force meeting is scheduled for 7/23). It is unlikely, however, that the corridor will extend south of 1-75. We will monitor the M-CORES study and report details relevant to the ENCDP. For more information, visit: httDS://floridamcores.com/. When will the widening of US 41 be finished? The expansion of US 41 between Greenway Road and 6 L Farm Road from 2 to 4 lanes is identified in the 2040 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan for construction. However, it has not been funded in FDOT's 5-Year Work Program (which identifies the most immediate projects for implementation). Specific bicycle and pedestrian concerns: • More dedicated, protected bike lanes that connect East/South Naples with Naples proper, to include pedestrian walkway(s) over US 41. • The local St. Andrews road is experiencing a lot of traffic and has had issues including a pedestrian death. Non -motorized connections, including safety considerations, is a key theme that has emerged from prior and current outreach efforts; we will take into consideration comments on specific bike and pedestrian needs in addition to a review of existing transportation analysis and planning efforts that we will use as a basis for transportation options and recommendations in this plan. Who is responsible for street direction signs, such as those for Naples Reserve Boulevard off US 41? t It's very hard to see the entrance to Reflection Lakes and Naples Reserve from US 41. r Q East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1164 9.A.4.j The developer or community association is responsible for entrance signs; and, the County Transportation Dept. approves and installs all wayfinding and street signage on public roadways. Other Public Facilities With regards to residential expansion, what provisions have been made for an expansion on the school system in Manatee School district? Based on data, analysis, and public input the goals of the East Naples Community Development Plan focus on improving options for non-residential land uses. As far as capacity for Manatee Elementary, current enrollment is 593 students; permanent capacity for this school as of 2018 is 706 seats, according to the Collier County School District, indicating that the current capacity can accommodate current enrollment. Has a study of stormwater management systems along the US 41 corridor been done to determine expansion of canal capacity supporting the commercial development which is being considered? County staff will coordinate with the FDOT to address stormwater needs/improvements for the area hope that infrastructure needs for roads, stormwater management, parks, and schools, among other things, are thoroughly evaluated before deciding whether we need more restaurants and shopping centers in East Naples. The Community Development Plan process will document existing and planned public facilities and services to support development and/or redevelopment in the area; more detailed impacts to public services and infrastructure are also analyzed as part of the development review process for new developments. Participation Can the August meeting also be a webinar, which will help summer travelers participate? We plan to have a virtual component to our next meeting and related outreach/engagement efforts given the number of seasonal residents and social distancing considerations related to the coronavirus based on guidance from the Center for Disease Control. Is there a committee one could be part of? Based on recommendations in the ENCDP, various opportunities to participate in committees will be available to interested stakeholders/residents. Do online participants need to do anything special to be added to the distribution list for updates? Did registering online automatically add us to that list? Those who registered for the workshop virtually will be contacted to join the project email list; attendees can sign up for the list at any time on the project website (http://colliercountyfl.gov/EastNaplesCDP). Will we receive the PowerPoint? A recording of the webinar and a copy of the PowerPoint will be made available on the project website We will send an email to the project email list once those materials are posted, and you can join the East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1165 9.A.4.j email list via the project website (http://colliercountvfl.gov/EastNaplesCDP). What if a lot more or different survey responses are received after the June 9th date when the preliminary survey results were analyzed for this workshop? The project team will add any additional survey responses received between June 9th and July 91h to the overall survey summary, document findings, and note any changes to the preliminary findings in the subsequent public outreach and engagement efforts. Other Topics Do we have any projects on rain barrels? The Stormwater and Pollution Control Sections have information on rain barrel programs and projects. Are there any other plans to install art in the area? Love the new statue erected for Donna. Aesthetics and design were key themes that emerged from the preliminary survey results. Comments such as this one on art can be considered as part of future branding discussions for the area. The Community Redevelopment Area just west of the East Naples Study Area is also developing a Public Art Plan, which can be viewed here: https://bayshorecra.com/proiects/public-arts-master-plan/. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 1 Packet Pg. 1166 EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Technical Memorandum 2. Vision Elements, Land Use Concepts, and Recommendations September 28, 2020 Prepared for CoVe r County Prepared by Tindale ):Oliver East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 Packet Pg. 1167 9.A.4.j able of Contents 1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................4 2.0 Vision..................................................................................................................................6 3.0 Land Use Concepts.............................................................................................................9 4.0 Transportation Options....................................................................................................54 5.0 Additional Recommendations..........................................................................................59 6.0 Implementation...............................................................................................................62 7.0 Appendices.......................................................................................................................66 Figures Figure 1: Overview of Planning Process........................................................................................8 Figure 2: Build -Out Scenarios......................................................................................................10 Figure 3: Non -Residential Square Footage Benchmarks..............................................................12 Figure 4: Pathway Connection Grand Lely Subdivision/ Donna Fiala Eagle Lakes Community Park .................................................................................................................................................... 55 Figure 5: Short -Term Intersection Improvement Examples........................................................56 Figure 6: Existing US 41 Cross Section Example..........................................................................57 Figure 7: Proposed US 41 Cross Section — Rattlesnake Hammock Road.....................................57 Figure 8: Proposed US 41 Cross Section — Naples Manor Area...................................................58 Maps Map1: East Naples Study Area.....................................................................................................5 Map 2: Land Use Concept Sites.....................................................................................................9 Map 3: US 41 at Naples Manor and Surroundings......................................................................14 Map 4: US 41 at Naples Manor and Surroundings - Zoning.........................................................16 Map 5: US 41 at Naples Manor Connectivity Analysis.................................................................18 Map 6: US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock and Surroundings.............................................................25 Map 7: US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock and Surroundings — Zoning..............................................27 Map 8: US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock Connectivity Analysis.......................................................29 Map 9: Existing Towne Centre and Surroundings.......................................................................36 Map 10: Towne Centre and Surroundings — Zoning....................................................................38 Map 11: Towne Centre Connectivity Analysis.............................................................................40 Map 12: Opportunity Zone in the East Naples Study Area..........................................................53 -ki- Table 1: US 41 at Naples Manor and Surroundings — Existing Land Uses....................................15 Table 2: US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock and Surroundings - Existing Land Uses ...........................26 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 2 Packet Pg. 1168 9.A.4.j Table 3: Towne Centre and Surroundings - Existing Land Uses...................................................37 Table 4: Land Use Build -Out Scenario Polling Results.................................................................46 Table 5: Implementation Summary.............................................................................................64 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 3 Packet Pg. 1169 9.A.4.j 1.0 Introduction This second technical memorandum for the East Naples Community Development Plan builds on analytical and outreach findings from the first stages of the planning process, documented in Technical Memorandum 1. It recaps the desired direction for the community and provides land use concepts, recommendations related to transportation and other topics, and implementation guidance in response to this future vision. Technical Memorandum 1 summarizes findings from the Background and Needs Assessment completed in the first stages of the project. The analysis showed that while the East Naples Study Area (Map 1) is generally well served by public facilities and services, it is underserved in terms of non-residential uses, with only 11% of current square footage built as non-residential relative to the unincorporated county as a whole that has a share of 1S% non-residential square footage; the lack of quality commercial options was also identified as a major issue through outreach conducted in 2018 as part of the US 41 Corridor Study for this area. Initial outreach for this planning effort also indicated that additional development needed to be balanced with green space and aesthetic considerations. Additionally, more local transportation options and connections are needed, including for non -motorized travel. This second technical memorandum provides a way forward for the community that responds to the vision elements identified through public engagement (detailed further in Section 2.0). and addresses the imbalance of residential and non-residential uses. It takes into consideration limitations and opportunities detailed further in Technical Memorandum 1: • limited roadway connections • limited permanent population and overall density • potential constraints of market demand • likely development and redevelopment opportunities The remainder of this technical memorandum includes the following sections: • Section 2.0: Vision — provides elements of the future direction for the community, accounting for public engagement and analytical findings in Technical Memorandum 1 and additional stakeholder and community engagement completed for this technical memorandum; this section summarizes the full planning process, including engagement. • Section 3.0: Land Use Concepts — provides land use concepts ranging from moderate to more robust changes on three selected sites in the East Naples Study Area that can be applied to other development and redevelopment opportunity sites; also includes regulatory, incentive, and longer -term planning considerations to implement concepts. • Section 4.0: Transportation Options — summarizes complimentary options and alternatives to transportation improvements shown in the land use concepts to improve safety, comfort, and connectivity to destinations for various modes of transportation. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 4 Packet Pg. 1170 9.A.4.j • Section 5.0: Additional Recommendations — summarizes recommendations for other potential topics of interest for future efforts, such as green space, marketing and branding, a recycling drop-off center for the area, housing affordability, landscaping and architectural styles, and signs. • Section 6.0: Implementation— summarizes steps to take following the approval of this plan to implement recommendations, including marketing efforts, regulatory changes, long-term and capital planning processes, and budget programming. • Section 7.0: Appendices — summarizes in more detail findings from additional community engagement: o Appendix A: summary of additional stakeholder meetings o Appendix B: summary of findings from second workshop and related online engagement Map 1: East Naples Study Area East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 5 Packet Pg. 1171 Ise] �v S n 0[So000CZOZ d:V9 99Z CZ-6-9 ]Q d mm d woo Vd W 9 AeIJGAO vvsn-ieu!wsuej-L:iu9wLioeuv r � # § E S m » &z e e 9 ? # � j e / a � ° ( ƒ 0 2 E e E.p � e e m � E / / / U Co ƒ J � a _ \ a 9.A.4.j The elements above are based on the outreach and analytical findings from Technical Memorandum 1. There are additional considerations for affordability based on stakeholder meetings conducted for this technical memorandum (see Appendix A for details on additional stakeholder meetings). Figure 1 summarizes the complete set of analysis and engagement activities undertaken for this project. Some stakeholders in the most recent meetings expressed strong concern over adding housing for low-income households in the Study Area, a concern also noted in outreach for Technical Memorandum 1. Other comments from outreach indicated that the area's value, or affordability given its proximity to several local attractions (Naples, beaches, etc.), was an asset. Additional stakeholder meetings for this technical memorandum with non -profits that provide housing indicated that there are increasing barriers to serving lower income households in the county in terms of housing. Technical Memorandum 1 also showed that renter households are facing particularly widespread burden issues — renters in the area already burdened; traditional multi -family units that are typically rental make up about 6% of the housing stock. This would be a particular issue for renters with lower incomes. As a result, proposed concepts and recommendations include options for mixed -use that can support quality non-residential uses and potential opportunities for additional housing at market rates and more attainable price points. The stakeholder meeting with transportation agency staff also highlighted how mixed -use options could support the walkability and diversity of transportation options indicated as desirable in the community engagement. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 7 Packet Pg. 1173 ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :;uawyoeuv E a) an Cu an c w u v � o � a a a 0 3 v v O v � V7 re cd Ln .