Loading...
CCPC Agenda 05/15/2025COLLIER COUNTY Planning Commission AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 May 15, 2025 3:00 PM Joseph Schmitt, Environmental - Chairman Chuck Schumacher - Vice -Chair Paul Shea, Environmental - Secretary Randy Sparrazza Charles (Chap) Colucci Michelle L. McLeod Mike Petscher 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. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Addenda to the Agenda 4. Planning Commission Absences 5. Approval of Minutes S.A. March 20, 2025, CCPC Meeting Minutes (2025-1413) S.B. April 3, 2025, CCPC Meeting Minutes (2025-1414) S.C. April 17, 2025, CCPC Meeting Minutes (2025-1510) Page 1 of 708 6. BCC Report - Recaps 7. Chairman's Report 8. Consent Agenda 9. Public Hearings 9.A. PL20220002063 — Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay (GMPA) — Northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road - Resolutions of the Board of County Commissioners proposing amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Map Series to create the Greenway—Fritchey Residential Overlay (GMPA) on property within the Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District -Receiving Lands to allow up to 1,299 single family and multifamily units with affordable housing; and, the Conservation and Coastal Management Element amending Policy 6.1.7 to reduce the littoral shelf requirements for certain property within the Greenway—Fritchey Residential Overlay; furthermore directing transmittal of these amendments to the Florida Department of Commerce. The subject property is 227.09± acres and is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Transmittal Hearing) [Coordinator: Michele R. Mosca, AICP, Planner III, GMCDD, Zoning Division] (2025-1387) 9.13. PL20250000524 - Publication of Legal Notices for Neighborhood Information Meetings (LDCA) - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the Comprehensive Land Regulations for the Unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, to allow Legal Notice for Neighborhood Information Meetings by publication on the County Clerk's website or a printed newspaper, by providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments To The Land Development Code, more specifically amending the following: Chapter Ten — Application, Review, And Decision -Making Procedures, including Section 10.03.05 Required Methods Of Providing Public Notice; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; Section Six, Effective Date. [Angela Galiano, Planner II] (2025-1330) 9.C. ** THIS ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD BEFORE 5:05 P.M. **PL20220003445 - Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Updates (LDCA) - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the Comprehensive Land Regulations for the Unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, to implement Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay provisions of the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan by providing for Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to the Land Development Code, specifically amending the following: Chapter Four — Site Design and Development Standards, including Section 4.08.01 specific definitions applicable to the RLSA district, Section 4.08.04 Implementation of Stewardship Credits, Section 4.08.05 Baseline Standards, Section 4.08.06 SSA Designation, and Section 4.08.07 SRA Designation; Section Four, Conflict and severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Six, Effective Date. [Eric Johnson, AICP, CFM, Planning Manager] (2025-1362) Page 2 of 708 9.1). ** THIS ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD BEFORE 5:05 P.M. **PL20250000235 - Floating Solar Facilities (LDCA) - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the Comprehensive Land Regulations for the Unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, to define a Floating Solar Facility and allow a Solar Floating Facility as a permitted use in the Agricultural District (A), Estate District (E), Public Use District (P), Community Facility District (CF), and as an accessory use in the Commercial Professional and General Office District (C-1), Commercial Convenience District (C-2), Commercial Intermediate District (C-3), General Commercial District (C-4), Heavy Commercial District (C-5), Travel Trailer -Recreational Vehicle Campground District (TTRVC), Industrial District (I), Business Park (BP) and to establish regulations for Floating Solar Facilities, by providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to the Land Development Code, more specifically, amending the following: Chapter One — General Provisions, Including Section 1.08.02 Definitions; Chapter Two — Zoning Districts and Uses, including Section 2.03.01 Agriculture Zoning Districts, Section 2.03.03 Commercial Zoning Districts, Section 2.03.04 Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 2.03.05 Civic and Institutional Zoning Districts; and Chapter Five — Supplemental Standards, by adding a new Section 5.03.08 Floating Solar Facilities; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Six, Effective Date. [Richard Henderlong, Planner III] (2025-1360) 10. Old Business 11. New Business 12. Public Comments 13. Adjourn Page 3 of 708 March 20, 2025, CCPC Meeting Minutes ATTACHMENTS: 03-20-2025 CCPC Meeting Minutes 5/15/2025 Item # 5.A ID# 2025-1413 Page 4 of 708 March 20, 2025 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida March 20, 2025 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Chuck Schumacher, Chairman Paul Shea, Secretary Randy Sparrazza Michael Petscher Michelle L. McLeod Charles "Chap" Colucci Amy Lockhart, Collier County School Board Representative ABSENT: Joe Schmitt ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney Derek Perry, County Attorney's Office Kevin Summers, Manager - Technical Systems Operations Page 1 of 21 Page 5 of 708 March 20, 2025 PROCEEDINGS MR. BOSI: Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you, Mr. Bosi. Good morning and welcome to the March 20th planning Commission meeting. Item 1, please stand for Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Great. Item 2, roll call. Mr. Secretary. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Chairman Schmitt, absent. Vice Chair Schumacher? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Secretary Shea is here. Commissioner Sparrazza? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Colucci? COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner McLeod? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Petscher? COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Ms. Lockhart? MS. LOCKHART: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: We have a quorum, sir, six out of seven. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Great. I don't see any addenda to the agenda. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Can I add something? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I know you don't want -- Mike, is it possible for you, sometime in this meeting, just to give us three minutes? Is that -- CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Three. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Three minutes on what this new law that is going through on affordable housing, how -- against Live Local saying basically that PUDs are not sheltered from Live Local and what impacts that might have on how we make decisions, if it's passed. MR. BOSI: Sure. At the end of our -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah. MR. BOSI: At the conclusion of our regular scheduled hearings, we can just -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Three minutes. MR. BOSI: Three minutes, yeah. No, and it's a dynamic -- it's a dynamic aspect because it's still going through all the process of changing -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just your perspective, though, what it means to us. When we start looking at multiuse petitions that have some commercial in it, does it meet -- should we be thinking about Live Local if this law changes? MR. BOSI: Yes, yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you. Planning Commission absences for the next meeting. (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: What's the date on our next meeting, Mike? COMMISSIONER SHEA: April 3rd. MR. BOSI: April 3rd. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Any -- any planned absences from any commission Page 2 of 21 Page 6 of 708 March 20, 2025 members as it stands? COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: For the 3rd? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Yep. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: No. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay. Approval of previous minutes, we have February 20th, 2025, meeting minutes. I'll take a motion to approve or -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Motion to approve as -is. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Any second? COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Second. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: All right. All in favor? COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: (No verbal response.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: (No verbal response.) COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Great. BCC report/recap. MR. BELLOWS: Good morning. Yes, on March 3rd the Board of County Commissioners heard the Baker Senior Center PUD amendment. That was approved on their summary agenda, so that's subject to the Planning Commission recommendations. And the FP&L Summit tower, that was a conditional use for a 150-foot tower. That was approved by the Board 5-0. MR. BOSI: And Mike Bosi, Zoning director. Just to let you know, they also decided not to move forward with the proposal to allow for the renting of urban guesthouses. There was just -- because they couldn't control the duration of tenureship, they felt Airbnb provided too much of a potential negative to justify the proposal moving forward. And they also told -- directed staff to make no changes to the existing golf course conversion process. If you remember, about nine months ago, the Planning Commission had heard the modifications, thought we had -- staff had went too far because we were trying to protect against Bert Harris. And we went to the Board of County Commissioners, and they said, "Leave it as -is." So the golf course conversion process remains intact as it was adopted in 2017. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you. MR. BOSI: Yep. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: No Chairman's report today. Consent agenda, there's nothing on the consent agenda. So that brings us to our public hearings. ***Item No. 1, PL20240005475, the Immokalee Senior Housing Mixed -Use Planned Development. All those that will be testifying, please stand to be sworn in. THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Great. MR. ARNOLD: Good morning. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Good morning. If we could start out with just any disclosures from commission members, please. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: No. MS. LOCKHART: Staff material only. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Only staff materials. Page 3 of 21 Page 7 of 708 March 20, 2025 COMMISSIONER SHEA: Staff materials. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Staff materials. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Staff materials, spoke with staff, and then on my -- as my involvement on the Women's Foundation Board, I recently toured the Immokalee Foundation facilities and went to the middle school and viewed some of their other projects that they have going on there. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Got it. Got it. Good. I have just staff materials only for myself. With that... MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. Good morning. I'm Wayne Arnold. I'm here representing the property owner and the Immokalee Foundation. And we're here to modify the Immokalee Senior Housing plan development, which was approved a number of years ago, and we're changing that. I'll go through some of our changes and answer any questions that you may have. Okay. That's not advancing for me for some reason. There we go. So with us today we have Noemi Perez from the Immokalee Foundation; we have Michael Facundo who's on your CRA advisory board and a local architect working on the project; and we have Jim Banks, our traffic engineer, who's prepared the traffic analysis for the project. So we're here to modify a PUD that's about seven and a half acres today. We're seeking to add a small RMF-6 zoned portion, which is located in that area, and that's going to become part of our water management system, but we're bringing that into the PUD. So it will be a total of about eight acres. So the property is currently partially developed. It was originally intended to be a 119-unit senior affordable housing project. They were going to take down the property in a series of takedowns. They built the first phase, a 30-unit project. They elected not to pursue constructing the other units, and the Friendship Baptist Church, who also is located here, and the cemetery that they manage here were the owners and elected to go ahead and sell the property. The Immokalee Foundation is looking to expand its footprint in the Immokalee area, and so we're pursuing this for both the Immokalee Foundation to have their educational services to be located here as well as a future home for the Friendship church to expand their footprint that's immediately adjacent to the site. I'm not sure -- obviously, Ms. McLeod, you've had the tour of the facility and kind of understand the mission of the Foundation, but they were formed a number of years ago to really help the children of Immokalee. And their mission is really to help all ages of children pursue careers outside of the agricultural industry that has been so essential for the Immokalee community but looking for educational opportunities at every level. So they offer after -school mentoring programs. They offer assistance for kids to fill out college applications. They help them establish different mentorships, different -- different employers in the community, assist with providing internships for some of those children that are moving on to school. They have a great relationship with FGCU, and a number of their students will ultimately go on and attend FGCU. Until recently -- we lost one of our young engineers -- but he was a participant in the Immokalee Foundation, went on to FGCU, became a civil engineer and worked for us and has recently moved on to another firm. But we were proud of his efforts, and I know he spoke so highly of his ability to be a participant with the Immokalee Foundation, how that was a life -changing experience for him. So that's sort of their mission. And they -- they're in a facility that's very close by today, but they, obviously, would like to grow. That's why we're asking for them to have a 50,000-square-foot facility on this site that will be a two-story building, so they could have about a 25,000-square-foot footprint on each floor, and that could fulfill their ability to house, you know, some of these after -school events, some evening events for the mentoring of the kids. Here's one of the reasons that it's essential for them to be in this location. It's maybe hard Page 4 of 21 Page 8 of 708 March 20, 2025 to pick up, but the nearest school is Highlands Elementary just immediately to the north, north of the cemetery, but then you go on -- we have the Immokalee Technical Center; we have Immokalee Middle School; we have Immokalee High School. So, you know, you have all of these facilities that are within walking distance of this property which makes it essential because a good portion of the middle school and high school kids that participate after school walk to the facility. So we think it's an ideal location and makes a lot of sense for the Foundation to expand here. So just to go through the request, again, we're already zoned as the senior housing RPUD and RMF-6. We're proposing to change that to the Immokalee Senior Housing Mixed -Use Planned Development to account for the community facility uses that would be for the educational facilities related to the Foundation as well as the future church and childcare use that we've proposed. We're adding, like I said, about a half -an -acre site that's currently zoned RMF-6. Part of this, we're rescinding the affordable housing density bonus. There was -- there was a question whether or not that bonus density agreement that the county approved as part of the original PUD had ever been formally recorded. There is a deed restriction on a small portion of the site that has been developed here. That's the southernmost. So north is to your left. That building and that about 2.3 acres of property was legally described as part of a restrictive covenant that restricts that to the senior housing and limits that tract to 30 units. So the strikethrough and underline version of the document you have in front of you has changed all the references to the 119 units to 30 units, and we've kept all the development standards intact for that building. And I don't think any representatives for the current property owner of the residential building is here, but I've spoken to their attorney. She's a local attorney representing the company that owns it. And we've provided them with all of the documentation, and as far as I know, they're in full agreement with what we've proposed. This is our newly proposed master plan. It's kind of bubble-ish, but on the bottom you see the residential tract that we've retained, and then the balance of the site, which is about 5.6 acres, will be what we're calling "community facility," and in our list of permitted uses, we've made provisions for, as I said, the Friendship Baptist Church and a small childcare facility as well as the Foundation's educational services to be on that tract. Here's sort of a -- get an idea of how the Foundation is laying out its building. The future church site hasn't been laid out yet by the Friendship church, but access is going to be on Santa Rosa Boulevard. This is l lth, which is the main access to the site today. The residential structures are down here and will share a common access at that location. But you can see how the parking's going to situate on the perimeters, and then the building footprint will be here, and they're proposing some outdoor courtyard space and everything that Mr. Facundo and his group are working on. Here's a list of our uses. And you can see that it includes a lot of SIC codes related to education, because the Immokalee Foundation isn't really a school, but it is a supplementary program to offer, like I said, a lot of these after -school and training programs, so we've listed several of those. And then let me talk a little bit about the church for the Friendship Baptist Church, who owns the property. We made a provision for there to be a 5,000-square-foot church, and we called it an accessory 100-student childcare. And if you read the neighborhood information minutes, there was quite a bit of discussion about this childcare component, whether or not it was -- was that really accessory and sort of like when the church is in session and they can have a childcare, and we modeled that, and Mr. Banks modeled that as part of our traffic analysis to be a facility that would operate in conjunction with a church but would function like a stand-alone childcare center. So the church -- we made it accessory to the church because we're not going to go out and just build a childcare center on the balance of this site. What Friendship would do is create a church, and then they could operate a daycare center. Page 5 of 21 Page 9 of 708 March 20, 2025 So that's how we've tried to structure that and tried to make it very clear. And I know it was a little confusing for people but, you know, we're calling it accessory to the church because it can't exist without the church. And our offices, where I'm located, I think Mr. Banks also did the traffic analysis for that. But it commingles a childcare facility with the church, and that's how it was permitted -- what is in the City of Bonita Springs -- that it was an accessory -type use to a church, but it can't function without a church being there. So that's how we've structured this, just to try to make that clear. Development standards for us, the most significant change is we're changing from 35 feet to 45 feet for a zoned height. The residences were at a zoned height of 35 feet, two stories. In summary -- and we're here to try to construct a new, you know, Immokalee Foundation education facility. Like I mentioned, we're very centrally located to the other schools. We are consistent with the Immokalee Master Plan. This is designated a high -residential area. It allows higher density than we're achieving, and it was previously approved at that high density. And the Immokalee Master Plan allows for these community facility uses to exist throughout every land use category. And then the Immokalee CRA heard this project a few weeks ago. We did a Zoom presentation to them, and they voted unanimously to support the PUD changes. So with that, that's, in a nutshell, what we're proposing. We're here as a team to answer any questions that you might have. We appreciate staffs recommendation of approval and hope you can, too. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you, Wayne. Max height, 45 feet, correct? MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Andy similar -sized structures within there, in that 45 feet area, or is this going to pretty much be the biggest building around? MR. ARNOLD: Well, it probably -- I can't speak to it. Mike and Noemi live out in Immokalee and may be able to speak to it, but I think most of the schools are probably going to be in that 35 to 40-foot range. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay. Any questions from any planning commissioners? Go ahead. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Just out of curiosity, Wayne, why are they changing the name to Immokalee Senior Housing? MR. ARNOLD: So it's currently zoned as the Immokalee Senior Housing Residential Planned Development, and we just thought it would be more simple to change it to the Immokalee Senior Housing Mixed -Use Planned Development since we're now inserting the mix of community facility uses and residential. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: But why "senior" when this is clearly going to be for young folks? MR. ARNOLD: Well, because it was originally called the Senior Housing Mixed -Use Planned Development. Many of the amendments we do, we don't change the name of the projects. We just simply carry forward the name of the planned development. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. Okay. That's all I had. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay. Any other -- any other questions? No? Okay. Staff? MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Zoning director. As the -- as Wayne has indicated, staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC requirements. There is -- I should note that there is one deviation related to a parking reduction, and staff is in support of that based upon the nature and the demographic of the Immokalee community and the preponderance of that population for bicycling and walking being some of the primary means of transportation. We've looked at the proposed exchange for the senior housing to the Community Page 6 of 21 Page 10 of 708 March 20, 2025 Foundation, and we think that there are community benefits associated with that, and we are recommending approval from that regard. And any questions you may have... CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Not seeing any questions. Public comment? MR. SUMMERS: Yes, Mr. Chairman. You have two registered speakers online. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay. MR. SUMMERS: Starting with Donna Yzaguirre. Donna, are you there? If you could unmute yourself. MS. YZAGUIRRE: Can you hear me? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Yes. Good morning. MS. YZAGUIRRE: Hi. Hi. Good morning. How are you? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Good. Please state your name again for the record. MS. YZAGUIRRE: Donna Yzaguirre. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you, ma'am. Go ahead. MS. YZAGUIRRE: Okay. So I live right down the street from where this facility is, where the church is and where the current building is. And I went to the last meeting, and one of my biggest concerns is on 1 lth Street there already is Highlands Elementary School, and the traffic on 1 Ith Street is just -- during the dismissal times and arrival times, the traffic is just ridiculous, and then in the afternoon, we have a horrible traffic situation because Arthrex lets out at a certain time, and schools get out the same time. So sometimes, in the afternoon, the intersection of 1 lth and Immokalee Drive, which is literally maybe a thousand feet from where this facility's supposed to go, it's like you have to sit there for some 10, 15 minutes sometimes just to cross the intersection. And sometimes in the morning when I'm trying to leave to go to work, I can't even get out on the road to go to work. And I haven't seen a significant traffic study done on 1 Ith Street that would convince me that this facility is going to be conducive to the people who already live in the community around the area, that it's going to be conducive for us other than more of just an irritation for us in our daily lives. And this building is going to be, like, this huge monstrosity, and then it's going to -- and, you know, my thing is is there's so much property in Immokalee available for sale, I don't know why they specifically chose this area other than the connection to the Friendship Baptist Church and Mike Facundo being the pastor of the church, also being the architect on this job. I just can't see what it's zoned for now and what they're proposing to do is going to benefit mein any -- in the area, anyway. And plus adding --in the future adding 100-seat daycare. That's going to add -- that's going to be people that are going to be picking their kids up after they get off work and all that stuff, and that's already going to add 100 more vehicles, at least, to what already is congesting our area as it is now. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: I understand your -- I understand your concerns. If I can just ask you one question. Would you prefer the 119 multifamily houses there? MS. YZAGUIRRE: I don't think -- that's been zoned like this forever, and I don't think -- all that property that's behind there belongs to the church. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: But they could put 119 multifamily there. MS. YZAGUIRRE: But, I mean, I just don't see -- CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: That could be in excess of 240 vehicles if you had two people per unit that had vehicles. So I understand where you're coming from with the traffic. I'm just trying to add to that use that I think if you -- in my opinion, if you reduce the uses that it was originally zoned for, being that 119, you're going to take a little bit of weight off of that traffic. And I understand the comments on traffic, and I'll ask Transportation if there has been a study done on that 1 lth Street and Immokalee and what type of resolve we could find for you there. But other than that, I appreciate your comments. Page 7 of 21 Page 11 of 708 March 20, 2025 MS. YZAGUIRRE: Well, I wouldn't mind the building, as they've got it listed, and the church and all that, as long as they push it to the east side of the property to where -- right now, when the church parks, they actually park in the right-of-way right next to the road, and so some of the vehicles poke out into the road. I wouldn't be opposed to doing it the way it is if they omitted the future chance of there being a 100-seat daycare. I would be completely fine with that. But that 100-seat daycare, that's what I'm -- I'm more opposed to that than anything, and maybe not going over the 35-foot limit. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you. MS. YZAGUIRRE: This is still a residential area. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you for your comments. MS. YZAGUIRRE: Thank you. MR. SUMMERS: All right. Our next speaker is Gilbert Flores. Sir, if you could please unmute yourself. MR. FLORES: Hi. Good morning. Can you hear me? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Yes. Good morning, Mr. Flores. State your name again for the record, please. MR. FLORES: Hi. Good morning. My name is Gilbert Flores, and I am a property owner on Orchid Avenue, which is very close to this proposed project. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay. MR. FLORES: And I am here this morning to basically echo what Donna has said. I mean, I know I don't understand the -- I'm not going to say to you that I understand what is involved in a traffic study, because I don't; however, it's one thing to read something on paper and then experience it in real life. And so, again, the proposed project will add -- will add more congestion to I Ith Street with Highlands being there, an elementary school. Now, when Mr. Arnold talked about that this is ideal because it's central and kids can walk there, I understand that; however, you have the iTECH Center, you have Immokalee High School, and the middle school. Both Immokalee -- we only have one middle school in Immokalee. We only have one high school. That -- all the elementary schools feed into both of those schools, and those are right across from each other on Immokalee Drive; it's Immokalee and 9th Street. And then the iTECH is there as well. You have a four-way stop that is basically managing the flow of traffic -- we don't have a stoplight there -- for all of this activity to take place. That's only two blocks away from where this proposed project is going to take place. So when you -- if you see this, if you come and observe, it is not safe for these kids to be crossing. Again, there -- it's a four -- it's a four-way stop. It might be a blinking light; I don't remember. But that's what you have there in terms of managing that traffic. Now, you go two blocks, and you want to add this project that's going to generate more traffic and then kids walking in there. I can tell you right now it is not -- it is not safe. And I -- the comment that you made earlier -- and I don't know your name, sir, but about adding housing units, you know, you're telling us which is the lesser of, I guess, the two evils, right? Maybe that should have never been approved. And so our homes are there, and you have all these non -profits. And excuse me for expressing myself this way, because I have worked for a non-profit, and they do good things. I'm not against, you know, non -profits. But in Immokalee there are just so many. When do we get to the point where we say "no more"? Because the traffic here is unbearable. This --on 29 here you have --and I know I'm getting away from the project. But just to tell you -- and I know this is an issue everywhere. But people are using our main road here, 29, to go to Arthrex to work, to go to Naples to work. People from Lehigh, people from Fort Myers traveling all through here to do that. So not only do we have to contend with our main road being congested, now the streets Page 8 of 21 Page 12 of 708 March 20, 2025 that we use to go -- to go home, we have to wait behind school traffic coming in both directions to turn into Highlands, and now you're going to add this project on 1 lth Street. So again, are you making it better for non -profits? Of course you are. But are you making it better for me as a private homeowner? No, you're not. That's my investment. I pay property taxes. These non -for -profits do not. And I know we become lenient, and I don't know, whatever the laws have been written to exempt them from certain things, you know, that's fine. It's a law. But, you know, some of these not -for -profit -- just keep this in mind. They're not poor. You look at their balance sheet, they're not poor. I mean, they certainly pay their CEOs enough money. But you have RCMA, you have Guadalupe. You know, now the Immokalee Foundation, which I have nothing against. I think all three do great work. But I'm just letting you know that we're being taxed while they are not. So keep in mind, again, how safe this is going to be to add this on this residential street -- is what I would call it -- other than the church existing there, and the -- and Highlands. My other point is when we attended the meeting here -- I think it was on the 7th -- there was a back -and -forth between Mr. Arnold and Mike Facundo about the actual daycare center. And on Page 13 of the minutes that was taken, it says, January 7th, 2025, neighborhood information meeting transcript, okay. So there's a back -and -forth because we did raise a question about, okay, besides the Foundation building -- and I did say to Noemi, I said, you know -- because I know her. But I said, I don't -- I don't know that I'm too concerned about what -- in terms of traffic, what that's going to generate for you guys to go in there, but a childcare center, if you're going to run a childcare center that's a full operations childcare center, drop-off and pick-up, morning and then afternoon, that's just going to make it worse. And Mike said -- and I'm reading off of this transcript. It said, "It's not a function of the church. We're not into the childcare program," and then Mr. Arnold says, "Well, I think, again, our traffic analyzes it." I don't --there's not clarity in terms of is the churchgoing to run a full childcare program, or are they not? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Flores. MR. FLORES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay. Mr. Arnold. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. Just to address a couple of those comments, if I can. First of all, yes, I think I made it clear that the intent is that the church could operate a fully functional 100-child daycare facility. Mr. Banks analyzed that as part of his traffic analysis. The church isn't in the business of operating a daycare today, but I know what the gentleman said about non -profits, not all of them have a lot of money, and for them to pay a consulting team for us to come back in a year, whenever they decide they might want to add a childcare center, it's expensive, it's time-consuming. It's a year process to get through here. So we think it makes sense because we don't have that impact on the roadway that degrades the levels of service. And 1 lth functions well. I think Mr. Banks was just out there as late as yesterday afternoon to monitor the dismissal from Highlands Elementary School and to monitor the traffic. And if you'd like, I'm sure Mr. Banks can come up here and talk to you a little bit about his analysis and what he observed out there on the field, if that's okay. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Please. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Mr. Banks. MR. ARNOLD: Jim, you're up. MR. BANKS: Good morning. For the record, Jim Banks. Mr. Arnold is correct, I was out there yesterday and made some observations. I want to be careful that I'm not implying that the residents aren't being truthful but maybe overstating the -- their concerns. First and foremost, the traffic on I Ith is a low volume of traffic. Now, you do have these little, short, brief peaking periods when the schools -- in the mornings and in the evenings when Page 9 of 21 Page 13 of 708 March 20, 2025 they let out. But we were out there making observations, and the traffic demand on 1 lth Avenue is low, and the additional traffic that we would add on that will not exacerbate that situation where it would lower the level of service. It operates at a fairly high level of service, again, except for in the evening there's about a seven- to eight -minute period when students are being picked up and some of the vehicles are queuing out onto 1 lth. But at no time was traffic flow impeded. It might have been delayed some when somebody's traveling northbound on 1 lth Avenue and they have to get around the cars that are queued up, but at no time was there any significant blockage. I also drove around and monitored some of the adjacent intersections. I observed no type of delay that was presented to you earlier by one of the residents. The traffic -- those intersections work at a high level of service as well. There are sidewalks on both sides of 1 lth Avenue. So when the schoolchildren are let out of school, they have -- and the sidewalks are offset from the road, so they do have safe areas to walk. And it is correct the intersection of Immokalee Drive and 1 lth is a four-way stop intersection, and it functions like a four-way stop intersection. Everyone has to come to a complete stop, and there's crosswalks. So if children need to walk across that intersection, they do so. I saw nothing that raised any concerns in my -- based on my observations that would present a safety concern. Also, I would like to point out that this facility is located within proximity of other schools, and it's an after -school program. And there is a high volume of these students that are walking to and from these schools. So what we're expecting is is when these schools let out, some of these students that are going to go to these after -hour programs are simply going to walk because it's close enough to their school, so there's not going to be this additional trip where they're being picked up and then driven to this other facility. And again, it's a high -- there's not a situation where there's one student walking by themself. There are a lot of students out there. So there's not this, you know, situation where it's -- there would be a concern that there's only one student walking down the street at a certain time of the day. Also, it should be pointed out that this project is aligned with the Santa Rosa Street. I'm going to step away from the microphone and just point. Well, this is Santa Rosa right here, and that goes straight out to 29th Street. So in the event that there is a situation on 1 lth, that is an unforeseen congestion situation, whatever it could be, a vehicle broke down in the street or something, they do have direct access out of that neighborhood onto 29. So, again, they would be able to not impact on 1 lth Avenue during those critical -- critical times. And then finally, I'd also like to point out that if the daycare is activated by the school, we will ensure, and it will be required, that we have enough on -site storage so when the parents do come pick up their children, they are queued up on our site, not on 1 lth or Santa Rosa or any of those streets. And I'd also like point out that a daycare is not like a school where the bell just rings and all the students get out one time. It's kind of -- you know, the parents trickle in, pick up their child when it's convenient for them, and then they leave. So you don't have the queuing demand at a daycare like you do at a school. So we feel that the amount of traffic that will be generated on this site, for one reason, because it's a walkable location to the adjacent schools, and it's going to be low -- it will not, again, degrade the operation of 1 lth Avenue, and we do have -- we will have on -site storage if the daycare is ever enacted. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Commissioner McLeod. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yeah. I was just trying to get an understanding of the timing of things. So the middle school, the timing is at, like, 7 to 3? MR. BANKS: 7:00, 7:15 to about 3:00. They let out at 2:40, but by about 3:00 is when Page 10 of 21 Page 14 of 708 March 20, 2025 the vast majority of students have been picked up. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And so then the programs at this new center would be from, like, whatever, 3:30 to whenever? And maybe -- I don't know, you know, if Noemi wants to discuss what happens during these times. And then what happens at the facilities during the morning time when the kids are at school? Can you share? MS. PEREZ: Good morning. Noemi Perez, president and CEO of the Immokalee Foundation. So the middle school program, which is -- primarily, we serve the middle and high school -- they let out about 3:45. Most of those students are walkers -- they don't have a driver's license -- so they will be walking to our site. High school lets out about 2:05, so they would be at our site by 2:20 in order for our program to start after school at 2:30. So programming at our site runs from 2:30 till about 5:30. Again, most of our students are walkers. We have enough space in the parking lot that the cars would not be on the road. They would be in -- and Mike and his team structured it that way, because we talked about having a loop to have access, you know, for cars to just go around. We do have three shuttle buses as well that we could primarily transport students if that were an issue, as well, of concern. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Thank you. And what happens in the morning time from -- until 2 when the high schoolers come? MS. PEREZ: We do not have any programming happening. If we do have students on site, it would be our postsecondary students, and that would be minimal. But most of our staff would be working there in the morning. Some of our programming would happen in the summer as well. But we partner with FGCU, so we transport all of our students off campus for summer programs. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. Great. Thank you. MS. PEREZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Commissioner Sparrazza. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you, Chair. This may be more for staff, but along with Wayne, too. I know it's a time -staking, laborious project and process to ever think about putting traffic lights in, but has there ever been any studies throughout the Immokalee Drive area, whether it be on 9th or I Ith, more likely 9th because of the schools within the vicinity, to even do a study for a traffic light? And while car traffic -- vehicle traffic, of course, is important, I'm also thinking of safety of the students. Has that ever been chatted about? MR. ARNOLD: I will discuss the pedestrian and bicycle -safety issue. So Immokalee, in the last couple of years, was a recipient of a TIGER grant, which is a federal grant that provides pedestrian accessibility throughout the community, so there's a new series of sidewalks that are being constructed throughout Immokalee. 1 lth, which we've been talking about, has sidewalks on both sides. So there's clearly a path for the pedestrian and cyclists to be off the roadway. But I'll let Mike Sawyer address the county roads and the signals. That would be their domain. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Wonderful. Thank you, Wayne. MR. ARNOLD: Sure. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Dr. Sawyer, good morning, sir. MR. SAWYER: Good morning, Commissioners. Mike Sawyer, Transportation Planning. Quite honestly, I don't know of any current study that has been done at this particular location. That doesn't mean that we won't. There's basically 12 criteria for a signal, and there is a whole list of things that we look at. It's a combination of the traffic. It's, you know, safety concerns. Like I said, it's a whole range of Page 11 of 21 Page 15 of 708 March 20, 2025 things that we have to follow, and they're, you know, FDOT and national standards. I will also point out that when the SDP does come in for this, whether -- you know, for the church and for the daycare, depending on if they come in at the same time or independent of each other, there will be an operational analysis that is going to be required as part of the TIS. We don't do that level of detail here because what we're doing is we're simply looking at the potential zoning that might occur on the project. Once they decide in this case whether it's going to be just a church or whether it's going to be a church and the daycare or the other uses that they're proposing, that's when we go into more depth as far as looking at, again, doing a whole new TIS, but that TIS also includes an operational analysis. So at that point, if staff determines we do need to have a more in-depth study of this area because of the issues that are on 1 lth, that's going to happen at that point. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Great. Thank you. It was -- it's just my concern, as I stated, while vehicular traffic is of utmost concern, child safety, I would think, is monumental, and especially in the 9th area. It may not be as impactful as we're hearing, but children that need to walk to a great facility like this, just trying to make them as safe as possible. Thank you very much, Mike. I appreciate it. MR. SAWYER: Not a problem. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Secretary Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Question for Jim. So in your analysis right now, do you think this change will increase or decrease the traffic congestion that the residents are speaking about? MR. BANKS: I don't think there's going to be a notable change in the congestion because the congestion that does occur out there is that short window of time that happens up at the elementary school, and we are not going to impact that situation, that seven minutes, eight minutes when the vehicles --because the school has on -site queuing. They just --they don't --they don't use all their queuing capacity right now. And I don't know why they're not doing that, but they do -- they're not. And so there's -- again, there's, like, this seven- or eight -minute period right before -- right after the school is dismissed where they back out on the street, and then it clears real quick. Once it starts to clear, it immediately just -- all the vehicles are then processed -- because they load up a lot of the cars at a time. And so they -- when they -- when they are -- after they load up, you know, several of these cars, they move out, you know, 10 or 15 cars at a time. And so that queue clears instantly when it does clear. But again, we will not be contributing to that, again, because we have -- we're going to have our own on -site queuing capacity as well as we're not generating that much trips. So again, it's not going to make a measurable difference on the congestion on 1 lth, this project will not. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But you don't think it will reduce it, then? MR. BANKS: I don't think it's going to reduce it. I mean, there is going to be a lot of captured trips simply because the children are going to walk from these schools. But there is going to be on -site staff, and so we are going to have some traffic just where the adults are coming to and from the site. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Commissioner Colucci. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Well, this seems to me to be a wonderful addition for the Immokalee community as a whole. The only bone of contention that I see is -- other than the safety/pedestrian issue that you talked about -- is the bone of contention appears to be traffic from the daycare center. And my understanding is the plan is to do what can be done by the daycare center to relieve really perceived traffic issues, and that includes that the traffic would be queued up on the site for the daycare; is that correct? MR. ARNOLD: That is correct. So just to go back and explain what Mr. Banks was Page 12 of 21 Page 16 of 708 March 20, 2025 talking about. So the schools don't go through a site plan review. They're exempt under your county rule. And this is an older school, highly pedestrian, but it does get traffic for people picking up their kids. And what the county would normally make people do is they have a queuing analysis that you do, and it's 25 feet per car. It's divided by -- I think it's four per student or something. But anyway, it calculates into a length of space you need to queue vehicles on site. The school didn't do that. Jim has been out there and analyzed it. They have the opportunity to probably queue all the cars they need. They just don't function that way. But we will be required, for not only the Foundation building, but for any future childcare, to queue all of our trips on site. Nobody can stack back in onto Santa Rosa or 1 lth. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Yeah. To add to that, it's been 10, 12 years since I've been to a daycare, but I've never been to a daycare where they had a car line. Usually people pull up, get out of your car, go get your kid, get in. But there's not, like, a queuing system like you see at the elementary schools where there's a bunch of cars lined up to get their kids from daycare. People come and go at different times. So I'm not as concerned with that traffic. Ms. Lockhart? MS. LOCKHART: Yes. I just wanted to comment that I will bring it to the attention of -- that they use -- that they evaluate whether they can use more queuing capacity at Highlands. Also -- and I wanted to comment that Immokalee Middle School had an expansion a number of years ago, and we submit a -- what we call a school board review, and with that, a Traffic Impact Statement. And I believe it was -- it was determined -- we added 400 seats to Immokalee Middle School, and it was determined that the traffic along 1 lth was working, that the four-way stop was good. So I tend to lean toward what Mr. Arnold is saying, and also their traffic engineer, that that traffic is working. There are, of course, issues with -- you know, like they were commenting the one -- the one bell, everybody's leaving. We try to work on that individually at schools when -- because conditions change from year to year, number of parents dropping off versus number of school bus riders. So we will take a look at Highlands. But we have the impression that everything is working on that street, so -- and with the uses that are currently there, also the uses that -- the 400-seat capacity that we were evaluated for adding has not been fully utilized, so just so you know that. So there should be. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you, Ms. Lockhart. Commissioner McLeod. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I'm thinking maybe this does reduce traffic. So instead of the parents picking up their kids after school, these kids are either going to be shuttled or walking to these facilities, so that's less cars picking them up. Am I seeing this right? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: I would think so. MS. LOCKHART: I would tend to agree with that, because they are being picked up, taken to other facilities if they -- if they are seeking after -school care or tutoring. So I think this is just a really good opportunity. This is the kind of urban development that you want to see with these multiple uses and also that it's friendly toward children, with the two sidewalks on either side, the proximity, the closeness of being able to walk. I think it's -- I think it's an ideal situation with all the different schools, elementary middle, and high school, so... And those are uses also, if I could just make one comment, that -- with the church, the daycare, the schools, the residential, these are all traditionally compatible uses. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: I agree. Okay. Having -- seeing no other questions, we'll close it and open up to Board discussion or a motion. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I would like to move forward with a motion -- hang Page 13 of 21 Page 17 of 708 March 20, 2025 on. Let me get the right number -- as -is with no additional requests or prerequisites for PUDR-PL20240005475, Immokalee Senior Housing Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: I second the motion. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: All right. All in favor? COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Against? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: There you go; six -nothing. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you so much. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you. Great job out there. I know -- I know there was a comment that there's too many non -for -profits. I don't think that's true. I don't think you can have enough -- not have enough [sic] people helping people. So I applaud what you do, and I wish you all the success moving forward. Moving on, old business. Do we have any old business? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: No. New business, I think other than our conversation with Mr. Bosi, probably we can get past public comment. Any public comment? MR. RUSSO: Good morning. My name is Glen Russo. I reside at 3169 Capistrano Drive in Naples. My concern is I believe that there's a number of plot plans that have been incorrectly approved within the Fiddler's Creek development, and one of those plot plans is where I live at 3169. So the first exhibit I'd like you to look at is the 2018 master plan, and the second exhibit is the procedure for changing a master plan. When is a master plan changed, and how is it changed? MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Excuse me. Mr. Russo can speak, of course, but there is pending litigation on this matter, so you would need to refrain from any discussion. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay. MR. RUSSO: Well, I've -- I've bifurcated my comments to what is not under appeal, which is the plot plan -- plot plan is not under appeal -- versus the 2024 master plan, which I have filed an appeal under. What I've said so far does not apply in any way to the 2024 master plan. It's only dealing with the 2018 master plan and plot plans that were approved according to the 2018 master plan, not the 2024. The last part of my presentation, which will only be a minute, does touch on the 2024 master plan, and I understand and agree that your comments may not be appropriate for that part. But as it relates to -- my first part of my presentation has nothing to do with the activities involved in the master -- the 2024 master plan or the plot plans -- I mean 2024 master plan or the appeal. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Can I ask you a question? What's the purpose of the -- what are you looking for from us? MR. RUSSO: I'll -- I was going to get to that. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Is that something that we can act on, Heidi? MS. ASHTON-CICKO: I would still direct -- my recommendation is to refrain from comment, but you can certainly hear what he has to say, and he does have the right to speak under Page 14 of 21 Page 18 of 708 March 20, 2025 public comments. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But is he looking for action from this commission? MS. ASHTON-CICKO: I don't know what he's seeking, but I -- CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: I'll ask you that question, Mr. Russo. Are you looking for action from us? What is your goal today? MR. RUSSO: My goal is to have the -- to work with the Commission and the staff to look into the plot plans which I believe were incorrectly approved, and there's at least eight of them which I will -- which we'll speak about. So I want to -- I think the county has a real serious issue here, what I'm trying to make you aware of, that plot plans were approved that did not follow the master plan and that those changes in the plot plans did require a master plan change with a public hearing. That was not done. So you have at least eight plot plans in which they were approved, they did not follow the master plan, and that master plan should have been revised. When the plot plans came in, the county should have said, "Well, wait a minute. These plot plans you're giving us don't match the master plan of 2018." This is all before -- this is in 2022. Okay. This was all before the application for the 2024 or any of that. That's why I believe you can comment on it, because this is activity and actions that occurred even before the 2024 master plan was even filed, okay. This is a different subject, okay, at least this part of my presentation. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Okay. So -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Have you talked with staff? It seems like usually we wouldn't see this until you guys have communicated and come to some -- MS. ASHTON-CICKO: He's referring to approved development orders which could be Site Development Plan; it can be building permit; it can be a rezone. He's commenting on approved development orders, and you, as a Planning Commission, do not have the authority to open up an approved development order. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But I guess I'm interested -- usually you guys have communicated before we see anything. MR. BOSI: This is a -- maybe I'll provide a little clarification to the Planning Commission. This is a public comment. Anybody can come up here and say anything they want. There's no action required. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. Thank you. MR. BOSI: Just -- you allow him to speak what he asks [sic], make whatever requests that he makes, you'll -- and you'll take whatever steps that you feel is appropriate. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: I would still tell the Planning Commission, as the County Attorney just said, I wouldn't engage in questions. I do want to hear what you have to say. I am interested to hear it. MR. RUSSO: Sure. That's fair enough. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Thank you. MR. RUSSO: So your regulations, which are on the screen there, if you can turn to Page 3 -- and I'm not sure, with all the back -and -forth and questions, does that get deducted from my five minutes, or do I get -- CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: No, no, no. Go ahead. Go ahead. MR. RUSSO: So you have a process when a plot plan -- or when somebody wants to change your master plan, and that process is divided into three stages: Minor change, middle-of-the-road change, and significant change. Significant changes require public hearings. Minor changes are done by staff. The middle of the run is staff and the Commission, if I got that correct. But I'm mostly focused on when a plot plan comes in and it doesn't follow the master plan in a significant way, a public hearing should be triggered so that the public can come in and say, "Wait a minute. You're changing this or that. We as the public want to give you our side of the Page 15 of 21 Page 19 of 708 March 20, 2025 story." The developer will give their side of the story, and then you as a commission can weigh the two and make a decision as, "Hey, you know, that's a good point," or "that's a good point" or "we think that that's not a good point at all." When the plot plans come in and they change the master plan in a major way or don't follow it in a major way, there is no opportunity for the public to comment. There's no public hearings. There's no public notice. There's no neighborhood meetings. There's nothing. And that's what occurred in the plot plan that I live in. They came in, and they made a major change which should have triggered a master plan public hearing. That did not happen. So that got approved, and nobody from our -- we weren't notified. We weren't mailed or nothing, and that's the problem that I think you have. It's a very significant due -process problem. So we believe that -- I believe that there was a plot plan -- I'll say the one that I live in -- that triggered the necessity for a public hearing master plan amendment, which was never done. Okay. Now, if you go to Page 4, please, of this, these other items that trigger a master -- a major change of the master plan, and the one I'll focus in on is the traffic circulation. So if you change the traffic circulation of the master plan, that is an automatic major change which automatically requires a public hearing, okay? That was not done in the case of the plot plan. And so there's other criteria that I highlighted. And I submitted all this, and I would suggest -- if the staff can make copies, then you guys can look through it, I think that you'll find it very enlightening, and I think you really need to look at it, because I think you have a very significant issue or possible breakdown of your system, of which where I live was caught up in it. But it's not just for me. My interest is for me, but your interest should be, "Well, are plot plans following the master plan like it's supposed to be, or are we doing it reverse? Do we have the tail wagging the dog?" And in this case, I think you have the tail wagging the dog. So that's what triggers a major change, and I believe that the plot plans that I will give you all fall into one or more of those categories. So on Exhibit 3, these are all the areas that I believe plot plans did not follow the master plan. And all of this -- all of the development in these areas that are highlighted should have triggered a public hearing, of which none of them did. Now I'm a -- I've been a developer for 30 years, so I'm actually -- I read maps, and I do what the developer of Fiddler's Creek does. I build office buildings and shopping centers and apartment buildings and got all the approvals, so I kind of understand the process. And I've checked myself and rechecked myself, because my assertions are pretty -- pretty significant. So I don't take what I'm saying lightly. So these are visually the areas. Now, what I'd like to submit as Exhibit 4 is eight plot plans, at least, that have been approved by the county with -- that had significant differences from the master -- the 2018 master plan, and no master plan amendment or revision was done, certainly not a public hearing one. So I believe you have a very significant problem. Now, the issue is, is that -- is this limited to Fiddler's Creek? Are there other developments where they're coming in with plot plans that don't match the master plan that are being approved without the master plan being adjusted? Because the master plan is where you guys get involved and the public gets involved, and you say, "You know what, that's not a good idea. That road that was going this way should go that way," or "You know what, all this preserved area that was on the master plan, you know, you're reducing it significantly. We don't think that's a good idea." And the public gets up and says, "We don't think that's a good idea," and the developer says, "Well, it is because we're going to give more land over here." And you guys say, "Well, that sounds like a good idea. We're getting more land out of it, or maybe it's just a bad idea." The point is, there should be a discussion. That whole discussion process, public hearing and your back -and -forth with the public, you've been basically -- how do I say this? You've been Page 16 of 21 Page 20 of 708 March 20, 2025 denied that opportunity, which I think is a significant problem, especially if it goes beyond Fiddler's Creek and these eight. I mean, if this is going on on a regular basis, there could be a breakdown in your system where some -- because they're supposed to take the master -- the plot plans, and they're supposed to overlay them on the master plan and say, "Is it generally following?" Okay. We know that the plot plans are more detailed. They have lot lines and all that. But if roads appear from nowhere or dead -ends turn into through roads or clubhouses drop -- just they're -- they're not on the master plan, they're nowhere, there's now a 40,000-square-foot plot -- clubhouse. Well, where'd that come from? Well, that was approved on the plot plan level. No public hearing. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Can you go through that pile and pick one or two of what you think are the most egregious changes? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: I was actually going to tell Mr. Russo I've now given him seven minutes since we've restarted the clock at 9:54. So I'm going to have to ask you to wrap it up, sir. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah. It would be good to see, though -- you're saying a lot of things, and we're not seeing a specific example of the types of issues you're talking about. MR. RUSSO: I can show you one, if you'd like. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I would appreciate seeing one, just to get a feel. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Just one is good. MR. RUSSO: If you go to the master plan, 2018. Is there -- how do you use the pointer? Is there -- oh, my finger, okay. So right there, this is the road system for southern Estancia, and this is Marsh Cove. And you can see Marsh Cove is a dead-end, okay. What -- the plot plan for my development that was approved connected a road between here and here, okay. That is a traffic circulation change. Now, in discussions with staff, they've said, Well -- because this has been brought up. "Well, under a minor change -- if you change the alignment of a right-of-way, it's a minor change. It doesn't require a public hearing." But my question is, if a realignment of a right-of-way changes the traffic circulation, which this clearly does -- all right. When you change -- the traffic was -- from southern Estancia was all going out on Route 41 --yeah, Route 41. All that was -- by the plot plan was changed to go through Marsh Cove, our development. So they turned our dead-end street and took all the traffic from southern Estancia, ran it through our development. No master plan public hearing. Now, that is circuit -- that is traffic circulation change. And if you look at Exhibit 2 that I gave, that clearly triggers a master plan. So when a right-of-way, which might not -- realignment, which may not trigger a master plan. But when that right-of-way changing changes traffic circulation, that is a clear-cut requirement for a public hearing. So the master plan that was approved for my development, I believe, was illegally approved, and I would ask -- there's a five-year limit of -- statute of limitations based on a lack of public notice. I would prefer to work with this commission and staff to get the plot plan, regarding my development where I live that I believe was incorrectly approved, revoked. If this commission does not revoke it, then I will file a declaration with the Court to review the process, because I think there is a black -and -white issue that wasn't followed. But I don't like doing that. I would much rather work with staff, work with the Commission and say, "Listen, we have a problem." And so that's --and then just one last point, if you don't mind. Sothis is really where the rubber meets the road, and this is now where I'm into the appeal, okay. So this is now the 2024. And this is the really big, big problem. So I brought this up when they came in for the master plan, and the developer said, "All Page 17 of 21 Page 21 of 708 March 20, 2025 these connections, they're already approved. The connection of Marsh Cove, that's approved already by a plot plan." That -- quote -unquote, "That ship has sailed. You guys can't vote on that connection because it's already been approved." So by coming in and getting what should have -- coming in and getting a change that required a public hearing, which was not, they get it approved with no comment -- oops, oh. I'm sorry. They get it approved with no comment from the public and no substantial discussion on your guys' part, okay. They get that in. We don't even know about it. Then they come to -- they took a whole series of plot plan changes. At least -- I'll surmise maybe it was a dozen plot -- changes in the plot plan that didn't follow the master plan. And when they came in with the master plan, they said, "Oh, we're just truing up the master plan." And all these changes that were done under the plot plan, you guys, because you've already approved it, you have no say in it. So the public -- and this is why there's a five-year limit of statutations [sic] because the county and the -- the county, the State of Florida, and the court system are very, very sensitive about locking out public hearing. Their attitude is you can make your argument. You can have your day in court, so to speak. And you win or you don't win on the merits. And if you don't win on the merits, you just say, "Okay. Well, that's the way -- you know, that's how the cookie crumbles," so to speak. But when you are robbed from making that input, we never had an opportunity in a public hearing format to have you or the county decide, "Hey, that's a bad idea," because when we got to the point that we knew about it and said, "Hey, that's a bad idea," the developer said, "Too late. The county already approved it." And that is a real -- obviously, you can see you do have developments that are -- master plans that are being created by plot plan at a time, and that's not the way I think this Planning Commission wants to run the county. It's supposed to be the opposite. Big concept. Master plan. Hey, this looks good. This is over here. That's good. Great, we approve that. Now give us the details. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay, Mr. Russo. I want to thank you for your comments. We've gone well beyond, and I will -- MR. RUSSO: And I thank you for the additional time. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: You got it, sir. Thank you. Mike, we did want to move into you and talk to you about what we had started out the meeting with. MR. BOSI: And I just wanted to --I did get a note from Mr. Summers that Commissioner Schmitt had raised his hand and was going to provide a comment. I'm not sure if you wanted to hear that, or do you want me to go on? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Is he on Zoom? MR. BOSI: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Yeah, I mean. It's the Chair's prerogative. Absolutely. MR. SUMMERS: Mr. Schmitt, you're allowed to speak, if you could unmute yourself. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Is he going to vote -- did he vote on the other items? CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: I don't know. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: No. MR. BOSI: No. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: No. So now he's just going to provide a comment. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Which we should have. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Because you didn't approve his participation by -- you know, so -- CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: So should I ask for approval of his participation now? MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Sure. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: I'd take a motion to approve Chair Schmitt. Page 18 of 21 Page 22 of 708 March 20, 2025 COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: So motioned. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Second? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Second. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: All in favor? COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: (No verbal response.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: (No verbal response.) COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Mr. Schmitt, you have the floor, Chair. Is he there? Unmute. Mute. (No response.) MR. SUMMERS: He's unmuted at this time. We just --he might behaving some audio difficulties on his end. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Well, unfortunately, Chair Schmitt, we can't hear you, sir. MR. SUMMERS: Yeah. He muted himself now, so... CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Okay. Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Zoning Director. And I think what you're asking for is just an overview of what potentially has happened within the State Legislature. And I'm not going to really concentrate on one specific bill because there are a number of different bills that are out there. Some of the bills have been introduced to require where -- that you have a single-family dwelling unit, that a county cannot prohibit accessory dwelling units from being placed upon those properties. There's in -- within -- within the bill, it also indicates of how they can't be -- they can't be required to add additional parking if that is going to be required. So there's some -- there are some concerning issues that have been decided at the local level that it wasn't appropriate for the county to have a program such as that, and the State Legislature is contemplating provisions within bills that would require any single-family zoning district to allow for accessory dwelling units. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: There is -- there is in that bill -- I'm sorry, Mr. Bosi. I didn't mean to interrupt. But there is also in that bill a provision where if it's affordable housing that you add in, you can't lose your homestead either. So that kind of goes -- but I don't know how on -- how on the county side would we possibly have to manage that? I mean -- MR. BOSI: It would be extremely difficult. I mean, that would be an extremely difficult measure. And we'd have to wait until -- how the -- once the bill would be adopted, there would be some guidance that we would have to seek from our County Attorney's Office and hopefully from other resources to try to say, "How would those affect?" Another bill is opening up the PUDs. The Board of County Commissioners was specific that PUDs are individual contracts, and they are, therefore, unique and not eligible. Well, they have said that they are eligible. And one of the key points was the density associated with them are eligible. So the density that was associated with the mini -triangle PUD which allows 167 feet would be that height that's allowed within the jurisdiction. So those are the type of things that potentially could be damaging. The one thing that is probably still the safeguard that's in place is there's been no modification towards -- that they have to satisfy the most similar adopted zoning district that the county or jurisdiction would have; therefore -- and it would still be subject to the RMF-16 development standards, and that RMF-16 development standards has a requirement that your setbacks are half the height of your building. So even if you were entitled to 167 acres [sic], if you only had a 200-foot-wide -- or a 200-foot-wide commercial property that was -- you know, that was shallow but long, you would be Page 19 of 21 Page 23 of 708 March 20, 2025 really confined because your front and rear would be something that you would have to have a 50 -- you'd have half the height of the building. So if you're at -- if you try to get 100 foot, you'd have to be 50150, and they're really trying to confine this in a really small footprint. And so that has been one of the things that has dissuaded a number of the Live Local projects under the current regulations, but that has not been proposed to change. So that is one thing that we still recognize would be able to provide some additional protections. But at the end of the day, the State Legislature is going to do what the State Legislature feels is appropriate for the state as a whole, and we'll have to deal with what the ramifications are and work with the County Attorney's Office in terms of how best to comply with the state statutes but also provide for the most amount of home or local rule that we possibly would be allowed underneath how those regulations are presented out. So there's still a lot of uncertainty. What I can do -- over the next 30 days, the legislature will be starting to wrap up those sessions. I can give another --I can just lookout to, say, the second meeting in April, give you an update towards where all -- some of these issues that directly will affect us, specifically the Live Local and the ADU units. I'll give you an update at the, say, second meeting in April. CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: Yeah. The Legislature wraps up the end of April. They only have 60 days. So by the end of April, we should -- once it comes out -- once -- the committees are going to be -- are right now, so we'll see what comes out of committee over the next couple weeks, and then the next 30 days after that is where it's going to get hectic. But they are something to keep in mind because the Senate and the House still both match, and once the Senate and the House Bill matches, and then it goes to committee, that's where you get kind of tricky. Now, if it was just a Senate bill that was introduced but no House Bill, well, then it probably wouldn't be a point of discussion because they both have to -- they both have to align. Right now these are gaining traction. And I know the governor had pushed for no property taxes, and there are some bills out there that look like there's ways of lessening that, and especially the one with the accessory dwellings is, but that month of April will be the one to watch. All right. Okay. Having no further business, I will call to adjourn at 10:15 a.m. Thank you, all. Page 20 of 21 Page 24 of 708 March 20, 2025 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:15 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION JOE SCHMITT, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on , as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, RPR, FPR-C, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. Page 21 of 21 Page 25 of 708 April 3, 2025, CCPC Meeting Minutes ATTACHMENTS: 04-03-2025 CCPC Meeting Minutes 5/15/2025 Item # 5.13 ID# 2025-1414 Page 26 of 708 April 3, 2025 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida April 3, 2025 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Joe Schmitt, Chairman Chuck Schumacher, Vice Chairman Paul Shea, Secretary Randy Sparrazza Michael Petscher Michelle L. McLeod Charles "Chap" Colucci Amy Lockhart, Collier County School Board Representative ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney Derek Perry, County Attorney's Office Kevin Summers, Manager - Technical Systems Operations Page 1 of 24 Page 27 of 708 April 3, 2025 PROCEEDINGS MR. BOSI: Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Good morning, all, and welcome to the Planning Commission meeting, April 3rd, 2025. I would ask that the planning commissioners please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Commissioner Shea, could you please take the roll. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Chairman Schmitt? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Vice Chair Schumacher? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Secretary Shea is here. Commissioner Sparrazza. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Colucci? COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner McLeod? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Petscher? COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Amy -- Ms. Lockhart? MS. LOCKHART: I am here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: We are all present, sir. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Excellent. And, Ray or -- do we have any addenda to the agenda? MR. BELLOWS: No changes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: No changes. Okay. Our next meeting is on April 17th. Go ahead. MR. BOSI: I did want to say that right now we have no petitions scheduled for the May I st Planning Commission meeting, and we've passed the deadline. That was Wednesday. So I think we're -- it would be appropriate for a motion to cancel the May 1 st meeting because no petitioners are there. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I make a motion to approve that we cancel the May 1st agenda -- Planning Commission meeting since there's nothing on the agenda. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Second. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Anybody second? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Second. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Aye. Page 2 of 24 Page 28 of 708 April 3, 2025 COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. It passes. That's interesting that there's nothing. MR. BOSI: And just speaking with Ray, there's a number of petitions that we have there, but for whatever reason, the applicants have not been very aggressive to get them forward, and there's a lot of questions surrounding future economic activity, things like that. So we'll continue to monitor and let the Planning Commission know in terms of workload. But right now we've -- our summer is looking pretty light, but that could change within a month. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And we think that the Costco petition will come in midsummer even regardless of whether we're out of season? I guess, basically -- is that going to be problematic, or will the Board want us to defer that to the fall? MR. BOSI: No. And the way that we've always processed it related to the summertime break for land -use petitions has been the Planning Commission can proceed as forward. And we do have a Zoom option so, you know, participants, no matter where they're at, they can participate. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. MR. BOSI: But the Board has a policy not until the last meeting in September, first meeting in October before they'll hear anything that is controversial that has any -- that's in any of our seasonal areas. So us moving forward with the advisory role that has been requested of the Planning Commission regarding the Costco PDI, it will be -- it will be probably July; one of the meetings in July that we'll have that hearing. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And I would recommend that it be the only item on the agenda. MR. BOSI: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Because I would expect it's going to be a lot of participants. MR. BOSI: Agreed. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Next item, then, is approval of minutes. Well, I've already -- let me go back. The next meeting will be April 17th. Are there any projected commissioners who will not be able to be present for that meeting? COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: I will not be. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Chap is the only one. Okay. So it looks like we'll have a quorum. What's on -- what's it look like for the 17th, just the two petitions associated with the car storage area? MR. BOSI: We have the car storage, which is the -- on 951 south of the 41/Collier intersection. That's a GMP and a PUD. And then we also have a GMP only for a future housing project, 160 acres, off of Sabal Palm in the sending area. It's only the GMP because it's a large scale. It's 160 acres. It takes two rounds of hearings with the Planning Commission, two rounds of hearings with the BCC. So at that hearing we'll put forward the Growth Management Plan amendment. We'll give you, as an informational piece, the PUD so you can see what they have -- they Page 3 of 24 Page 29 of 708 April 3, 2025 currently have in the PUD for the design standards, the specifics, but there will be no action on the PUD. It will only be the GMP because you're going to be at a transmittal hearing. And then at adoption we will bring the PUD together with that GMP. So you'll have full visibility on both of them. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Okay. Next item, approval of minutes, March 6th, 2025. Do I hear a motion to approve those minutes? COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: So moved. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Second. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Second. It was moved and seconded. And there's no discussion, no corrections to be made, so I ask that we vote with a motion and second. So please vote. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So it passes unanimously. And from Ray, BCC report? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. On March 25th, the Board of County Commissioners heard the conditional use for the 350-foot-tall communication tower. That was denied by a vote of 5-0 for the proposed location and that the tower should stay at its current location until they come up with another site. MR. BOSI: And Mike Bosi, Zoning director. Just to give you a little bit more specifics. There was a strong presence from the Seminole and the Miccosukee Tribes in objection to it. And if you remember, at the Planning Commission there was just the owner of the Skunk Ape Research Center -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Right. MR. BOSI: -- that had came and spoke against it. Well, some of the indigenous tribes came and spoke against it, and because of that, the Board was very concerned about its impact. And instead of saying -- instead of continuing it until they were able to find an alternative location, they just -- they took action on it. They denied it and said bring back a better location after -- and make sure that as you're going through the site selection, you've got direct lines of communication with the indigenous -- the indigenous tribes to make sure there's no -- there's no issue in terms that location and inference with, you know, their native practices. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But still with an understanding of the degradation that currently can occur without that tower being present. MR. BOSI: And it was also a direction to continue to talk with the Park Service, because right now the reason for that tower was the decommissioning of the tower at that Camestown. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Right. MR. BOSI: That tower is still at its present location. The federal government -- Page 4 of 24 Page 30 of 708 April 3, 2025 the Park System has purchased that property. They want to decommission the tower, but there's conversation that's going on recognizing that that tower is absolutely in need for communications in that area. So until we're able to find an alternative location or if the Park Service would agree that a tower and their welcome center, which they intend to -- you know, to develop is not incompatible uses because you're going to have a lot of public there. You're going to need reliable cell service. And having a tower, because of the safety aspect of it, there are some benefits, and there is some logic to it. So there's a lot of discussions that are going to have to take place as to where that new location is going to be; if it's going to be a new location, or if they're just going to reconstruct the tower that's there with a newer structure at its current location. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. MR. BOSI: So more to come. MR. BELLOWS: And -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Ray, anything else? Go ahead. MR. BELLOWS: Yes. The Board also approved the Tamiami 500-acre MPUD and companion GMPA, and that was on the summary agenda. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. And I -- and you did have a discussion as well in regards to the LDC amendment. The Board provided guidance. Was that the meeting they provided guidance with the issues of golf course conversion? I know we heard the -- we did the LDC. We did the review. MR. BOSI: There was the -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Go ahead. MR. BOSI: The Planning Commission heard it and made recommendations that the staff basically take a lighter -- a lighter approach to modifications to it. We asked the Board, do you want us to move forward with the simplified version or go back to the version -- or go back -- come back with a modified version as requested by the Planning Commission, and they made the decision to make no changes to it. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. MR. BOSI: And then -- and also, as I mentioned before the meeting started, the recommendation that the Planning Commission made, you know, to support the renting of urban guesthouses within the urban area, the Board of County Commissioners decided against that, not to move forward, and it was primarily because -- that they could not regulate duration, and the impact of short-term rentals and Airbnb and the VRBO issue was something they felt would have the potential to really disrupt neighborhoods in a way that they didn't feel that it was -- in their term, the juice was not worth the squeeze. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. All right. And next item is Chairman's report. I have nothing. ***There's nothing on the consent agenda, so we'll move to the first public hearing. That is a -- PL2023016891. That's the Amatout, is it, land -- MS. EMBLIDGE: No. Armantrout. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- on Sunset Boulevard. MS. EMBLIDGE: Armantrout. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Oh, Armantrout, okay. Armantrout, that's -- now that I look at it. All right. With that, first we'll do any -- are there any -- is there -- oath of anybody who wishes to speak; please stand for the oath. THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give Page 5 of 24 Page 31 of 708 April 3, 2025 will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And disclosures, starting with Amy. MS. LOCKHART: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Staff materials only. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Likewise, staff materials only. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Reviewed materials and visited the site. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. With that, Margaret, it's all yours. MS. EMBLIDGE: Thank you. Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Margaret Emblidge. I'm a certified planner with LJA Engineering representing the applicant. We have some of our project team with us today. Let me do this. You'll see on the screen this list consists of all the team members. Here today, though, we have Karen Bishop, Jim Carr, and Jim Banks. Tim Hall was not able to make it, but we're prepared to answer any questions regarding environmental conditions. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I think Karen just made it in time. MS. EMBLIDGE: Yeah. MS. BISHOP: I bring up the rear. That's my job. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Go ahead. MS. EMBLIDGE: So the location of the project is at the corner of Sunset and Whitaker, which is approximately a block east of Santa Barbara Boulevard. The applicant is requesting to rezone the 5.28-acre parcel from the rural agriculture to the residential single-family one -acre zoning district subject -- as I mentioned, the location. The applicant intends to plat the parcel into three parcels so that they can construct a single-family -- one single-family per lot. Just as a sidebar, we -- the property was previously three parcels, and at some point in time it was combined, and now the owners want to plat it so that they can -- so that the other family members can build a single-family residence on the property. And here's a concept plat layout on what they're looking at. I mean, this isn't exact. We'll know better once we get to the actual plat application, but I thought this would be helpful for you to see what -- what they're initially thinking. And again, here's the surrounding zoning and parcels. And I wanted to highlight that in the agriculture zoning district that surrounds the property, there are several parcels that are small parcels that don't meet the five -acre requirement, specifically -- let's see. These parcels here are .74-acre parcels. And the reason why I bring that up is that it points out that this area is an area in transition from a five -acre agricultural area, and this proposal is consistent with the area. The subject property is designated urban residential subdistrict which allows a density of -- a base density of four units per acre, and based on the intent of creating three parcels, this would be consistent with this urban residential subdistrict, which it would result in a density of 1.76 acres -- units per acre. And this is just a highlight of where it lands on the Future Land Use Map. We did have a -- conduct a neighborhood information meeting on January 9th at Page 6 of 24 Page 32 of 708 April 3, 2025 the South Regional Library, and there were no attendees from the public. And we did not receive calls or emails from the public regarding the request that -- we did not receive those. I did communicate with staff, and I don't want to speak for them, but I understand they did not receive any communications from the public. So in conclusion, the applicant agrees with the staff report and recommendation for approval. The request to rezone the property is consistent with the Growth Management Plan and also the rezone criteria pursuit so the Land Development Code. This request is compatible with the surrounding properties, as I mentioned previously, and the applicant respectfully requests that the Planning Commission forward this request to the Board with a recommendation for approval. And that ends my presentation. I'm available for questions. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. I don't have any -- see any questions from my colleagues. I'll ask the question. Is this -- this is in the Water/Sewer District -- MS. EMBLIDGE: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- or will these be on septic? MS. EMBLIDGE: Yes, they are in the Water/Sewer District. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That's what I thought. MS. EMBLIDGE: And there are main lines that are near by. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Because you brought up the lots off of Polly. MS. EMBLIDGE: Yes. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: It made me look at even a little bit further east. Is there an air -- is that an airport? MS. EMBLIDGE: Yes, it is. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I've never -- MS. EMBLIDGE: That's a private airport, and it's part of a planned development. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It's a -- Wing South. It's part of the development. You pull your airplane right into the garage. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: It's been there for 50 years. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Been there forever. Fifty, yeah. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Very interesting. Okay. I'm glad you made me go out east and take a look at that. Okay. That's it. MS. EMBLIDGE: All right. Thank you. Anything else? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. When you buy your airplane, you can -- you can get your own hangar and pull right in. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Pull right in, yeah. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I didn't realize it's been there 50 years. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Yep. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Wow. Anyways, we're digressing. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yeah. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And do I hear a motion for approval? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Public? Page 7 of 24 Page 33 of 708 April 3, 2025 CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Oh, thank you. Any public comments? MR. SUMMERS: (Shakes head.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Nobody signed up? No calls? No nothing? Okay. Then we'll ask the commissioners if they have any concerns or if they'd like to make a motion. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Any staff report on this? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, we'll hear staff report. Thank you. I'm getting way ahead of myself. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: If you'd come -- MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Zoning director. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: If I'd come to the meeting once in a while, I'll remember. MR. BOSI: And I concur with the presentation that Margaret has provided, but what I would point out is there's no deviations being sought within this. This is straight to RSF-1, so the LDC regulations that have been adopted and have been deemed appropriate are the ones that will be applicable to the project. And just to give you also an understanding of what they could ask for, because of where this sits within the urbanized area they could ask for up to four units an acre. They are leaving a lot of density on the table, and I think it's in the spirit of compatibility. So in that regard, with the fact that there are no deviations, that they are -- they are looking for a larger lot configuration similar to the existing leftover ag or existing ag within the area, staff is firmly behind this project, and we think that it's a project that fits within the character of the area. And we do agree that this is an area that is starting to transition to alternative uses. But this helps set a pattern of -- of a residential density that is similar towards what currently exists. So staff is in support of the project. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Chair, I'd make a motion to approve as presented. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Any seconds? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Second. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I guess all in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any opposed, by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: No opposition. It passes unanimously. MS. EMBLIDGE: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I thought we'd give Karen time to talk as well, but she missed a big opportunity. Page 8 of 24 Page 34 of 708 April 3, 2025 MS. EMBLIDGE: Yeah. I'm sure she's disappointed. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: ***All right. Next item, PL20230016622, and that's the Sainvilus Subdivision. And do we have a petitioner here? It's all yours. But we'll first take an oath. Anybody wishing to speak, please stand for your oath. THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Disclosures. Amy. MS. LOCKHART: None. Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Staff materials only. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Likewise, staff materials only. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Reviewed the materials, got some clarification from staff, and I did go out to Immokalee yesterday, and I visited the site. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. With that, sir, the floor is yours. MR. SAINVILUS: All right. Good morning. And my name is James Sainvilus. I'm the developer. And I would like to start by thanking you guys for being here this morning and having to -- for us to present to you. And I want to start by addressing the people in Immokalee that -- I'm from Immokalee and graduated'97. And I went to college, went for an engineering degree. Came back. I was a teacher at Immokalee Middle School. I taught seventh grade because I had a teaching certificate for physics since I was in engineering, so I had that. And I wanted to start with that by saying that Immokalee is a place where if I want to do anything, I want to do it there. And right after I graduated, I became a teacher in Immokalee. Tried to be an example to the people, the young kids in Immokalee. And also I became an engineer for the city. I worked for the BCC for 15 years building a wastewater plant -- water plants. And also I switched over when I find out there was a position in Immokalee CRA and MSTU. I applied for the position and actually worked for the CRA for seven years. So I know what's going on in Immokalee. And my dad moved from Haiti straight to Immokalee in 1980, so -- and we live in Forrester Avenue, which is where the project is actually being proposed right now. So technically, I know the area and I know what Immokalee is actually going through and what they need. So by saying that, I want to address that to -- again, to the people in Immokalee, that I understand what's going on there, and I came back. And many of -- many of Immokalee, they don't go. They stay in Immokalee to help out the -- help out whatever way they can. But I came back, and I want to propose this development by presenting these homes to people like teachers, firefighters. So there are a lot of Habitat homes being built in Immokalee, great, and they are low-income base. So a lot of people are not qualified to get into these homes, and that is why I'm presenting these homes to where they can be Page 9 of 24 Page 35 of 708 April 3, 2025 compatible. So right now, if you buying anything in Immokalee, you can't really compare it with any home being sold within the Immokalee. There's nothing that's been sold in Immokalee that you can compare it with. In fact, I bought this lot with this home in it. They had to go to Naples to compare the house I'm buying in Immokalee to give me a proposal based on the appraisal value. So my home was appraised based on the Naples value, so I had to pay a lot of money for it. So my point is that if we have these homes that I'm presenting, I'm proposing, they will bring the value within Immokalee and Ave Maria. So these homes will basically be presenting more like, if you do an appraisal -- if you worried about your property values not increasing, it will definitely increase your property value because it is not affordable home. It is market -value homes that we are proposing to the people with low -- I mean, not low, but middle income that can afford it and being able to -- to being able to invest in town, because you may want to buy a second property and, instead of going to Ave Maria, you can just buy it here in town. And then if you want to rent it or if you want to park your money by buying more homes, this is the place, because they will be worth almost the same amount as Ave Maria prices. So that's what I have to say. And I do have my developer -- my civil engineer here, and my architect is here to go over the plan of where the project is being proposed and the location of all the changes that are going to be made. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. MR. SANDORA: Hi, everyone. I do have a PowerPoint. Is there a way that we can plug it in? I'm Canon Sandora. I'm the civil engineer on the project, and thanks for the opportunity to be here today, and I'm glad to be representing James. And, you know, he's an Immokalee guy and wants to do something positive for Immokalee and provide some much -needed working-class, you know, homes so people can -- they don't have to leave Immokalee to, you know, find a nice home. They can stay right in Immokalee. So just on, like, a high level of the project, you know, James isn't really pushing the envelope on the project. He's just staying within the base density that's allowed for -- per the Immokalee Area Master Plan. So it's -- which is six units per acre for the medium residential subdistrict. So he's not proposing any bonus densities or something, you know, trying to get all this density on a -- you know, on a four -and -a -half -acre site. You know, he's just staying within the limits that are right in the master plan. So we've looked at all areas of the project that should be considered. You know, we've really thought out the site plan to make it suitable and everything. It's just a two -- it's a two-story home. So, you know, I guess you can go up to 35 feet, but it's -- we're just doing a two-story home, two -car garage. They're attached on one common wall, so it's kind of -- you know, that's the -- there's one that's on its own because, basically, 4.52 acres times six gets you to 27, so we've got -- so there's 26 that are attached with one common wall, and then we have one single-family that gets us to the 27 units. That's kind of a high level of the project. I guess I can go into the details a little bit. And if you guys have any questions, feel free to interrupt me and stuff like that, so... Principal uses, they're residential detached single-family units and attached Page 10 of 24 Page 36 of 708 April 3, 2025 single-family units with that zero lot line. So they're kind of like villas, if you will, but they're each -- everybody's on their own property, so -- and then just typical accessory uses, you know, for -- that you would see, you know. So getting -- this is just a slide about the density here, as I mentioned, you know, 4.52, and then we get the base unit. You know, we're just sticking to the base. No bonus densities. Here's an overview of the site plan, and if -- for you guys to take a look at it. And there's -- you know, Forrester Avenue is where we're connecting on the north. Then you have Roberts Avenue on the south. So basically, our road -- Forrester Avenue is basically a dead end, so we're basically extending the dead end and having a culvert -- a cul-de-sac there. And, you know, we don't want that road to be a throughway for a number of reasons. One of them is we don't really want -- I mean, we prefer not to have that be through traffic, you know, people driving through the -- that neighborhood right there, maybe to -- there's a school over there and, you know, people try and cut through to avoid the school, and it provides extra traffic on a little residential road. You know, people like to live on a dead end and stuff like that. And since Forester's a dead end, there's really not much traffic on Forrester at all, so it can -- it can easily handle the additional traffic there. There's a few homes that are connecting right off of -- right on Roberts. There's one -- there's basically three units there connecting on Roberts. And by having that road shortened and not go all the way to Roberts, it also provides more open space, more green area, more room for landscaping. You see we have a nice -- that lighter green area is for detention, so we're providing plenty -- you know, plenty of room for stormwater on site, so... And we have sidewalks on both sides. I wanted to mention that, too. And also we put in a sidewalk connecting to Roberts. That was something with -- when we had the -- when we had the CRA meeting, when we had the neighborhood information meeting, that's something we added to provide a pedestrian connection. So if anybody's walking, they could just connect right to Roberts. There's some -- there's some -- down Roberts there's some stores and stuff that people might want to just walk to, so... CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Randy, you have a question? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Yes. If I may real quickly. Are these 960 square feet under air? So they're fairly small? They're condo size? MR. SANDORA: That's one floor. So they're -- that's just the -- That's just the first floor right, Bill? MR. GLASS: Yeah. MR. SANDORA: Okay. MR. GLASS: The upstairs is larger. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It's a townhome. It's upstairs, downstairs. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Right, upstairs, down -- I couldn't imagine that -- from the layout here -- all right. So they're probably 16-, 1800 square, something like that? MR. SANDORA: Right. MR. GLASS: They're actually larger. I don't know the exact number, but the Page 11 of 24 Page 37 of 708 April 3, 2025 second floor -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Sir, you have to come to the microphone, please, or -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Or relay to him. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Or relay. If you're going to speak -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: All right. That's fine. I just wanted to make sure -- MR. SANDORA: He's going to present the architectural plans in a minute. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: All right. Thank you. MR. SANDORA: So -- sorry, I showed on there, and it, you know, caused -- you know, it makes you think that, but, you know, he's going to present that in a second, so... So getting into kind of a little bit more of the specifics on the site plan, you see, you know, we're providing the stormwater management system is .82 acres, so that's a -- you know, a good portion of the site for a detention area. You know, we're providing the Type B landscape buffers at -- to the adjacent properties. We're providing Type D landscape properties on the roads. We're providing the required open space, which is 2.71 acres; 60 percent of the site. And I talked about the sidewalks on both sides. So, you know, you see the connection that we talked about on -- or on Forrester there. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Can you show the sidewalks? MR. SANDORA: The sidewalks, they're right here. So you see them here. You might even be able to see them back here a little bit better. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And then did you say there were sidewalks out to Roberts? MR. SANDORA: Yes. There's a sidewalk right here that -- from the culvert that connects down and goes directly south towards Roberts. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Mike. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Where is that -- where does it come in on Forrester Avenue? Because Forrester Avenue is very small. MR. SANDORA: Yeah. It just -- COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Is it right in front of that house, 1104? MR. SANDORA: 1104? COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Right in front of -- where exactly on Forrester Avenue are you coming into? MR. SANDORA: Yeah. It is very short, so it kind of dead -ends right up here. So it's just on the south side of Forrester. There (indicating). Do we -- COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Mike, I think you're on the wrong side of 111th [sic]. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: I'm on the wrong side? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Yeah. That's Immokalee Middle. If you want to keep going out -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: It's between Forrester and Roberts. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Is that a track? COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Yeah. Is it right next to the track? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: No, you've got to keep going to your left. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yeah. It's on the other side of 1 lth. Page 12 of 24 Page 38 of 708 April 3, 2025 COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Oh, the other side. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: There you go. You see that vacant lot? MR. SANDORA: Yeah. It's on the west side of 1 lth. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: I see it. Perfect. Thank you. MR. SANDORA: We're only asking for one deviation, and it's -- instead of a 60-foot-wide road right-of-way, it's a 45 feet -- -foot right-of-way, which still provides room for sidewalks on both sides and still 11 feet of open space within the right-of-way. It's a common deviation that I've seen on a lot of PUDs and stuff like that, so... Just to get into the traffic, you see how many trips that we're adding. For the -- for instance, for the p.m. peak hour, there's 29 additional trips for the development, which the roads can more than handle. It's not a significant impact to these major roadways, State Road 29 or Lake Trafford. There's ample available capacity on these roads for the additional traffic. That's what this is showing. We're only -- we're only adding 10 trips to State Road 29, three trips to Lake Trafford Road, you know. You see there's ample capacity here available. And then you can see exactly where we're adding the trips. So right here on Forrester and this -- this is kind of a better map that shows where the other roads are. You know, you're basically -- there's a total of 16 trips coming in. This is for the p.m. peak hour, 16 trips entering the site. There's nine trips exiting that's on Forrester. And like you said, Forrester is very short. It basically dead -ends right here. So there's not much traffic on that road at all, so there's plenty of capacity on these roads to handle those additional trips. So, now, Bill, you can -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Michelle, do you have a question? MR. SANDORA: Oh, do you guys -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Can you go back on the other map that you had? MR. SANDORA: This one? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yes. So you say now that there is an exit on Roberts? MR. SANDORA: There is -- oh, right now? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Well, no. I mean, in your plan. MR. SANDORA: Oh, in our plan. So there's three units that are just going to have driveways directly off Roberts that are proposed. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: So they get off of Roberts, and they go right into their garage? MR. SANDORA: Yeah, I can -- I can -- maybe when I show this at the same time -- these units are just right off of Roberts. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. MR. SANDORA: And there's -- there's other homes on Roberts, so there's actually an existing home right here that's going to be tooken down and then, you know, this is going to be put up, so... COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And are you asking for the deviation on Roberts, too, besides Forrester? MR. SANDORA: I don't -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Just on Forrester. MR. SANDORA: It's in the -- it's in the PUD documents. Like, it's in Exhibit F, I Page 13 of 24 Page 39 of 708 April 3, 2025 think, that it's a commitment that we're going to be connecting there, I think, but... MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Zoning director. And if you look at the display that's currently on the -- the deviation, the 45-foot-wide right-of-way is only for the dead-end section that they're showing. They are not proposing any modifications to Roberts. Roberts is an existing roadway. That is going to stay. They're just going to have driveway cuts off of that for the three units that are facing Roberts. The rest of the units will be off -- will be off of the northern street. MR. SANDORA: Forrester. MR. BOSI: Forrester. And that 45-foot right-of-way is shown here as they showed, a 20-foot -- 24-foot travel lane and 5-foot sidewalks and I I feet of open space. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. Can you show that on the map again; where is that deviation? Just in the cul-de-sac. MR. SANDORA: Yeah, it's this road. This right-of-way is 45 feet. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Oh, uh-huh. MR. SANDORA: This right-of-way. This is the proposed road, so yeah. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. Thank you. MR. SANDORA: Bill, do you want to -- MR. GLASS: I'm Bill Glass with G2 Architecture. I was on the Estero Design and Planning Group for five years, so I applaud your dedication and your time. Not really a lot to -- again, these are attached singles. We did that for a lot of reasons. I'm actually living in a villa right now, and we love it. We don't even know our neighbors are there, and we just mingle with them in the driveway when we're picking our -- driving out or whatever. It works really well. It's a nice way to get singles on a house without all that space between them. I apologize for the square footage on the second floor not being shown, but it's much larger than the downstairs, because the garages are covered. It's probably another 13-, 1400 feet. These are large units. I kept waiving that flag to James and saying, "You're probably large for the Immokalee market," but that's really what he wanted. He wanted these to be family homes, not cracker boxes. And we -- we tried to accomplish that. That's really all I have. I mean, if you -- I'm glad to answer questions. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yeah. This may be outside our purview, but are you going to have fences in between for privacy of these residences? MR. GLASS: We weren't planning on it, I don't believe. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: So they're just, okay, wide open? MR. GLASS: We try not to chop them up. Maybe landscape, you know, between them, but -- MR. SANDORA: Yeah. MR. GLASS: -- not fences fences. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. And then that open space, the dry detention area, is there a way that all the residents can enjoy that area, that open green space that's a requirement? MR. GLASS: Well, it's pretty wet three or four months of the year, I would imagine. But, yeah, it's in between. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: It's called a dry retention area. But you're right, it's Page 14 of 24 Page 40 of 708 April 3, 2025 probably wet in the -- MR. GLASS: I thought about putting a horseshoe pit in the one behind our building, but it was January. By April I knew better. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I just had a question real quick for the architect. Is that -- your square footage plan, is that -- is that per unit or total for that whole building? MR. GLASS: It's only the first floor. I apologize to you. What we were trying to do is get a lot coverage calculation, and my drafter in the office dropped the footage from the second floor off the -- off the slide, and I'm -- I didn't see it. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: So it would be, like, 1800. So it would be another -- MR. GLASS: So it's 1610 footprint, plus the second floor, which is probably 13-, 1400 feet of living area. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah, 25 -- (unintelligible) 2500. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: So you're, like, 1200 square feet a unit, basically? MR. GLASS: Bigger -- they're bigger than that. They're, like, over 2,000; 2200 feet. MR. SANDORA: It is per unit. MR. GLASS: Per residence. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Oh, the square footage calculation is per unit, not the footprint? MR. SANDORA: Right, right. MR. GLASS: Right. It's just per unit. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you. MR. SAINVILUS: I'm sorry. I wanted to answer your question. Yes, the dry retention area will definitely be used for people within the area. Because when I was growing up in Immokalee, we had -- called Oakhaven. I was there for, like, a year. So whenever there's no more water there, we play soccer within the area because it's a dry area, so people can actually use it. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay, great. MR. SANDORA: About the fence, if you guys -- if, you know, there was a requirement to do a fence, we would definitely do one. We definitely wanted to do a landscaping for sure to provide privacy. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. That would be nice, good landscape. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Anybody else? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: This is also going to be -- these are going to be purchased -- this is going to be a fee simple, correct? So it will be its own HOA. MR. SANDORA: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: So once the developer turns over, it goes to the residents, correct? MR. SANDORA: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I just want to note two areas in the petition. One, of course, you've already addressed is the deviation. The second, though, is this is in a wellfield risk management special treatment area, and with that, for my colleagues on the Board, there are special requirements in the LDC that are very strictly reviewed during the Page 15 of 24 Page 41 of 708 April 3, 2025 application process. So that has to be notified. It doesn't require any movement on our part from a standpoint of Environmental Advisory Council, but we just note that it is a wellfield risk management area. That's part of the water -- area of Immokalee sewer -- water/sewer -- Immokalee source of water for that area. MR. SANDORA: Okay. Is there an environmentalist on the Zoom call? We had -- were they able to join? They were supposed to be here today, but they had a -- something came up. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. MR. SANDORA: Some type of emergency here. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Do we have any questions? Amy, did you -- I have no question. I just wanted to point out that it is a wellfield treatment area. MR. SANDORA: Yeah. We had -- our environmentalist was -- had some type of emergency or something, so -- but, okay, thanks. We've done all the environmental and stuff, and we understand the wellfield. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. And it was clear, you stated in the environmental review as well, that it includes black bear -- from a standpoint, the black bear plan, from a standpoint of dealing with the bear population out in that area. MR. SANDORA: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Anything else from the petitioner? You've concluded. Staff, anything? MR. BOSI: As designated within the staff report, staff has reviewed it for consistency with the GMP. We do note there are -- one deviation that you guys discussed. Staff is supporting it based upon it being a dead-end -- a dead-end cul-de-sac, and it seems sufficient enough space to provide for all the necessary arrangements with sidewalks on both sides of the street. They're consistent with the density that's allotted to them through the medium residential within the Immokalee Area Master Plan. And staff is supporting the -- supporting the project and can answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Charles, do you have any? COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: James, could I ask you a question? MR. SAINVILUS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: It seems -- we're talking about a project here that -- anybody can buy one of these units, correct? MR. SAINVILUS: Correct. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: I'm just trying to get my head around where your head is. Your intention, it seems to me to be affordable housing without designating it as such; is that correct? MR. SAINVILUS: Keep it as medium income. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Okay. So it isn't an affordable housing project? MR. SAINVILUS: It's not affordable housing project where you've got to make X amount of money, but -- I think MT something. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: AMI. Page 16 of 24 Page 42 of 708 April 3, 2025 MR. SAINVILUS: AMI, something like that. It's not. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It's market rate. MR. SAINVILUS: Market rate. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I don't think a teacher can afford market rate right now. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I don't know about Immokalee, though. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yeah. Immokalee is different. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I think -- I mean, they're pretty attractive units, and I think it's a -- I'll make my comments when we are to talk, but I just want to open it up for -- any public speakers? MR. SUMMERS: Yes, Commissioner. You have one public speaker, Sylvia Ocanas. one. have -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Sylvia, please approach the lectern. Either one, either MS. OCANAS: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I'm glad to be here. I do COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Good morning. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Silva, could you put the microphone down? Thank you, Silvia. MS. OCANAS: Short people usually have to. Can you hear me? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. MS. OCANAS: Okay. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I'm glad to be here. I do have a concern. I know there was a lot of neighbors that showed up on the first meeting once we heard about it. But it's going to happen, and we do need more affordable housing, I do agree, but being that it's a dead end, I do have a very large concern -- because it happened a couple of years ago with -- in fact, I'm a retired Collier County public school employee for 33 years, and I have been a resident of Collier County for -- since 1980, and in Forrester, I've been there since 1994, so I've seen it grow over the time that I've been there, and changes. But one of my concerns is -- major concerns is an emergency evacuation if something was to happen on a dead end, and we have all this added traffic coming in of people who have moved in on a 4.52-acre and 27 units. We encountered -- at one time a hurricane had blown a large avocado tree which blocked the whole road. There was no access. So my concern is can we not have two accesses, one through the Roberts, which is a two-way street, not a dead end. You have access to go that way instead of a dead end where if something like that was to happen, it -- there would be no way of coming out. We really had a hard time. In fact, at the end of North 1 Ith Street, there was another large tree where it blocked the whole residence there. They couldn't even get out of their residence. That's my -- one of my main concerns. And the other main concern is there will be no property management company to enforce any proper maintenance on the little bushes that they will be putting or landscape they will be putting around those homes, which will mean that if it's not properly taken care of, everything will be outgrown. And if you've gone down on certain areas of Immokalee, people don't care about their landscaping half the time. Page 17 of 24 Page 43 of 708 April 3, 2025 And I would like to know if they are just going to be putting bushes, because my -- my understanding it's only going to be 15 feet from the houses to the area -- the easement all the way around. If there could be a 6-foot cement wall around those areas, because if they have a bush, if they don't keep maintenance on it, there's no one in control of that, it will be outgrown, and it will not be very nice. But those are my two main concerns is the emergency evacuation being it's only a dead-end street and only one way out. If something was to happen, there should -- I would think -- and I would love to have two ways out towards the Roberts and Forrester, both sides, because that is -- that is a very deep concern, only because we've seen, with hurricanes, that has happened where it does block the whole road. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Michelle? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yes. Silvia, thank you for coming today. So you live on Forrester? MS. OCANAS: Yes. I've been there since 1994. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And what address? 1218? 1212? MS. OCANAS: At the dead end, 1225. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. And -- because I just have this concern about the deviation. So when we shorten the allowable space there, does that mean that there's less -- so the sidewalk's going to be closer to the road, or how -- MR. BOSI: No, no. There's -- there's -- there is -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Four feet, I think. MR. BOSI: There is -- there's -- I think there is space between the road and -- I used to call it devil's strip. There is -- there will be a -- there's grass between where -- the road, and then there's grass and then there's a sidewalk within that 45-foot right-of-way. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. So -- yeah, there's just a shorter space to the road there. What do you think about that? I mean, I just -- I hate bringing things closer to the street. I like landscaped areas, wider, and it is on a cul-de-sac, and that's -- you know, staff is reasoning it, you know, it's a cul-de-sac, but still, there's people who live on that street. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It's a fairly common request, very common, in fact, throughout the county. It's a small street. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Small. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It's -- and I would guess that -- and I'd look to Mike Sawyer. But, Mike, I would assume that that is going to be, like, a 25-mile-an-hour street, if that. Maybe 10-mile-an-hour. So it's very common, and it's a cul-de-sac. And I understand your concern, but these type of it cul-de-sac type designs are pervasive throughout the county. We typically do not mandate that they have a secondary access. It's only -- what was it, 20 -- how many units was it again? MR. SANDORA: Twenty-seven. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Twenty-seven. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That's what I thought. So it's -- though it would be desirable, it's -- I don't have any reason, unless staff thinks otherwise in regards to access -- and I'll leave that up to staff when they discuss, but it's -- it's a typical design, cul-de-sac. Everybody in this county -- MS. OCANAS: I understand. Page 18 of 24 Page 44 of 708 April 3, 2025 CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- wants to live at the end of the cul-de-sac. MS. OCANAS: I understand. The thing is, it's a dead-end street. It's a very small road. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. MS. OCANAS: It's not even, really, a two-way road, it's so small, and to have extra -- I mean, you're -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Let me correct you on that. It is a two-way road. MS. OCANAS: Yes, yes, but it's a very small -- because there's only residents that live there. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. MS. OCANAS: And now we're going to have 27 units. You figure 27 units, two people, two cars on each unit. That's added traffic. And if there was an emergency, you should have availability to have exit on the other side, especially because the other one is a larger lighted area, and that's the area -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. I'll -- I'm going to ask staff, then, as far as -- as far as what I read in the staff report, this has been reviewed by both Fire and the Sheriffs Office, and there were no concerns raised that I'm aware of. MR. BOSI: Correct. It has been reviewed by all the agencies, and Transportation has signed off on it. And you pointed out, we don't have a requirement that projects have to have two access points. We encourage two access points, but we do not -- it's not a requirement. And the way that -- and if you think about it, there is access off to Roberts, but it's only for the three -- the way this is designed, it has -- the water management cuts off -- cuts off the ability for the traffic that comes from the north from Forrester down to Roberts to even be able to access it. So the way that this is designed, it would -- if we forced an interconnection for the entire project through to Roberts, they would have to redesign the arrangement for where the water management is. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And account for through traffic and all the other types of things that would happen, yes. MR. BOSI: Yeah. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Anything else? MS. OCANAS: No. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you. MS. OCANAS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: In regards to that -- and I'm going to ask the petitioner if they have anything to respond, but I would like the petitioner to address the issue of -- they said there was no management company, but I am going to mandate that there's going to be some kind of an HOA. MR. SANDORA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That there would be an HOA, that would be either through some kind of a management company that would be hired as the HOA consultant -- but that would be responsible for maintaining all of the common areas through an HOA dues or any other type of requirement. But I'll leave that -- if you want to address that, please. MR. SANDORA: Yeah, there has to be an HOA to maintain common areas, so yeah. Page 19 of 24 Page 45 of 708 April 3, 2025 CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So it will be through an HOA either -- it will be formed by the residents, but they'll have some kind of a management company as well to manage the HOA? I know it's a minor cost, but... MR. SANDORA: That's the typical way. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: They don't have to have it. I mean, they could do it themselves. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: They have to have a board of directors. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: They have a board of directors, yes, and comply with Florida Statutes, yes. MR. SAINVILUS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: They would be required to set up the full gamut of all the documents. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Right. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: The developer. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: The developer, correct, yeah. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: The developer, yeah. Okay. Rebuttal from the applicant? Anything that was discussed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I see none. Paul, do you have a question? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah. Actually, I was going to -- had the same comment as you on the HOA. I will point out I live in a community with 550 doors, and we only have one exit/entrance. I'm not saying it's right -- MS. OCANAS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SHEA: -- but it's around -- it's around the county. MS. OCANAS: Well, we did encounter that huge avocado tree. When it came, there was no way we could get out. Everybody just brought their saws and started -- you know, and called. But there was another one at the end of North 1 lth, and it was a private resident, and they couldn't get out. It just totally blocked out. So that is a concern. When there's redeveloping and there's an opportunity of getting two exits, I don't -- I don't see why there cannot be because of that reason, even if on those residents, they have an emergency, that would be -- I mean, they have a -- what is it? A cul-de-sac. They have to turn around to get in there. I hope there's enough access for that, too, because -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Well, thank you for your -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: They were trying to avoid a through traffic. MS. OCANAS: I'm sorry? COMMISSIONER SHEA: They were trying to avoid making that a public road and through traffic all the way. Unless it became gated, that would be the only way to stop that concern. MS. OCANAS: Yeah, yeah, and it is possible to do it that way. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Thank you. Any other -- MS. OCANAS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- public speakers? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: No other public speakers. Page 20 of 24 Page 46 of 708 April 3, 2025 Again, I offer one more time if the applicant has any rebuttal. None. Staff report, please. MR. BOSI: As noted within the staff report, staff is supporting the petition, the deviation. We think it is appropriate. It's been reviewed by all reviewing agencies. There have been no negative comments received. This was the first time we did hear about the request for the cut -through. We recognize that it could be done, but we do not have the code that says that it has to be done. So it's the applicant's discretion. And we feel that the number of units that are being proposed are relatively low in that regard. And for those reasons, staff is supporting the project as it's presented. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Mike. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: I have a question for staff. You state in your staff report that it's consistent with the future goals of the GMP. Do you believe that it's consistent with the current surroundings and current values of the community? MR. BOSI: If you look at the block that's basically Forrester, Roberts, and 1 Ith, that area is very underdeveloped. I think it is a project that's going to benefit the Immokalee community with 27 market -rate -- market -rate units that will have an uplifting effect upon property values within the area because of the new construction and the amenities that are provided for. So in that regard, I think this fulfills what the Immokalee area master plan was trying to promote within this area medium level of density within an area that is looking for -- and remember, the entire -- the Immokalee urbanized area is contained within a CRA, meaning there has been a determination of blight within this area that -- and you want to promote new development. This is the type -- and this is the type of development that fulfills the mission of the CRA and the Immokalee Area Master Plan, bringing new construction, new housing units, and an opportunity to provide for more households. And when that more -- and when they do hit that critical level -- and it's getting close -- Immokalee is going to have a -- the addition of some additional goods and services because the market will start to respond to these new developments. So these are the type of projects we really want to -- we want to support for the long-term health and the long-term diversity of housing but also other land uses within the Immokalee community. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: I have one more question for -- is this a wood -frame construction or concrete block construction. MR. GLASS: The idea was to do the lower floor in block and the upper floor in wood, but it hasn't really been determined yet, and we're not in the -- out of building yet, but it wasn't going to be all wood. That was -- that was not what we were going for. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: The reason why I like this project and that it's at market level is because -- so I'm on the Housing Alliance Board, and talking to a lot of people about Immokalee and the affordability of Immokalee -- and this is what I'm hearing is that a lot of the people in Immokalee are doing -- they're starting to own their own businesses, whether it's landscaping or what have you, and they're starting to make money at a level that would not justify them for affordable housing. And so this project at market rate as to what, then, like, teachers and firefighters Page 21 of 24 Page 47 of 708 April 3, 2025 can afford to pay out in Immokalee, I think that this is something that would be better suited for, then, that missing middle. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Well, let me close the public hearing. Are there any other public speakers? MR. SUMMERS: No, sir. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Then I'll close the public hearing and open it up for Board discussion, then. Go ahead, Michelle. Anything else? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: No, that's it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, I'll make a comment. I think it's a great project for Immokalee. As long as I've been in Collier County -- I commend the developer for moving forward with this. I think it would be a welcomed addition to Immokalee. It's market -rate housing, and I know it's -- you know, it's going to depend on what you can build it for and your breakpoint and when you can -- what you can sell it for. We're not here to debate that, but I fully understand what it is, and I think it's going to be a product that is going to be probably very successful in the Immokalee area. So with that, any other discussions from -- COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I had a couple points. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: When we say "market rate," you know, these townhouses could be up probably around 400,000 -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yep. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: -- which is probably about 35-, 3600 a month in mortgage payments. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yep. I don't know if these guys priced it out. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: That's just what the market rate out in Immokalee is right now for new construction. It's 385-, 365-, 395- on the new -construction home. You take that square footage, you divide it out of what these are going to be at, my concern is that you're going to end up having a bunch of investors and this turns into a rental situation, because I don't see -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I understand. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I've been married to a teacher for a long time; 3600's a pretty big number for a teacher to crack. So that's my only -- I think it's a phenomenal project for the area. I'm just concerned that it's not going to fit the market rate. It's going to almost kind of price itself over. And that's not our concern, I get it. I understand staff said it fits the square foot -- or the units per acre fits. All that fits. Again, my concern is that it's not going to end up what we want it or think it to be. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I have -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Michelle, go ahead. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: So to that point, from what -- in going out there and talking to, like, the teachers out there, they are not living in Immokalee. They are living in Ave Maria and with these price points. So now the way I see it is that this gives them the opportunity to stay in Immokalee instead of finding housing in Ave Maria. So there is a market for that $400,000 price range. I think. I don't know. I don't practice real estate. But this is what I'm hearing: Teachers are not living in Immokalee because they can't afford the -- or they don't qualify for affordable housing, so they go Page 22 of 24 Page 48 of 708 April 3, 2025 outside of the area. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. Well, I can't -- I don't think -- and, Chuck, I appreciate your comments, and you did state it's beyond our purview. I can't stipulate how they -- how they market it or whether an investor buys three of them and rents them. It's -- I think that's something that -- between the developer and how he can control that from happening, but that's beyond our purview. We're here to address the zoning. And I think it's a welcomed project. Is there any other comments from members of the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Do I hear a motion of any sort? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I'll make a motion to approve? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Michelle, second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It passes unanimously. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Shouldn't we be adding a stipulation to this approval regarding the retention of a management company. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: That will fall by itself. That will dictate the statute. Chapter 720 regulates that. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That's a -- COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: So that will be his -- that will be the developer and the residents at the time of turnover. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: The developer's going to have to address that in his documents, and it will be Florida Statute they'll have to comply with whether it's an HOA. COMMISSIONER COLUCCI: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: It would supersede anything we would try to levy. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. And we've already stated the deviation and, of course, the wellfield management area. With that, it passes unanimously. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Congratulations. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. With that, staff, any -- MR. BOSI: Nothing further from staff. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Nothing further. And just to note, again, the 1 May meeting has been canceled. And what else? I saw you point. Page 23 of 24 Page 49 of 708 April 3, 2025 All right. With that, I make a motion that we adjourn. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Second. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All in favor? Aye. We are adjourned. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:06 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION JOE SCHMITT, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on , as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, RPR, FPR-C, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. Page 24 of 24 Page 50 of 708 April 17, 2025, CCPC Meeting Minutes ATTACHMENTS: 04-17-2025 CCPC Meeting MInutes 5/15/2025 Item # 5.0 ID# 2025-1510 Page 51 of 708 April 17, 2025 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida April 17, 2025 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Joe Schmitt, Chairman Paul Shea, Secretary Randy Sparrazza Michael Petscher Michelle L. McLeod Chuck Schumacher, Vice Chairman Charles "Chap" Colucci Amy Lockhart, Collier County School Board Representative ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney Derek Perry, County Attorney's Office Kevin Summers, Technical Systems Operations Manager Page 1 of 42 Page 52 of 708 April 17, 2025 PROCEEDINGS MR. BOSI: Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, thank you, staff. Welcome to the April 17th, 2025, Collier County Planning Commission meeting. And I would ask that all please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Commissioner Shea, I ask that you would please take the roll. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Chairman Schmitt? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Vice Chair Schumacher? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: He's not here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Secretary Shea is here. Commissioner Sparrazza? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Colucci? (No response.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner McLeod? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Petscher? COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Ms. Lockhart? (No response.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: So we -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We have a quorum. COMMISSIONER SHEA: -- have a quorum of five, yep. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We have a quorum of five. That means none of you can go anywhere yet. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: We're all here. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Next meeting is May 7th [sic]. That has been canceled. So the next -- actual next scheduled meeting is May 21 st. COMMISSIONER SHEA: May 1 st was the next meeting, isn't it? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: No, May -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: It should have been, yeah. MR. BELLOWS: We have canceled the May 1 st meeting. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Oh, I said May 7th. May 1 st. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: And then May 15th will be our next meeting. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you. May 15th is the next meeting. MR. BELLOWS: That's, I believe, going to be a 3 o'clock meeting? MR. BOSI: Correct, starts at 3. MR. BELLOWS: On May 15th, that will be a 3 -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That's a 3 o'clock meeting because of the LDC amendments. MR. BOSI: The LDC amendments require a nighttime hearing with a 5:05 start time. We have one GMP amendment -- one LDC amendment that does not require a nighttime hearing, so those two items will be what we will be discussing from the 3:00 to 5:05, and then 5:05, we'll start the nighttime -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Are there any land -use petitions scheduled? MR. BOSI: A GMP -- large-scale Growth Management Plan amendment that's eventually going to have a PUD attached to it, but that will be at the adoption stage. This is only the transmittal. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Page 2 of 42 Page 53 of 708 April 17, 2025 Okay. Mike, did you want to, at this time, since we're talking scheduled meetings, talk about the June meeting, or was it -- correction -- July meeting? MR. BOSI: Well, yes. One of the things I wanted to see what the Planning Commission -- the first meeting in June we'll be able to have our regular scheduled meeting. The second meeting is the 19th of June. The Board of County Commissioners has a workshop in this chamber, so we are going to have to cancel the 19th meeting. The next meeting after that is the July 3rd. The July 3rd meeting is a Thursday right before the 4th of July holiday. Does the Planning Commission want to move forward with a July 3rd Planning Commission meeting based upon -- Friday will be the 4th of July, the holiday, and the holiday weekend is there. I'm not sure in terms of travel schedule. I know that a lot of times people have vacations, things like that. I'm not sure if there's going to be -- was there going to be -- our ability to get a quorum. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I have no plans -- I'll be here. What about members of the -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: I'll be here. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any concerns about rescheduling? I'm fine with it, if anybody else -- what do we look like, Mike? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I'm okay for the 3rd. But to recap, we still do have June 5th -- MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: -- at 9 a.m. and the 19th at 9 a.m. in June. MR. BOSI: 19th is canceled. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: June 19th canceled. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: The 19th is cancelled. MR. BOSI: Yes. The Board of County Commissioners will be in this room. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: You're right. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: They have budget hearings then? MR. BOSI: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So there will be -- just to recap again, the June meeting, June 5th, 19th is canceled, and we'll meet again on the 3rd. MR. BOSI: 3rd of July. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And we project one of those meetings may be the Costco hearing. MR. BOSI: One of the -- either July 3rd or July 17th, highly likely will be the Costco PDI review and recommendation from the Planning Commission. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. I didn't see any approval of minutes. Was the next item -- were there any minutes in here? I didn't see them. MR. BOSI: I don't believe there were any -- there were no minutes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Next item, Ray, do you have anything, BCC report? MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, good morning. Commissioners, on May -- or April 8th the Board of County Commissioners heard the NC Square Growth Management Plan amendment and the PUD companion rezone -- PUD rezone. That was continued to May 13th BCC. MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director. The issue was -- was the traffic on Immokalee Road and the density being sought. The -- or the Board of County Commissioners was not comfortable with the density level based upon the traffic volume on Immokalee. So they asked the applicant to evaluate what type of modifications could be made to the proposal. We're still waiting to hear what that's going to be; not sure. But the May 13th meeting will provide some more clarity as to, you know, what the applicant can go to in terms of overall density and what the Board will be comfortable with. So we'll provide an update of that to the Planning Commission at the -- at your next Planning Commission meeting. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. As far as next item then, Chairman's report, I have no comments other than what we discussed for the upcoming meetings. Page 3 of 42 Page 54 of 708 April 17, 2025 There's nothing on the consent agenda, so we'll proceed to the public hearings. And we have three items in public hearing. The first 2, A and B, are a GMP amendment and the accompanying -- or PUDZ, and that has to do with the 951 Vehicle Sites [sic] Commercial Subdistrict and the 951 Vehicle Sites [sic] CPUD. Anyone wishing to speak at this meeting, please rise to be sworn in. THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I then go to the planning commissioners. Are there any disclosures? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Staff materials only. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Staff materials, and I did have a phone conversation with Rich Yovanovich concerning this -- the two petitions. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Staff materials and also a phone conversation with Mr. Yovanovich. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Staff materials and a phone conversation with Rich Yovanovich. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Staff materials, spoke with Rich, and spoke with Mike Bosi about it. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Rich, before we start, though, I do note and I want to make sure staff -- I noted about probably two or three weeks ago that the sign was not in front of the right lot. It was fixed, so -- but it should have been sufficient for the public hearing, correct? MR. BOSI: Staff feels it's sufficient. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. All right. But I did notice this morning it's a bit skewed, so between now and the Planning Commission [sic] you want to have your contractor go out and fix the sign? It's a little easier to read, though, as you're driving down the street now because it is a little -- MR. YOVANOVICH: See, we were thinking ahead. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: You're making progress. All right, Rich. It's all yours. MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. For the record, Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the applicant. With me today is the applicant, Rod Bushnell. Margaret Emblidge is our land -use planning. Barry Jones is our civil engineer. Mr. Banks is our traffic consultant. Jeremy Sterk is our environmental consultant. And I don't think Russ -- is Russ here? Yeah, no Russ. And Russ Weyer, you have his materials in backup, is our consultant as to the needs analysis. As the Chairman said, there are two petitions in front of you today, both related to doing a motor vehicle storage facility. This petition, for those of you who were on the Planning Commission when the Lutgert motor vehicle storage facility came through the process on Airport Road, is very similar to that petition as far as the uses, et cetera. So there's a lot of similarity between the zoning and the Growth Management Plan amendment. So you've seen this type of facility before. The property is 9.3 acres. It's located on Collier Boulevard north of Championship Drive and about a mile and a half -- no, it's on -- just let me you give you the map. It's better that way. There's exactly where the property is. It's across the street from Pelican Lake Motor Coach Resort and Silver Lakes RV Resort. Both of those are higher -end RV resorts in Collier County. There are two petitions. One is a small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment because in this particular piece that we're located right now, residential -- we're in the Coastal High Hazard Area. So under the Growth Management Plan, we would come forward with three units per acre or we would do a more by doing affordable housing. As you can see from the location of this property, what we're proposing really makes sense. It's right next door to a more traditional self -storage and next to both Lee County and FPL facilities. So our request is to do the Growth Management Plan amendment and rezone it to a commercial PUD. I just highlighted some of the suitability criteria. We are on a four -lane major road. It is a low -density project, 20 p.m. peak -hour trips. We have existing utilities to service the site. And we're near, as I mentioned, other similar facilities. Page 4 of 42 Page 55 of 708 April 17, 2025 One of the -- and I know we had this conversation, is -- or I had this conversation specifically with Mr. Sparrazza, is when is this going to end? You know, why are there -- why are there so many of these types of facilities coming forward? And the reality, it's probably not ending anytime soon because there is -- there are a lot of car enthusiasts for one thing, but also with the hurricanes that we've had, people who live in certain parts of the county, their garages are below minimum flood elevation, so they're -- they can't basically get insurance because they don't have a place to put their cars during hurricane season. So there's -- there's a lot of demand for these types of facilities because they are being built at the minimum flood elevation, which assists people who need these types of facilities, but also, there are a lot of people who have car collections, and they're looking for these types of facilities. So there's -- you'll see a few more of these things, I'm sure, as they wind their way through the process. But there is, as you can see from our analysis, a significant demand for these types of facilities. And we're conveniently located, obviously, for Marco Island, which has issues with flooding during storms, and also relatively close to the unincorporated area of Collier County. I'm not going to go through the proposed text. You've all seen the proposed text. I'll highlight a couple of things. It's a maximum of 135,000 square feet of area. We're allowed -- the uses we're allowed is we're indoor storage of vehicles, RVs, four -wheelers, swamp buggies, we're also -- we can -- you can put your wine collection in there. You can put your cigar collection in there. This is basically verbatim from what we did for the Lutgert self -storage. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Rich. MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Excuse me. Can you back up. I just wondered. We were talking beforehand. What is the elevation of this? MR. YOVANOVICH: And I'll get Barry up here if I say this wrong. I believe it's seven feet is the minimum flood elevation, so we'll be at seven feet which is, I want to say, roughly above where we are today. Did I get that right? MR. JONES: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Rich, I believe I looked at the D firms, and it's an AE8 zone, I believe it is. AE zone and 8BFE. MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm happy to bring Barry up here. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah, whatever. If Barry can confirm it. I mean, there's different versions of the flood insurance rate maps. So the one I located said AE8. MR. JONES: Good morning. Barry Jones, LJA Engineering for the record. I'm a licensed professional engineer, state of Florida. The FEMA flood maps that we looked at had a FEMA elevation 6.0. So the minimum BFE would be the six plus one, would be seven. We're proposing to put the buildings at elevation nine. The reason we're elevating them up is, number one, for additional security in the event of surge beyond what FEMA may anticipate but also to be able to put the stormwater chambers underneath the site. In order to minimize the impact to the wetlands, they're going to spend the additional money to do subsurface stormwater rather than impact additional areas on the site. So that's going to require the site to come up. So the buildings are up at elevation nine actually, so they'll be well above FEMA. Even if FEMA was at eight, we'd still be at nine. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. I don't know what version I looked -- maybe I looked at the newer maps. I -- MR. JONES: Possibly, and possibly it's one that changed, and it's possibly that I got it incorrect. But we're proposing to put the buildings at elevation nine, which would still meet the requirement of eight. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And you have one foot of freeboard anyway, so... MR. JONES: It's FEMA plus one to get to the minimum BFE to get insurance, I believe. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Great. Thank you very much. MR. JONES: Thank you. Page 5 of 42 Page 56 of 708 April 17, 2025 CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: For my colleagues, I don't have the indicator here, so if you want to -- have a question, please just so indicate. Thanks. MR. YOVANOVICH: This is the -- this is the master plan. As I mentioned, the -- it's 9.3 acres in size. We're adjacent to FP&L and Lee County and a self -storage, and then it's undeveloped to our -- I hate that direction. I don't know what direction that is from Marco Island what we're on -- is that south? Okay, south. And, you know, Barry kind of hit you the highlights. I was going to bring up the height at this point, but we talked about the height of the building at that point. We're meeting all of the native preservation requirements within the code and open -space requirement that's required in the Land Development Code. Staff is recommending approval of both the small-scale GMP amendment as well as the PUD. And I can go much more detailed if you like, but I think you've all read the materials, and this is the brief overview of what we're proposing, and we're requesting your recommendation of approval. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Rich, can you go back to that again. The full opening there, is that the existing opening? Jim? You may know. MR. YOVANOVICH: Go ahead. MR. BANKS: No. There's not a full access there. And we did speak with FDOT, and I don't think we're going to have full access onto State Road 951. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. But you show it on this, but it -- MR. BANKS: It was just concept. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Concept. But it will be right -in, right -out? MR. BANKS: FDOT will have jurisdiction over what our access looks like. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And, I mean, there is an opening not far from here -- MR. BANKS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- for people coming from the south would have to do a U-turn. MR. BANKS: Yep. Just to the north of our site, there will be full access. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. All right. Thanks, Jim. Anything else? MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm just here to answer any questions. Hopefully -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: There's no deviations, no changes in use. It's pretty straightforward. MR. YOVANOVICH: Pretty straightforward. I mean, I don't want to take up a lot of time if it's not necessary. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: And the best part is no outdoor storage of any type. MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct, correct. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: So everything is concealed within the beautiful building that's going to be erected. MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. And available for rent. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I'm thinking a man cave there, that's why, so... CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And your $500,000 Mercedes or Lamborghini. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: 1.2, if you must know. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Joe, I have a question. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes, go ahead. I've got the machine now, so we're good. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Oh. You say these are rentals, not ownership? MR. YOVANOVICH: They could go either way, honestly. At this point we're contemplating renting. But if the market turns to where he wants to sell them, he could sell them. It goes either way. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. And I like the idea that you guys are going two feet above FEMA plus one because -- just to share an example, I built my house eight years ago. I did FEMA plus one. Last year they changed the flood maps, as we know. Now I'm back in the flood zone. So I think it is smart to go up as much as you can. MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And then the only other concern I had was with these kinds of Page 6 of 42 Page 57 of 708 April 17, 2025 facilities, there's always the concern for carbon monoxide poisoning. Is there going to be carbon monoxide indicators, or how does that concern -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Honestly, I don't think we -- we're going to obviously meet the building code, and that's a good comment, and we could look at that to make sure -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: -- that there's adequate protections for those who buy or rent these units. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Great. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. And that concludes your presentation. Do we have any public speakers, registered speakers? MR. SUMMERS: (Shakes head.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Anybody in the audience wishing to speak? Please submit your -- we have none. All right. Staff? MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director. Just to give an overview of what -- the Comprehensive Planning and the zoning review. Obviously, with a Growth Management Plan amendment, with the adoption of the subdistrict, the project would be in compliance with the Growth Management Plan. One of the things that we did discuss internally was, you know, this site utilization, we really -- because of our policies, we -- we want to discourage a lot -- residential development within the Coastal High Hazard Area in terms of any high density projects. We think this is a suitable alternative to residential development because of the surrounding land uses. The self -storage with the two -- or the FP&L and the LCEC substations and facilities as well as the existing self -storage, we think this provides a consistency within land use. We have reviewed the market study and agree that there is high demand for these facilities, and the ones that are available aren't available because they're occupied. So in looking at -- one of the things we also have is we've looked at the self -storage map. There is -- the one that -- the existing is the only self -storage within a two-mile radius of this area, and we know that there's a number of high -income households that would be inclined, I think, to enjoy the services of this -- of this facility at this location. So with the GMP amendment in place and the consistency within the land uses and the fact that there are no deviations being sought and that the applicant is willing to go above the FEMA plus one, for all those reasons, staff is in support of the -- of the proposal. Any questions that you may have for staff? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. Mike, this was -- what precipitated the requirement for the small-scale Comp Plan amendment? Just because of -- this was identified as a mixed -use district? And this is now not a mixed -use proposal, so it required -- MR. BOSI: It's an urban mixed -use -- urban residential mixed -use subdistrict. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. BOSI: Unless you have an allocation of an activity center or another subdistrict that allows for commercial uses or quasi -industrial uses, a commercial use or quasi -industrial use is not allowed to go unless it is authorized by the Growth Management Plan. The Growth Management Plan concentrates those within our activity centers. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Right. MR. BOSI: This is outside of an activity center, not within an individual subdistrict that would allow for nonresidential land uses. So because of that, that's why they need a small-scale amendment to allow for the nonresidential land use to move forward. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I mean, my comment, it's a no-brainer. Given the adjacent property, it was really never going to be a residential area. MR. BOSI: And that does give staff a little bit of opportunity to introduce this recognition. Our code doesn't require -- suggests that the most appropriate places for new residential land uses is within our activity centers. But staff does recognize that in specific locations, that there are justifications for the inclusion of self -storage, neighborhood commercial, other types of nonresidential land uses that is beneficial from an overall transportation and land -use pattern when you bring those uses in closer Page 7 of 42 Page 58 of 708 April 17, 2025 proximity towards where the residential units are. And so because of that, that's why we have so many site -specific small-scale amendments is because -- to provide for the Growth Management Plan allowance for a need that, through the market studies, are justified for nonresidential land uses to be serving those residential uses that are in closer proximity. And overall -- the overall approach or the justification for it is we are going to reduce the trip lengths that are associated -- with the trips that are associated with this commercial attractor because it's in closer proximity towards where the demand is coming from those residential units. So when we shorten those trip lengths, we improve our transportation system without having to increase our transportation road miles because we're being more efficient within our land -use planning. So that's why we have so many small-scale amendment that come through. It's not a criticism of our plan, but our plan tries to concentrate it upon our activity centers. That's where we want the intensity to go. But at appropriate locations, through land -use analysis and market analysis, we can make determinations that exceptions can be made for it, and it helps the overall public transportation system and the overall land -use arrangement to provide for better efficiencies. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Well, that answers my question. I have a second follow-up. In the staff report -- and I'm looking at the Comp Plan. And I'll tell you what page that's on. It's Page 8 of 1406. And -- but you have a quote in here, "Staff still has its reservations about the location of the proposed use. According to the measurements, the subject property's located less than a mile from Henderson Creek making effects from storm surge and wind damage a possibility." I note that, but we've heard from the applicant that their proposal is pretty much going to negate what they believe will be an impact to Henderson Creek. And I know that area was bizarre during the last hurricane. In fact, several of the businesses right along Henderson Creek, because of the storm surge, actually were -- received the floodwaters. But given what they're proposing -- this is for future reference or when you present this to the Board of County Commissioners -- that pretty much negates or it pretty much deals with what staffs concerns were regarding the potential flood impacts. And I have to believe that the applicant, because of the potential and certainly the liability that they may incur with the -- what I would consider the value of the home -- or values of the vehicles that will be stored there, they're going to take every measure to preclude any damage to these vehicles. So I just need to make sure that when you -- when you provide this to the Board of County Commissioners, include what they're doing, because we already discussed that they're going to AE -- they're going to be one -- at least one foot of freeboard, if not two. MR. BOSI: And, Chair, that was a comment from our Comp Planning staff. There was a concern about this being in the Coastal High Hard Area and in close proximity to Henderson Creek and the potential for storm surge, and there wasn't a direct acknowledgment that they were going to -- or three feet above the base FEMA elevation. And the other aspect that I talked with our Comp Planning team about, as you know, it's their obligation to provide the services to -- you know, to their clientele that their facility or their property is going to be safe. So not only going above what base elevation or the requirements for where they're going to set this building, but they also, because this is a commercial building, a non -livable space, if they felt appropriate, they could floodproof this building as well if they feel that -- if that was an additional concern. So that statement will not be making its way to the executive summary. But those were some of the initial concerns from Comp Planning related to the placement of these facilities. But we also do recognize that the liability is always assumed by the -- by the applicant and the applicant's team. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Any other comments from commissioners? MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I add? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Rich, do you have rebuttal? Page 8 of 42 Page 59 of 708 April 17, 2025 MR. YOVANOVICH: No, I just want to add to that comment because, honestly, that comment was a little bit of a source of frustration from our side because there are minimum flood elevations that are required in Collier County. If I were bringing a residential project and said, "I want to build it at the minimum flood elevation," I'm sure I would have gotten the same comment from Comprehensive Planning staff. The problem with that comment is if you're not going to let us build at the minimum flood elevation that the code requires, someone's going to have to buy the property, and that someone's going to be the government. The government sets the minimum flood elevation, and that should be governing how we evaluate petitions. The fact that we're going higher is an election that we're making. And we may make that same election for a residential building or any other building that goes in the Coastal High Hazard Area. So I would encourage that we kind of focus the comments, as Mike has indicated to, you know, "All right, this is what the code requires. We're going to approve it, but, you know, seller beware. Maybe you want to go higher. Maybe you want to take additional standards or not." But that shouldn't be -- it shouldn't be a criteria for whether or not we get something through the process. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And I would agree. That's why I brought it up, because it -- I just wanted to make sure, for the record, that it was clear that you're exceeding the requirements. And, of course, as a business decision, you're making that decision based on to mitigate any potential insurance impacts -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- that you may or your client may have. MR. YOVANOVICH: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So -- which is not a land -use issue. That's a business decision. MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct, correct. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. Okay. Comments? Do I -- any -- would -- I close the public hearing then and open for comments from my colleagues. Any further comments? Anybody want to propose a -- make a recommendation? Mike. as it is. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Yeah. I'll make a recommendation of approval for this project CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That's both -- COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Yes, for both, PL -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Both GMP amendment and for the PUDZ. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Correct, correct. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. And I'll second that motion. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Ave. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It passes unanimous. Thank you. ***And we'll proceed to the next project. That's PL20230016340. That's a GMPA, Sabal Palm Road Residential, and we'll wait for the cast of characters to change here, and we'll turn over to the next applicant, which again is Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Arnold for this one. MR. YOVANOVICH: Are we ready? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We are ready. MR. YOVANOVICH: As you know, this is a legislative matter and not quasi-judicial like the last one. So I don't know if you want to make any disclosures or not. You're obviously not legally Page 9 of 42 Page 60 of 708 April 17, 2025 required to make disclosures. So I'll just -- I'll go into my presentation unless I hear otherwise. This as -- this is the first in what hopefully will be a two-step process for this project. We're doing -- we're doing a Growth Management Plan amendment and a PUD rezone. The reason you're seeing the growth -- only the Growth Management Plan amendment today for consideration is because it's greater than 50 acres, and that's the process that requires us to go to the state, get state comments, come back -- we're at the transmittal hearing -- come back and then do an adoption hearing, and then there'll be -- the PUD hopefully will get transmitted, and at that hearing when we come back it will be both the Comp Plan amendment for the adoption hearing and consideration of the PUD. We are going to share with you some of the details of the PUD so you can see the results of what would happen should the Growth Management Plan amendment get approved. The team with me today is the applicant, and Jon Rubinton is the representative of the applicant, and he's here. Mr. Arnold's our planner. Mr. Trebilcock is our traffic consultant. Tim Hall is our environmental consultant, and Jeremiah DeForge -- he goes by JD -- is our civil year. I want to start out with you received a staff report, and in that staff report, there were recommendations from staff as to -- related to open space and density and some other things related to the project. Over the last -- since Saturday, Mr. Bosi and I have had some conversations, and Mr. -- he asked me, "Hey, Rich, can you talk about the density and maybe bring the density down, and can you increase the open space" from what we had, which was 55 percent, to 60 percent. And I'll get into greater details of how and what density is in the area and what can occur. And we are able to reduce the density from the 2.66 units per acre to 2.5 units per acre. That's -- I think that's a 27-unit reduction, if I remember the math correctly, and we are able to increase the open space from 55 percent to 60 percent. So I believe now with those changes -- because I'm going to modify my presentation based upon those changes. I believe that is consistent with what staff would recommend approval of, because all my exhibits have been modified to that, and I want to know if I need to un-modify them, so... MR. BOSI: And, Chair, if I could comment on that. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes, please. MR. BOSI: We did -- in our staff report, as you have read, there was conditions that we said that we would like to see what we felt was appropriate for this petition in terms of open space and density. The original submittal didn't quite get us there, and so that was the recommendation. The recommendation was for denial because -- but on Page 8 of our staff report we had said here's what we were -- we were looking for. Like everything, we're not getting everything that we had asked for, but we are -- we are comfortable with the density reduction with the increase in open space that the public benefits that are being provided for within this petition have now -- have now satisfied staff where we can support this petition. So based upon our staff report and our original position that we -- if there was modifications related to the open space and to the density, that staff could get behind and support the petition, we feel that we've arrived upon that with the applicant's modification. So what he's proposing -- what you're going to hear, the modifications on the 2.5 units per acre and the 60 percent open space, those are things that staff is now supportive of. So based upon that, staff is in recommendation of this petition. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Chair? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes, I have two. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Oh. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It shows Chuck, but it's not Chuck. Who pressed there? We've got the seats wrong. Go ahead, Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. Mike, so of the four conditions that staff was recommending, the petitioner has conceded to two but not the other two. Page 10 of 42 Page 61 of 708 April 17, 2025 MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: But despite that, you guys are recommending approval now? MR. BOSI: We're recommending approval. One of the things that is not within this application, but you'll see within the PUD, there's also a suggestion in the sending areas that if there's any development within there, there has to be a transition. They are providing for a 30-foot buffer transition, but that's in the PUD. So you won't see that until -- you won't see that until the adoption stage where the PUD is going to be actually evaluated by the Planning Commission. But the other aspect was the two amenity centers because -- one for the townhouses and one for the single-family homes. That was one of the things we were asking for, a single amenity center. But because they're able to get to 60 percent, if they can do that with two amenity centers, staff is indifferent to it. We wanted the 60 percent. And with the 60 -- with them agreeing to the 60 percent open space, how they want to arrange the land uses within that -- the 40 percent that they're going to have as non -open -space area, that's within their purview, and staff is really indifferent to that. It's really the 60 percent that we were tied to in terms of our support of the project. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: So anyway, what you see on the visualizer now is the location map of the 169.19-acre parcel. And Wayne will get into this in much greater detail as to, you know, the suitability for this site for what we're requesting. But we're approximately .4 acres -- and I'll show you a slide in a minute -- from the Urban Coastal Fringe, which is the urban area of Collier County. So that distance from basically where Winding Cypress ends, right around here is where the urban boundary ends, to our project is less than a half a mile. And you can see that this portion of Collier County, you know, is developed. And here is, up here, Rattlesnake Hammock. That's one of those activity centers that Mike discussed earlier as part of the Hacienda Lakes DRI and PUD and allows for a lot of commercial. Physicians Regional is right here, and there are several other employers in the area. So as you know, this project is going to contain -- 15 percent of the units are going to be income -restricted, for -sale product, which I believe we're the first project to come forward that's not a Habitat for Humanity related project to be income -restricted for -sale product. So we think that that is an absolute benefit to the community, furthers the county's goals to providing income -restricted housing, and we think in the right location -- and as I said, Wayne will get into that in greater detail. That's a little bit closer up of where the property is. And we'll get into this in greater detail. You see the vegetation that's on the site today. And there's not much because it's farm. We're keeping all of that vegetation, and both Wayne and Tim will get into greater detail about how we're enhancing the environmental value of this property through our particular project. As I said, we're asking both for a regular scale Growth Management Plan amendment and, ultimately, a rezone to a PUD. The property currently is zoned ag, we're currently in the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District, and we're establishing our own subdistrict to allow for this property to be developed as residential and affordable housing at 2.5 units per acre. By way of talking about the Comp Plan right now, the Urban Residential Fringe, which I mentioned to you is less than half a mile away, under the Growth Management Plan, you can get to -- you have a base density of 1.5, and you can get to 2.5 units per acre, an additional unit, by buying TDRs. And if you were to do affordable housing for sale, you can get another six units per acre. So if I'm stacking it correctly, you can get to 8.5 units per acre on property within less than a half a mile away. So I think what -- our request at 2.5 units per acre is certainly reasonable considering how close we are to the urban area and the Urban Residential Fringe Growth Management Plan designation. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Rich, you're saying you don't need the affordable housing credits to get to the density you're proposing? Page 11 of 42 Page 62 of 708 April 17, 2025 MR. YOVANOVICH: No. What I'm saying, the only -- what I'm saying is the reason -- first of all, I can't put residential here except at one unit per 40 acres. In order to justify the Growth Management Plan amendment to allow this site to be developed as a residential community, we're offering up affordable housing. If you remember, the Growth Management Plan says the only way you can get more density through the amendment of a Growth Management Plan is either through TDRs or some other public benefit. So our public benefit is not -- we're not buying TDRs. Our public benefit is to provide income -restricted for -sale product. So yes, we have to do something to increase the density to justify the Growth Management Plan amendment. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Question for Mike. In your report you said that you -- affordable housing doesn't apply to sending areas. Are we ignoring that this is a sending area? MR. BOSI: That's the purpose of the Growth Management Plan amendment. MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. MR. BOSI: The Growth Management Plan amendment that they're proposing will allow for the density that's being proposed. Currently the density is one to 40 units [sic] within the sending area. MR. YOVANOVICH: And if I may, Mike is absolutely correct. And back in -- what was it? 2002. 1 always forget when the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District was actually -- 2001. MR. BOSI: '2. MR. YOVANOVICH: '2, okay, that's what I thought. I know the moratorium was put in place when my children were born, so I know exactly when that was. I forget when we came out of it. But when these lands were designated, they were big -picture designations. They didn't get into the specifics of individual parcels. And neither were property owners really notified as to what was happening as to this process. Commissioner Schmitt is aware of that. It was -- basically the county was going through this change of the Growth Management Plan, and property owners weren't being told, unless you were paying attention -- and most people were not paying attention -- that there were changes being made. This portion of Collier County used to be designated ag at one unit per five acres. My -- my client's seller was a farmer. They weren't paying attention. So you have a piece of property that basically has been developed. There's really hardly any native vegetation on it. That's what receiving lands look like in Collier County. So this -- I think, had they made the case and come forward, they would have been designated something else as part of this process. But they weren't paying attention, to no fault of their own, and so you have a piece of property that's a farm that's been -- I'm trying not to use the word "nuked," but I can't think of another word. The vegetation is gone, and it's close to the urban area, and we believe that this particular piece of property should have its own subdistrict, no longer be sending lands, and should be allowed to be developed for this very specific purpose of a -- of a residential community that provides 15 percent of the units to be income -restricted for -sale property. This is the existing future land -use map, and you can see the green area predominantly is vegetated wetlands; however, there are portions like here and here that have been -- that make sense for development, and we're asking for that change. This is the urban area at four units per acre. This is the Urban Residential Fringe. That's 1.5 units per acre base. You can get to 2.5 units if you do TDRs. You have Hacienda Lakes, which is the big, huge community up here. It's at -- I think it's at 2.8 units per acre, and then slightly north of that the San Marino parcel was also approximately 2.8 units per acre in the Urban Residential Fringe. So I think the transition that Mike was talking about at our 2.5 -- you know, properties right along here, vacant properties, could get to 8.5 units per acre underneath the existing Growth Management Plan by doing what we're doing, income -restricted for -sale product. So the type of property we're talking about, the environmental enhancements that we're going to be making, justifies our request to no longer be designated sending lands. This is how the map will look if we're successful. You'll still have all this area designated as sending. We'll have our own subdistrict, and then the lighter green will still remain Urban Residential Page 12 of 42 Page 63 of 708 April 17, 2025 Fringe. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Paul, do you have a question? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Probably a question for Mike. More of an education question for me. Usually you get your TDRs from sending areas. So you can be in a sending area and buy TDRs and override the fact that it's a sending area? MR. BOSI: No, no. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Well, how is he -- he said he's using -- using TDRs, but they usually come from sending areas. MR. BOSI: There's no TDRs being utilized within this program. The sending areas, as you've noted, are areas that you can create TDRs from. What he is utilizing is a Growth Management Plan amendment to lift this 169 acres from the sending area, redesignate it within its own subdistrict, and allocate density to that subdistrict. That's how the density is going to provide for. And because they're providing for affordable housing, they've crossed the bar. In 2023, we adopted the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District amendments, and in that amendment, it said that if you wanted to go above the base density within the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District, you would have to utilize TDRs or, if not, you would have to have a significant public benefit, and affordable housing has been designated -- accepted as that an alternative accepted public benefit. So the GMP that they're asking for that authorizes the density associated with this project is associated with a public benefit which has been recognized by this board, affordable housing, but that's the bar that the GMP has set. If you wanted to go above the density that's allowed, you're going to have to provide for either TDRs or a public benefit, and the public benefit being affordable housing. MR. YOVANOVICH: So we're not generating any TDRs from that property to justify our -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: I thought you said we were. That's why -- MR. YOVANOVICH: I said we weren't, that we're not doing that. In the alternative, we're providing affordable housing. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Rich, the reason why you're not doing TDRs is -- because you couldn't do this project without going down that way or -- MR. YOVANOVICH: I can't do this project at all if I don't do a Growth Management Plan amendment. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. That's why you opted not to do the TDRs? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, to get the additional density, we opted to go with an affordable housing project instead of buying a bunch of TDRs and not providing affordable housing. Those were the two options under the Growth Management Plan to be able to request the Growth Management Plan amendment in the first place. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Let me clarify this, because I was on the staff at the time when we had the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District. And for my colleagues, this goes back to the -- we had a consent order, the Governor's order, and it generated, Mike, probably, Ray, what, two-year study, consultants. So, Rich, I do say even though you stated for the record people weren't notified, it was clearly advertised and was over two years of hearings and public meetings and night meetings and others. Now, people have not paid attention, but it was duly advertised and noted, so... MR. YOVANOVICH: I didn't say you didn't follow the law. What I'm saying is there was no notice provided to individual property owners other than you read the newspaper. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But that created the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District and the Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay. Now, the mixed -use district is zoned mixed use now. So -- but the requirement at that time, there were designations of sending lands, receiving lands, and neutral lands. One of the questions I asked both Rich and in my conversation with Mike, it's clearly evident that this orchard's been there well over 50 years, and why it wasn't neutral lands, it's -- I couldn't -- I couldn't answer and Mike couldn't answer. It's just -- because I can cite -- I don't want to use any names, but we did have a couple of court cases in the county where landowners objected, and they finally had to go to Page 13 of 42 Page 64 of 708 April 17, 2025 settlement agreements. Why this landowner didn't object, like Rich said, he just didn't know this was happening, and then they were gladly growing oranges, which by the way, was a great location for the Honeybells here in Collier County. So they -- the fact is it was not designated either a neutral land or receiving, but clearly it's an orchard, and under -- even under Florida law there's formerly used cropland rules and all these other types of impacts. That said, it's still designated receiving land. And as a result -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Sending. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Sending. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Or correction. It's still designated sending land. Thank you. So as a result, that required the Comp Plan amendment to identify this and redesignate it through a Comp Plan amendment. And I still question -- and I don't know if -- I mean, your client or, of course, your environmental staff may have some background on this in regards to how it was designated as sending, but the fact is, it's sending, and -- MR. YOVANOVICH: I'll give you my hypothesis. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. YOVANOVICH: When we were doing this project -- this process, we weren't looking at individual -- the county was not looking at individual parcels. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We were not, no. MR. YOVANOVICH: They were looking at large swaths of land. And I don't think there's any question that, you know, this portion of Hacienda Lakes, which is designated sending lands, this portion that's designated sending lands, and everything below it and around it is environmentally sensitive lands. The county wasn't -- they didn't go into individual parcels to say, "Whoa, wait a minute. You've got this one oddball piece." They were just looking bigger picture. They went through the process. They changed the code under the right notice. Nobody's questioning whether or not the process was legal. What we're just saying is, you know, the property owner wasn't paying attention, wasn't reading the newspaper, didn't have a lawyer who was screaming at them, "Hey, get involved in the process." And the others, they did have lawyers saying, you know, "Get involved in the process." And so we're just saying we're going through the process. We think because this is agricultural operation, it makes sense to have residences on this piece of property. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. Because in other areas of the county, especially in the Rural Lands Stewardship, it was clearly evident that farmland and orchards were either neutral or receiving. But they were more focused on habitat -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- water -- flowways and habitat areas and other types of things. Here is, of course, the proximity to the Belle Meade area and -- which I'm going to ask staff, because one of the things -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I want to get into this -- some of the questions, but go ahead, because I have two other -- I have petitioners [sic] as well. Michelle, your question. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Heidi, are you -- MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Yeah, I've been wanting to comment. For clarity, this Growth Management Plan that's proposed proposes to rewrite the rules for this property. MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: And if you feel that there are other requirements that need to get you there to approve it, then you can add it, such as requiring TDRs or other things. Mr. Yovanovich is explaining how he's getting to his density using affordable housing. But this Page 14 of 42 Page 65 of 708 April 17, 2025 is not a by -right. He's rewriting the rules and, you know, you can add conditions as you feel are needed. Thanks. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Michelle, did you have any other questions? COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Not yet. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And, Randy, I think I've got you next, even though it says Mike. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I'm Randy. Rich, if you would, with the maps that I've looked at yesterday and today, I don't quite see the boundaries of where, officially, the Picayune Strand State Forest lies and how close this property is to it. Can you help mark that? MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm going to let -- I'm going to let Tim Hall take you through that. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: If you -all could be patient -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Is it in your presentation? MR. YOVANOVICH: That question's not in my presentation, but the environmental aspects of what we're doing are all in the presentation. But we'll go in any order you guys want to go. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Let's save that, because then Tim can come up and give that presentation. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Which is fine. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Because I have more issues on that. But let's go back to just north of this property are the -- to leave that other map on there. There you go. Nope, Hacienda Lakes. MR. YOVANOVICH: Let me go a little further, please. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That Hacienda Lakes area, just properties to the north. Those are -- that's all preserve area that was placed in preserve because you did develop -- or the developer did develop Hacienda Lakes as shown here. A portion of the -- Hacienda Lakes is in the -- was that sending area there, or was that -- MR. YOVANOVICH: The way Hacienda was developed was -- is Hacienda had a significant portion in the Urban Residential Fringe. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Right. MR. YOVANOVICH: Base density of one unit per five. They also had a significant portion that was in sending lands. They stripped the TDRs from the sending lands portion of the project to bump the density up to the 2.8 units per acre. We're talking about that today. So they took all of this area -- and don't hold me to the exact location, but that's all part of Hacienda Lakes. It was all designated sending lands, and the TDRs were stripped from those lands and moved into the Urban Residential Fringe portion of the project. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But the area just north on Sabal Palm, that's all still -- that's now in preserve? MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: As part of the Hacienda Lakes DRI. MR. YOVANOVICH: So is this area right there. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: There, yes. MR. YOVANOVICH: So there's portions of this property that is adjacent to Hacienda Lakes. We're right across the street from Hacienda Lakes that is in a conservation easement. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Does that answer your question? Go ahead, Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I'm trying to figure this out in my head. So again, if Hacienda Lakes got the increased density that you want by going with the TDRs -- they didn't use TDRs? Oh, I thought you said that. MR. YOVANOVICH: They did. Hacienda, I believe, absolutely did use TDRs to get to the 2.8. They absolutely did. I did the project. I know. What we're saying -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: My question is then why are you not doing that? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, then we could do -- do you want the affordable housing project, or do you want TDRs? That's the issue is we came in and we said, "Nobody's building for -sale affordable Page 15 of 42 Page 66 of 708 April 17, 2025 housing product." So we said, "We can make it work economically if we designate 15 percent of those units, which is now 63 units instead of 68, as for -sale product." Staff asked -- "We also want TDRs" I said, "That's great." You know, I want a lot of things, too, but we can't throw additional TDRs into the mix and have an economically viable product. And staff asked for it. Mike will confirm. He said, "Hey, we want TDRs, too." And we said, "Sorry, we can't" -- you know, there's only so much we can do. And don't forget, my client's taking the risk of what are the construction costs going to be when we actually go build this project. And as we can all see, construction costs are going up. And to throw another risk factor of buying TDRs, then you'll -- you won't have a product -- project. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: So continue? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Go ahead. Continue, Rich. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. This is -- this is what we've done. This is the revised language just showing you that we're revising it to go to 423 dwelling units. We're increasing the open space to 60 percent. I would also point out that if we were receiving land and we were going to do an affordable housing project -- now keep in mind receiving lands is also in the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District -- the open -space requirement would be only 50 percent. So we're going an additional 10 percent to meet with staff s request, and we have reduced the density down to the 2.5 as requested by staff. So this is what you will see modified when we resubmit it to the County Attorney's Office to make sure we made the changes appropriately. From an environmental summary -- and Tim will get into this much -- in much greater detail -- we are going to improve the water quality by this project over what exists today. We're going to provide for water to be able to flow under Sabal Palm to continue the water -flow requirements that people wanted. We're creating wading bird forging areas as part of this project. We are increasing -- and we'll show you this on the master plan. We're increasing -- we're basically providing a flowway over a portion of the property that's today -- or where the orchard is. And you'll be getting Conservation Collier easements. And I think, importantly, because this is sending areas, it's really an environmental issue. Your Environmental staff, the bottom -- this is from your report -- is recommending approval. So your Environmental staff is supporting this proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, which I think is very important considering this was at one time designated sending lands, and our project is going to fit in with the sending lands around us. In addition, this is -- you've seen a version of this map in the past where we show the businesses that are in relative close proximity to this property. Where you see the "H," that's Physicians Regional. And there's schools and other employment opportunities within a 10-mile radius that could be served by the residents of the community as well as those who are in the income -restricted, you know, categories. And importantly, this information was in your PUD staff report, or it was provided as part of the PUD review. Cormac Giblin -- who I don't think he's here today, but who -- I'm not sure if he's a formal portion of the review process for this or not -- has recommended approval. And you can see I highlighted a couple of things from -- this is directly from him. He provided this to me. He says the need for affordable housing units is great in Collier County. As the University of Florida Shimberg Center for Housing reports, that are currently -- there are currently 51,368 cost -burdened households in Collier County with 25,687 of those spending more than 50 percent of their monthly income on housing expenses. And then down here he's saying, "Approval of this development will assist Collier County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing." So you obviously have your Environmental staff and your Housing staff recommending approval of this Growth Management Plan amendment. And finally, Transportation staff has reviewed this, has found us to be consistent with the Growth Management Plan, and is recommending approval of both the GMP and hopefully, ultimately, the PUD when it gets in front of you. Page 16 of 42 Page 67 of 708 April 17, 2025 So from a -- from a review standpoint, you have -- now you have Comprehensive Planning staff recommending approval, you have Environmental staff recommending approval, you have Housing staff recommending approval, and you have your Transportation staff all recommending approval of this proposed Growth Management Plan amendment. I'm going to turn it over to Wayne to take you through some of the details about the site so you can see how this will be implemented through the PUD process. Again, you can provide us some of that feedback if you want to for the next hearing, but really the hearing today is on the Growth Management Plan amendment. But we want to show you how this actually further fits into the surrounding lands and is consistent with those surrounding lands. If you have any more questions of me, I'm happy to answer them, or hopefully Wayne or Tim will answer some of your questions and, as always, we're available for -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I want you to just -- for the clarity, of the 450 units, 350 now will be -- what are the new numbers? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, there's going to be 423. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: 423. MR. YOVANOVICH: Those are the new units, and 63 of which will be income -restricted. When we come forward with the PUD, we will identify how those are broken up. I could tell you what we're currently thinking. We're currently thinking that we will reduce the single-family some, and we'll reduce the townhomes some. It will not -- the entire 27 acres [sic], the current thinking is they're not going to come out of the townhomes. So that's what we're -- we're thinking under the PUD. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And then -- and then you also are increasing the -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Open space. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- open space to 60 percent. MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, sir. We have a summary slide that will -- at the end that -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: -- that tells you what I just said, and I showed it to you in the revised language. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just a quick question. What's the property east -- on the east boundary currently? Is it currently ag? MR. YOVANOVICH: It's currently zoned ag, and it's sending lands. And I believe that's in a Conservation Collier easement for Hacienda Lakes. I'm not 100 percent sure on that, but it is sending lands. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: You know, there was a large swath -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Did you say the east or the west? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: To the east. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. I got it right. Somebody's coaching me in the back and said west. I don't get direction right often. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Is it in a conservation? MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't know if it's in a conservation easement or not. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But it is agricultural? MR. YOVANOVICH: It's agricultural, and it's sending lands. It's not? Is it not? Again, that's why I hedged. I'm not sure on the conservation easement. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It would be good, when this goes into the state or goes to the Board of County Commissioners, that you identify the other lands around that are in conservation or in some sort of protection. COMMISSIONER SHEA: He did, except for that one spot. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Oh, okay. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just -- he got everything but the east covered. Page 17 of 42 Page 68 of 708 April 17, 2025 MS. COOK: Jaime Cook, your director of Development Review. So the area completely on the west and to the south is in a conversation easement by Hacienda Lakes. This eastern portion, except for about from Sabal Palm to maybe about here, is -- that is zoned agriculture. Everything else south of that is part of Picayune Strand. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. MS. COOK: Good? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. You should clarify that on the map. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah, they do. COMMISSIONER SHEA: That's not what it looks like on the package. MR. BOSI: It's their map. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Pardon me? MR. BOSI: It's their map. MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't know what just happened. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I'm just looking at this map. MR. YOVANOVICH: That's not my map. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Michelle, question? MR. BOSI: That's a location map. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Rich, are you going to talk about, later, the breakdown of your affordable housing? Because -- so you're going to have 15 percent of the now 423 units. Do you -- at some point, I read that they're all going to be townhomes, but now you're saying maybe not and then -- MR. YOVANOVICH: No, that's -- I'm sorry. Let me clarify. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: We go from 68 income -restricted units to 63 income -restricted units. They're still going to be in the townhome product. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: Right now we have 110 townhomes and 340 single-family. What I'm saying is the 340's going to be reduced by a certain number, and the 110's going to be reduced by a certain number. That's the current planning. And then of the -- I'll make up a number. Let's say 95 we reduce -- we reduced the townhomes to 95. The 63 units will be out of that 95. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. And do you know these townhomes -- how many bedrooms are they? One, two, three, four? MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm sure they're twos and threes or -- they're all threes. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: They're all threes, okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: Are you ready for Wayne? (No response.) MR. ARNOLD: Good morning. I'm Wayne Arnold, a certified planner. And you've talked a lot about the big -picture planning principles, and I'm going to walk you through the PUD master plan that we've submitted that's been running concurrent through staff review, and you'll see that again probably sometime in the summer, would be our guess, officially, but I'm going to go through that with you. But just from a standpoint and why this makes sense, you know, we had that discussion, Rich and I were fortunate enough to be working for folks who had land that they had identified for future development back when this Rural Fringe was established. That corridor largely focused on the Immokalee Road corridor and some of the other parcels that were just east of Collier Boulevard. I think, as we've talked about, I just think you had some land use, less sophistication, from a citrus grower who didn't really have a direct interest in probably somebody telling them they needed to pay attention to what was happening to their land. I think that Joe mentioned that, you know, I think under any scenario, if somebody had raised their hand and said, "This doesn't make sense for this to be receiving lands. You could give us neutral or give us receiving," I think they probably would have been given some opportunity to have something -- Page 18 of 42 Page 69 of 708 April 17, 2025 you know, you've seen other examples of that. There were some call -outs for lands that were near Pine Ridge Road, for instance, just east and to the Rural Fringe. So not uncommon. It just maybe should have been done 20 years ago instead of today. But anyways, you can see we're proximate to the urban services. I think that this exhibit shows you that there's easy access to Collier Boulevard and all the other things that that brings. Rich talked to you already about the employment. And I made a list just given, you know, the radius map we had, which was 10 miles. You have three major hospitals, 15 schools, you have dozens and dozens of major employers, including shopping centers, home improvement stores, you're getting a new Home Depot that's not too far from here. You may be getting a Costco that's not too far from here, but all those employment opportunities. You've got about 18 country clubs, by my count, and you've got 15 police and fire stations that are in the vicinity. The affordable housing component really will serve those major employers in the area and help provide some necessary housing for those -- for those employees. You know, I don't think we're an isolated parcel. Yes, we may be designated sending today, but clearly, to me, misidentified in that regard. Tim will get into it in a little more detail, but citrus groves are not what they were. You know, Rich and I have had the fortune to represent the Paul family who had large citrus groves out in what's now Orange Blossom Ranch off of Oil Well Road. The citrus industry's been decimated. And I think long term, citrus is probably not the most viable use for the property, but by the same token it's operating today. They are basically an unregulated land use when it comes to water management and discharges from their site. So with urban development, you're going to get a modern water management system. You're going to get storage on site. You're going to get limited discharges off site once that water's been cleansed on site. So we think that that's certainly another benefit to the property. This is our proposed PUD master plan. We have a residential district that's designated by "R" on the master plan, and you have another area where we talked about the townhomes up on the northeast corner that we've designated with the "R-TH" just to make it clear where those townhomes are going to be located on the property. We've already talked about the fact that there's very limited vegetation. There's a little over 10 acres of vegetation on site; a lot of it's exotic. It's going to be cleaned up. But we've identified those as preserves on our site. There's one of them, and here's another one, and those two areas are the only vegetated portions of the site that are being retained and enhanced. We have two access points onto Sabal Palm Road. We have a primary access right in the middle of the site. We have another access point that will be designated to the far east corner that will serve the townhome area as well. We've got two amenity sites; one that will serve the townhomes located immediately adjacent to those townhomes, and we have another larger amenity area that will serve the balance of those single-family homes in the community. One of the large environmental features that Tim's going to talk to you about is the fact that we're going to establish a large flowway across the western and southern portions of the site which will carry the water that's coming from the Hacienda preserve areas to the north across Sabal Palm Road and south through the property and then into the other Hacienda preserves that are located to the south. The other thing that was mentioned -- and it is in our Comp Plan language now that we have inserted. After talking to Jaime Cook's Environmental staff, they asked us to provide some sort of buffer to those adjacent conservation lands. So we've established this 30-foot-wide buffer area that goes along this portion of our western boundary, along the south boundary, and up along the eastern boundary of our project. And those -- we'll provide a 30-foot buffer, and it's going to have a -- our language today says 10-foot-high wall. But I think after talking to Tim Hall and Environmental staff, I think that language will say "a minimum 10-foot-high wall," and that's to separate wildlife from our people, and that's meant so the wildlife that can utilize that area will have a safe passage, and there won't be an interaction between our people and the habitat for those animals. Page 19 of 42 Page 70 of 708 April 17, 2025 So those are two significant environmental features; the buffer preserve and then the flowway that's established through the project. Those are two very significant parts of the project. This is our list of permitted uses. It's very standard. We're asking for single-family, two-family, and townhome project. It's all for -sale, as Rich has already mentioned, and out of that carve -out for the townhomes, we'll come back to you with a specific number that -- the County Attorney's asked us to identify how many townhomes and how many single-family. I think Rich said it; we probably are -- looking at the number today, it would be about 95 with our reduced number of dwelling units from 450 to 423. This is Sabal Palm Road. This is another public benefit that we believe we're bringing. The image to the north shows you what was done for the Verona Walk project. The road was improved; Sabal Palm Road was improved. Had a sidewalk on one side of the road, and you can see where they've got their developed portion to the south is going about a half a mile to the east of this location. And you can see this is a sign that identifies that the orange grove's about a half mile ahead. This sign says that the county maintenance ends here. And so the road takes a definite change from that location to the east. And one of our commitments is to bring that road up to the same standard that's been identified above, so we'll have a sidewalk on the south side of the road as well as new improved road surface that will meet modern standards and provide water management as well. Rich already showed you this environmental summary slide, and I've talked a little bit about it. And Tim's going to come up and talk to you about that as well. And I think Tim can attest, urban development can be good for the environment. In this case, we think it does provide benefits, you know, between the on -site stormwater, the -- part of the flowway that we're doing -- and we have a deviation -- we had a deviation related to littoral plantings but we've changed that now to just a commitment as part of the PUD. There will be smaller littoral areas, and there will be better wading bird habitat with this flowway that's being established through the project. So that will provide for a more marshy environment for habitat and wading birds. And then, of course, the native vegetation, as Rich mentioned, we're going to be retaining -- we've committed to saving 90 percent of the native habitat that's there. It probably will be closer to 100 percent, but we're making that commitment at 90 percent of the native that's there. And then, of course, the -- creating the separation for our development footprint with the 30-foot buffer. And just some of the planning conclusions. The state requires us to meet certain conditions for amending a Comprehensive Plan, we in the local government, and so that's a data -and -analysis situation. And you've seen market -demand analysis for some of these. But in this particular case, affordable housing is probably one of the largest public benefits that we're providing as part of this process. So the 63 for -sale affordable units will be one of the large public benefits, and we provided the former ULI study and Collier County's own study, and then, of course, your own Housing department has evaluated that commitment and believes that this is a significant commitment to make. Tim Hall provided lots of data and analysis showing you that the site is heavily degraded today. It's going to be put back in a better condition with the urban development we're proposing. Mr. Trebilcock did a transportation analysis, and your staff agreed with it, that we don't have impacts to the surrounding roadway network and that we're enhancing it by creating this new Sabal Palm Road enhancement. We're creating a flowway. We've got habitat, water -quality improvements from our water management system, and we have support for transmittal from now your Zoning staff as well as Environmental, Housing, and Transportation. And then lastly, I would remind you just how close we are to the urban area and all the employment that is available for folks. So this is not an isolated piece of property out in the middle of nowhere. This has been an impacted site that's going to get better. So again, just a reminder of our public benefits that Rich alluded to. The for -sale income -restricted housing -- and, again, I can't think of any other project that's come forward with that commitment other than a Habitat community -- the flowway restoration; Sabal Palm improvements; preservation on site; we've increased our open space from 55 percent to 60 percent; and then, of course, Page 20 of 42 Page 71 of 708 April 17, 2025 the density reduction from 2.66 to 2.5 and reflecting that in the reduced number of dwelling units. So with that, I'm going to -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Wayne, I have a question. In regards to water/sewer, you're going to be -- will there be a whole -- a line coming from 951 all the way up Sabal Palm now, or is there a tie-in point further up the road? MR. ARNOLD: There is a tie-in point today, Mr. Schmitt. I think it's about there on Sabal Palm Road. So we'll be extending water and sewer from there. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: You're extending water/sewer? MR. ARNOLD: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Randy. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I'm up now, okay. Wayne, thank you. Probably a question for staff. If this is, in fact, the first for -sale affordable housing not associated with Habitat, will -- will these properties be required to follow the same structure for after the -- I'm assuming they're -- after the original owner sells it, he can't sell it for four X, you know, market rate or something. And there's an entire process in place, correct, for that? MR. BOSI: Correct. Mike Bosi. Unfortunately, Cormac Giblin is occupied with Leadership Collier today, so he was unable to make it, but I did speak with him yesterday. And there's a -- there is a formula that is -- that is imposed upon the property owner and the title to the deed related to it has to maintain an affordable housing for the 30-year period. Now, the owner of that property does get to enjoy the increase when -- in equity as the property appreciates, but there's a limit towards what that appreciation can be. So if they sell prior to that 30-year period, they are able to retain a portion of the equity that was created over the -- over that time, but they're only allowed to sell to another income -qualified individual that would -- that would satisfy the requirement for this still maintaining within the affordable stock. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, let me correct that. Let me correct that. The way it works is there's a 30-year commitment. It's recorded, so it comes up in every title, and that has to be released by the county to the next purchaser. Mike was right that there -- I think it's roughly -- you're allowed 5 percent appreciation per year for the -- for the purchaser. If you go to sell it to someone who is income -qualified, there's no issues with the sale. But if you sell to someone who's not income qualified, the way it works is you get that appreciation, and whatever that number is -- let's just say -- let's just say you sell it for 100,000 more than you paid for it and you've got 20 percent worth of an appreciation, that other 80 percent, or $80,000 in my example, you split the profits with the county. The county gets half, the property owner gets half. So that money goes back to the county to provide affordable housing. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And that money goes into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund? MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. So that's how the program works with the resale. If it should happen to be a resale. Our anticipation is is when people buy these units, they're going to stay in those units for a long time because the reality is even if they did decide to sell, where are they going to go? Because the housing costs everywhere else in Collier County are much higher than that, and these are going to be market rate, really nice townhomes suitable for families which is, I think, important. So there is a mechanism for someone to sell to someone that is not income -restricted, but they don't get to just keep all of the increase in property value. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: To make sure I understand this correctly, using simple numbers, if AMI right now was 100,000, 120 percent at 100,000, and in five years AMI is, we'll call it, 110,000, realistically that property can only be sold -- the new purchaser purchases that property for 110-. They can't buy it for 150- because that's outside the AMI. MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: So that current owner can only make up to the new AMI Page 21 of 42 Page 72 of 708 April 17, 2025 percent. MR. YOVANOVICH: But the difference is, unlike rental where only income -qualified people can rent that unit -- let's just say you bought the unit and you were income -qualified. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: And then you want to go sell it, and nobody comes to you who's income -qualified, and I come to you, who's not income -qualified. You could still sell it to me, but you only get a certain percentage per year of increased value. And let's use my example. Ten years from now the property went up $100,000. Under that scenario, let's just say 50,000 of that would be yours because that's the normal. The other 50,000, you don't get to keep it all. You get half of that appreciation, and the county gets the other half. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Right. The key factor there was that no one came to purchase the unit that was income -qualified. MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: If they do come income -qualified, and it's -- MR. YOVANOVICH: You still have the choice whether to sell it to them or not, because -- because you split the profits, if you will, with someone else. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: So it could turn into a sale of a property with profits going to the current owner recognizing that you have to split -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: -- the profit between owner and county. MR. YOVANOVICH: And that's the way -- that's the way -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: That's the way all of them are. MR. YOVANOVICH: The program has always been set up that way. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Okay. I know I went off on a tangent, and I apologize to everybody. I wanted to make sure that we were still following all the rules, and you also helped qualify -- or clear up any misunderstanding I had of the rules. Thank you. Appreciate it. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I have a lot of questions on this. Where do I start? MR. YOVANOVICH: Can Tim -- can Tim get up here and do the environmental first, because I don't know -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. Let me ask Wayne a question. MR. YOVANOVICH: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And then I'll get to this. Wayne, on your presentation, can you go to Page 14? MR. ARNOLD: Sure. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And you pointed out where the townhomes are. And in looking at that, I realize that there's no road into the community. Are you not going to allow the people who live in townhomes to access the community? And where would there -- the pool and recreation center be, and how do they get there? MR. ARNOLD: Yes. There's a dedicated amenity area for the townhomes right here. It's called out as "AA," amenity area. So the townhomes will be in this general vicinity. Their amenity area will be proximate to there, and there will be a separate access point here, and there will be an interconnection here that's an emergency interconnection to their cul-de-sac that's part of the balance of the community. So the amenity center for the larger single-family project will be here, and then the amenity for the townhomes is there. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And so how do those townhome people -- can they go -- how do they get to the other neighbors? MR. ARNOLD: It's designed for them to be an independent community. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: That's interesting. But aren't we trying to get away from that where when we do put affordable housing in two projects that it's intertwined so you don't feel like you're the step -- the redheaded stepchild? Page 22 of 42 Page 73 of 708 April 17, 2025 COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Yeah, that was my question, too. MR. ARNOLD: Well, keep in mind that the townhomes -- 100 percent of the townhomes are not affordable, so the townhome community is a separate, distinct part of this PUD. So that's why it's been designed to have its separate amenity and access. MR. YOVANOVICH: Which is -- which is not unusual for different projects to have multiple types of projects within the boundaries of the PUD. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I get that, but normally it's all where -- it's all interconnected. You don't, like, designate -- MR. YOVANOVICH: I have to think of some, but I know there's a handful, I think, of -- just like this where we have a single-family with its own project entrance not interconnected with a multifamily condo project that has its own separate entrance and there's not an interconnection. Obviously, you can walk to your neighbors and ride your bicycles to your neighbors, but there's not a -- there's not a driving interconnection. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: I understand what she's saying, because if all of the affordable housing is going to the townhomes, you do feel like the redheaded stepchild, or I -- in this situation because you're not able to use the other amenities of the entire community. Even though you're part of whatever this community's going to be called, you're just not allowed to use the rest of the community. MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct, but remember in my scenario -- COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: And you're even segregated with a separate gate. You're not even allowed to go through the guardhouse gate. MR. YOVANOVICH: They're separate -- they're separate projects, there's no question. And if this were all market -rate townhomes, it would be a separate project. So would they feel like redheaded stepchildren because they can't go into the single-family? Maybe; maybe not. But what's important is the townhomes themselves are not 100 percent affordable. There is a -- they're all -- they're all going to be the same fit and finishes basically, because that's what's required. And if my numbers are correct, 95 total townhomes, 63 will be the income -restricted units. So there are market -rate units intermixed in the townhomes. So we haven't totally isolated the townhomes from -- I'm sorry -- the affordable housing from other market -rate units. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Can you cite an example of where this has been done? MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure. I've done two Habitat projects that were -- I think two -- that were -- but they were rentals, and they were a market -rate rental apartment complex with an adjacent Habitat project. The two did not intermingle, and 100 percent of the affordable units were in the Habitat project. None of them in the apartments, up off of tree -- the Tree Farm PUD, which is up on Collier Boulevard and Immokalee Road. We just came in and amended that, got a deviation to state that 100 percent of the affordable units can be in this part of the project, and none of them would be in this part of the project. No sharing of amenities. And that's moving forward, and people are happy. Now, this is -- now keep in mind these are, again, market -rate townhomes of which a portion of them will be income -restricted. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Would you be willing to open up a road to allow them just to -- COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: An emergency access road? MR. YOVANOVICH: We have an emergency access. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Yeah, but paved emergency access road? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, we could talk about how it needs to be identified with the fire department; how they want that. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: What type of single-family homes are there? Are these -- are these very large 3,000-, 4,000-square-foot single-family homes, or are they regular -- MR. YOVANOVICH: There's going to be a variety. Do we know how large they're going to be? And let me -- I don't want them to tell me from the audience. Again, these are all PUD considerations when we come forward with the PUD. I know you want to talk about that at this point, but -- you know, we could talk about it now, but it's really related to the PUD. But the market's going to be the market for what the units -- the housing square footage is going to Page 23 of 42 Page 74 of 708 April 17, 2025 be. But if you -- we're probably at a break. Are we at a break right now? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We're going to take a break in a minute and a half. MR. YOVANOVICH: I could either get Tim up here to finish the environmental, and then during the break I could try to get the answers to your questions. I don't really want to do it, you know -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I think it's better we just take a break before Tim -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- because I have a lot of questions on environmental. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. Whatever you prefer. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So any other questions on this issue? And just for the record, again, these are issues that we can deal with when it comes in for the PUD, because this -- even though Wayne is showing us this as the master plan, this is not part of this submittal packet. This is for information only. We can -- we can get down to the nuts and bolts of this when it comes in. If it gets approved, and they proceed with the PUD, we would deal with this issue. COMMISSIONER SHEA: They're also not committing to that. They're just -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: They're not committing. There's no commitment to this. It is on the record. Go ahead, Mike. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Yeah. I just think it's important to talk about it now, because if it doesn't get past this, it's not going to go to the PUD. So why don't we talk about it now? Not now. We can take a break, but just -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, it has nothing to do with the submittal. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Okay. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We can talk about it. They can know your desires, but it has nothing to do with the submittal that goes to the state or to the Board of County Commissioners other than this is for information only. It's not -- it's not part of the actual application. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, typically, you have both at the same time because we're doing them both. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Correct. We -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. YOVANOVICH: And I also know the curiosity of wanting to know, if the Growth Management Plan gets amended, what's the real project going to look like? So we're sharing that information with you. That doesn't mean it can't be massaged between now and -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Right. MR. YOVANOVICH: -- we get -- we come back for the actual adoption hearing. We're asking you to transmit right now to the state so the state can weigh in and say, "Do we agree with changing this from sending land to a potential residential project?" You'll get -- it doesn't get approved today in this round. It comes back again for the adoption hearing, at which time you'll have both petitions in front of you for you to -- then, you know, twist my arm or not twist my arm on the PUD in order to get a yes on both. Does that make sense? COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I'm going to take a break now. We'll reconvene in 15 minutes at 10:45. (A brief recess was had from 10:30 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.) MR. BOSI: Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Thank you. With that, Mr. Yovanovich, do you want to proceed with the environmental discussion? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, let me -- let me try to answer -- I think there was a question about size -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. Go ahead, please. MR. YOVANOVICH: -- size of the units. The townhomes currently is -- they're looking at between 1,700 and 1,800 square feet. Three bedrooms, two and a half baths is the current, you know, Page 24 of 42 Page 75 of 708 April 17, 2025 thought process for the market. And keep in mind we never put all this in the PUDs, so I hope you're not going to say this is what we have to build. And then the single-family is going to range between 1,800 and 3,000 square feet. So we're not talking about mansions next to, you know, very small units. We're talking about very similar unit sizes. So I don't think you're going to have the redheaded -stepchild concept that -- and that's fair. I mean, you know, sometimes you can't think of a better analogy. You know, it's fine. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I know. I didn't mean to -- MR. YOVANOVICH: It's effective. I understood what you were saying, you know, but I don't think you're going to have that scenario here. And it's also not unusual -- if you go up and down -- you go up and down Vineyards, every one of those communities off of Vineyards is a gated community. So every one of those, even though it's the Vineyards community, you've got to get a code from somebody to go in to go visit your neighborhood -- your neighbor, so we -- and I think we have interconnected sidewalks so people can walk to their neighbors' and ride their bicycles to their neighbors'. They just can't drive their car. And you know what, they ought to exercise anyway. So hopefully we're doing them a favor. And I think that -- hopefully that answered the questions about the market and all that. And now Tim will come up and talk about the environment. Where are you? MR. HALL: Good morning. For the record, Tim Hall with Turrell, Hall & Associates. I can start with -- I think Jaime had already answered the question. There's a block of land right here -- I believe it's a 20-acre parcel -- that is still in private ownership. From that piece down to this corner, that block and moving to the east, is part of Picayune Strand. That's owned by the state, and then from this corner around to this side of the property is all part of the Hacienda preserve area. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Tim, can you go further south and show us -- MR. HALL: I can't on this. This is a -- this is a set -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Okay. Because I know further south you actually hit -- MR. YOVANOVICH: 41. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Winding Cypress -- yes, you hit 41. You hit Winding Cypress and Naples Reserve, and the strand picks up north of Naples Reserve, so it has to come up here somewhere. MR. HALL: It kind of wraps around. The state has bought, you know, different properties in that area, and they -- so I don't -- I mean, I don't have the exact boundary on it. When we come forward the next time, you know, if we come forward the next time, I can make sure to have that map for you so you have all of the different kind of property designations of that area around it. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Okay. Thank you. MR. HALL: And then, you know, just like we had said, the property has been in agricultural use for several decades. You know, even when I was young, we got oranges and all out there. And I grew up on Six Ls, and we used to come up the back way on Sabal Palm to get to it. So going through some of the environmental, you know, summaries that we put together -- and trying to explain how the change from the agricultural use to the residential use is going to affect the property -- most of these benefits are associated with the surrounding preserve areas, not so much with the property itself. But the enhanced water quality. Right now with agricultural uses, you get rainfall. They kick their pumps on. The water is dumped into the adjacent areas. There's really no control on that. So a lot of times where that pumping occurs, you get shifts in natural habitat to vegetation that can handle a much flashier hydro period, meaning that you get really extreme highs and really extreme lows depending on the pumping regimes and how the -- how the farms are operating their irrigation systems and their -- how high they try to keep the water table to support the crops that they're growing. So having the on -site stormwater retention and treatment is also going to result in a more controlled flow that goes back to try to mimic what that natural -- that natural sheet flow would be. When you go through the stormwater management program, they limit the amount of water that can come off of the site at certain time frames and how long it takes the systems on the property to recover, and what that Page 25 of 42 Page 76 of 708 April 17, 2025 does is it kind of mimics kind of a more natural hydro period so that water coming into the adjacent areas is more consistent with what would have been there historically versus what's there now. Additional enhancements to the hydrology, they're going to allow for some increased flow under Sabal Palm Road, which acts as a barrier to water moving from north to south, and so allowing that flow to come through and into the flowway associated with this project, again, is going to kind of try to restore some of the natural flows and hydro periods in that area that have been lost over time. One thing we are doing on site is enhancing the native habitat and the native vegetation. As the project exists today, there's about two and a half acres, 2.56, that qualifies as native habitat under the county's code. There's additional vegetation there, but it's almost -- almost predominantly or completely exotic vegetation. There's a lot of Brazilian pepper, Melaleuca, java plum, acacia. There's a ton of exotic vegetation on that site. So as part of the project, they will remove all of the exotic vegetation and restore the native habitat to those two preserve areas that were shown on the plan. And that will do a couple of things. It removes the seed source in terms of enhancements to the adjacent preserve areas. You've got the Melaleuca and Brazilian pepper and all that are producing seeds that are transported over into those adjacent preserve areas and act as a seed source and an ongoing risk to contaminating those preserve areas with more exotics. So by going in and getting rid of all of them on this property and restoring that native habitat, then you're going to remove some of that risk to the adjacent areas, really. Putting in the native plantings and then protecting the on -site areas under the conservation easements will all be part of that. With respect to the wildlife within that area, the separation of the development from the adjacent conservation areas was talked about a couple of times. And having that separation -- or increasing that separation will allow the animals to utilize the lands that they're used to using within those adjacent preserve areas, but putting in this buffer -- and I don't know that it will actually be a wall. A wall or a fence, either one, could suffice to keep the -- keep the animals from coming into the development area. In addition to that, there's going to be some requirements for the development itself. When we go through the Conservation Commission and the Fish and Wildlife Service, they're going to put conditions on the property, and some of those are going to be how the property itself is managed and reducing these attractive nuisances that can occur. Generally, they prohibit feeding of pets outside, so you don't have animal food outside. They prohibit putting your garbage cans out or -- until the day of the pickup or, in areas where they have dumpsters, putting in wildlife -proof dumpsters to keep the animals out of them. Cleaning, if they have outdoor grills, making sure the grills are cleaned and not left outside. In some cases where you get really high incidences of nuisance animals, bears, raccoons, that kind of thing, they can also prohibit bird feeders and that kind of thing. So it goes to educating the owners as they come in that they are in an area where there are wildlife -- wildlife interactions are a potential and educating them on what to do around their houses and within the property itself to minimize the chance of any adverse encounters with those wildlife. Another thing that will likely be required is that because you have these big adjacent preserve areas, fire management or fire maintenance is a big thing with them. They use fire to help maintain and manage those habitats. So people moving into these -- this community will also be given notice that at certain times, you know, somewhere -- mostly likely on a five-year schedule or something, I would guess, given the types of habitats, five to seven years, but there will be periodic controlled burns in these adjacent areas. And, you know, they'll be given notice of when those burns occur and all, but that's just something else that will go along with kind of ownership in here as an acknowledgment that -- you know, that things like that are going to be happening next door. I think that's kind of the scope and how the conversion of the agricultural to the residential use, you know, and the improvements that would come about as a result of that. And I'm happy to answer, you know, any questions if it wasn't clear or if you have anything else you want to -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Tim, I have several questions. But the first one really is -- probably it Page 26 of 42 Page 77 of 708 April 17, 2025 will not come back until the PUD. But you've already -- are there jurisdictional wetlands? And I'm assuming that this is in the panther consultation area. You're going to have to go through Section 6, consultation. MR. HALL: Section 7. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Section 7, thank you. MR. HALL: Yeah. We'll go through that. There are some wetlands on the site. The area where the flowway is going through -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. HALL: -- has some wetland habitat there that will be incorporated into that flowway. And so the way that that flowway is designed, some of the depths, how that littoral area will be incorporated into it and providing the foraging habitat and all for some of the wading birds, whether or not they consider that an enhancement or an impact. Likely they will consider it an impact, so we will have to do some wetland mitigation, and then it is in the panther consultation area, and so there will be panther mitigation that would also be required for the development as it moves forward. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: PHU, purchase of PHUs. MR. HALL: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Recognizing your expertise -- and the staff cites the Belle Meade Hydrological Enhancement Overlay as part of the Picayune Strand. What is your assessment in regards to any adverse impact on the flowway? Second to that is this is also -- just east of here was the Comprehensive Watershed Improvement Plan. I have no idea where the county is on that. Jaime may. That's been going on for almost 10 years. But, again, they cite this in the staff report. What is your assessment in regards to are there any potential impacts that this may have on both the BMHEO, as it's called, Belle Meade Enhancement -- or Hydrological Enhancement Overlay, or the Comprehensive Watershed Improvement Plan which, my recollection -- maybe you can clarify -- is to the east. I don't know how far east that is. It was part of the Picayune Strand. MR. HALL: I mean, the Picayune Strand project went all the way over to the Prairie Canal, which is, like, Jane Scenic Drive. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. HALL: Several miles to -- further to the east. That included filling in of the Miller, Fakaunion, and Prairie Canals. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: The intent of the comprehensive plan -- the watershed plan, that was the county's plan to move the water south. It was -- because of what they said was too much freshwater -- I believe, if I recall, too much freshwater. But I have no idea why staff has that in the staff report, but we don't address it. And I'm just puzzled as to -- it appears to be a reason that staff was recommending disapproval. MR. YOVANOVICH: If I recall the staff report, the comments you're referring to were comprehensive -- your Comprehensive Planner review. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. MR. YOVANOVICH: Not your Environmental staff review. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Not the environmental staff. Thank you. It's the comprehensive plan review. MR. YOVANOVICH: Those are -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But it's still the staff report. MR. YOVANOVICH: I appreciate that, but I think it was made by someone in an area, if I may, outside of their lane. The Environmental staff review found us consistent with the goals and objectives of Collier County's environmental conservation portions of their element. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. I've got Michelle and Mike, okay. This come up different on here. But Mike, go ahead, you're first. I want to -- I wanted staff to cover that as well. I'm going to ask staff specifically these questions because it's in the staff report. I just want an environmental assessment as to -- after you reviewed this. Page 27 of 42 Page 78 of 708 April 17, 2025 And I asked, again, that, for the record, from your assessment, is there any adverse impact on either the Picayune Strand or the Belle Meade Hydrological Enhancement Overlay? MR. HALL: I don't believe so. I mean, a lot of the work that's been done out in Picayune by the state and all as well has been to try to restore some of those old natural hydro periods, areas that have been overdrained because some of the canal systems -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. MR. HALL: -- or blocked -in areas because of development and so forth. So there has been a big push with all of those areas to the east and all to try to restore these natural hydro periods. And as I said, you know, a lot of what would happen as a result of this project would be to also try to help kind of restore some of the historic hydro period that may have been -- that may have been lost over time. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. But this project will not in any way -- or will there? There's -- you're going to stay -- MR. HALL: In my opinion, no. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: You're staying within your footprint. You're not going into any other of the surrounding areas? MR. HALL: That's correct. We're dealing with the water that would have historically flowed onto this site -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. MR. HALL: -- to get through this site and into the areas to the south and then dealing with the water on the site itself to make sure that it meets the state standards before it leaves the site. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: My question -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Go ahead, Mike. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: My question relates to the water flow. Are you putting culverts in throughout all of the road where you're making the road improvements to, or just in front of the community? MR. HALL: The only culverts I'm aware of -- COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: North and south. MR. HALL: -- that we're putting in are the ones right at the community that would tie into the flowway that goes through the community. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: So what about east to west? Are you -- what about the water that flows east to west? Are you -- how is it going to get around the community? MR. HALL: There are -- well, I mean, you've got -- Sabal Palm Road is there right now that acts as a dam, and the culvert's through the dam. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Correct, but north/south, east/west. MR. HALL: Well, the water -- I see what you're saying. The water in that area flows generally from north to south. The -- so the community being tight up against Sabal Palm Road, the water on the north side of Sabal Palm Road is picked up through those pipes and through the community and then will outfall through the flowway on the south side of the project. The water to the east and west of the project will still basically just flow to the south. There's not a big east/west exchange along there -- COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Okay. MR. HALL: -- except through the swale that runs along Sabal Palm Road. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Okay. Thank you. MR. HALL: Yep. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Tim, you had mentioned in your report right now that you're considering either walls or fence to separate the wildlife from the residential use, which made me think of something. And maybe this is -- it's really a PUD discussion -- or when we talk about that. Page 28 of 42 Page 79 of 708 April 17, 2025 But in Jacksonville there's a community, Deerwood Beach -- I mean Deerwood. It's a community up in Jacksonville. And there's a lot of deer. It's a large development. And they have fencing with the picks to keep the deer from entering the residence. And occasionally a deer would try to escape or enter the community, and those peaks would, like, rupture their bodies. So -- sorry to bring this up. But it's just like, if anything, I would rather see a wall versus a fence. To try to keep the habitat out we may be doing more damage to the habitat than protecting them. MR. HALL: And I think that will -- that will, as you said, come up later on when you -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Right. MR. HALL: -- get into the actual design discussions. There are pluses and minuses with both. I know what you're talking about with the picks and all on there, and, you know, my opinion is always just "go higher" so the animals can't get up, you know, to that, to that -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Deer can jump high. MR. HALL: Who knows. They can, yeah. And, you know --and alligators can climb fences, you know. So you're not ever going to be able to keep everything out. But the intent is just to put a barrier there that is going to help -- to help handle 95 percent of the potential interactions there. There are still some that may or may not occur no matter what you do. The fencing is good for a lot of reasons, airflow and all. Sometimes when you put a wall in there and you change the way that that air can move, you create these little microclimates that can cause algae or mold growth in areas where you may not, you know, want it or that could affect adjacent vegetation. You also usually have more maintenance associated with a wall. People don't like the wall looking ugly, so pressure cleaning, chemical cleaning, that kind of stuff associated with walls that you don't have with fences. Alternatively, the walls a lot of times will hold up a little bit better in smaller storm events and all. If a tree falls on a wall, it may not do as much damage as it does on a fence. So there are pluses and minuses to both. Generally, the wildlife agencies prefer fences. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And I should say -- yeah. My concern is about the animals and not harming them, so -- and a wall -- a fence is probably more attractive than a wall, but I'm just concerned about the animals. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. MR. HALL: All right. I'll turn it back over to Rich, then. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, that concludes everything we have to say about our proposed Growth Management Plan amendment. I believe we now have a -- unanimous staff recommendation of approval. And we're requesting that the Planning Commission forward this transmittal to the BCC with a recommendation of approval. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Well, before I go to public speakers -- oh, we've got Michelle again. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Oh, no. I mean, I'll talk about this after. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: I've just got more questions. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Go ahead, Mike, because I mean, I have questions, too, but I want to address some of the issues before we go to public comments because I think some of these questions will be answered. But go ahead, Mike. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: My -- just my question was about the road. You're going to improve the road all the way to where Vineyards improved it? Or not Vineyards. Verona Walk. MR. YOVANOVICH: We're going to pick it up where it -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Winding Cypress, whatever it's called today. MR. YOVANOVICH: We're going to pick it up from where the county maintenance currently ends all the way to our second project. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Are you going to extend the sidewalk all the way to your -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: So where's the closest -- this is just for the affordable housing aspect. Where's the closest bus stop, so somebody in the affordable housing could take a bike to the bus Page 29 of 42 Page 80 of 708 April 17, 2025 stop if they need? MR. YOVANOVICH: I -- is there one at Sabal Palm? Sabal Palm and 951? Yeah, Sabal Palm and 951. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Okay. I just -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. I didn't know either. I'm glad. Yes. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: That was my only question. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Chairman, I do have a -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Go ahead, please. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. With regards to this first -ever for -sale affordable housing project outside of Habitat for Humanity, I need to wrap my head around how this will work, because this is the first time we've ever done this before. I do remember -- and I went back to the transcripts of the March, I think it was 6th, meeting when we talked about the Community Housing Plan initiative LDCA, and I asked Cormac how something like this would work, because how it works for rentals I get, but for for -sale I was struggling with. And I looked at what he said, and like you said, there's two options if somebody sells. You either sell to somebody that is -- what do you call it? MR. YOVANOVICH: Income -qualified. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Income -qualified or if you sell to someone who isn't income -qualified, you share the profits. You had mentioned something about a certain percentage. That never came up when we talked about this. And so -- MR. YOVANOVICH: It is in the current regulations. I don't think it's being deleted by the proposed amendments. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: And I think it's you get a 5 percent appreciation every year. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: You said that, but I never have seen that before, and it wasn't discussed when we did this. MR. YOVANOVICH: I'd have to go back and look and see if it's in the Code of Ordinances or it's in the Land Development Code, but it's definitely in the -- it's in the affordable housing regulations in one or the other codes. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yeah. And Cormac didn't mention it when I specifically asked him about that. It wasn't in the transcripts either. But -- okay, it is what it is. But -- yes. MR. BOSI: What I would say is when the PUD is actually under review, I will ensure that Cormac will be here to be able to specifically answer those -- that specific question that you have related to the affordable housing application for the for -sale product. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. And then in understanding how this will work, like, let's talk about a hypothetical. For instance, let's say that the community is built today and the rule of thumb is housing that's affordable is that it shouldn't be more than three times your annual salary. At the current rate now, at 120 percent of AMI, this person three times the amount of income would put that housing affordability at, like, a 400,000 range. So are you saying that your townhomes of three bedrooms would be around 400,000, and that's how you're keeping it affordable? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, what I'm saying -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: How do you do this? MR. YOVANOVICH: That would be -- that would -- the answer is, that is what we'd have to sell -- if your math is right, and I have no reason to believe your math's not right, then that's what we would be -- the maximum we could charge to sell that unit to someone who's income -qualified. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. And does that matter how many bedrooms it has? I know you said three, but you may change it, but does it just -- is it per unit? MR. YOVANOVICH: This is where -- this is where I'm not going to get outside of my lane. I think we need to have -- we can talk about those specifics when Cormac's here. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. I was hoping, yeah. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And this comes back for adoption as well. So once we get comments Page 30 of 42 Page 81 of 708 April 17, 2025 from the state, it does come back to us again as a Comp Plan amendment. MR. BOSI: And I can -- Mike Bosi. I can comment that if you've got four people, you've a four -- you have a -- at 120 percent, the maximum purchase price would be 408,000. If you only have two people for a two -bedroom, then that would go down to 327,247. So there is a different income price associated with the bedrooms as well. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Where did you see that? What chart is that on? MR. BOSI: It's a chart that Cormac sent to me because he couldn't be here. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. Because I have the charts that we talked about at -- yeah, I would just like to really get a better understanding of how that works, maybe the next time. MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. But I think what's important is nobody's providing this housing for people who -- at incomes they can qualify to buy housing. And there is a table. I don't have it. It's not on the table I just put back up. But there is a table that talks about, you know, under the current regulations, you know, the maximum purchase price. Apparently Mike might have it. But there is a table. It's regulated, and we'll meet whatever those guidelines are. But I think what's important is if you look at what -- what Cormac is basically saying is right now the median condo price is $466,000. That's the median. So we're talking -- obviously, we're selling it for less than what the median is going to be. So it's -- it's a discount for people to be able to come and live in Collier County near work. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Anything else? MR. YOVANOVICH: No. I'm just responding to questions. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Mike, I have some questions concerning the staff report. Do you want to answer these, or -- James -- or probably a lot of this has to do with environmental as well. So Jaime. I'm not sure who, but the one is there's a quote here, "The purpose of the BMHEO, the Belle Meade Hydrological Enhancement Overlay, is to restore the natural flow and rebalance flowways in two natural systems." And then it goes on to cite as well the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan is the county's initiative to do exactly that. Where is the Comprehensive Watershed Plan in regards to this development? And what -- where are we with the Comprehensive Plan? Because I want to know if this -- it's cited in the staff report. I would like to know, are there any potential adverse impacts to what the county's initiative is to restore the flowway? MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director, and then I will let -- Peter Hayden from stormwater is also attending. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Peter's got the -- he's got the wand now on this one. MR. BOSI: But I wanted to show you -- give you guys a couple maps -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. BOSI: -- before we get there. On the screen, this little red area is basically where they're at. They are within the Belle Meade Hydrological Enhancement Overlay. That's why staff pointed that out to the Planning Commission, and that's to try to promote sheet flow -- sheet flow within this area. In speaking with Peter -- and he can come up and specifically provide his commentary, but he says because of the way that this sits and because of the culverts within that they're going to install on Sabal Palm and disburse the water to the south with some water quality, that it should not affect or be in dis-alignment with what the overall goal of the Hydrological Enhancement Overlay is. And there was another question just to give you in terms of the ownership within this area. And let me get this to where it's manageable. So anything that's in green is owned by the State of Florida. Anything that's in blue has had their TDRs severed. And Mr. Yovanovich was correct, the area here and area -- and the area here was where Hacienda severed TDRs, and those TDRs were extinguished for the approval of the Hacienda PUD approvals. So Page 31 of 42 Page 82 of 708 April 17, 2025 as you can see, the state owns this green property here, the property here, the blue areas have been restricted. There's limitations that developments cannot be developed because they're in the TDR program. So this really is the last area of potential development, because the rest is owned by the state as you move further to the east. And from staffs standpoint -- and I discussed it with Chairman Schmitt -- we think because they had the purview -- and when it started, the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District was 93,000 acres. It was done at a 10,000-foot level, and I think this 169 acres got included within this overall environmentally sensitive area as sending, but if they were doing a more site specific, they would have -- they would have at least made this designation probably neutral because it is an existing farm operation that has been in existence for somewhat of 60 years. But I just wanted to show you how that -- the ownership within that area. It's almost all owned by the state. This is one of the last areas of privately -held property that is obviously been almost completely cleared and has been in agricultural production for over 50 years. And the reason why we didn't mention the hydrological area was just to show that this is on the edge -- the east -- or the westernmost edge and the northernmost edge of this area. But because of the design and -- because of the design and the promotion of water quality that's going -- and also providing for a distribution of that water to the south, you know, to further enhance the overlay, we feel that it is in concert or is not incongruent with the Belle Meade Hydrological Enhancement Overlay. But I'll let Peter speak to the larger basin question, I think, that you had. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. MR. HAYDEN: Peter Hayden, stormwater manager. Good morning. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Hi. MR. HAYDEN: So this is the actual whole larger basin. And I figured I'd bring that just to kind of help, and I think this is going to work. As you can see -- and I don't know -- is there any way to get a mouse on that? All right. So you can -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Make sure you speak into the microphone there, Peter. Thank you. There you go. MR. HAYDEN: You got it, Joe. All right. So you can see here that I've kind of shown the whole Belle Meade area, and I think -- it's basically going up to the north. You can see up here there's Golden Gate Main Canal. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. MR. HAYDEN: Coming down to the south you can see Alligator Alley, which kind of severs it. Then you can ultimately see below here this whole contributing watershed area, and then, actually, this was the south area that we were studying at the time. The project here is approximately in this area here which is somewhat like Michael said, outside our boundary. We do have -- definitely do have flow through here. And the fact that they talked today about having, you know, improved culverts underneath Sabal Palm Road, that's going to help that whole area and help for, you know, keeping that flowway open. And as long as we can work that through once it comes back, you know, for the PUD, this is going to be an improvement actually, because we still have dam out there. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But the project -- you're still moving forward on this, and it's still being studied, or where are you with this now? MR. HAYDEN: No. So the restore project we had, which is we had money from -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: From the -- MR. HAYDEN: --Exxon -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Exxon. MR. HAYDEN: -- Valdez, right. So that -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. HAYDEN: -- with the Corps -- because we were actually looking to -- the Golden Gate Main Canal, we were actually going to try to take that freshwater flow and bring this south, and actually Page 32 of 42 Page 83 of 708 April 17, 2025 with the Corps and everything, it wasn't permittable. So at this point we're kind of going back to see what we can look at. But at this point, that -- at least the restore project, that's been -- that study's been done. We couldn't permit what we wanted to do, so that one -- we can't go further with that. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. So bottom line is it's cited in the report. It's information, but from your perspective, there -- it's -- this development does not adversely impact anything from -- with the standpoint of the BMHEO or the Comprehensive Watershed Improvement Plan? MR. HAYDEN: Correct. Based on the location of it, because it's essentially right on that fringe, on the outside of that fringe. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Peter, thank -- that's all I have. Let's see. Mike, just for the record -- and you and I talked about this. The other quote here, it says, "The Comprehensive Planning staff believes that the petitioner has not provided appropriate relevant data and analysis to address the statutory requirements of the Growth Management Plan." That really threw me off. I mean, if they didn't provide it, why? And why did staff bring that petition to us without the data and analysis that they thought they needed? MR. BOSI: And that was, in reflection, that the analysis was done to this -- on this 169 acres, and we felt that it was not comprehensive in terms of fully trying to understand what this project meant to the Belle Meade hydrological area. But through further conversations with our stormwater department, we have subsequently learned that their purview is this should not interrupt the Belle Meade Hydrological Overlay. So basically, the statement was -- their focus was on only 169 acres, and we were looking for what are the effects from a more -- more regional perspective or specifically related to the hydrological overlay. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Bottom line, you softened your position on that? MR. BOSI: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Next one, then. Further down the paragraph, "Suggested alternatives for the types of residential development is more consistent with the goals and policies of the overlay as well as updated environmental analysis of the surrounding properties." I mean, I read this plain language. It says, "You didn't give us what I think we want" -- MR. BOSI: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- yet it comes to us -- MR. BOSI: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- to hash this out. MR. BOSI: Well, actually, it didn't. We came to a compromise. Before it got there, we set our bar at X. They set their bar at Y. We compromised in between. What we are saying is we think -- they were at 55 percent, 55 percent open space. We said, you know, "In the urbanized area, you would have 60 percent open space. You're going less than what would be in the urbanized area." We didn't think that was appropriate. We thought 60 percent was appropriate. They were maintaining that 55 percent was all that they could provide for. We've -- they've come to 60 percent. We -- because of that, we've withdrawn that objection. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And I understand. And typically -- and I know you did this after our discussion. And you and I talked about this -- MR. BOSI: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- so this is not a surprise that I'm bringing this up. But you and I have talked about this, and in the conversations with Mr. Yovanovich as well there was a discussion in regards to compromise. My only point is it's in the staff report. Typically, we would have gotten some kind of an amended staff report to correct some of this. MR. BOSI: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And that's what bothers me, because -- MR. BOSI: Well -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- my colleagues don't have the background and understanding that I do in regards to this. And it's -- to me it's pretty inflammatory language from the standpoint saying, Page 33 of 42 Page 84 of 708 April 17, 2025 "Well, we didn't get what we want from the petitioner, and -- but we're going to send it to you -all, and you figure it out." I am really not happy with that. And the next statement says, "The proposed amendment does not satisfy the gradual change designated in the FLUE, and staff believes the current permitted allowances" -- yeah -- "insinuated above are more appropriate for the property," which they discussed again the one unit per 40 acres, which is not going to happen on this property. I mean, I've got a staff person pretty solid on what this should be, one unit per 40 acres. Unless somebody's going to go in there and buy this property and develop a ranch, which would be a beautiful place if you want to have one unit per 40 acres, or a horse farm. But again, it's in the staff report, and we're now saddled with trying to hammer through this. But go ahead. MR. BOSI: And what I would say, back to their positions that they took, the compromise in the agreement was arrived upon yesterday. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. BOSI: So the staff report is what it was. The staff report served its purpose in staffs -- in staffs regard. We found -- we came to -- we came to a compromise. They didn't get exactly what they wanted. Staff didn't get exactly what we wanted, but we think we came to an appropriate compromise. And the staff -- it took the staff report to get -- yield -- to yield at least a little bit of leverage towards where we were at when they were at this disagreement. Now, related to the transect of density -- and within the planning world, you start with your downtown -- the concept, your downtown district is your most intense uses, and you've got a transect that goes -- as you further go away from that downtown area, you trans- -- you lower or you lessen the intensity or the density associated with it. Within the urbanized area, you have four units an acre. Within the Urban Residential Fringe subdistrict, it's 2.5, but you can get a little -- you can get more. And then -- and then it goes to 1 to 40. And we thought the 2.6 was a little bit aggressive based upon that transect. Now, we do recognize that the GMP does -- does call out a special circumstance that you can go above that 2.5 if you're utilizing for -sale affordable housing, which this project is utilizing. So they have provided for the avenue that the GMP says, "This is the one avenue that you can get that you could increase beyond that 2.5 units per acre." But because that -- they were moving to an area that was 1 to 40, we thought 2.6 was just a little bit too high, and that's why we had said that the 2.5 was an area that we could compromise in terms of that transect in stepping down of density, and that's -- and that's why staff took that -- the position that it did. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And then reached an agreement with them. MR. BOSI: And then we reached an agreement. And I had to -- and, unfortunately, I had a conversation with you, and we had a meeting already pre-set up with Michelle, so I described where we were at. I knew at the time that we were going to spend a lot of time, and I apologize that I didn't, you know, write a supplemental staff report and get it to you guys, but then there's probably more questions that you're going to have in your mind. I thought that it was more appropriate that we would introduce this compromise to the Planning Commission members who I hadn't had a chance to speak to verbally so I could tell you why we were at, what the reasons, what the motivations were instead of handing you a piece of paper saying, "Staff is good with what's being proposed at X" while you had Y that was the conditions that we described within the staff report. So that's just -- and it's just a factor of almost timing then. We didn't have enough time to give you a full explanation of how we got here. I just wanted to utilize this time face-to-face to verbally -- because verbally I can communicate with you much more efficiently than I can when I -- you know, just through a narrative. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Then there's another -- "Furthermore, there is a limitation that the affordable units are regulated to townhomes which can be lackluster and inconsistent with the goals and policies of the RFMU overlay sending district." Is that an editorial question [sic]? What is lackluster? And why -- why are we dictating what the product is? I've never -- in the years I've been involved in this, I don't tell a developer what the product is. It sounds like staff is objecting to townhomes. Page 34 of 42 Page 85 of 708 April 17, 2025 MR. BOSI: And -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I mean, we've never done this before. MR. BOSI: That's unfortunate, because what the objection was was the bar is at 30 percent in -- as the staff person, I spoke with them, Parker. Thirty percent is what the Board of County Commissioners has said, "This is the mark. If you want to go above that -- if you want to get density above the GMP, you're giving us 30 percent of affordable housing." But as a clarification, there's some nuance to that. That's 30 percent for rentals. We've never really had the issue of, "All right, what about for -sale product?" What -- you know, "How should we evaluate that?" In speaking with Cormac further, Cormac said, "Fifteen percent of homeownership is a heavier lift than 30 percent for a rental product within -- within a rental property." And because of that, that's what the term "lackluster" was focused upon, not the housing type, but was upon the percentage and a misunderstanding that a 15 percent of homeownership opportunities for affordable housing is actually a more difficult lift for the developer than 30 percent over a 30-year period of time for an apartment complex. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And the follow-on sentence clarifies. It says, "Staff has requested additional commitments to affordable housing," but that was based on the fact that staff didn't take into consideration that these were -- MR. BOSI: Ownership. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- owner -- owner -occupied, which I clearly support from the standpoint -- I would prefer, frankly, for the longevity and for folks to participate in the economic benefits of homeownership, that they become owner -occupied. I just had a real problem with this term "lackluster," because -- what's that? It just lacks shining or I -- or, you know, that's a term of art, and I -- MR. BOSI: It's a term of art, and it's a term that I probably should have -- during my review I should have nixed it and just said that -- I should have just revised it and said, "It's not at the percentage that we've grown -- that we've established." But that's on us. We have to have better communication with our internal -- with our divisions, with our subject -matter experts to have a better understanding of how they view it, because Cormac signed off on it, and we needed to have a better understanding. And we've subsequently had that conversation, but we should have had that conversation before the staff report -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And to note again, Enviromxnental staff approved this. MR. BOSI: Correct. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And I've got some other commissioners. But in your closing comments -- because I want to clarify the four bullets where the Comprehensive Planning staff -- the four bullets on there, we need to clarify these four statements; the open space, the density, and the increased clustering of units in our final proposal. But with that, I've got Michelle and then Paul. Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Chair, I have two concerns that I'm struggling with. Should I address them now, or are there -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, we're going to have -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: --speakers? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We're going to have speakers, so -- and then we can get into discussion. So, Paul. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Mine's more -- a question I would ask now, and maybe it's been answered, but what happens -- I mean, most -- it's very difficult to do the home -buying affordable housing because most people don't have down payments. MR. BOSI: Right. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So I guess I'm -- what happens if they can't find any buyers? Do they all of a sudden become market rate? Page 35 of 42 Page 86 of 708 April 17, 2025 MR. YOVANOVICH: No. They stay vacant until we find a buyer. COMMISSIONER SHEA: They stay vacant until you find -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Till they find a buyer. There are down payment assistance programs and other mechanisms to help people -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: But the key is that if we can't find a buyer, we have to keep working at it. MR. YOVANOVICH: They never become market rate. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Thank you. MR. YOVANOVICH: I think that is -- yeah. MR. BOSI: And just from discussion with Cormac and discussion with individuals that are tied into the real estate market and -- staff is not concerned that there's not going to be an audience -- a line of folks that will be interested and qualified to be eligible for these -- for these units. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Do you have any other questions before we go to public speakers? Then I'll ask staff to close with comments. So do we have any public speakers? MR. SUMMERS: No. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: No speakers. Anybody in the audience wishing to speak? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Well, we have no speakers. So with that, staff, do you want to give your presentation? And I would -- I'd ask that you address the points we are increasing the open space to 60 percent. MR. BOSI: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: The density is being reduced to 2.5. MR. BOSI: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I know staff says recommending to 1.5, but it's going to be 2.5. MR. BOSI: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Increase the clustering of units. Was that -- what was that? MR. BOSI: That's been addressed. Like I said, the clustering of units have been addressed with them meeting the 60 percent open space, and that's what clustering is. Clustering is to provide less of an -- less of an -- as you know, less of an impact upon the overall project development area. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And the last point that was on the staff report is singular development with one -- within an amenity center. But we're going to have two amenity centers. That's already been agreed upon. MR. BOSI: And once again, and we said because they were able to get to the 60 percent, how they -- how they allocate their project within that 60 percent, staff -- staff is -- has signed off on. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And I appreciate the fact that we wanted to move this forward. I'm not busting your chops in regards we didn't get a supplemental. I just would have liked a little more clarity from the standpoint of how -- the language that was used in the staff report and if there was clarity. But I know there was -- there was a lot of disagreement between the applicant and the staff in regards to what's presented. But the outcome is -- we've got a solution, and we've got a final recommendation. So do we have any other comments from the Board? Go ahead, Michelle. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I have questions. Okay. So I'm struggling with how can we approve something like this if we really don't have an understanding of how this affordable housing component is going to be played? For instance, Cormac -- as you noted, Cormac showed that the average condo right now is selling for 400-and-some-thousand. That's exactly how much you would be required to do the -- so these -- these units are the average. They're not affordable. And we don't know, is it per unit -- that's why I was hoping that Cormac would be here so I could ask all these questions. It just -- and then -- and then this point about 30 percent, the requirement to allow for increased density, but then we're saying, well, not really because on for -sale units, 15 percent is good Page 36 of 42 Page 87 of 708 April 17, 2025 enough. MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I take a shot first, and then you can -- first of all, what we're asking for at the 15 percent is under your existing density bonus matrix -- your existing. Not the one that you just considered to modify -- would allow for a density bonus of three units per acre. So what we're asking for is consistent with your existing density bonus matrix because we're providing owner -occupied. So the 15 percent is what your matrix says. I'm not asking for more than what the matrix would say. So that's my response to how -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: -- how you get to that number. And we've said that early on, we're using your matrix, and we're the first one out of the chute trying to do a for -sale product. Cormac's number was the median is 466-. That's what that number in his report was, 466-. And if you can get me back to my report, or my PowerPoint, I can show you, because I cut and pasted exactly what he sent. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. So then we're off by 50,000. MR. YOVANOVICH: $58,000. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: If your numbers are right, at the 408-, okay. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: In my eyes that's almost market rate. MR. YOVANOVICH: You know, but you're not the one moving in. That 58- may as well be a million dollars to someone who's only making 120 percent of the median income. And it's a brand-new place, fully amenitized. And so, you know, 58,000 -- I remember my first house, you know, what I qualified for. And I don't know if I've told this story before. They came back. I'm at the closing table. And they amortized my mortgage on 15 years versus 30. And I go, "Keep my deposit. I can't afford that extra thousand dollars a month." And then they realized the error. So that may as well be a million -dollar spread for someone who is making 120 percent of the median income. It may be close to market rate, but it isn't market rate. It's less than market rate. And again, that's the average. So that means you're talking about units that are older units that are being sold that are factoring in to bringing that average down to 466-. I'll bet you dollars to donuts the median income for brand-new product is higher than 466-. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I just get concerned, too, that we're really not filling the need of who really needs affordable housing. And I think, Mike, you shared that statistic with me that over 50 percent of those living in our community -- what was that stat? MR. BOSI: Over -- or over 54 percent of the jobs created in this market pay $45,000 a year. I mean, it just -- COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Right, so -- MR. BOSI: The jobs that are created within this market do not align with the housing costs. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: So this doesn't really address that. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, it addresses the other people. It addresses a whole lot of other people that make 120 percent and below the median income. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: But in my eyes, it's almost -- it is at market rate. But thank you for pointing out that in the current chart, 15 percent of affordable housing for for -sale gives you that increase in density. MR. YOVANOVICH: And I -- and I'm going to try to take your counsel when you and I talked about privately. Nobody's doing market rate -- I'm sorry -- doing for -sale affordable housing product other than a very qualified wonderful not -for -profit that is addressing the people in the category you're talking about. Nobody else is doing it. We're meeting the goals and objectives and following the process that's in your Land Development Code to address this. And it's a little disheartening, frustrating to be sitting here and having someone who I respect tremendously who I know is involved in affordable housing, and others, saying, "Well, it's not good enough." Page 37 of 42 Page 88 of 708 April 17, 2025 COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yeah, I would -- to be honest, I would like to see it more at, like, 100 percent of AMI -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. YOVANOVICH: And at some point -- at some point you've got to say -- and that's fine. If that's the message that's sent to the client, we'll probably -- to use an analogy -- we'll probably pack up our toys and go home because, you know, we just -- we just can't shoulder that burden unless you're going to get rid of impact fees or do something else to help bring the impact -- bring the price of houses down to where it's economically viable. It can't be just the development community. We're playing by the rules. We are playing by the matrix, and we're being told there's a shortfall. We're trying to chip away at it. And if we don't chip away at it, then we're not going to -- you're not going to see any other projects come forward. This is the first test case. You know, what's the message that's going to be sent to us? MR. BOSI: And Mike Bosi, again. And just to give you a little bit of, I guess, comfort or at least recognize that right now the PUD is not being reviewed. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Right. MR. BOSI: It's just -- it's a courtesy review so you can understand. The next -- when we come back at adoption, that's when the PUD would be reviewed and the specifics, and you can get into a little bit more in terms relating to the 15 percent and the 30 percent and the commitment at 120. But what you're being asked to do is transmit the GMP with the density that's associated with this project with a commitment for affordable housing. You're going to be able to review that, what would be transmitted to the state, but then the questions about the PUD will -- that's when the -- that's when you'll have this opportunity, again, to bring these up. So I think you providing these comments to the applicant at least gives them an understanding of some of the things that they have to address as this process moves forward, but the actual application of reviewing the PUD formally begins with the adoption hearings which would happen sometime this fall after this comes back from the State of Florida and goes through -- it goes through their review process again. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. And I appreciate that, which brings me, then, to my second concern, which is how can we be putting a development on sending lands? However, through this conversation and all this information, clearly this land is more -- has the elements of being a receiving land because it's flat. There's no vegetation. There's no elements that define sending lands. So I've worked through that. And I know, Paul, you were also questioning, how can we put a development on sending lands? But I think I've worked through it because it looks -- it acts like a receiving land. But then I'm thinking, well, if we give this up, should we then -- just like how sending and receiving lands work, you give to take. Do we then give somewhere else? Am I the only one that's -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: No, but we'll talk about it later. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. Okay. All right. So that's where I stand with that. MR. YOVANOVICH: And just so you know, way back when, there was a process within, I think -- within a year, I think it was, of the adoption of the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District, property owners could come in with site specific and say you mis-designated me, but again, that would require someone to be really paying attention to the rules. So I feel fairly confident that had that happened within a year, we came and showed you this piece of land, I think the County Commission would have said, "No, no, no, sending land is not the right designation for this particular piece of property." And I think you've -- I think you've gotten there based upon -- you know, and I think a lot of it has to do with the design and how we are taking care of -- it's no longer up here -- this Belle Meade Hydrological Enhancement Overlay. We are actually helping it with our project. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: With that, staff, any other comments? MR. BOSI: No. I mean, I -- I appreciate the discussion. I think there was -- I mean, all of the questions were very pointed, and I understand some of the concerns. Page 38 of 42 Page 89 of 708 April 17, 2025 It's taken a while for staff to completely wrap its hands around this, but we do think that there are public benefits that are going to be provided for. There's safeguards that have been provided for from how the project's going to treat the water, displace the water to the further state and protected areas. And we do recognize that this is a unique commodity of for -sale affordable housing that doesn't come along very often other than a Habitat project. So for all those reasons, we're supportive. But apologize for the disconnect between what's in the staff report and where our position was coming in, but sometimes it happens that way. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Based on the recommended changes, you are making -- you're recommending approval? MR. BOSI: Correct. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. With that, we have no public -- no public commaits, so I'll close the public hearing. Commssioners, any comments? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Paul. COMMISSIONER SHEA: This is a very complicated one for me because I'm an environmental engineer, and I'm on the Affordable Housing Commssion. There's a lot of testimony out there -- I think years and years ago somebody decided that this was an area that needed to be in this category. I understand the argument that it wasn't well enough defined, but I feel like we're -- we keep nibbling away by getting these one-off projects. And to me, the environmental side of this you haven't convinced me. And I think the commssioners established where the boundaries were. They established what the land is. This is not compatible with everything around it. There's nothing around it that's compatible with this. I'm not going to support it only because I think the commissioners need to make that change; otherwise, we as planning commssioners are going to keep nibbling away at a decision that they made that this should be sending areas and should be environmentally protected. And it -- I'd feel a little better probably if all the land around it wasn't in conservation as well. It just -- it doesn't feel good to me, although I will say I'm very surprised that there aren't -- usually we would get tons of environmental groups in here, and that -- I don't know if that means that they -- that they feel it's okay or not. But I'm not going to support it. I think the commssioners should make that decision. They established the ground rules. I'd rather they make it than me. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Any other commalts from anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, I'll close. Clearly, in my estimation -- and I understand what Paul's saying. This was designated sending lands, but clearly it's disturbed lands. It was farmlands. It's been farmlands for over 50 years, and if you look at anywhere else in the Rural Lands Stewardship or, more specifically, even out in the -- or the Rural Lands Stewardship out in the Eastern Collier County, almost any areas that were farmlands were designated either neutral or receiving, predominantly receiving. The areas to be protected were the natural boundaries around many of the farms, whether they were croplands, tomato field, orchards -- oranges groves or whatever they were out there. All those areas that were primarily farmed were pretty much designated receiving. I believe that this is disturbed land. It's clearly been that way for years. I am willing to vote and recommend approval, send this to the state. I'd like to see what the state says when they review this. I believe from the standpoint, the discussions I had with Mike Bosi in regards to staffs position, environmental staff has approved this, the housing staff has approved this. There was some discussion with the Comprehensive Plan. I'll leave that between Mike and James Sabo. They can discuss how this thing will move forward, but we have it. I'm willing to recommend approval, but I would like to see if there is any other comments from my other colleagues. Page 39 of 42 Page 90 of 708 April 17, 2025 COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Sure. I'll make one to actually piggyback on Paul. If there is a statement that can be put together about asking or suggesting that the BCC clarify this topic that you were discussing about -- I'll use your words -- "nibbling away at this," where if there isn't a clear definition, this will continue. And if that's what they want, fine, but maybe it should be brought up on a separate topic to the BCC for "what truly are your boundaries in a case like this that we should be following?" CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, to answer your question, when you nibble away, I mean, there's nothing left. This is it. And to answer Paul's question, yeah, this goes to the Board of County Commissioners. Their final vote will establish the policy. They're looking to us to make a recommendation. And I look at this as this is the -- this is what was defined with one other developer, the old hole in the doughnut that was used many years ago. I don't want to bring up the case. I know it very well. But from the standpoint, there's nothing else left out there. What Tim pulled up, Tim Hall pulled up -- put up as far as, and I think even Jaime, there's nothing left out here. This is all going to be preserved except for this one area. But yeah, I don't know, maybe someday we'll face somebody else coming in here arguing that I want to convert from sending to receiving. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Other than the 20 acres that's just to the -- or estimated 20 acres just -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, that's ag land, but it's -- clearly that's sending land, and clearly that is not -- it's not farmland. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Okay. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I mean, that is not farmland. This is -- and then under Florida Statute, there are very clear procedures for formerly used croplands and converting to residential and otherwise. In the federal permitting process, formerly used croplands, it's identified as in most -- a lot of cases exempt even from the 404 permitting process. So I mean, I'm willing to see what the state -- the state is the one that imposed the restrictions on us back in'99. That was the final order -- the final order which created the requirement to stop the one unit per 40 acres, one unit per five acres that we were developing the eastern lands in. That was the -- kind of the straw that broke the camel's back was the one unit per five acres in the -- and some of the developments going out east. But we complied. We developed these rules. I think when we -- go back. When we did develop some of these rules, we knew there would be these anomalies. And we've done this before in the eastern lands. There have been areas that we've identified that we may have missed, but they were tweaks. Especially when we looked at the townships that came in, there were areas -- and all those have now gone through. In fact, some of them were litigated. Are you still going through litigation on some of those, Rich? MR. YOVANOVICH: No. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: They're all -- they're all pretty much resolved? MR. YOVANOVICH: I think what you're -- I think you're predominantly working -- talking about the Hussey settlement? CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah, the Hussey settlement. MR. YOVANOVICH: I was partly involved in that, but -- and that's a perfect example of tweaking that occurred. There were lands that were previously sending lands that became receiving lands because of this process. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah, I didn't want to bring up the case, but now that you have, yes, it was the Hussey property. MR. YOVANOVICH: It's not unprecedented. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It's not unprecedented. MR. YOVANOVICH: And the Board -- you know, candidly, I think the Board wants your opinion. They don't want you to punt. They want you to say, "Does this make sense or not sense?" Page 40 of 42 Page 91 of 708 April 17, 2025 They'll let -- they'll let you know if we're, quote -- and I agree, we're not nibbling away, because it's not going to all go away. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Nothing left. MR. YOVANOVICH: It can't go away. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And, Tim -- I'm going to ask Tim; just to open the public hearing a minute. Tim, in regards to this orchard, is there any perimeter -- was there a perimeter for irrigation? Were these lands irrigated, and was there any type of perimeter irrigation ditch for the years that they farmed? MR. HALL: Yeah, it's completely isolated. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It's completely isolated. MR. HALL: There's a perimeter berm -- there's a perimeter berm and a perimeter ditch around it. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So all the years they farmed or irrigated, it still never impacted the surrounding lands. MR. HALL: The pumping out of -- CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Out. MR. HALL: -- the field into, but it never took water in from the surrounding lands because the berm isolated it. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. All right. Thanks. Close the public hearing again. Yeah, go ahead. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: I just think that -- I think this land's been disturbed so many times with copper, sulfate, herbicide, pesticide that it shouldn't be in the sending lands. It should be designated receiving lands. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. And by our Comp Plan amendment, we're essentially doing that. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Correct. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That's what we're doing. We're recognizing that -- to use the case that was before us when this first went through is the Hussey property, and it was the same, which was not that far from here, if I recall. Just north. MR. BOSI: Just north. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. It's to the north, yeah. MR. YOVANOVICH: The blue area right there. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Anybody else? Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Well, I -- with that, I'm going to propose -- I recommend approval of the -- since I brought up all the discussion, I'll recommend approval. Let me get the number. Let me go back, sorry. And this is the PL20230016340, that's the GMPA, Sabal Palm Road Residential Subdistrict. I recommend approval. Do I -- is there a second? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I'll second. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All in favor, say aye. Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All opposed? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: 4-1, it passes. With that, thank you. And any other closing comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We will see you next -- Page 41 of 42 Page 92 of 708 April 17, 2025 MR. BOSI: 15th of May at 3 o'clock. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: At 3 o'clock. And you will be sending us all the good information? MR. BOSI: I will -- absolutely. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you very much. MR. BOSI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I make a motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: Second. CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All -- anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We adjourn. Thank you. I didn't even hear the opposition. We're done. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:55 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION JOE SCHMITT, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on , as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, RPR, FPR-C, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. Page 42 of 42 Page 93 of 708 5/15/2025 Item # 9.A ID# 2025-1387 PL20220002063 — Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay (GMPA) — Northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road - Resolutions of the Board of County Commissioners proposing amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Map Series to create the Greenway—Fritchey Residential Overlay (GMPA) on property within the Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District -Receiving Lands to allow up to 1,299 single family and multifamily units with affordable housing; and, the Conservation and Coastal Management Element amending Policy 6.1.7 to reduce the littoral shelf requirements for certain property within the Greenway—Fritchey Residential Overlay; furthermore directing transmittal of these amendments to the Florida Department of Commerce. The subject property is 227.09f acres and is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Transmittal Hearing) [Coordinator: Michele R. Mosca, AICP, Planner III, GMCDD, Zoning Division] ATTACHMENTS: CCPC Staff Report Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay Greenway-Fritchey DRAFT RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) Resolution FLUE Greenway-Fritchey GMPA - 040225 corrected Resolution CCME Greenway-Fritchey GMPA- 040225 Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA Transmittal Documents Page 94 of 708 i &I Collier County STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: MAY 15, 2025 SUBJECT: PL20220002063 LARGE-SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (GMPA): GREENWAY-FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) COMPANION TO: PUD-PL20220002061; GREENWAY FRITCHEY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT — TO BE PRESENTED AT THE GMPA ADOPTION HEARINGS ELEMENTS: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT & CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT EX01 IIO"L111"KII NA Agents: Robert Mulhere, FAICP Jeremie Chastain, AICP Bowman 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34110 Owners: Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, FL 33912 Rich Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich, Koester, PA 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. 11145 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34113 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The 227.09-acre subject property is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, approximately a half mile north of Tamiami Trail East (US 41), in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Refer to the location map and aerial map on page 2.) GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 Page 95 of 708 ELL I Sabal Palm RD PROJECT QQ LOCATION C T W Fritchey RD 1T,4 I ��` McToo �n SITE e� peoovavesv O� sso00 Location N1ap Zoning Map - - - N tITE SUBJECT mm y . y (Fj{ GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 2 April 21, 2025 Page 96 of 708 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant proposes a large-scale Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to create a new overlay, the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay. The applicant also proposes amending the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and creating a new map ("Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay") in the FLUM series of the FLUE to identify the newly created Overlay. Also, the petition proposes to amend Policy 6.1.