^ Lon Ln � o a L Le, LA CL LA LA W J C J V) m 4-1 c �. LM J V W 9.A.4.j 3.0 Land Use Concepts The project team selected three sites in the East Naples Study Area to illustrate potential land use concepts: the US 41 at Naples Manor, US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock, and Towne Centre sites (Map 2). The sites graduate in terms of opportunity for intensity from the Naples Manor site, which is more neighborhood scale and furthest from the urban node of Downtown Naples, to the Towne Centre site, which is closest to Downtown Naples, contains a relatively large potential redevelopment site with greater depths, and has the potential for a larger regional draw. Aside from this variety of characteristics, the team chose these sites due to their current potential development and redevelopment opportunities, their alignment with location preferences identified through public outreach, and the potential for applicability of concepts on these sites to other sites in the Study Area and beyond, such as the outlet shops on Collier Boulevard south of US 41 and developments under consideration near Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Map 2: Land Use Concept Sites Three build -out scenarios were created for each site, ranging from light to moderate to robust (Figure 2). Incentives to promote desired uses and approaches to discourage/prohibit undesired uses, discussed in more detail later in this section, could be used with any of the build -out scenarios. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 9 Packet Pg. 1175 9.A.4.j • Focus on transportation, landscaping, and some development design improvements Figure 2: Build -Out Scenarios • Partial site build -out • Multi -floor mixed -use (ground floor commercial, upper floor office/residential, max. 3 floors) and ground floor commercial • Transportation, landscaping, and development design elements These scenarios can help respond to: • Full site build -out, longer term • Multi -floor mixed -use (ground floor commercial, upper floor office/residential, max. 3 floors) and ground floor commercial • Transportation, landscaping, and development design elements • market demand, particularly given that developers saw residential density as a limiting factor on additional commercial uses and that there are a number of areas in Collier County where more urban -style and walkable areas are being promoted; this market demand may also shift in the future in terms of amount and type of retailers and offices, with the prevalence of big box retailers, general shifts in discretionary spending income for middle class households, and the rise of services -oriented buying, online retailers, and remote work.' • a possible approach to transition over time from current development styles and transportation design based on current, more suburban conditions to desired more walkable options. • general community design, use, and density/intensity preferences identified through public engagement and documented in Technical Memorandum 1. 1 Some sources indicate that, aside from the stressors of the pandemic on retailers such as those in traditional malls, these retailers have already faced declines due to the diminishing prominence of anchor department stores, the rise of big box retail that competes with mall -style retailers, less discretionary funds for middle class households, and a shift in focus from buying goods to buying services. Others anticipate a sustained increase in remote work due to the pandemic, which may affect office demand. See: Austan Goolsbee (February 13, 2020) Never mind the internet. Here's what's killing malls, The New York Times. Justine Griffin (December 11, 2015) What will fill the mall of the future? Probably not more department stores, Tampa Bay Times. Katherine Guyot and Isabel V. Sawhill (April 6, 2020) Telecommuting will likely continue long after the pandemic, Brookings. Sara DiNatale (May 28, 2020) COVID-19 has likely quickened the end of malls as we knew them, Tampa Bay Times. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 10 Packet Pg. 1176 9.A.4.j • approaches that are repeatable at other development and redevelopment opportunity sites in the East Naples area and Collier County more generally. They also illustrate approaches that have already been used elsewhere in more urban parts of the county, such as the City of Naples. Note that aside from market demand, actual build -out would also depend on a more specific development program that accounts in more detail for requirements such as parking. Additionally, build -out, particularly as the scenarios get more robust, would likely occur in the long-term, perhaps requiring a decade or more to be constructed. Technical Memorandum 1 also established non-residential building square footage benchmarks for gauging increases in desired commercial development. The share of square footage built in for unincorporated county is approximately 15%, while it is only 11% in the East Naples area. The project team calculated the additional square footage needed to move from the 11% mark to the 15% mark in the East Source: Tindale Oliver Source: Google Maps Naples area, assuming current levels of residential development and a focus on desired commercial uses or other uses such as office incorporated with commercial as part of mixed - use development. Figure 3 illustrates which square footage benchmarks might be achieved with the use of a light, moderate, or robust approach at all the sites, with a focus on commercial and office; residential could be included in mixed -use, depending on market demand. However, these benchmarks are simply illustrative measures. Even adding small amounts of these uses can still meet the intent of community vision elements if focused on desired commercial types and quality development. Note that these calculations do not include vacancies in existing commercial structures. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 11 Packet Pg. 1177 9.A.4.j Figure 3: Non -Residential Square Footage Benchmarks 88% 0 c m S-J n7a r 12% Additionallio' rCom r. scenario for all sites: assumes existing commercial/ office sq ft 1.3 million Moderate scenario (commercial/ office) for all sites:1.5 million sq ft 87% 13% 2.0 million 86% 14% 2.7 million Robust scenario (commercial/ office) for all sites: 3.2 million sq ft 85% 15% 3.4 million Note: the benchmarks shown assume current level of residential square footage and square footage/acreage added in addition to filling vacancies in existing commercial buildings. For each of the build -out scenarios shown in this section, approximate additional commercial square footage is shown based on concept -level estimates, as well as a maximum amount of additional office or residential square footage, assumed to be in upper stories. These maximums are based on assumptions of upper story build out of all office or all residential; again, the actual built uses would depend on market demand, limitations when accounting more specifically for development requirements, and other external trends, likely resulting in some combination of residential and office. Approximations for a maximum number of employees or residential units that could be added based on the square footage maximums are also included. The project team presented these scenarios to attendees of Workshop 2 to understand preferences for these different scenarios, the findings of which are discussed further at the end of this section and in Section 7.0, Appendix B. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 12 Packet Pg. 1178 9.A.4.j US 41 Near Naples Manor Existing Conditions This site is furthest from the more urban node of Downtown Naples. Many of the streets connecting to US 41 in this area are neighborhood roads, and these connections to neighborhoods such as Naples Manor are fairly regular. The commercial lots along this corridor are also relatively shallow. As a result, the project team considered the lowest levels of potential intensity for this site, relative to the other sites. Map 3 provides a closer aerial view of the area. Table 1 shows the existing land uses for the area. Single-family and multi -family residential makes up much of the land use square footage in this area, given the surroundings of this segment of the corridor. Map 4 shows the zoning for this area. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 13 Packet Pg. 1179 lil iSe3 6v sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : tiS99Z) £Z-6-9 dad ejeldwo3 ddWO ABIJOAO 6vsf1 le}}!Wsueal :;uowt43euv F,,;Oo: U a Y V a 9.A.4.j Table 1: US 41 at Naples Manor and Surroundings — Existing Land Uses 40 Existing Land Use Vacant 36 9% Single -Family Residential' 236 62% 1,801,005 Multi -Family Residential 20 5% 1,951,428 Commercial 21 5% 168,478 Golf/Parking/Tourism 1 0% Industrial 2 1% 57,791 Institutional 0 0% 31,547 Government 8 2% Other/Utility 59 15% 20,978 Total 382 100.0%3 4,031,227 'Where applicable 2Does not include residences formally designated mobile homes. 'There is a slight difference between total percentage as shown and summed percentages of land uses due to rounding. Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 45% 48 % 4% 1% 1% East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 15 Packet Pg. 1181 iSe3 6v sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : tiS99Z) £Z-6-9 dad ejeldwo3 ddWO ABIJOAO 6vsf1 Iemwsueal :; owtveuv N 9.A.4.j Land Use Concept Build -Out Scenarios An 88-acre area of this section of US 41 was studied through more detailed aerial photography to develop the following build -out scenarios. Source: PlusUrbia Design A closer look at traffic connectivity in this area (Map 5) shows the near alignment of Myrtle Lane and Broward Street, intersecting with Tamiami Trail with the presence of a traffic signal. The fact that it is near the center of this node makes that intersection a natural place to start building a walkable, mixed use center. Additionally, the west side of Tamiami Trail lacks a parallel lane to link the commercial properties in the way that Floridan Avenue links the parcels on the east side. Such a lane would provide connectivity for the western side of Tamiami Trail and reduce the traffic pressure along Tamiami Trail. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 17 Packet Pg. 1183 9.A.4.j Map 5: US 41 at Naples Manor Connectivity Analysis Traffic signal Texas Ave — route to school East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 18 Packet Pg. 1184 9.A.4.j US 41 @ NAPLES MANORLIGHT CONCEPT Source: PlusUrbia Design Transportation and landscaping highlights: • US 41 redesign as multi -way boulevard as it passes to the west of Naples Manor. This design would allow for higher speed traffic to move in the lanes of the central thoroughfare and lower speed traffic with a high degree of access and parking to be relegated to the side lanes (similar to Floridan Avenue on the east side); the side lanes and central thoroughfare are separated by a median that contains a protected multi -use pathway with trees. • Improved connections to neighborhoods, including additional landscaping • New connections between neighborhoods and US 41 via parking lots, which can help reduce block size • Enhanced street crossings • Protected intersection; may include elements such as: corner curb extensions where cyclists and pedestrians can wait for the crossing signal; clear crosswalks for pedestrians and a bike crossing zone, which are striped and positioned to maximize visibility for turning cars; stop bars for cars located slightly farther back than a conventional intersection's stop bars, allowing for wider crosswalks; and a textured area that assists with traffic calming • Street parking East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 19 Packet Pg. 1185 9.A.4.j 0 Native plantings: multi -way boulevard can be planted with multiple rows of Florida Royal Palms; canopy trees on other streets might include: Florida Live Oak, Gumbo Limbo, Bald Cypress, Florida Maple, Paradise Tree, Satinleaf, Florida Slash Pine, Pigeon Plum, Dahoon Holly, and Wild Tamarind, supplemented by palms such as cabbage palm, Florida Silver Palm, Keys Brittle Thatch Palm, Buccaneer Palm, and Saw Palmetto US 41 @ NAPLES MANOR MODERATE CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES Commercial Scl Ft Added 254,000 Max. Office/Res. Scl Ft Added 59 000 Max Employees/Units Added 700 employees/ 40 units LEGEND Existing Buildings - 3 story Infill / Redevelopment 1 story Infill / Redevelopment M Demolished Structures East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 20 Packet Pg. 1186 9.A.4.j Land use and design highlights (in addition to highlights from Light concept): • Spaces along street frontage filled in with buildings that hug the edge of parcels to support walkability • Mix of ground -floor commercial and some multi -story mixed -use with commercial and office/residential (more limited build -out in this concept); warehouse space can be encouraged to redevelop as mixed -use • "Gas backwards" gas station design- placement of the fuel pumps at the rear of the site and the store at the front of the site along the roadway, making the store easily approachable by pedestrians and cyclists Source: concept images - PlusUrbia Design, calculations — Tindale Oliver Notes on calculations: • Numbers based on conceptual design and rounded. The calculations shown herein are conceptual and do not guarantee potential build -out. • Maximum square footage of either office or residential indicates that which could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of the two would be possible. • Maximum employees or units indicate those that could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of office and residential would be possible. Assumed 1400 sq ft unit, 300 sq ft of office per employee, 500 sq ft of retail per employee. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 21 Packet Pg. 1187 9.A.4.j US 41 @ NAPLES MANOR ROBUST CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT Commercial Sq Ft Added 329,000 Max. Office/Res. Sq Ft Added 170,000 Max Employees/Units Added 1,200 employees/ 120 units LEGEND Existing Buildings 3 story Infill / Redevelopment 1 story Infill / Redevelopment M Demolished Structures East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 22 Packet Pg. 1188 9.A.4.j Highlights include those of the Light and Moderate concepts, with a more complete build -out across the site. Source: concept images - PlusUrbia Design, calculations — Tindale Oliver Notes on calculations: • Numbers based on conceptual design and rounded. The calculations shown herein are conceptual and do not guarantee potential build -out. • Maximum square footage of either office or residential indicates that which could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of the two would be possible. • Maximum employees or units indicate those that could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of office and residential would be possible. Assumed 1400 sq ft unit, 300 sq ft of office per employee, 500 sq ft of retail per employee. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 23 Packet Pg. 1189 9.A.4.j US 41 and Rattlesnake Hammock Existing conditions This site lies at the intersection of US 41 and Rattlesnake Hammock Road, approaching the urban node of Downtown Naples; as a result, the project team considered it to have an opportunity for more intensity relative to the Naples Manor site, if desired. The unique roadway layout includes radial streets. Map 6 shows the area in more detail. Table 2 summarizes the existing land uses in terms of acreage and square footage. The area includes a variety of commercial and residential uses, including both multi -family and single-family housing that make up significant shares of the square footage in the area. Map 7 shows the zoning for the area. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 24 Packet Pg. 1190 iSe3 6v sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : tiS99Z) £Z-6-9 dad ejeldwo3 ddWO ABIJOAO 6vsf1 Iemwsueal :; owtveuv 9.A.4.j Table 2: US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock and Surroundings - Existing Land Uses Vacant 24 8% Single -Family Residential 112 40% 1,226,634 37% Mobile Home 2 1% 19,476 1% Multi -Family Residential 18 7% 1,334,173 41% Commercial 68 24% 501,879 15% Golf/Parking/Tourism 1 0% Institutional 7 2% 191,282 6% Government 50 18% Other/Utility 1 0% 11,092 0% Total 284 100.0% 3,284,536 100% 'Where applicable Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 26 Packet Pg. 1192 iSe3 6v sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : tiS99Z) £Z-6-9 dad ejeldwo3 ddWO ABIJOAO 6vsf1 Iemwsueal :; owtveuv i H v m � n � 7 m o LL (D " V U 2 d m 2 2 2 d Co U) m m K Q U U CD : a K�� Of It K a w U N - %%% ** �j**IY*�, �� �JVX? , � 1 9 o m U � a cl Ha Y Q� flex q Q O�Jg - aQ7ogleU peed do OQ' O 1'� �~ /yam• i oqo N 9.A.4.j Land Use Concept Build -Out Scenarios A 109-acre area around the intersection was studied through more detailed aerial photography to develop the following land use concept. x Source: PlusUrbio Design A transportation connectivity analysis on the site (Map 8) shows potential opportunities to connect parking lots and parcels, reducing pressure on certain intersections and reduce the size of large blocks. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 28 Packet Pg. 1194 9.A.4.j Map 8: US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock Connectivity Analysis AA7�--106; East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 29 Packet Pg. 1195 9.A.4.j US 41/RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCKLIGHT CONCEPT Source: PlusUrbia Design Transportation and landscaping highlights: • Protected intersection at US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock Road (see Naples Manor description for details) • Other enhanced street crossings with adjusted signal timing to aid pedestrian crossings • Wider sidewalks • Bike lanes with buffer zone in place of conventional bike lanes • Planting strips, native plants (see Naples Manor description for more details) • Hidden parking screened in mid -block lots • Street parking • Cardinal Way is a local street that can be made for walkable with sidewalks, parallel parking, street trees, lanterns and street furniture • Large surface parking lots can be transformed into parking decks with mixed -use development, freeing up more space for new retail, housing, civic uses and open space East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 30 Packet Pg. 1196 9.A.4.j US 41/RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK MODERATE concEVT Commercial Sq Ft Added Max. Office/Res. Sq Ft Added Max Employees/Units Added L1 J/ 3727000 372,000 21000 employees/ 270 units LEGEND Existing Buildings 3 story Infill / Redevelopment 1 story Infill / Redevelopment Demolished Structures East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 31 Packet Pg. 1197 9.A.4.j Land use and design highlights (in addition to highlights from Light concept): • Spaces along street frontage filled in with buildings, shaping the streets; corner properties are developed to hug the intersection, creating a focal point for those traveling along US 41. • Mix of ground -floor commercial and some multi -story mixed -use with commercial and office/residential; anchor stores can be left in place. Source: concept images - PlusUrbia Design; calculations — Tindale Oliver Notes on calculations: • Numbers based on conceptual design and rounded. The calculations shown herein are conceptual and do not guarantee potential build -out. • Maximum square footage of either office or residential indicates that which could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of the two would be possible. • Maximum employees or units indicate those that could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of office and residential would be possible. Assumed 1400 sq ft unit 300 sq ft of office per employee, 500 sq ft of retail per employee. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 32 Packet Pg. 1198 9.A.4.j US 41 /RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROBUST CONCEPT Commercial Sq Ft Added Max. Office/Res. Sq Ft Added Max Employees/Units Added 4545000 4549000 2,400 employees/ 320 units I LEGEND Existing Buildings - 3 story Infill / Redevelopment 1 story Infill / Redevelopment Demolished Structures East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 33 Packet Pg. 1199 9.A.4.j Highlights include those of the Light and Moderate concepts, with a more complete build -out across the site. Source: concept images - PlusUrbia Design, calculations — Tindale Oliver Notes on calculations: • Numbers based on conceptual design and rounded. The calculations shown herein are conceptual and do not guarantee potential build -out. • Maximum square footage of either office or residential indicates that which could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of the two would be possible. • Maximum employees or units indicate those that could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of office and residential would be possible. Assumed 1400 sq ft unit, 300 sq ft of office per employee, 500 sq ft of retail per employee. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 34 Packet Pg. 1200 9.A.4.j Towne Centre Existing conditions The Towne Centre site (Map 9) is a large open strip commercial mall that has been the topic of redevelopment discussions in recent years. The lot depths are approximately double the size of other commercial lots fronting the US 41 corridor, allowing more flexibility in its redevelopment. This site is also the closest to Downtown Naples. As a result, the project team considers this site an opportunity for the most added intensity, relative to the other sites considered, if desired. Table 3 shows acreages and building square footage of existing land uses for the Towne Centre site and its surroundings, based on the extent shown in Map 9. Much of the acreage is government -related due to the Collier County Government Center in the area, just outside the Study Area boundary. Commercial uses make up about a third of acreage and square footage. Multi -family residential is far less prominent in terms of acreage, yet much more prominent in terms of square footage due to density. Map 10 shows the current zoning for this area. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 35 Packet Pg. 1201 ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv .• i o 9.A.4.j Table 3: Towne Centre and Surroundings - Existing Land Uses Vacant 18 6% Single -Family Residential' 44 15% 321,006 13% Multi -Family Residential 5 2% 1,296,884 51% Commercial 94 32% 844,774 33% Golf/Parking/Tourism 1 0% Industrial 0 0% 2,880 0% Institutional 9 3% 68,364 3% Government 121 41% Other/Utility 3 1% 7,764 0% Total 296 100.0% 2,541,672 100% 'Where applicable Does not include residences formally designated mobile homes. Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 37 Packet Pg. 1203 7eaL Sn0 6 000 Z Z d:� 5 Z £-6g]Qd mmdmoo ¥dWOA N� O�vS�|m Wsu�l:;emLj� n¥ lil / � a. m \ a k - wa 19 « $ { } § 0. $ & 1-7/ ) \ 1� Sm2 % 9.A.4.j Land Use Concept Build -Out Scenarios A 98-acre area around the Town Centre site, including the parcels across US 41 from the commercial mall, was studied through more detailed aerial photography to develop the land use concept. Source: PlusUrbia Design A connectivity analysis at the Towne Centre (Map 11) illustrates how the large surface parking lot at the Towne Centre mall site can be broken up into smaller blocks to promote additional development opportunities and walkable connections. The canal may also be evaluated for a walkable connection and open space/gathering space along its route. Parcels along the west side of US 41 can also be better connected. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 39 Packet Pg. 1205 9.A.4.j Map 11: Towne Centre Connectivity Analysis East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 40 Packet Pg. 1206 9.A.4.j TOWNE CENTRE Source: PlusUrbio Design Transportation and landscaping highlights: • Existing parking lot broken into blocks with more connections between US 41 and large retail at back of site • More walkable connection along the canal at the northern end of site, creating open/gathering space • Bike lanes with buffer zone in place of conventional bike lanes • Enhanced street crossings with curb extensions and cyclist -friendly signals to create protected intersections (see fuller description in Naples Manor site description) • Street parking and opportunity for parking decks lined with mixed -use development; these improvements support parking once and walking between establishments • Native plants (see Naples Manor site description for more details) East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 41 Packet Pg. 1207 9.A.4.j TOWNE CENTRE MODERATE CONCEPT Commercial Sq Ft Added 770QQQ � � LEGEND Max. Office/Res. Sq Ft Added 770,000 Existing Buildings 47100 3 story Infill / Redevelopment Max Employees/Units Added employees/ Istory lnfill/ Redevelopment 550 units N Demolished Structures East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 42 Packet Pg. 1208 9.A.4.j Land use and design highlights (in addition to highlights from Light concept): • Buildings and green space along new connections • Opportunity for ground -floor commercial or multi -story mixed -use with commercial and office/residential; mixed -use buildings are up to three stories to line potential parking decks; opportunity to evaluate the transition of the trailer park at Neapolitan Circle to mixed -use development with relocation assistance for trailers • Nearly every block has green space Source: concept images - PlusUrbia Design; calculations — Tindale Oliver Notes on calculations: • Numbers based on conceptual design and rounded. The calculations shown herein are conceptual and do not guarantee potential build -out. • Maximum square footage of either office or residential indicates that which could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of the two would be possible. • Maximum employees or units indicate those that could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of office and residential would be possible. Assumed 1400 sq ft unit, 300 sq ft of office per employee, 500 sq ft of retail per employee. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 43 Packet Pg. 1209 9.A.4.j TOWNE CENTRE ROBUST CONCEPT to+� :� a , ob + At I ■ir ■�sa�rr me Commercial Sq Ft Added Sq Ft Added Max Employees/Units Added 905,000 905,000 4,830 employees/ 650 units LEGEND Existing Buildings - 3 story Infill / Redevelopment 1 story Infill / Redevelopment M Demolished Structures East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 44 Packet Pg. 1210 9.A.4.j Highlights include those of the Light and Moderate concepts, with a more complete build -out across the site. Source: concept images - PlusUrbia Design, calculations — Tindale Oliver Notes on calculations: • Numbers based on conceptual design and rounded. The calculations shown herein are conceptual and do not guarantee potential build -out. • Maximum square footage of either office or residential indicates that which could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of the two would be possible. • Maximum employees or units indicate those that could be added given the concept design and based on whether net square footage added was all office or all residential, yet some combination of office and residential would be possible. Assumed 1400 sq ft unit, 300 sq ft of office per employee, 500 sq ft of retail per employee. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 45 Packet Pg. 1211 9.A.4.j Concept Preferences During the public workshop held September 10, 2020, attendees had the opportunity to participate in a poll on these land use concept build -out scenarios to indicate their most and least preferred scenarios. Table 4 shows the results based on the results from 66 to 88 respondents (the number varied by question). The moderate scenario for each site was: • the highest or second highest (see the following note on the US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock site) share of "most preferred" responses and • had the lowest share by far of "least preferred" responses. Note that the percentages shown include results from direct responses received via the polling program, as well as responses typed into the virtual workshop platform. For more details on polling results, see Section 7.0, Appendix B. Table 4: Land Use Build -Out Scenario Polling Results Light 24% US 41 at Naples Manor Moderate 37% Robust 37% Light 22% US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock Moderate 30% Robust 47% Light 16% Towne Centre Moderate 53% Robust 30% Light 51% US 41 at Naples Manor Moderate 3% Robust 45% Light 67% US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock Moderate 2% Robust 30% Towne Centre Light 52% Moderate 3% East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 46 Packet Pg. 1212 9.A.4.j Robust 44% Regulatory Considerations Technical Memorandum 1 provides an overview of existing Growth Management Plan (GMP) and Land Development Code (LDC) regulations that pertain to the East Naples Study Area in general. This section indicates where adjustments should be further evaluated to implement the land use concepts and preferences presented herein, with a focus on facilitating mixed -use development given its inclusion in the preferred moderate scenarios. LDC adjustments could be implemented as an overlay. Development Standards to Promote Land Use Concepts Allowed Density and Intensity As noted in Technical Memorandum 1, there are density restrictions in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), which contains the US 41 corridor in the East Naples Study Area. The Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code both indicate density restrictions to 4 units per acre (UPA), with an exception for use of the affordable housing density bonus. The mixed -use concepts presented in this plan would require increases in density allowances; language would also need to be evaluated to reflect the intent to target more dense/intense mixed use along this major corridor (aside from the currently formally -designated Activity Centers). Existing regulations do not apply significant restrictions on office and commercial development intensity (Floor Area Ratios, FAR), so those are not constraining to proposed concepts. -oostol Considerations Given the timelines of the build -out scenarios, some of which may take 10 years or more, the County should evaluate the need to adjust criteria for long-term build-out/redevelopment in the CHHA, particularly as environmental conditions such as sea -level rise change or if the area experiences increased vulnerability to coastal hazards; this need may be accelerated if significant increases to density were allowed and incentivized to facilitate more robust build - out scenarios. These factors may also have implications for Special Flood Hazard Areas defined by the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) and present in the Study Area. At a minimum, the County will need to maintain consistency with existing State statutes and account for National Flood Insurance Program requirements from FEMA (the County affirms its participation in this program in Policy 12.2.3 of the Growth Management Plan); this effort could also help further analyze resources needed for proper design/construction in the area over time and how constraining these needs may be to overall development levels. This evaluation might include, among other factors, building design, infrastructure, evacuation, and flood zone designations and the related Community Rating System Classification. It can also account for changes in services/protections provided by natural elements, such as changes to natural buffers. E U 2 r a East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 47 Packet Pg. 1213 9.A.4.j Note that there are existing requirements and guidance in place for flood plains and development in the CHHA; examples include those in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element for infrastructure design (Policy 12.2.6), structures that suffer certain types of foundational damage (Policy 12.3.6), and land acquisition by the County during post - disaster recovery (Policy 12.3.8). Additionally, there are construction standards for the Special Flood Hazard Areas and CHHA in Section 3.02 of the Land Development Code. These standards require elevation of new or substantially improved residential and non-residential development to base flood elevation/base flood level (non-residential has the option to waterproof), among other supplemental building design standards. Allowed Uses C-3, C-4, and CPUD zoning categories are prevalent along the US 41 corridor. C-3 and C-4 capture many of the desired uses indicated in outreach; only C-3 allows for mixed -use with residential, with additional design requirements. This allowance can be evaluated for C-4 in this area where commercial and office uses are compatible with residential. Regarding mixed -use requirements that pertain to C-3, the requirement that residential be limited to owners or lessees of retail would create a significant obstacle to creating upper floor residential and a mixed -use environment. Live -work buildings are only one type of mixed -use development, and the scale and phased build -out of development would be better supported by having upper floors that are financially independent of ground floor tenants (no lessor -lessee relationship). Furthermore, requiring residential to be located above principal uses for mixed -use in C-3 (Sec 2.03.03) would eliminate the possibility of urban flats or stoops or other building types that engage the ground floor with residential units. Allowing horizontal mix of uses with ground floor residential would be useful where there are frontages not suitable for retail. The Towne Centre concepts also illustrates the transition of a Tractor Trailer -Recreational Vehicle Campground District (TTRVC) area to a mixed -use area along the corridor. Further outreach and suitable alternative locations for the existing use should be identified if this re- zoning option is pursued. The heavier nature of commercial use types in C-5 zoning may be less suited to the desired uses identified from outreach. Remaining C-5 designations along this segment of the corridor could be evaluated for re -zoning to C-3 or C-4 as part of the implementation steps. Additional standards that can be applied for undesired uses are addressed later in this section. Heights The two-story height limit for mixed -use development in C-3 (Sec. 2.03.03) would need to be increased to three stories to accommodate concepts provided. The C-3 district has a general height limit of 50 feet, and C-4 has a height limit of 75 feet. These are likely sufficient to facilitate multi -story mixed -use development at a maximum of 3 stories in moderate scenarios. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 48 Packet Pg. 1214 9.A.4.j Setbacks and Buffers The amounts by which buildings must be set back from the lot line (setback) for C-3 are as follows: • Minimum front yard: 50% of building height, but not less than 25 feet • Minimum side yard (non -waterfront): 50% of building height, but not less than 15 feet • Minimum rear yard (non -waterfront): 50% of building height, but not less than 15 feet Setbacks for C-4 are as follows: • Minimum front yard: 50% of building height, but not less than 25 feet. Structures 50 feet or more in height = 25 feet plus an additional 1 foot of setback for each foot of building height over 50 feet • Minimum side yard (non -waterfront): 50% of building height, but not less than 15 feet. • Minimum rear yard (non -waterfront): 50% of building height, but not less than 15 feet Setbacks need to be re-evaluated to balance community preferences for setbacks and landscaping with the ability to create more walkable environments. Current standards make it difficult to front the streets in some of the concepts shown in this section and promote walkability. Front setbacks can range down to eight feet in parts of certain concepts. Adjustment to a build -to line or build -to zone, which is not dependent on building height or a maximum front setback, would be more effective to deliver a more walkable environment. Additional provisions may be evaluated where larger front setbacks are retained to include sidewalk space or other amenities within the setback; this effort should include an evaluation of landscape requirements for foundation plantings to ensure that they do not create a barrier for pedestrian activity. Generally, commercial ground floors or even residential urban ground floors with stoops, dooryards, and entranceway plantings can make pedestrian access to buildings difficult. Additional special considerations include evaluating the setback requirements from the canal in the Towne Centre example to facilitate a walkway and open/gathering space along that corridor. Buffer requirements in the TTRVC district (10-ft minimum front yard, 5-ft minimum side yard for non -waterfront, 8-ft minimum rear -yard for non -waterfront) may also make it difficult to create the multi -way boulevard streetscape shown in the Towne Centre concept, an issue which could be addressed through re -zoning and transitioning this area to mixed -use, as noted previously. Finally, there are buffer requirements in Section 4.06.02 between C-3 and C-4 uses, which only apply to external boundaries of mixed -use projects in C-3. Reduced buffer requirements can be evaluated between similar types of commercial uses and any expansions of mixed -use in C-4, to promote more compact development. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 49 Packet Pg. 1215 9.A.4.j Parking Regarding the amount of parking required, requirements are generally high and can be evaluated for decreases. Evaluation for a set standard reduction for mixed -use development might also be considered; the County Land Development illustrates an example of this approach with Planned Unit Development (PUD) standards: required off-street parking Code spaces in neighborhood village centers are reduced to 50-75% of typical standards, a requirement facilitated by their pedestrian -friendly design. Currently, the mixed -use provisions for C-3 allow for a reduction based on a shared parking analysis; if a standard reduction is not pursued, this sort of analysis might also be extended to mixed uses in C-4, particularly if mixed - use containing residential is allowed in certain instances. Regarding parking structure and space design, an exception on the prohibition of parking structures facing the primary facade should be considered for mixed -use development in the C- 3 district (Sec. 4.02.38). This would be useful if an existing strip mall may have a parking structure built facing the primary facade on the other side of newly built internal "street." Furthermore, minimum 9-ft width for on -street parallel parking is excessive and should be re- evaluated. There are many successful examples throughout the US of 7-ft or 8-ft wide parking bays. Open Space The 30% open space requirement for development in C-3 and C-4 districts would make it difficult to implement some of the proposed concepts unless pervious pavement, streets that can be closed for events and used as plaza space, and green roofs and amenity decks for parking structures are counted. Additionally, maintaining and preserving green space emerged as a key priority during outreach. One option to evaluate is an in -lieu fee for open space, which can help keep development compact and concentrated in a walkable node while allowing for open space to be aggregated at a site nearby in the community. This approach may allow for a larger open space site with more options for what it will contain yet may also require more administrative efforts from the County to ensure the aggregated open space is located and properly maintained. These options should be weighed with additional options for public green space (discussed further in Section 5.0). Alternatively, open space design standards can be evaluated to ensure quality green space; heightened open space design standards could also be the focus for incentives or financial support to obtain more naturally oriented open space and infrastructure on the site while offsetting additional costs to developers. Site Connectivity and Access Regarding site connectivity, mixed -use design criteria for C-3 (Sec. 4.02.38) recommend a grid street system and bicycle, pedestrian, and pathway connections to the extent possible to support interconnectivity in the development; Section 6.06 encourages increased East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 50 Packet Pg. 1216 9.A.4.j interconnectivity. More explicit provisions can be evaluated to facilitate the addition of connections to break up extremely large blocks. Regarding site access, explicit requirements for shared access can be evaluated for owners of neighboring properties. Commercial Planned Unit Developments Much of the study area is zoned as PUD. PUD design criteria (Sec. 4.07.00) should be evaluated in light of the potential adjustments mentioned herein to guide development in areas under consideration for a re -zone to PUD with commercial uses or mixed -use, as well as redevelopment of existing commercial PUDs. Development Standards for Undesired Uses The 2018 US 41 Corridor Study identified gas stations and storage facilities as undesirable uses for the area based on outreach; many comments collected as part of this planning effort also noted carwashes and fast food as undesirable. A full prohibition of new undesired uses in the area can require a strong legal basis and defense to implement; as a result, a more moderate approach is often used that involves placing limitations on the location, design, and operations for these new uses. This approach, in coordination with allowances and incentives for desired uses, helps bring a more favorable mix of uses into an area. Regarding location and types of development with undesired uses, the following are adjustments already proposed to or under consideration by the County that can be continued through the review and/or implementation process: • The Land Development Code already includes separation standards for facilities with fuel pumps, at 500 feet; the 2018 Study recommended increasing spacing t a quarter mile (1,320 feet) and spacing could range higher (e.g., 5,000 feet). • Regarding warehousing, the County has already considered some options for placing some controls on this use. The latest effort for consideration, as detailed in Technical Memorandum 1, is to address concerns with the self -storage use by allowing it in C-4 commercial districts only in combination with other permitted uses as part of a mixed - use development and if it occupies less than 50% of the total area of the first floor. Regarding design of undesired uses, the 2018 study noted in its summary of findings support for landscaping and screening. The County has additional design and site requirements for several undesired uses. Facilities with fuel pumps have special design standards that include additional buffer and landscaping requirements (Sec. 5.05.05); there are additional general design standards for self -storage buildings (5.05.08) and carwashes abutting residential districts (5.05.11). There may be some additional adjustments to these standards to evaluate, including expansion of these design requirements to remaining undesirable uses and placement of fuel pumps in the back of the site with a convenience store fronting the main road. Given the East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 51 Packet Pg. 1217 9.A.4.j existence of design requirements in conjunction with continued feedback from the community to further address these uses, efforts may need to be more focused on spacing, better integration of certain uses with other desirable uses, and generally increasing desirable uses overall to change the use landscape. Example of convenience store fronting the intersection with fuel pumps at the back in Gainesville, FL; image source: Google Maps Development Review Incentives to Promote Land Use Concepts Development review incentives can be considered to help incentivize development based on the land use concepts for the study area and other appropriate areas. Specific incentives discussed during a stakeholder meeting with representatives of the development community include fee waivers and expedited permitting. Developers also noted that funding tools specific to investment and improvements in this area may be helpful. One option specifically noted was Tax Increment Financing (TIF) for transportation, infrastructure, and other improvements. This approach takes a portion of property taxes generated in the area and ensure they are reinvested back into the specific boundaries of the area for a defined set of improvement types. These revenues are relatively flexible in terms of items they can be used to fund. TIF is currently used in several parts of the County, including Innovation Zones at Golden Gate City, Activity Center 9 at the Collier Boulevard/I-75 interchange, and Ave Maria. Adding a TIF District in East Naples should be weighed in conjunction with these existing districts and other under consideration. Another tool for development financing specific to a portion of this area, shown in Map 12, that includes the part of the US 41 at Naples Manor site is the Opportunity Zone. This option was created by 2017 federal tax reforms that allow tax incentives for those who invest eligible gains (capital and other) in a Qualified Opportunity Fund (QOF). These funds support investments of in qualifying business properties in areas identified as economically distressed and designated as Opportunity Zones; State governors have some discretion on where these zones are designated, with approval from the federal government. Opportunity Zones funds for collecting East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 52 Packet Pg. 1218 9.A.4.j investment dollars are created by private sector taxpayers. Developers can identify and interface with managers of these funds, with assistance from the County to market the vision for the area that includes the Opportunity Zone and specific investment opportunities. Regulations to guide development should be in place prior to attracting investment. Investors can contribute money from eligible gains reported for tax purposes through 2026, so marketing efforts would need to be in place prior to that time. Note that opportunities for this particular zone may be somewhat limited given that much of the area is taken up by established residential neighborhoods. Map 12: Opportunity Zone in the East Naples Study Area Qef. Ne Nam mw* Rd Vewnaw-N,k ,, 5aoa1 Palm Rd imztoi Source: US Department of Treasury East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 53 Packet Pg. 1219 9.A.4.j 4.0 Transportation Options Bicycle &t Pedestrian Connections Off Main Roadways Regarding bicycle and pedestrian connections, generally most neighborhood roadways and all major roadways in the study area have complete sidewalks; however, many lack either on - street bicycle lanes or parallel multi -use path facilities. Notable deficiencies include: • Rattlesnake Hammock Drive from US 41 to Santa Barbara Boulevard (bike facilities) • Lakewood Boulevard (bike facilities) • County Barn Road (sidewalks) • Wildflower Way (bike facilities) • Lely Resort Boulevard (bike facilities) • Lely Cultural Parkway (bike facilities) • Grand Lely Drive (bike facilities) Additionally, the shared -use pathway shown along Collier Boulevard is more limited in width than is typically preferred, at about 6-ft wide instead of 12 ft. Although roadways such as US 41, Collier Boulevard, and Davis Boulevard have on -street bike lanes, current guidance from FDOT and FHWA suggests that separated bicycle facilities are preferred along these higher -speed roadways. Along lower -speed roadways (35 MPH or less), on -street bike lanes or separate bicycle/shared-use paths are acceptable. In addition to enhancing/completing the study area's major roadway bicycle network and addressing roadway segments with missing sidewalks, the East Naples community may wish to consider making strategic non -motorized network connections to provide access to amenities without requiring cyclists and pedestrians to rely on perimeter arterials such as US 41 and Collier Boulevard. Figure 4 imagines a new pathway connection between a private road in the Grand Lely subdivision and the Donna Fiala Eagle Lakes Community Park Complex. The path shown in red is the route from a home to the park (2.25 miles) and the Parkside Elementary School Campus (3 miles); the path shown in blue using the new trail connection reduces the trip to the park to only 0.75 miles and the school trip to less than 0.25 miles. Neither trip requires travel along busy arterial or collector streets. These types of improvements can add to improvements noted in the Section 3.0 land use concepts such as landscaped right-of-way along local street connections between commercial sites and neighborhoods and intersections noted for local streets. Other comments and options for implementation of recreational trails are noted in the green space discussion of Section 5.0. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 54 Packet Pg. 1220 9.A.4.j Figure 4: Pathway Connection Grand Lely Subdivision/ Donna Fiala Eagle Lakes Community Park Main Roadwav Imarovementc In addition to bicycle and pedestrian connections off the main roadways, there are major thoroughfare improvement options that complement and provide alternatives to those provided in the land use concepts; following are examples of how they can be applied to US 41. General mobility strategies that can be used to enhance thoroughfares in this area include: • Short- to mid-term intersection improvements to implement design best practices for pedestrians and widening existing sidewalks or constructing new shared -use paths to provide for low -stress bicycle facilities • Applying alternative intersection concepts to make major intersections safer, easier to cross, and more efficient consistent with FHWA and FDOT Intersection Control Evaluation policies and procedures • Applying FDOT context classification criteria to establish target speeds and identify short and longer -term design interventions to maintain roadway capacity but manage speeds E and provide better, safer facilities for all travel modes r Q East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 55 Packet Pg. 1221 9.A.4.j Figure 5 shows examples of short- and mid-term intersection improvements. These types of improvements do not change the fundamental operations or capacity of an intersection but create a safer environment for cyclists and pedestrians by making the intersection more compact and affecting changes to geometry to reduce turning speeds. Figure 5: Short -Term Intersection Improvement Examples Use channelizing island to make I 1 crossings shorter and allow Reduce curb radii to slow pedestrians to cross in stages. right turn movements and make crossings shorter. �..f rf.. Clearly define pedestrian M path across multiple adjacent driveways. Where feasible, pass crosswalk through median - to reduce conflict with left "r turning vehicles. 4M Widen sidewalks to create v shared -use paths for cyclists and pedestrians. Figure 6 shows the existing cross section of US 41; the roadway has an approximate right-of-way width of 200 feet for much of the segment in this area. Figures 7 and S show two concepts of how to modify the roadway to reduce speeds and enhance livability while maintaining the roadway's capacity. In the first example a wide median is created by moving the bicycle facilities to a separated pathway, eliminating right turn lanes, and slightly narrowing travel lane widths. The wide median allows for implementation of alternative intersection concepts which can simplify intersections, reduce crashes, and increase roadway capacity. The second example shows a more compact roadway with a frontage road system to handle local traffic and bicycle & pedestrian activity. Both examples use landscape features to create a sense of "enclosure" to help reduce traffic speeds. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 56 Packet Pg. 1222 Z Wsuejl:;emt43e 7eaL Sn0 6 000 Z Z d:VIS 5 £-69]Qd mmdmoo ¥dWOA NOA O�vSn-|m n¥ M q Q A � a. 2 \ a : = i 0 . \Ef -� ` =a- 2 - � - - f / § 2 � o \ %ze z j@\\£)\ § o - § ) 2 _ f a > & � - k \\r-a }//§{\§ { Q 77 & 2 �`a/SED \)§fee ! } }\j k/ \ S mw {g\ Q - Lul e�% - G -}\ % \/ / � f ]3 .> e ) 2 - /k�j \ca \�r E § o /2.E)\ _ � $ / T T -- T T T ) ;sea Lv sn 0£60000£ZOZ-ld : V999Z) £Z-6-9 dad a;aldwoo `ddWO ABIJOAO wvsfl lewwsueal :}uawyoeuv Iq N N Cl a r 0 V R a 9.A.4.j 5.0 Additional Recommendations Green Space Preservation and increases of green space were noted often in public engagement activities such as the online public survey and workshop comments. There are important distinctions to be made between private and public green space as well as green space for more recreational purposes versus more preservation or conservation purposes (although both of those aims may be served by a common site). In terms of private open space, many residential neighborhoods in this area incorporate private recreational spaces, such as golf courses. The land use concepts in Section 3.0 also highlight ways that green space and landscaping can be incorporated into new private commercial or mixed -use development and right-of-way design. Regarding public open space, Technical Memorandum 1 measured access to the County's community and regional parks facilities, finding that many of these are accessible within a 20- minute drive or less. These facilities are also guided by Level of Service (LOS) standards laid out in the Growth Management Plan and analyzed in more detailed as part of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, among other measures. Efforts to increase public recreation and preservation/conservation green spaces would need to be considered in the County's Parks and Recreation Master Plan update processes, the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization MPO bicycle and pedestrian planning processes that include trails planning, and associated capital planning processes to incorporated these aims in broader planning and funding (both capital and operations/maintenance) considerations; more implementation details are provided in Section 6.0. For desired improvements above and beyond the typical level of service Rookery Bay and surrounding natural areas are south of East Naples Study Area. Image Source: https://www.paradisecoast.com1 standards, the community could pursue the option of creating an MSTU to finance additional green space/parks improvements and related maintenance. This option has been used for the Golden Gate area to support a community center. Branding and Marketing CamDaiLr Branding and marketing emerged as key topics of interest in the public engagement for the 2018 US 41 Corridor study as well as engagement efforts for this project. Several comments indicated an interest in renaming the area (for example, South Naples) and basing the branding East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 59 Packet Pg. 1225 9.A.4.j on natural amenities of this area and other attractions such as parks, the Collier County History Museum, the botanical gardens, arts attractions, and other amenities that include those in the Community Redevelopment Area to the east. See supporting document Technical Memorandum 1 for more information. These efforts can build on the general vision themes of this plan to evaluate, adjust, and/or create community names, associated logos, design and color schemes, architectural styles, marketing campaign materials (e.g., brochure, video), design and placement of branded signs (e.g., at gateway locations into the community), among other items. The marketing effort can also include raising awareness of investment opportunities via the area's Opportunity Zone, discussed in Section 3.0. This effort should include further Example of monument sign and gateway feature with landscaping from Treviso Bay community. Image Source: Google Maps coordination with community groups (e.g., East Naples Civic Association, BEONE merchants association, and other stakeholder from this study listed in the Public Involvement Plan) , County planning and zoning staff, County communication staff, members of the development and financing community, and others. Recvding Dron-Off Center The current recycling drop- off center serving the East Naples area needs to find a new location due to an expiring lease at the current location. This is an operation that would require at least an acre of land, operate during daytime hours, and have trucks visiting twice weekly for hauling materials Example of recycling drop-off center. Image Source: Collier County as well as an additional truck visiting five times monthly during low traffic times. Enhanced design, such as specific architectural style elements, landscaping, screen, and other elements, could be considered for the site. During the second public workshop for this project, the project team presented information on such a facility and polled attendees to see if they would be in favor of having a well -designed recycling drop-off center in the East Naples study area. The results indicated that 47% of 75 respondents indicated that they would be in favor to some degree of such a facility in the area (with 37% extremely in favor), and 33% indicated they East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 60 Packet Pg. 1226 9.A.4.j would not be in favor to some degree (with 20% extremely not in favor). There appears to be enough support for this idea to explore the option further. Note that these results include those gathered directly through the polling program during the workshop and those types into the virtual workshop platform (see Technical Memorandum 2 in the supporting documents for more details). Housing Affordabilitv As noted in Section 2.0, there was input related to housing affordability during public engagement. Options to maintain housing at different price points could be explored in the future for residential units coming online as part of mixed -use developments. A few tools recently approved by the County that can be used to further the provision of housing at various price points include impact fee deferrals (limited to 225 units a year), a pilot program to allow payment of impact fees in installments, promotion of the existing affordable housing density bonus, an option to provide financial support by allocating funds to the Local Affordable Housing Trust Fund (Resolution 2019-207), and the option to add properties to the Community Land Trust the County is establishing (referenced in Contract 19-7577). The County may also promote smaller units as part of mixed -use development and programs for housing upgrades. The County is currently studying tiered impact fee rates based on a buy -down option for economic growth and that does not require reimbursement of covered fees by other funding sources, a de-minimis analysis for homes in relevant affordable price ranges, to see if certain home types can be exempt from fees, and identification of homes available at various price points in the county related to different income brackets. Landscaping, Architectural Style, and Signs The land use concepts of Section 3.0 provide guidance on certain landscaping and urban design regulatory needs and represent land use concepts using architectural styles such as those currently found in the area and supported by the Land Development Code. However, specific changes to landscaping, architectural style, and signs should be evaluated in further detail as part of follow-up regulatory amendments to the Land Development Code. This evaluation should account for detailed findings from the 2018 US 41 Corridor Study and specific design and branding styles that emerge from the branding and marketing campaign effort. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 61 Packet Pg. 1227 9.A.4.j Example of existing roadway landscaping. Image Source: Google Maps 6.0 Implementation Implementation of concepts and recommendations in this plan will be a significant, multi -year process. This section focuses on the implementation steps that will be required with general tentative timeframes; a summary of implementation steps and how they relate to the main vision elements in Section 2.0 is shown in Table 5. Timeframes provided are tentative estimates that may be subject to change depending on timing of different plan updates, development build -out timing, and other factors. Funding sources are assumed to be those typically associated with the implementation processes described below, unless otherwise listed for implementation in Table 5. Branding and Marketing (estimated 1-2 years) — Based on the vision elements of the East Naples Community Development Plan, the County can immediately begin to coordinate between community and business stakeholders (e.g., East Naples Civic Association, BEONE merchant association, and other stakeholders noted in the Public Involvement Plan in supporting documents) as well as County communications staff and external marketing and branding expertise, to develop more details around a branding and marketing campaign and related materials. Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code Updates (estimated 1-5 years) — Updates to the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code (potentially as a zoning overlay) to reflect the changes highlighted primarily in Section 3.0. This may require additional evaluation for items such as public facilities/infrastructure planning, as mentioned in that section. Code changes can take 6-12 months to implement. There may be a longer timeframe for adjustments to the Growth Management Plan; additional time may also be required for the creation of local funding source tools (e.g., TIF district, MSTU). Long -Term Capital Planning and Improvements (estimated 1-5+ years) — Improvements proposed in the Community Development Plan can be considered during initial stages of the East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 62 Packet Pg. 1228 9.A.4.j following long-term and capital planning processes; note that some improvements, such as more straightforward safety adjustments to intersections and improvements previously identified as a need such as relocation of the recycling drop-off center, may occur more quickly than other improvements that need to go through the long-term planning and capital planning process described below. Technical Memorandum 1 in supporting documents provides more information on improvements that are already planned and programmed for the East Naples areas via the processes below. • County — Long-term County planning documents that are periodically updated include the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Master Mobility Plan. Part of the parks planning process is the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, which advises the County Commission on matters related to the acquisition, development, and programs for parks facilities and provides input to the Parks and Recreation Department. Capital projects from the planning efforts and other local efforts typically are implemented through the County's Capital Improvement Program, which includes, among other topics, parks, transportation, and other infrastructure such as the recycling drop-off center. These plans are prepared in five-year increments and are updated annually as part of the budget approval in the fall. In Collier County, this capital planning process is supported by updates to an additional document, the Annual Update and Inventory Report, which documents an inventory and Level of Service Standards for key facilities. MPO and FDOT — A significant amount of transportation planning and improvements occurs through the Collier MPO, the regional transportation agency serving Collier County and municipalities (Naples, Marco Island, Everglades City) that oversees the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) for use of federal and State transportation dollars. For the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, the MPO staff issues a call for projects to implement projects that are incorporated directly or by reference into the plan. The staff ranks projects based on a set of criteria for final approval by the MPO Board to identify prioritized projects. These projects are submitted to FDOT on or before June 30 to coordinate for implementation. Changes to a roadway's cross section or even substantial changes to a major intersection can be costly and require a formal planning and development process. For State highways such as US 41, this process typically begins with the MPO identifying the project within its priorities and then working with FDOT to program funds to perform a Project Development & Environmental (PD&E) study. PD&E studies include a formal statement of a project's purpose and need, a thorough analysis of the traffic and operational outcomes of various scenarios, public participation, environmental review, and preliminary design and costs estimates. In some cases, prior to beginning a PD&E study, FDOT will conduct a multimodal corridor study or some other type of feasibility study to get a better sense of options East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 63 Packet Pg. 1229 9.A.4.j and begin developing conceptual alternatives for further refinement and evaluation as part of a PD&E. These interim studies are especially common when the project purpose and need is focused on supporting changes to a roadway corridor's urban form or addressing subjects other than increasing a roadway's automobile capacity. Long-term improvements are programmed for funding through the LRTP's Cost Feasible Plan, updated every five years (the MPO is currently updating the 2045 plan). More immediate improvements over five years are contained in the Transportation Improvement Program. Other Approvals by the County Commission (estimated 1-5+ years) — Other items requiring County Commission approval, if pursued, include items such as potential approval of additional housing affordability tools currently being studied; allocations and disbursement of funds to the Local Affordable Housing Trust Fund, which may be tied to budget approvals decided in the Fall of each year); and designation of lands to the Community Land Trust, which may be approved as land opportunities are identified. Table S: Implementation Summary Short -Term (1-2 years) Branding and Marketing Effort (Section 5.0) Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code amendment evaluation/implementation of overlay elements for promotion of land use concepts, discouragement of undesired uses, development review process incentives, and housing options (Section 3.0 and housing size/type diversity recommendations in Section 5.0): • Density/intensity increases with evaluation of coastal building considerations • Adjust permitted uses in C-3 and C-4 to facilitate mixed use and any desired uses not already captured • Potential rezoning of certain TTRVC and C-5 designations on the corridor • Height allowance adjustments to accommodate three stories in C-3 mixed -use projects • Allowances for setback and buffer decreases in certain cases, with requirements for pedestrian - friendly improvements where larger setbacks are maintained. • Parking minimum reductions and adjustments to parking structure/space requirements to facilitate mixed -use and multi -modal environment • Explicit provisions on increasing site connectivity and requirements for shared access for neighboring properties • Adjustments to PUD design criteria in support of adjustments noted herein • Increased separation standards for gas stations • Continued current effort of requirement in C-4 to incorporate self -storage into mixed -use development with certain amount restrictions on first floor • Placement of fuel pumps at back of site and expansion of supplement design requirements for undesired uses that currently lack supplemental standards • Expedited review and fee incentives for desired development • Allow more diverse housing sizes/type through corridor mixed -use provisions East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 64 Packet Pg. 1230 9.A.4.j Housing affordability tool/program implementation based on outcomes of current study and use of existing housing programs (e.g., for housing upgrades; Section 5.0) Recycling drop-off center relocation (Section 5.0) Mid -Term (3-5 years) Land Development Code amendment evaluation/implementation for additional incentives (Section 3.0): TIF district creation with language on use of funds Housing improvements through longer -term housing affordability tools, such as allocations to/disbursements from affordable housing trust fund and dedication of land to community land trust (Section 5.0) Long -Term (5+ years) Continued development incentives and housing support to reach desired development outcomes (Sections 3.0 and 5.0) SPACEBEAUTIFICATION & GREEN Ad Short -Term (1-2 years) Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code amendment evaluation/implementation of overlay elements for promotion of land use concepts (Section 3.0): Commercial open space in -lieu fee or open space design standards that promote quality open space without overly burdening development Mid -Term (3-5 years) Land Development Code amendment evaluation/implementation for additional site design requirements and green space funding support (Section 5.0): • Additional landscaping, architectural, sign updates that reference, where applicable, outcomes from the branding effort • Green space MSTU, if desired Public green space improvement planning as part of Parks and Recreation planning and capital improvements processes; additional green space planning for special funds created (e.g., MSTU, in - lieu fee; Section 5.0) Long -Term (5+ years) Public green space capital improvements through County processes, MSTU, in -lieu fee funding (Section 5.0) TRANSPORTATIONjA Short -Term (1-2 years) Begin County bicycle and pedestrian connection improvements (Sections 3.0 and 4.0); deficiencies and opportunities noted: East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 65 Packet Pg. 1231 9.A.4.j • Rattlesnake Hammock Drive from US 41 to Santa Barbara Boulevard (bike facilities) • Lakewood Boulevard (bike facilities) • County Barn Road (sidewalks) • Wildflower Way (bike facilities) • Lely Resort Boulevard (bike facilities) • Lely Cultural Parkway (bike facilities) • Grand Lely Drive (bike facilities) • Connections between residential subdivisions and local destinations • Landscaped right-of-way along local street connections between commercial development and neighborhoods (see Section 3.0 concepts) • Intersection improvements on local roadways (see Section 3.0 concepts) Begin coordination with MPO and FDOT processes on more immediate and long-term adjustments on major roadways (Section 4.0) Mid -Term (3-5 years) Continue County bicycle and pedestrian connection improvements (Sections 3.0 and 4.0) Immediate improvements, such as intersection safety improvements, along major roadways (Section 3.0 and 4.0) Long -Term (5+ years) Complete remaining County bicycle and pedestrian connection improvements (Sections 3.0 and 4.0) Remaining improvements for more comprehensive change along major roadways such as US 41 (Section 3.0 and 4.0) 7.0 Appendices Appendix A: Summary of Additional Stakeholder Meetings Collier County and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Staff (August 11, 2020) Tindale Oliver and Collier County held this meeting with County and FDOT transportation agency representatives to discuss potential transportation approaches for US 41 (prior to future additional analysis such as Intersection Control Evaluations). The discussion began with a presentation on possible improvement approaches along US 41 that would enhance safety and convenience for multiple modes. Highlights of potential approaches discussed included: • Removing on -street bike lanes and creating separated multi -use pathways in the area where sidewalks are generally located (including width adjustments) • Intersection adjustments to shorten crossing distances for pedestrians • Adjusted intersection geometry to slow speeds around site access points and increased use of U-turns leaving and accessing sites to decrease reliance on left turns. These adjustments would need to account for impacts on access management and turning radii need and intersection maintenance considerations for vehicles such as trucks. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 66 Packet Pg. 1232 9.A.4.j Comments received in response to these proposals included the following: • There are a lot of areas trying to create more urban and walkable styles of development; the project needs to be mindful of demand given other sites in the county with similar aims so that infrastructure and design is implemented that people will actually use. In response to this comment, the project would include phasing to show how design, infrastructure, and surrounding land uses and development might evolve over time to accommodate market demand constraints. • US 41 is reaching its current capacity, so will need to redevelop with mixed -use and Transportation Demand Management strategies to meet needs and accommodate travel moving forward. • Interconnections between residential subdivisions and commercial developments need to be made. • Consider an approach taken in Golden Gate City where the County is looking to decrease the roadway median and move that right-of-way to provide green space on the outside of the lanes where it may better benefit multi -use pathway users. • While Intersection Control Evaluations may show that traffic volumes are not near the targets needed to make adjustments discussed, consider requiring development to set aside right-of-way to accommodate necessary improvements in the future for more urban -style design and infrastructure [This point may be particularly helpful for areas not built out yet, primarily in broader East Naples area and beyond.] • Think about the context classification of the roadway, currently and for the future, and how land use and transportation infrastructure/design relate. East Naples Civic Association (August 12, 2020) Tindale Oliver and the County held this meeting with three members of the East Naples Civic Association. The following are key takeaways from the discussion, the key topics of which were identified during the February meeting with the Association: • Civic Association representatives were concerned that housing values in East Naples are lower than other parts of the County and that there is a disproportionate amount of low-income housing in the East Naples area. Findings in Technical Memorandum 1 indicate that single-family homes and condos are comparable in just value between East Naples and the county (including incorporated areas), with the exception that the East Naples area tends to not have the highest values that the County does and that the East Naples areas tends to have more condos in the $100,000 to $150,000 value range. Note that areas such as Naples might have values high enough that they are not characteristic of most communities. Findings also indicated that traditional multi -family housing that is typically rental only makes up about 6% of the total housing units. • Undesired uses were also discussed, including the option to remove these uses from c allowable uses if a zoning overlay for the area is considered. r a East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 67 Packet Pg. 1233 9.A.4.j • Incentives as an approach to shift development patterns were discussed, including the consideration of desirability of incentives by the community members and effectiveness of incentives for developers. • Branding was discussed and the possibility of working with local merchants' groups to help with a branding/marketing campaign during future efforts. Local Nonprofits: St. Matthew's House and Habitat for Humanity (August 12, 2020) The following takeaways emerged from the discussion with representations of the local Habitat for Humanity chapter and St. Matthew's House, who help provide services to the community: • Habitat for Humanity is finding it increasingly difficult to serve the lowest income brackets for which it provides services (the organization serves households at 80% Area Median Income — AMI- and below); in practice, households need to make at least $30,000 annually (estimated by the organization at approximately 30% AMI) for the organization to process them. The organization is increasingly competing with private developers to purchase land; the organization also faces barriers in terms of zoning allowance restrictions and the variance process to implement projects. • The affordable housing impact fee waiver was shifted to a deferral. • There is a land trust set up that can accept land for affordable housing. • The East Naples Study Area is primarily built out, so any efforts to include affordable housing would likely need to focus on redevelopment and upgrades to mobile homes with lower structural quality. The organization is also considering what can be done in areas outside rural boundary. • St. Matthew's House is seeking funding for a housing project with set -aside for affordable units that they have planned. Appendix B: Workshop 2 and Online Component Summary Introduction This workshop provided an opportunity to review and provide feedback on the draft East Naples Community Development Plan elements, including draft goals/vision elements (developed in the first stages of the project), land use concepts, transportation options, and other recommendations. The workshop included and brief presentation and the following options for attendees to provide feedback: • Polling questions • A questions/comments box to provide written feedback and questions • A question and answer session to provide verbal feedback and questions Workshop details: • Date and time: Thursday, September 10, 2020, 5:30 p.m. — 8 p.m. • Total attendance: 179 o Virtual attendance: 166 East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 68 Packet Pg. 1234 9.A.4.j GoToWebinar: https://globaI.gotowebinar.com/loin/1277329455024836368/390707721 Webinar ID 654-146-803 o In -person, following CDC guidelines, attendance: 13 Board of County Commissioner Chambers Third Floor, Collier County Administration Building, 3229 Tamiami Trail E., Naples, FL 34112 • Staff/panelists present: o Tindale Oliver: ■ Ali Ankudowich ■ Demian Miller ■ Steve Tindale ■ IT support: Ben Cates, Andrea Sauvageot o PlusUrbia: ■ Andrew Georgiadis ■ Juan Mullerat o Collier County: ■ Commissioner Fiala ■ Michele Mosca ■ Anita Jenkins ■ Trinity Scott ■ IT support: Richard Dawson, Troy Miller Polling Responses The following summarize responses to polling questions posed during the workshop. Attendees could text in responses using the Poll Everywhere program (noted as "direct polling" below). Virtual attendees could also type in responses to the polls using the GoToWebinar platform if texting was unavailable or if they had difficulties with the polling program. In cases where typed responses were not labelled, responses were assigned based on the time received; generally, the addition of the typed responses did not have a large effect on the generally preferences of the group, but these two types of responses are shown separately. For anyone having difficulties submitting input through any of the means provided during the workshop, they could submit feedback via the project email address. How did you first hear about this workshop? Typed Direct Polling Totals % DP % Both Response Count Count Count A. Email from a mailing list 2 25 27 54% 55% B. Digital Ad (web, social media) 0 3 3 7% 6% C. Word of mouth 0 13 13 28% 26% D. Other 1 5 6 11% 12% Q East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 69 Packet Pg. 1235 9.A.4.j Totals 1 3 1 46 49 Choose your MOST preferred concept for US 41 at Naples Manor Typed Direct Polling Totals % DP % Both Response Count Count Count A. Light 2 14 16 25% 24% B. Moderate 3 22 25 40% 37% C. Robust 6 19 25 35% 37% Totals 11 55 66 Choose your LEAST preferred concept for US 41 at Naples Manor Typed Direct Polling Totals % DP % Both Response Count Count Count A. Light 6 35 41 52% 51% B. Moderate 0 3 3 4% 3% C. Robust 7 29 36 43% 45% Totals 13 67 80 Choose your MOST preferred concept for US 41/ Rattlesnake Hammock Typed Direct Polling Totals % DP % Both Response Count Count Count A. Light 2 16 18 23% 22% B. Moderate 4 20 24 29% 30% C. Robust 4 34 38 49% 47% Totals 10 70 80 Choose your LEAST preferred concept for US 41/ Rattlesnake Hammock Typed Direct Polling Totals % DP % Both Response Count Count Count A. Light 6 47 53 67% 67% B. Moderate 1 1 2 1% 2% C. Robust 2 22 24 31% 30% Totals 9 70 79 Choose your MOST preferred concept for Town Centre Typed Direct Polling Totals % DP % Both Response Count Count Count A. Light 0 14 14 18% 16% B. Moderate 6 41 47 53% 53% East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 70 Packet Pg. 1236 9.A.4.j C. Robust 5 22 27 29% 300 Totals 11 77 88 Choose your LEAST preferred concept for Town Centre Typed Direct Polling Totals % DP % Both Response Count Count Count A. Light 9 37 46 49% 52% B. Moderate 0 3 3 4% 3% C. Robust 4 35 39 47% 44% Totals 13 75 88 Rate the Idea of a Well -Designed Recycling Center in the East Naples Study Area Typed Direct Polling Totals % DP % Both Response Count Count Count 1. Completely Support 5 23 28 35% 37% 2. Support Moderate 0 9 9 14% 10% 3. Neutral 2 11 13 17% 17% 4. No Support Moderate 1 9 10 14% 13% 5. No Support at All 1 2 1 13 1 15 1 20% 1 20% Totals 10 65 75 Key Takeaways from Comments The most common themes that emerged from the comments included the following: • Amount, type, and location of development: o Desire for fewer fast food/chain restaurant/less expensive uses and gas stations o Desire for more Trader Joes and/or Whole Foods, "nicer" restaurants and shopping o Suggestions to improve or redevelop existing blighted commercial areas instead of building out new areas • Preserving and increasing green space: support more open green space / preserves and trails / native landscaping and shading; concerns of overbuilding • Transportation safety: o Support safer non -motorized transportation (bike/ped) connections to other greenways and attractions/venues o Safety concerns with crossing US 41; desire for safer intersections Recycling drop-off center: truck traffic and noise concerns regarding recycling center off of US 41 and near residential areas; some general concerns about placement along US 41 or in East Naples, yet note that the polls indicate overall support for recycling drop- off center in the Study Area. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 71 Packet Pg. 1237 9.A.4.j Questions Questions are in bold and responses follow. • Questions on the eastern part of the Study Area: Why didn't you propose more development around the Collier Blvd and US 41 general area since it is closer to the newer and extensive residential developments to the east, north and south of that intersection? Are you going to look at the Collier Blvd and US 41 intersection area as part of this process? Why did the presentation not include the more eastern part, such as proposed area at Rattlesnake and Collier? I just recently reviewed the plans for East Naples. The June presentation included potential redevelopment off of Rattlesnake and Collier Blvd. This was not addressed in presentation that I could see. I live in Naples Lakes Country club and am wondering about development in and around NLCC. Is there anything on the horizon for this area? It has many areas of need between Rattlesnake and 75. o We looked at these intersections as possible examples for land use concepts but thought the others would make better examples for various reasons, such as focusing on redeveloping some of the older existing development in the sites selected. The example sites are meant to be illustrative of how more diverse land uses can be accommodated in the study area but are not meant to exclude the potential for this type of development at locations other than those shown during the workshop. There are several vacant parcels with approved development orders on the east side of Collier Boulevard and north and south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road in this area. A recent approval in the northeast quadrant allows 265 multi -family dwelling units with up to 185,000 square feet of commercial development. • How much has the plan morphed post COVID lockdowns for the new realities (ie curbside) in retail development? o The plan provides concepts and related implementation items to put rules, incentives, and other strategies in place to encourage more desired development and land use outcomes; yet it acknowledges that the actual build - out is likely subject to external factors affecting market demand, such as COVID- 19. The plan includes options to adjust to these factors as more information becomes available and to allow for variance in timing and phasing for build -out based on these factors and related uncertainties. • How would you connect the two sides of US 41? Is it just traffic lights? o Strategies include slowing traffic by narrowing lanes and geography improvements to cross the street. Break up and shorten crossing distances to help drivers be more conscious and more refuge to cross. This would include widening sidewalks and improved lighting. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 72 Packet Pg. 1238 9.A.4.j • Will plantings be native with limited need for treatment and care? o The concepts show native plantings; follow-up landscaping requirement review and adjustments as recommended in Section 5.0 of this memo can provide an opportunity to address this item. • Would Bike/Pedestrian Blvd. extend all along 41, joining all three centers? o Extension of this concept along the corridor aligns with goals in the plan and would depend on more detailed transportation analysis for feasibility. • Has there been discussion with the plan to emphasize greenways for pedestrians to connect the other areas? o It is not a large transportation component in the project as the major roadways are where the development would occur. However, the general concept is not in conflict with this plan. Other County and regional transportation planning documents that do focus on greenways are noted in the first technical memo for the plan, and we will provide information on how to engage with those processes as part of the final plan. • Will green space left on west side of light concept be maintained or adapted into greenspace? o Vacant properties with entitlements shown in the "Light" concepts (such as those at the US 41 at Naples Manor site) are assumed to be allowed to develop as usual with the option for some design improvements; interventions to turn these areas into additional greenspace would require further evaluation through planning and capital improvement processes for the parks and recreation system, unless a specific local funding option was passed for capital and maintenance (e.g., an MSTU). • What happens to the existing businesses? In the robust plan, the warehouses are gone, where did they go? o Existing businesses are allowed to operate until they decide to sell and redevelop, which would occur through typical market processes; as occurs under typical market circumstances, a use might find another area in which to locate, owners of the operation may turn to other activities, etc. These concepts show what kind of redevelopment might be possible with certain adjustments to regulations, incentives, and capital improvements to facilitate a transition to other types of development and uses, but it avoids requiring a transition of existing uses due to property rights protections. • On the moderate and high -density buildouts, what is the impact based on seasonal versus full-time occupancy? o Existing estimates of seasonal and full-time households for East Naples were presented in Workshop 1 and are similar to the County as a whole: approximately 40% permanent households and 60% seasonal households (note that rentals were not included in this estimate, but traditional multi -family units that are typically rental make up 10% or less of the housing in either area). More East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 73 Packet Pg. 1239 9.A.4.j detailed analysis would be required to understand whether these ratios would change significantly with additional residential units. • How many non-official/non-Tindale residents are attending? Are these the only people voting or are the official and Tindale folk voting in the poll too? o There are currently 145 attendees for this event, not counting officials or Tindale Oliver staff. Staff are not participating in the polls. (Note: virtual attendance maxed at 166.) • Canal infrastructure questions: Will this contribute to significant water runoff into that canal? Does that lead to Naples Bay, which is already under pressure with freshwater pollution? What modifications to the canals will be needed to handle the additional impervious areas and resultant increase in stormwater flow in each of the 3 zones? o Specific infrastructure and environmental impacts would be part of a more detailed review of this concept for code implementation. • Are potential developers being provided with data regarding the number of residences in East Naples that fall within in plus $1.5M, $1.25 to $1.5M, $1M to $1.25M, $750K to $1M, etc.? I suspect the number are huge and would go a long way to encourage higher end commercial and retail development. o The project team found the median income in the area to be approximately $53,000. We spoke with development representatives as part of outreach for this project with information on general population and median income estimates in the area; those discussions touched on concerns about limited density in the area. A marketing strategy and materials put together as a follow- up to this project could be used to share information about the area to developers and other target audiences. • What is considered affordable housing? o Affordable housing may take a broader meaning in this context, indicating ways to diversify price points through types/sizes of housing provided (e.g., allowing for smaller units) and/or housing subsidized for different income levels that may particularly benefit from such a subsidy. • Is the shopping center with Greenwise also being updated? o In the concept presented for US 41 at Rattlesnake Hammock Road, the building with Publix remains. • Have there been any thoughts of tearing down the entire old Lucky's plaza and starting over? Maybe then making the entire area new as opposed to just the parking lot area. o This site could be redeveloped under current regulations with low-level design changes or could be included for redevelopment as part of moderate or robust scenarios with more significant adjustments to regulations. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 74 Packet Pg. 1240 9.A.4.j • Any conversation about greenways to connect areas like the proposed Naples Bay Greenway from Collier MPO? These can connect multiple communities, businesses and recreational areas. o The first stages of this project reviewed plans for bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the area, including trails, from the MPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. That planning process and future updates provide a platform for more detailed trails improvement discussions; that process will be documented in the final Community Development Plan for East Naples. • Did transit plans also look at other destinations for biking or walking, such as to the Botanical Garden, Sugden, or downtown? o Technical Memorandum 1 reviewed existing transit service and planned improvements, as well as existing bike and pedestrian infrastructure and improvements; further proposals for roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian improvements are included in this technical memorandum. Many of the existing transit amenities and roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian proposals are located along US 41, which is a main route to access the Community Redevelopment Area containing the Botanical Gardens and Sugden Regional Park; this main roadway then continues west to approach Downtown Naples. As a result, the connections between the Study Area and the destinations noted will likely be further enhanced. • When are you going to provide a library and post office on 41 after Collier? o New libraries are assessed through level of service analysis and implemented through capital planning processes for the County; these are comments that can be raised during the updates to related documents, such as the budget with capital plan and Annual Update and Inventory Report annual update. The final plan will provide an overview of those processes. Placement of post offices are not under the jurisdiction of the County since they are federal facilities; there is no current plan for a post office. • Are you planning a post office in East Naples? It is very necessary. o Placement of post offices are not under the jurisdiction of the County since they are federal facilities; there is no current plan for a post office. • While you're working on the areas identified on US 41 which need it, the eastern end of the county is under enormous pressure from developers seeking to develop what is currently agricultural or open space - habitat for endangered species, bird rookeries, etc. Is there any plan to reign in the residential developers at all? o Development will be consistent with policies in the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code. The County has programs in the eastern portion of the County that aim to protect natural areas and direct development growth. Just east of Collier Boulevard is the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District that has a Transfer of Development Rights program; this program allows for the transfer of the right to develop from certain areas to other areas with an aim to concentrate East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 75 Packet Pg. 1241 9.A.4.j development and take pressure off the places left open and undeveloped. The area is undergoing a restudy to understand how to support initial aims of the program, such as natural area protection and development of growth, and make the program more effective. You can learn more about this area and program on the County's website. • Anyway to understand the traffic impacts to these three designs? o Presently any development in unincorporated Collier County would need to comply with the County's Traffic Impact Study procedures. Because the East Naples area has a high number of residences with relatively few non-residential uses, providing these uses closer to where people live could capture trips that otherwise would head further north; however, this would need to be evaluated as part of any future traffic impact study. • Is there a PRIORITY of which location we want developed first? Or are they all being developed at once? o The County will focus on getting regulations and incentives in place, then the private market will likely dictate development priorities. • What type of time frame are we looking at if plan is approved? When does it start and process? o The team will forward recommendations of policies, transportation and land development codes to the County for their approval. Depending on the complexity of the changes, it would take from six months to more than a year. As far as US 41, FDOT will have to do a study. Making physical changes take longer than land development codes. It will need to get into the FDOT work program. Traffic and engineering analysis require about three to five years or at least five years for a complete overhaul of highway. More information on implementation processes and timing will be included in the final plan. • Since there will be moderate to robust development there is a need for a better process for approvals. Will this be discussed in the "next steps" such as the recommendation for a community board for oversight? o Based on discussions with representatives of the development community, we understand that development review process incentives such as expediting permitting would be helpful to encourage the implementation of the plan. A community board for oversight can give a certain group more review of development but may also hamper the process from the developer prospective As a result, having strong community input on the vision, plan, and regulations overall and upfront may be preferable to having an additional review step for individual developments that meet the approved plans and regulations. However, a policy to authorize a review board would go through a Board of County Commission approval if pursued. • How much weight will the poll results have on the approval to the county? Are those the only areas and options (light, moderate and robust) on those sections? Will this East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 76 Packet Pg. 1242 9.A.4.j impact traffic in East Naples? Will people from North Naples come into East Naples to increase traffic in our area? o The concepts put together for the workshop and related preference poll results provide general guidance for the direction of the plan; the plan provides approaches and a process with examples for making change and serves as the basis for further implementation efforts, yet these steps are not final. We will document overall responses to the concepts as we complete the plan, and then it must go through approval with the County Commission. Individual implementation steps, such as regulatory adjustments and long-term/capital planning changes must also go through additional approval processes prior to changes being made. This will include further opportunities to analyze and discuss more specifics of these concepts and potential impacts, such as traffic. Ultimately, these concepts are intended to provide more local and walkable options for the Community of East Naples, yet there may be changes to traffic patterns, including around site access points. • Adding more shops, residentials, etc. how do you get over the bridge to go to downtown Naples with the traffic especially during season? o The aim of these concepts is to reduce mileage on the roads from trips outside the area. We are trying to keep trips closer to the East Naples area so you do not have to travel outside of it. • No mention of Courthouse Shadows, what about it? o Courthouse Shadows is being developed separately out of this area. It will be coordinated with the community development plan moving forward. • What is the status of the road work on Thomasson between Bayshore and 41? o The Collier Community Redevelopment Agency provides the following information about this project on the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area website (https://bayshorecra.com/projects/bayshore- beautification-projects/thomasson-drivehamilton-ave/): The $6 million Thomasson Drive/Hamilton Avenue project is funded by the Bayshore Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU). The new project will consist of a roundabout at the intersection of Thomasson Drive and Bayshore Drive and will enhance Thomasson Drive from Orchard Lane to Hamilton Avenue by constructing new 6-foot-wide sidewalks, bike lanes, decorative street lighting, signage and Florida friendly landscaping. Wright Construction Group Inc. based in Fort Myers, Florida was awarded the construction contract. Construction began on May 6, 2020 and will last approximately 12 months. The project started at the intersection of Hamilton Avenue and Thomasson Drive, moving east along Thomasson Drive to the intersection of Orchard Lane. • Can you give us a status on the new light on 41 at the entrance of Treviso Bay? o On August 3, the developer resubmitted plans to FDOT for their review of design E plan. They said they would have a contractor selected in 60-90 days. U 2 r a East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 77 Packet Pg. 1243 9.A.4.j • Everyone wants to preserve the quiet/calm and safety, quality of life and property values of their residential neighborhoods. How will increased commercial development impact our homes/residential neighborhoods? o Part of the public engagement for this project looked at preferred locations for additional development, which tended to be along US 41 and to a lesser degree along Collier Boulevard. The aim of targeting commercial development to these corridors, aside from focusing on where opportunities are more likely for this type of development, is to remain consistent with community preferences and avoid the residential neighborhoods of the area. In this way, the neighborhoods remain buffered but still have some increased local options, with green space and connectivity/access considerations. • Any budget estimates for these various plans? Or is it premature? o It is too premature. • Are there pedestrian counts to justify the plan for pedestrian plan. Any other areas in Florida use the left lane? I don't see me or others walking across six lanes. I would prefer above street crossing. o The idea is to encourage and provide the pedestrian circulation. You want to reduce the vehicular speeds to encourage the pedestrian plan. Once you get to a place in a vehicle, you do not necessarily want to have to drive to a neighboring shopping center across the street or to the one next door. There are short-term and long-term solutions to ultimately operate US 41 as an urban street. Other areas with left turn configuration as shown are West Palm and Miami. • Explain the overlay. Who creates it and has separation standards worked for undesirable development? o The overlay is a regulatory tool that targets to certain areas, such as those within East Naples, the regulatory adjustments that would promote the plan outcomes, The County Commission makes the final decision on approving an overlay. Separation standards are often used for undesirable uses because it can be legally challenging to prohibit uses outright and address uses already in existence. These standards mandate a distance between uses (i.e., gas stations must be a certain distance apart). These standards are already implemented for gas stations, but they can be evaluated for an increase in distance. Design standards can also be heightened to make these uses more aesthetically pleasing or more buffered from surrounding areas (through architectural standards, heights, setbacks, etc.). • What happened to the plans for a new arts center/theater/opera house park? o A multi -purpose facility was proposed as part of the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Plan for the area just west of the East Naples Study Area. More information on this plan can be found in Section 5 of this document https://bayshorecra.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/05.13.2019-Final- East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 78 Packet Pg. 1244 9.A.4.j Redevelopment-Plan-Update.pdf and on the Community Redevelopment Area's website: https://baVshorecra.com/. • How about an entrepreneur incubator, culinary incubator facility? o This effort may be coordinated with the existing Naples Accelerator that assists new and emerging businesses (overseen by the Collier County Economic Development Office; more information available here: https://www.colIieredo.org/naples-accelerator), as well as the incubator idea proposed as part of the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Plan (more information available in Section 5 of this document: https://bayshorecra.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/05.13.2019-Final- Redevelopment-Plan-Update.pdf). • What is happening with the gas station on 41 east of Collier Blvd on corner of Auto Ranch Road? It was destroyed in Irma and is in same condition. I asked two years ago what was happening and they said the new owners were waiting on permits. That was two years ago! Why hasn't the county razed this gas station and fixed up that corner? This looks disgusting. o This issue is a current Code Enforcement case; next steps may include a Notice of Violation and possible hearing. • The old K-Mart in Freedom Square was supposed to have several businesses open there. What is happening? I haven't seen any work. o The County is not involved in storefront openings; these are part of a developer - driven process with leases being determined between property owners and lessees. Permits have been pulled for interior renovations. • Would the recycling center be in one of the zones presented? Our neighbors would be in favor of one in our area. Also, any news about possible overpass at 951 and US 41? o The County is looking for a recycling site along US 41 and wanted to get consensus from the community to see if this fits within the East Naples vision. There are other locations that may be available near the airport. One site was identified on US 41; it was not yet purchased. We wanted to receive consensus from the community about a location along US 41 or about suggesting it move to an industrial area in the East Naples area. o There is no funding identified yet for an overpass through 2040 and the MPO plan is updated periodically. The 2045 plan is currently in planning stage. • There are three Collier commissioners that have oversight over parts of East Naples and that brings forth many problems especially with respect to their vision for growth. I live in the Isles of Collier Preserves and part of the development is in District 1 and others in the same development are in District 4. Does that really make any sense? Are there any plans to review this and give East Naples one commissioner? Redistricting only occurs once every 10 years after the census is completed. It is time for change; one commissioner for East Naples. The way it is now only causes East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 79 Packet Pg. 1245 9.A.4.j confusion and conflict with those commissioners that have responsibility in east and other parts of Collier County. Who do they really advocate for? o Redistricting will begin in 2021; there are no plans at this time to change Commission district boundaries. • We have been seeing some activity on Markley that have us wondering if development is planned soon. Any information would be appreciated. o Land clearing at 2185 Markley Avenue is related to agricultural farmland and mobile home. East Naples Community Development Plan: Technical Memorandum 2 80 Packet Pg. 1246 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissloners (BCC) at 9:00 A.M. on April 25, 2023, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL to consider: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO ADD THE US 41 EAST OVERLAY TO ALLOW CERTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT USES WITHIN THE CORRIDOR SEGMENTS; AND, ALLOW INCREASED HEIGHT AND DENSITY AND CERTAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT USES IN REGIONAL CENTERS AND COMMUNITY CENTERS THROUGH INCENTIVES; AND AMENDING THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT AND MAPS TO EXPAND THE SOUTH US 41 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. [PL20230000930] US 41 East Overlay a OKU F tc Z. v. �r � � ice• }; � Project, Location .. `, -T South US 41 Transportation Cacmi rency Exception Area o Thomaasa ,� Raf3iesnake m� Hammock RD IS on �m � �'Ag`Y k. 4'101g s r�V I P[O,j@Ct h Location w A copy of the proposed Resolution is on Ole with the Clerk to the Board and isavailable for inspection. All Interested panties are invited to attend and be heard. All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three (3) minutes on any item. The selection of any individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. H recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted ten (10) minutes to speak on an item. Written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record. As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like toparticipate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www.colliercounty0. gov/our-countytvisitors/caiendar--of-events after the agenda is posted on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user's risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252-8369 or email to Geoffrey.Willig@colliercountyfl.gov. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two (2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RICK LOCASTRO, CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK By: Martha Vergara, Deputy Clerk Q Cl) cm C� rn ILL 0 a d CL E O V Packet Pg. 247 PL 2023- US 41 East Overlay - Regional Center Map t with Coastal High Hazard Area w C4 a) a �y A 4� c PJ� ><e C IeeCT i sceol AV d N o emino V ha in BL- D 0 250 500 1,000 Feet Prepared by: Beth Yang, AICP Growth Management Department File: US 41 East Overlay Regional Center Map 1_CHHA.mxd LEGEND US 41 East Overlay - Regional Center Coastal High Hazard Area Packet Pg. 1248 PL 2023- US 41 East Overlay - Regional Center Map 2 with Coastal High Hazard Area Tahiti LN 0 J m CIR Maui on CiR M. [Catalina -CT OHO o \� d �U 001 Mindi AVE �R 0 J Rose AVE Biscay_ne_DR ThomassoIL RAW esnake-Hammock-RD O� Petal DR O� 0� 07 fro 0 n V gharOS O R Tobago BLVD 0 250 500 1,000 Feet Prepared by: Beth Yang, AICP Growth Management Department File: US 41 East Overlay Regional Center Map 2_CHHA.mxd a LEGEND E s c US 41 East Overlay - Regional Center a Coastal High Hazard Area Packet Pg. 1249 PL 2023- US 41 East Overlay - Regional Center Map 3 with Coastal High Hazard Area Q C� 0 300 600 1,200 Feet Prepared by: Beth Yang, AICP Growth Management Department File: US 41 East Overlay Regional Center Map 3_CHHA.mxd LEGEND US 41 East Overlay - Regional Center Coastal High Hazard Area Packet Pg. 1250 PL 2023- US 41 East Overlay - Community Center Map 1 with Coastal High Hazard Area J� �v G G � d iv cYa a � V 0 0 3 ca�b�• i � m Osceola AVE v P` 0 U) d �lk� Ua d z 00 Y v O Seminole AVE N Diamond LN °i= N X Enchanting BLVD m �ytie 0 Guilfor_d-RD 0 200 400 800 Feet Prepared by: Beth Yang, AICP Growth Management Department File: US 41 East Overlay Community Center Map 1_CHHA.mxd a M d c m U w c E 0 U O w 14 CL M a x x LEGEND z US 41 East Overlay - Community Center a Coastal High Hazard Area Packet Pg. 1251 PL 2023- US 41 East Overlay - Community Center Map 2 with Coastal High Hazard Area -�Baltusrol_DR a Cr c� W c� Sao 0 d� o0 v 5a�� AQ bb�e e e Cayo-Coco LN Dixie -DR . "w I� o��q o J`so 6 ay P'�JO 9GF '(te 0 200 400 800 Feet Prepared by: Beth Yang, AICP Growth Management Department File: US 41 East Overlay Community Center Map 2_CHHA.mxd LEGEND US 41 East Overlay - Community Center Coastal High Hazard Area Packet Pg. 1252 PL 2023- US 41 East Overlay - Community Center Map 3 with Coastal High Hazard Area 5� a� as OX LU a a Myrtle LN r v� Qe��D ,tee% o Go � t`' m e ism `y� N .as e t J h % T `�. o oh 7 Oregon TRL Z Osage TRL LEGEND 0 250 500 1,000 Feet US 41 East Overlay - 'r—����H��� Community Center Prepared by: Bath Yang, AICP Growth Management Department Coastal High Hazard Area File: US 41 East Overlay Community Center Map 3 Expanded Boundary_CHHAmzd Q Packet Pg. 1253 PL 2023- n US 41 East Overlay - Community Center Map 4 with Coastal High Hazard Area Indian -Key LN�� Sandfield LN z Q❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑t Andr_ea LN a a> 0 0 200 400 800 Feet Prepared by: Beth Yang, AICP Growth Management Department File: US 41 East Overlay Community Center Map 4_CHHA.mxd it RD LEGEND US 41 East Overlay - Community Center Coastal High Hazard Area Packet Pg. 1254