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to reduce the littoral shelf requirements. The proposed overlay text and map are attached as Exhibit "A." PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: To redesignate the property from the Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving Lands to Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District — Receiving Lands, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay to allow a maximum of 1,299 residential units with 20 percent of the units reserved for affordable housing to individuals earning at or below 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI), which yields a maximum of 260 for -sale residential units. A companion petition (PL20220002061) will rezone the property from Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district to allow the proposed residential uses. Note: The companion PUD rezone will be presented to the CCPC at the time of the GMPA's adoption. The draft PUD document is included in the GMPA back-up materials for informational purposes. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Subject Property: The 227.09-acre site is designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District —Receiving Lands and is located within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), all as identified on the FLUM. The subject property is zoned A, Rural Agricultural, and includes a Provisional Use for aquaculture (PU-87-6C, Reso. #87-177). A portion is undeveloped, and a portion is in agricultural operations. Surrounding Lands: North — Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving Lands, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Agricultural operations. East — Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving Lands, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Agricultural operations. (across Laredo Street, a local road) South — Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving Lands, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Single-family residential and agricultural operations, including an approved Provisional Use for earth mining and related processing (PU-79-11C, Reso. #79-124). (across Fritchey Road, a local road) West — Future Land Use Designation: Urban, Urban Mixed -Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Agricultural operations, single-family residential, and mobile homes. Further to the west- northwest (500') are lands designated Urban Mixed -Use District, zoned Regal Acres PUD (approved for 5.0 DU/A), and developed with attached single-family dwellings (across Greenway Road, a local road). GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 Page 97 of 708 In summary, the surrounding area's existing land uses include a mix of single-family residential, mobile homes, and agricultural operations. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: As noted above, the FLUM designation on this property is Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving Lands located within the Coastal High Hazard Area. The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) within the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) was established in 2002 by Ordinance 02-32 to address agricultural lands within the transitional area between Golden Gate Estates and the County's urban area and between the urban area and the agricultural lands and agricultural operations farther to the east. The land use strategies developed and employed in the RFMUD direct incompatible land uses away from environmentally sensitive lands. The Sending Lands are those lands within the RFMUD with the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitats for listed species. The Receiving Lands are those identified as the most appropriate for development and to which residential units may be received from areas designated as Sending Lands. The Coastal High Hazzard Area (CHHA) is the geographical area lying below the elevation of the Category 1 storm surge line per the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council's Hurricane Evacuation Study; increased density and expenditure of public infrastructure is discouraged in this area. On February 10, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) directed staff to initiate the RFMUD restudy. The restudy focused on areas that included complementary land uses, economic vitality, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship, all through a public outreach effort. The RFMUD restudy public outreach and staff assessment resulted in the RFMUD White Paper. The White Paper provided the framework for the restudy effort conducted by staff and served to further inform the Collier County Planning Commission and the public about those efforts. The RFMUD White Paper recommended GMP amendments to improve the RFMUD and Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program by further protecting the environment, conserving agricultural lands, addressing development characteristics, and establishing new development standards. In June 2023, the Board adopted restudy -based amendments to the RFMUD. Relevant to this petition, the RFMUD Receiving Lands now allows the development of affordable housing projects at a maximum density of up to 12.2 dwelling units per acre, subject to clustering provisions and Land Development Code (LDC) Section 2.06.00 for affordable housing. The FLUE states that implementing Land Development Code (LDC) regulations, such as design standards, development standards, and locational criteria, are to be established for affordable housing development within the RFMUD. The above -referenced LDC regulations are being drafted and will be presented to the CCPC and Board later this year. Additionally, an LDC amendment to implement the GMP affordable housing initiatives, adopted by the Board in November 2023, includes modifications to the affordable housing density bonus table in LDC Section 2.06.03. The changes to the table generally increase density for projects providing affordable units in the Low (>50 - <80% of Area Median Income (AMI)) and Very -low (<50% of AMI) income categories. The CCPC heard the LDC amendment on March 6, 2025, and voted to forward the amendment to the Board with a recommendation of approval; the LDC amendment will be presented to the Board on June 10, 2025. The proposed GMPA allows a maximum of 1,299 dwelling units, including an affordable housing commitment of 20% (260 for -sale units) to households earning up to and including 80% of the County's AMI. The proposed GMPA does not conform with the existing affordable housing income ranges, density, and requirement to integrate affordable housing units with market -rate units in accordance with LDC Section 2.06.00. However, the proposed affordable housing density and income ranges are GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 Page 98 of 708 PL20220002063 consistent with past Board approvals and the proposed modifications to the affordable housing density bonus table in LDC Section 2.06.03. The project's proposed development and design standards are generally consistent with past Board approvals. Some projects were approved with clustering standards, and others were approved with deviations from those standards. (Note: The companion petition (PL20220002061) to rezone the property from Rural Agricultural to the Greenway Fritchey Planned Unit Development (PUD) establishes the development and design standards for the project.) The table below identifies that the proposed project will provide more affordable units via the GMP amendment than the existing affordable housing density bonus table in LDC section 2.06.03 and more affordable units than the proposed affordable housing table via the pending LDCA. However, the GMPA does not provide for integrating affordable housing units with the market rate units in conformance with the RFMUD and LDC. Additionally, the companion rezone petition seeks deviations from the clustering provisions in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Zoning Overlay (RFMUO) within LDC section 2.03.08 for the minimum lot area, interior lot width, and the minimum side and rear yards — for single-family development and the minimum requirements for front, rear, and side yards for multi -family development. The applicant has indicated that the Habitat for Humanity development model and building plans are replicated for various projects throughout the community to reduce overall project costs and provide units that are affordable in the income ranges that are needed most in Collier County. As noted in the table below, the applicants receive a bonus of 994 market -rate dwelling units for providing 260 affordable units. The market rate units will be developed separately from the affordable housing units, without shared amenities or access points or a guarantee of shared bike or pedestrian access points (refer to the draft RPUD Master Plan). Base GMPA Density Affordable Affordable Market Rate Density (227.09 acres) Bonus Housing Housing Dwelling (per existing Requested Income Dwelling Units GMP) Project Level Units (Bonus units Density = 5.72 (% of AMI) (% of units to generated by DU/A achieve providing density bonus affordable 1,299 Total of 5.52 DU/A) housing units) Units 0.2 DU/A Proposed 5.52 DU/A < 80% 260 DUs 994 DUs (45 dwelling GMPA (20% of all units) DUs Existing LDC 5.52 DU/A < 80% 249 DUs 1,005 DUs N/A Sec. (19.86% of 2.06.00/2.06.03 bonus DUs) Proposed N/A LDCA 5.52 DU/A < 80% 125 DUs 1,129 DUs Sec. (10% of bonus 2.06.00/2.06.03 DUs Generally, when requesting a GMP Amendment that increases residential density, the FLUE requires the use of Transfer of Development Rights Credits to achieve that density, except when providing a "reasonably sufficient public benefit" as determined by the Board. For recent approvals, the Board has determined providing affordable housing provides such public benefit. As noted earlier, this petition includes a commitment to provide 260 affordable housing units. GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 Page 99 of 708 PL20220002063 Further, the petition proposes increasing residential density within the CHHA. Policy 12.1.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (COME) of the GMP requires mitigation to reduce the impacts of evacuation times resulting from projects within the CHHA. The owner has committed to providing a towable generator at the time of the first certificate of occupancy and a second towable generator at the time of the 250t1i certificate of occupancy to be used at hurricane evacuation shelter sites to address the required mitigation. Compatibility: FLUE Policy 5.6 requires new land uses to be compatible with and complementary to surrounding land uses. To review the appropriateness of the requested uses and intensity on the subject site, a compatibility analysis might include a review of allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, and the amount and type of open space and location. The area surrounding the proposed overlay consists of active agricultural operations and residential uses west and south of the project site, as identified in the Existing Conditions section of this report. The proposed project is within a transitional area (RFMUD — Receiving Lands), proximate to the County's urban boundary and services (Greenway Road is the boundary between the Urban Mixed -Use District and the RFMUD). The Board has approved several projects with similar densities in the past year proximate to the proposed GMPA location — refer to the table below. Project Location Density Affordable Housing Proposed RFMUD - Receiving Lands 5.72 DU/A For -sale: 20% of units at < 80% of GMPA '/2 mile north of US 41 AMI Elanto of Naples RFMUD - Receiving Lands 6 DU/A Rental:10% of units at < 50% of RPUD 3/4 mile east of Greenway Rd. AMI Tamiami 50-Acre RFMUD - Receiving Lands 8 DU/A Rental: 15% of units at < 80% of MPUD 1/3 mile east of Greenway Rd. AMI and 15% at < 100% of AMI For -sale: 15% of units at 120% of AMI Tamiami Trail Urban -Residential Mixed- 12.29 DU/A Rental: 15% of units at < 80% of Greenway Rd. Use District AMI and 15% of units at < 100% of MPUD 450' west of Greenway Rd. AMI Compatibility can be specifically addressed within the companion zoning petition. Still, staff finds the requested uses will be compatible with the surrounding area (at the level at which GMP amendments are reviewed for compatibility) and that this is an appropriate location to provide for residential development. Project Justification: The applicant prepared a justification statement for the proposed residential project (refer to Exhibit V.D.1. in the GMPA materials). Staff notes the following from the information provided: • The County's total population in 2024 was 404,735 people and is expected to increase by 3 percent between the years 2023 and 2028 (Source: Collier County Economic Development Office). • The University of Florida's Shimberg Center estimated in the year 2022 that approximately 22,883 owner -occupied households making 80% and below the County's Area Median Income (AMI) were cost -burdened (housing costs >30% of household income). Further, by 2050, the number of cost -burdened households earning < 80% of the AMI is projected to increase to 54,848 households. • The 2017 Urban Land Institute Study identified a "housing affordability problem" and, if not addressed, "will become a crisis." Additionally, the County's 2025 Consolidated Housing Plan GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 Page 100 of 708 I, y�li►�►�IZIIIZ►�IZ:I13 identifies an insufficient supply of affordable housing units at the low or very low-income levels and a need for affordable rental and owned housing near job centers. • The proposed development is approximately 3.5 miles from the Activity Center at the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and Collier Boulevard. The Center is mostly built -out and provides a variety of commercial uses. Transportation Impacts: A Transportation Impact Statement (TIS), dated July 5, 2024, prepared by Trebilcock Planning and Engineering, was submitted as part of this petition. Transportation Planning staff reviewed the petition for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan using the previous 2023 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the current 2024 AUIR. Staff found the TIS to be sufficient; however, a Developer Commitment Agreement (DCA) is needed to address the project's transportation related impacts. Transportation Planning Staff does not object to the transmittal of the GMPA and will continue to work with the applicant to finalize the DCA prior to the adoption hearings. Environmental Impacts: The proposed GMP amendment has no effect on the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) requirements regarding protecting native vegetation preservation on -site. Native vegetation on -site will be retained per the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.2 and LDC section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Listed species will be protected by permit and/or letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, per CCME Policy 7.1.2 and LDC section 3.04.01. Littoral Shelf Planting Area: The applicant has proposed a reduction from the littoral planting criteria in CCME Policy 6.1.7, which requires wet detention ponds within the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District to have a littoral shelf with an area equal to 30% of the ponds surface area, measured at the control elevation, and planted with native aquatic vegetation. The applicant is requesting the total littoral planting shelf area be reduced to 10% of the wet detention ponds area. The littoral area shall be planted in one or more larger aggregated littoral planting areas. Additionally, two rows of native grasses will be planted around the perimeter of the proposed lakes, which will aid in improving water quality by slowing runoff and trapping sediment. Environmental Services staff supports reducing the amount of littoral planting to allow for consolidated littoral areas. The consolidated littoral areas will enhance wading bird/waterfowl habitats and foraging areas. These areas will be designed to re-create wetland function, maximize habitat value, and minimize maintenance efforts. The consolidation of the littoral planting area will enhance the survivability of the littoral area plant species, as there is a lower survivability rate in littoral planting areas when installed in multiple lakes. The concentration of the littoral plantings will meet the intent of the GMP requirement, which is to enhance water quality and provide habitat for a variety of aquatic species and birds. Public Facilities Impacts: The project lies within the regional potable water service area and the South Collier Water Reclamation Facility wastewater service area of the Collier County Water -Sewer District (CCWSD). Water and wastewater services are available via existing infrastructure within the adjacent right-of-way, and sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available. Any improvements to the CCWSD's water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utility acceptance. GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 Page 101 of 708 PL20220002063 Affordable Housing: There is a need for affordable housing units in Collier County. The University of Florida Shimberg Center for Housing reports that there are currently 51,368 cost -burdened households in the County, with 25,687 of those spending more than 50% of their monthly income on housing expenses. The current median home sales price in the County is $650,000 (Single -Family Homes- $790,000, Condos- $500,000). Prices in Naples have increased 75% from pre-COVID prices. 77% of sales are cash deals. Source: NABOR Market Report, Feb 2025 The Shimberg Center also reports that the average observed rent for apartments in the County has risen sharply, doubling over the past ten years to $3,234 (2024). For reference, the 2025 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Income Limits are: 2025 Collier County Income Limits for Affordable Housing Income Unit by Number of People in Unit 2025 Percentage area Median Income Category Name 1 2 4 Collier 30% Extremely Low $ 23,880 $ 27,270 $ 34,080 County 50% very Low $ 39,800 $ 45,450 $ 56,800 Median 60% n;a $ 47,760 $ 54,540 $ 68,160 Household 80% Low $ 63,680 $ 72,720 $ 90,880 Income 100% median $ 79,600 $ 90,900 $ 113,600 $113,600 120% moderate $ 95,S20 $ 109,080 $ 136,320 140% Gap $ 111,440 $ 127,260 $ 159,040 Source: HUD 2025 Median Income; Florida Housing Finance Corp. Income and Rent Limits A Restrictive Covenant will be recorded on the affordable for -sale units, requiring them to be initially and subsequently sold to qualifying households for a period of 30 years from the Certificate of Occupancy of each unit. Approval of this development will assist the County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing. CRITERIA FOR GMP AMENDMENTS FLORIDA STATUTES: Data and analysis requirements for comprehensive plans and plan amendments are noted in Chapter 163, F.S., specifically as listed below verbatim. 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 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 Page 102 of 708 PL20220002063 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. 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. 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., Florida Statutes: 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community's economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. Section 163.3177(6)(a)8., Florida Statutes: (a) A future land use plan element designating proposed future general distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land for residential uses, commercial uses, industry, agriculture, recreation, conservation, education, public facilities, and other categories of the public and private uses of land. The approximate acreage and the general range of density or intensity of use shall be provided for the gross land area included in each existing land use category. The element shall establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and activities are ultimately directed. GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 Page 103 of 708 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. The petitioner must provide appropriate and relevant data and analysis to address the statutory requirements for a Plan Amendment. For this petition, the applicant provided a justification statement and public facilities analysis. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) NOTES: A NIM was held on December 5, 2022, at Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Preserve, 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL 34113. The meeting began at approximately 5:40 p.m. and adjourned at approximately 6:34 p.m. Several members of the public were present at the meeting, most residing in Naples Reserve Golf Club. The applicant's agent, Robert Mulhere, FAICP, explained the request for the proposed rezone and companion large-scale Growth Management Plan amendment. Attendees asked about the impacts on wildlife, environmental permitting, density, type of affordable housing units — rental or owner -occupied, farmland impacts, road impacts, the potential for a traffic light at Greenway Road, impacts on property values, the price points for market -rate homes, etc. The applicant's team responded to all questions. The Administrative Code requires a second NIM to be held when a petition has not been scheduled for public hearings within a year of the initial NIM. Over a year has elapsed since the first NIM was held in 2022. As a result, the petitioner conducted a second NIM on April 14, 2025, at Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Preserve, 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL 34113. The meeting began at approximately 5:30 p.m. and adjourned at approximately 5:45 p.m. One resident of Greenway Road was present at the meeting. The applicant's agent, Jeremie Chastain, AICP, explained the request for the proposed large- scale Growth Management Plan amendment and rezone. The attendee asked questions about sidewalks on Greenway Road, the proposed request for an eight -foot -tall wall, landscaping, and the project's access on Greenway Road in relation to its alignment with the attendee's driveway. The applicant's team responded to all questions. The NIM documentation is included in the CCPC backup materials. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: This petition proposes a large-scale Growth Management Plan amendment to create a residential overlay within the Agricultural/Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving Lands to allow 1,299 residential units, including 260 affordable housing units. The proposed project density is generally consistent with the RFMUD restudy -based amendments, as directed by the Board, except that the project does not conform with the RFMUO clustering provisions and the requirement to integrate the affordable housing units with market -rate units, as provided in the LDC. • The project's affordable housing component will be a for -sale product and include up to 260 residential units, or a total of 20% of all residential units, restricted to households earning up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income. Approval of this development will assist Collier County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing. Additionally, the affordable GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 10 Page 104 of 708 9y�li►�►�IZIIIZ►�IZ:I13 housing commitment may be deemed a "public benefit" as required by the FLUE when increasing density in the RFMUD and not utilizing TDR Credits to obtain that increase. • To mitigate the proposed increase in residential density within the CHHA, the owner has committed to providing two towable generators for use at hurricane evacuation shelters. • This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as it does not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. • A Developer Commitment Agreement (DCA) is needed to address the project's transportation related impacts; the DCA will be provided to the CCPC and Board of County Commissioners at adoption hearings. • There are no public utility -related concerns as a result of this petition. • There are no concerns about impacts on other public infrastructure. • There are no historical or archaeological sites affected by this amendment. LEGAL REVIEW: The County Attorney's office reviewed the staff report on April 21, 2025. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Collier County Planning Commission forward petition PL20220002063 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required review agencies. NOTE: This petition has been tentatively scheduled for the June 24, 2025, Board of County Commissioner meeting. GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay April 21, 2025 Page 105 of 708 EXHIBIT A GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD PERMITTED USES 1. MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS A. The maximum number of dwelling units shall be one thousand two hundred ninety- nine (1,299) (5.72 dwelling units per acre). 2. RESIDENTIAL/TRACT RI No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: `i 'i A. Principal Uses: 1. Single-family detacr 2. Single-family attach 3. Two-family and single-family zero lot line dwellings; 4. Townhouses; 5 Multi -family dwelling units; 6. A recreational building or clubhouse, with typical accessory recreational facilities shall be permitted which serves the residents and heir guests. any other principal use, which is comparable in nature with the bregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board ,f Zoning Appeals (BZA) or the Hearing Examiner (HEX), as applicable, by the process outlined in the Land Development Code LDC). es: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal residential uses permitted in this RPUD, including recreational facilities, such as a clubhouse, gazebos, and swimming pools, for residents and guests; Page 1 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 106 of 708 2. Neighborhood recreation areas for residents and their guests: swimming pools; parks, which may include seating areas, benches, and shade structures. 3. Model homes, sales centers, and temporary uses are permitted in accordance with LDC Section 5.04.00, Temporary uses and structures. 4. Entry gates and gatehouses. 5. Stormwater management treatment facilities, conveyance facilities and structures, such as berms, swales, and outfall structures. 6. Temporary construction and administrative offices for the developer and developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas, and related uses, subject to the procedures for a temporary use permit provided in LDC Section 5.04.01. A4C _N 3. RESIDENTIAL/TRACT R2 No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: Ak Singllmily detache w llings; _.._2. Single-family attached dwellings; 3. Two-family and single-family zero lot line dwellings; EJ 5. *lti-family dwelling units; �A recreational building or clubhouse, with typical accessory recreational facilities shall be permitted which serves the residents and their guests. 7. Any other principal use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or the Hearing Examiner (HEX), as applicable, by the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). Page 2 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 107 of 708 B. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal residential uses permitted in this RPUD, including recreational facilities, such as a clubhouse, gazebos, and swimming pools, for residents and guests; 2. Neighborhood recreation areas for residents and their guests: swimming pools; parks, which may include seating areas, benches, and shade structures. 3. Model homes, sales centers, an orary uses are permitted in accordance with LDC Sectio 5.04. emporary uses and structures. 4. Entry gates and gatehouses. 5. Stormwater management treatment facilities, conveyance facilities and structures, such as berms, swales, and outfall structures. 6. Temporary construction and administrative offices for the developer and developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas, and related uses, subject to the procedures for a temporary use permit provided in LDC Section 5.04.01. 4. PRESERVE/TRACT P 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: A. Principal Uses: 1. Prkervation of native habitat. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Passive recreational uses; 2. Stormwater management structures and facilities; 3. Pervious and impervious pathways and boardwalks, consistent with the LDC; 4. Benches for seating; and Page 3 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 108 of 708 Conservation -related and recreational activities as allowed by the LDC. Page 4 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 109 of 708 EXHIBIT B GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD The table below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Greenway Fritchey RPUD. 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 Site Development Plan or Subdivision Plat. PERIMETER RPUD SETBACK: The perimeter RPUD setback shall be, at a minimum, equal to the required width of perimeter landscape buffers, but no less than 10 feet. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE TRACT R1 & R2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE- FAMILY DETACHED TOWNHOME TWO-FAMILY & SINGLE- FAMILY ZERO LOT LINE MULTI -FAMILY DWELLINGS 1W CLUBHOUSE/ RECREATION BUILDINGS Principal Structures MIN. LOT AREA 1,680 S.F. 1 AC MAX. 1,100 S.F. PER UNIT 1,680 S.F. PER UNIT 1 Ac. N/A MIN. LOT WIDTH 28 ft. 18 ft. 27 ft. 150 ft. N/A MIN. FLOOR AREA 1,000 S.F. 1,000 S.F. 1,000 S.F. 550 S.F./DU N/A MIN. SETBACK FROM GREENWAY RD. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. MIN. SETBACK FROM FRITCHEY RD. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. MIN. FRONT YARD 20 ft.' 20 ft.' 20 ft.' 20 ft. 20 ft. MIN. SIDE YARD 5 ft.2 0 ft. or 5 ft.' 0 ft. or 5 ft. 2 10 ft.6 5 ft. MIN. REAR YARD 10 ft.3 5 ft. from edge of pavement3 5 ft. from edge of pavement3 10 ft. 15 ft. MIN. LAKE SETBACK4° 5 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. MIN. PRESERVE SETBACK 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft.6 10 ft. MAX. HEIGHT ZONED 35 ft. NTE 2 STORIES 35 ft. NTE 2 STORIES 35 ft. NTE 2 STORIES 60 ft. NTE 4 STORIES 35 ft. NTE 2 STORIES MAX. HEIGHT ACTUAL 42 ft. 42 ft. 42 ft. 62 ft. 47 ft. Accesso Structures MIN. SETBACK FROM GREENWAY RD. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. MIN. SETBACK FROM vs FRITCHEY RD. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. MIN. FRONT YARD SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS MIN. SIDE YARD SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS MIN. REAR YARD 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. MIN. LAKE SETBACK SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS MIN. PRESERVE SETBACK 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. MAX. HEIGHT ZONED SPS SPS SPS 25 ft. 25 ft. MAX. HEIGHT ACTUAL SPS SPS SPS 32 ft. 32 ft. SPS = same as principal structures; NTE = not to exceed; S.F. = square feet; BH = building height; N/A = not applicable Page 5 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 110 of 708 Footnotes - I 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 secondary front yard setback. 2 5 ft. minimum side setbacks for single-family attached, two-family and single-family zero lot line must be accompanied by another 5' minimum side setback on adjoining lot to achieve minimum 10 ft. separation. 3 Garages may be accessed from the rear of the property and will be required to provide a minimum 2-foot setback to the alley access easement. 4 Measured to the lake maintenance easement. 5 0' principal and accessory setbacks are permitted from the lake maintenance easements and landscape buffer easements, which will be separate platted tracts on the PPL or separately labeled easements on the SDP. There shall be no setback restrictions to the installation of fencing to create private yards between principal structures. 14 The minimum side yard and distance between st of 15 ft. for buildings three stories in height; and for buildings four or more stories in height. .N shall be increased to a minimum to a minimum of 20 ft. Page 6 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 111 of 708 xaoP'(duMS )J8zQ-M)(9ZOZ-LI-0 (190Z000ZZOZ-'Id) luaum30Q an" Iagolu3 At'—Qain\(SZOZ-LI-£) -U 3uaS - Isunugnsa'd PE 1Sod\ZQRd\dA'£\9£OZZOZ\ZZOZ\ZdN- VIVQY*RY\ H-IdVN-'I3\:0 £Z Jo L a&ed Z W o s NN�w CL Z LU a Q W a W 11' v� W �Z w - W a Q o , c - zoo z CL � a vi a w O W_Wy g Qom~ z W I'' w Lu r T a Z W wQ z coa �a ag o a co V s u UrrW u- WOr - �m w= o IUO 1 _� 0 Z o w 0 a EQ� Lu 3w w LLLL N� U - ~ � � Z O IL >- � � x of CL Q wco z a z W o Ir LU Jill oa C� J s W WIM i i, o gp8 1, Igo VJ Z O W R IY �y Y 00 - '� �RR 3tt IY. >��� �#'[�[h as rE stSt5P b� MOP e5 wi h~ B � � Nil pP 5z GG [3[g{{g� � �e �y @2 jil •, Ygg�W �� �i#��• 'k5 �� _4 �� yx 2� =�h�.yy3.«A6 .�A.epYE€€Zy{ Vim" j qc$ y 0 O N O (6 d xaoP•(duMS )J8zQ-M)(9ZOZ-LI-0 (190ZOOOZZOZ-'Id) luaum30Q Qn" Iagolu3 At'—Q-D\(SZOZ-LI-£) HILL 3uaS - Isunugnsad Pi£ 1Sod\ZQRd\dA'£\9£OZZOZ\ZZOZ\ZdN- VIVQY*RY\ H-IdVN-'Id\:0 £z io g aft,(l NV'Id'dalSVN3 ; 3 3,LI81HX3 • • l',cuedwlo� uewrneg e f'' N �`I'7 QNV'I uua raa S:i 1 vgod F" ARHO.L1bdAVMNAFIH!) "" 9'�5 a w Ufla'd AEIHDd.Hld- AVANNildd N w_ O a. _ Q W ma wr 4 WwaZ �� omw000Nw 35f1 ONb'1 oa.c�m¢v�iry mo��°c�' ��0 wo � �' a In m a �V?Jf11�f101a0t+ CL CI :JNINOZ O �+ Ja`b }Lo} [� g ---® -�-- �z am � W w F- iOZ ¢1 �-'wd' �W ¢ v= zDn zD �J'�z I I _ ram a o zmom a I I a�o� o= Z V I f I = (o 5 `L w"K N C) $ ��� W N� U4 �4 CD II Q ¢ E owl �m� � IIC�� w W p w r \/ -- ILA Vmaw ]m OJ W N 0 .\ II w_ ULL mew aw� o, UO JO U)gm Ll �' E wa= P- w J 't w M Iy N W rh m awJ�po warz oiD ,bLCtpo � UmNl�fl �I�w.wrn�lI I I NqII(` zg-0- �a- Qm�WJ ¢uwi w. E Ivool I w J I I w I a Jr v� 9 CD ~olzna a w I�� �I I W ' 10 z¢o z wzw�aa ----� 1 0- N�Ynrz am 5 wn��Ha� m H Q U3J ¢1Y E � owowa w _ w w � Q�a m m w sr I r C)mvim zo ZHm3- Qww<7 � w�Vu a���� s g o� waQL aO a� a°wmaz IL v • e x �a. > owaUsw I w pN N z¢ � �t� - � ® I� o�o� ❑ F OL�YI+] 4 0 J O Z ® a ¢ H = 4 / LE z O I� !r m rr O V1 H v7 U Q m H U m X II U w F- a oc` �rn WTm¢ m} ¢ W i. d Q W 0¢ N ¢ X p a_m 2 Li U a N��w�0 W �F- ULziJ W OQ 0 c0 mo a c7 W w. w m w 6� JJ N • _ > 004U m~~ 0 0 4 O D m o a o w T m J I O H H ~ Z W H w W W a'¢ < WZ _ ¢ L� Z U Z I I w z U m U U w w O"CD O ON O Qw� HBO UU I I Ij f ®ate -¢j U w W fS w N 0 Uw>D� I I I I UCH w ❑pQ 0rw a..i (1. CL } w 4 G < p = I U I I I I JZ [ 00 I W � O F II II II 11 II II II r` �� m w Il it 11 z o m Q !J cn J 0n N I d W W Y 6 I I I p j } I I I I ¢ m w w j w w w < I x� mo a� z m wQ m� °0¢ dz U 1 w W W W mZ Q (71 Z �,�j o Z 0 w d m a O _ - J w o d z n¢ w o l w a w QVOfl AVdlISS3E`0- --- �- --- - o--- --------------- n d o I` m o g J �yI1N341S32J JllWtl� oa o <= I a < < c~i ¢ J v� ��JNIS 3Sf1 ONt/1 �`I z 11 # ® o �0z �v+jnrnoiJOb' gC° a � a :MINOZ 0 V 00 0 O (M O a� (6 xaoP'(duMS )J8zQ-M)(9Z0Z-LI-0 (190Z000ZZOZ-'Id) luaum30Q Qn" Iagolu3 At'mua-D\(SZOZ-LI-£) -U 3uaS - Iuunugnsa'd Pi£ 1SOd\ZQRd\dA'£\9£OZZOZ\ZZOZ\ZdN-d,LVQY*RY\ H-IdVN-'I3\:0 £Z JO 6 a&ed SNOIIVIA3Q n�edwo� ae e— ID I I `QNV I l� A9H�,LIYId AyA1Nfld2I',J .«c � � s �� � � o F "a 0d �2 UD d O 2 U�..O O 3z¢ °3�pF300�¢ ¢ w a�z > cG WQ�wW wa' endow WQq H� >?ja cf)�V� Q[qd O'�'�Uj� ud� W _j d o-'Aw C> cK°" zd a aU a x Q fy� d a w O w GG [W a F=Odw L'i O lw z GAF z¢¢w�-' Ww0¢ w� W>, v, >O � v�7dW zz nWzyQx O o O W C U y O } O W U v w WW w" a Op [>iz O�¢ �iO wzc�dci s A¢Q o q¢ ¢ �mw 05a�qH am���z w¢o I "I W wen > W wGo > wed F FAY wz F"F > vdFd owo vrrww�-zwWF a 7NOn, N O�•q � 7=-O(�Odp 0 a .iW .aQ� We ad v . u d vN w a0 U N w wFw o �c40 d�wOW d� W W W F - �o OpQ mna > ro �Qwowx zN33 z�z�q zo� �z FOF 0 Wa O�v d°¢°fin QOQo� aoaQ�go e y U`Wn L`; yF'nw,�,w 5-F Ww A�]GW QWa Q�Q�F� u ow wiz Fzga C4 L, v w Uqqm US w zR q� �jwA zW9C4 �� [=ww ' QWO Q O� Owd NOQ Cm00� �d3wC) t A3� �wJm�uwi vx� QZUQd aEF@z E Ow0 O w vw ^C7� u vw0o wd wQ �7 UmCo z Wp 07 a 0Q awa7, w v Q Z w¢ o g we F w U O Ww W J�t0 `",wN cC)gz Zz,, z7•Sl>a F a �H WaRo z VFW 0 — W W aU O F O N w P W O U F c z w a 0 0 w zz' a 0 ® H a° z N z? w 3 Q O Q y w F ��j d3 O O Z �xpwz D�wU3WL) LIJ ° O�FO C, dd WOq px❑ �'Dg. U CC�vaq z 3 m4 d x�� U ¢�,0 y cax�3 F¢ x °w W [� r o� Q uw 3 w A aw g > y p 3 v a+a v -CA vFn tx wdd as gNJm�W G4V F-'L FFdU 7v d �vv �zOwp F-�zFa wQW ww w dH� z aov0F a¢3�w¢ C) 0 F3wz�� z n vW A¢ O z z F q LT, ° x F y O Q z WaWO � awlw~ w 7 a O O ¢ F wi Q Z QL�w0U wOz z z�z�� x,-A F-x3o F. F: WwWa �W wWF �FzF v��W�� o,&,�F x�zx �3w�d m�x�,¢ �4d y�t7 Y7o¢z w��z LDQ�7 OW-w@5 C7� n Wp HF BOO ywva a�o¢q ��dOl Wc7AEx G W z w w 0 0 uw. w W w a Z v 0 3 U x O q WU] F v, OwYw Q�zW c7Q z a2lEWA zA a qw� p�O�Pj w �z� v x� w z^ a W 4 �eG zo EGA z�iQ.a zU mw z F� W Oow O�Q0.p OF�w� Ofw$� O� xv O z E.;q �- 6 Fob w r_ Oy F 7ar13 `F da< F06�Mw'n � @@ d�wd °u aU dry" F Q O¢ �A�Cw W Qw�wz t wZr �BwNz3x A O F W A F x w p o w O F A z v o Fwq wC7FX ozwr� ww� zw¢a �aOxO xaoP'(duMS )J8zQ-M)(9ZOZ-LI-0 (190Z000ZZOZ-'Id) luo-30(i Qn" Iagolu3 AU—Q-D\(SZOZ-LI-£) -U luaS - Iuunugnsa'd Pi£ lsod\ZQRd\dA1\9£OZZOZ\ZZOZ\ZdN- VIVQY*RY\ H-IdVN-'I3\:0 £Z JO 01 OiNd k$ SA.7I'TV (INV S199UIS TdN 7F.LNI SNOI,LDHS SSONJ .. • • kM..—wmou x J77 ` V7 9 e a �= �.L 1 l�� Q F IHHJ.LRI3 .IVMNdd2I'J �°" ° s Cl � anaa zax�1T�Ta - zvMNaaa� •TWe a �� � �� y � � z w o z Q LL a J�omZ d O Z Q 0 Q Q l a LL Q �pp W W a QL�laa� Nm w o I ¢ 6] > E q 'd- z J w W o I z d Li I O >.¢ N� <� _¢¢ QQQ Q ~ OLLJ �o r v ❑ c J10 cn V Q d 04 a Lia U wIy wl R Q U>w- =v7 ¢ V a- mm Y J � WI l7 O LL : J Q W UO Q Z Er- w 7 p J H o O W W ¢ ICI --------- N ff �z--- W Z Z o Q o a - � u7 LP, oU� - — o z cCD z _fozz z o— 2 J >- a z 11 w ¢ = c< a s i � W N, cQ a U 4 z o a J a w J > , w Z 07 O - NCD Q�� o r m Z m m r CL �tou ~ W Z� tr LJJ Q<oo� �(/I z �"�a c� O _ U r ill 11IIji O kl (J OU OZ LC] O L VO V U FL > �Ud. W Oaw rZ,a 8 z�oL^aZ,a �awI of o Y W 'E Q U ti e S Q C � �C o ­j J W w S - ----- Q 2 U U W �o m l U JU J� �iU a zm� n z R ¢w Uz o ¢ �o i L� LLJ 00 Z z. W U Q z xaoP'(duMS )J8zQ-M)(9ZOZ-Ll-0 (190ZOOOZZOZ-'Id) luaum30Q Qn" Iagolu3 ,AU—Q-H\(SZOZ-L I-£) -U luaS - Iuunugnsa'd Pi£ lsod\ZQRd\dA1\9£OZZOZ\ZZOZ\ZdN- VIVQY*RY\ H-IdVX-'I3\:0 £Z JO i i OiNd huedwo� uew� e � ndao� w w U 8 ~ 8 N LJ Ui� �� a w�� ¢m ww J EL 3 Q O Ld Y Y J4 W < W U w S Z w p O U w Q -- - -- -- -- m m p D w U) (I� W Q LLI Q Vl w 0. W O O WO O> � d a W d Q w W O Q U ~ O O LL W(/ NCIAti LL �\ z � z Q 1 77_ \ C W }�LJ Q X J i\ I U -- - -- -- --- p O z r= cn x w 00 0 O Q) xaoP'(duMS )J8zQ-M)(9ZOZ-LI-0 (190ZOOOZZOZ-'Id) luaum30Q Qn" Iagolu3 ,AU—Q-H\(SZOZ-LI-£) A U luaS - Iuunugnsa'd Pi£ lsod\ZQRd\dA1\9£OZZOZ\ZZOZ\ZdN-d,LVQY*RY\ H-IdVN-'I3\:0 £ZJO Zi OiNd d A,L M1p Auedww ueuwwee r`� fi 33 �TT `QNV I N ..e Ii�m Clvq o-d Qf1dN h�i1�.LR73-.StlMN3�317 s f tE I�I�iI2L3 CVMN�32IJ W �a�k 8� �a8 � 3 z J w �I�V81�S o C�JdI z w � �m ?JV7L 101 Lww Ln LL a W O J J N CL Q LL- g W Z LLJ C) Fn <C O� o�� w�~ � l < �W o\I- J ai LLJ Z J Q Q U N W < WQ QL UUI UJLi W J J W U ~ _ �mLLJ W U) _ O > Ln Q w Vn0 _ _ = U LA 0 W (� Q �wLi U T Z �� Z� U)n- I_v LC) co 7- < Q O W W — — — — — — — — — — w I J J Z C u z�Q Q L- - ��w Q a - o'LLA w z L�LIO Q OU < n 0' <i Q w < LJ N 00 0 O n3 EXHIBIT D GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1: THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 2: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RUN SOUTH 00-59,06" WEST 692.65 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 80°21'12" EAST 327.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 00059'06" WEST 200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88021'12" EAST 140.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°59'06" WEST 362.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88021'12" WEST 467.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE NORTH 00059'06" EAST 562.35 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 3: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 4: - THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY ORIDA. ` PARCEL 5. THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST Page 13 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 118 of 708 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RUN SOUTH 0°59'06" WEST 692.65 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 88°21' 12" EAST 327.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 0059'06" WEST 200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88021'12" EAST 140.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0059'06" WEST 362.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88021'12' WEST 467.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE NORTH 0059'06" EAST 562.35 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO THE INT OF BEGINNING. AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, LYING AND BEING IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND *46hhh, Ne THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TO OUTH, RANGE EAST, LESS THE SOUTHERNMOST 30 FEET. AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF SECS' ON 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, LESS T EASTERLY 30 FEET FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY AND THE SOUTHERLY 30 FEET FOR OAD RIGHT OF WAY, CONTAINING IN ALL 10 ACRES MORE OR LESS. AND, (AS DESCRIBED IN AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION TITLE COMMITMENT FILE NO.: 1144058, COMMITMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 05, 2021 AT 11:00 PM): PARCEL 6: PARCEL B SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, LESS THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF AND LESS THE WEST 30 FEET THEREOF, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. Page 14 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 119 of 708 PARCEL 7: PARCEL A SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, LESS THE SOUTH 1/2 OF GOVERNMENT LOT 2 AND LESS THE NORTH 1/2 OF GOVERMENT LOT 2 AND LESS THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 8: SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, AND NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, AND NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 9: NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER CO TY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 10: '00C '%, NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 11: NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CO TELY 227.09 ACRES Page 15 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 120 of 708 EXHIBIT E GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD LIST OF DEVIATIONS Deviation 1 (Street System Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J., Street System Requirements, which prohibits dead-end streets except when designed as a cul-de-sac, to instead allow for dead-end streets designed with a hammerhead or Y configuration. 2. Deviation 2 (Street System Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N., "Street System Requirements", which requires a minimum right-of-way width of 60 feet to instead allow a width of 50 feet for internal private roadways within the Greenway Fritchey RPUD. See Exhibit C for cross -sections. 1W 3. Deviation 3 (Buffer Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C.2, "Types of buffers", which requires a 15-foot-wide Type B buffer when a community facility in a PUD abuts a residential unit to instead allow Type B buffer plantings within an area a minimum of 10 feet in width. 4. Deviation 4 (Wall Height) requests relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C, "Fences and Walls, Excluding Sound Walls", which limits the heights of fences or walls in residential components of PUDs to 6 feet, to instead allow a wall 8 feet in height. 5. Deviation 5 (Signs) requests relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a., "On premise directional signs", which allows on -premises directional signs be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of roadway, paved surface, or back of curb, to instead allow a setback of five feet from a roadway or platted easement. This deviation does not apply to County owned roads. 1110� 6. Deviation 6 (Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.1., "Sidewalks, Bike Land and Pathway Requirements", which requires s' alks on both sides of a local street, to instead allow a single sidewalk six feet in width on ne side of the street, and no sidewalks along alleys within Tract R2. See Exhibit C for al Streets and Alleys Cross -Sections. 7. Deviation 7A (Clustered Development) requests relief from LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b)i.a), "Clustered development", which requires a minimum lot area of 4,500 square feet and a minimum interior lot width of 40 feet for single-family development, to instead allow for a minimum lot area of 1,680 square feet and a minimum lot width of 28 feet for single-family development. Deviation 7B (Clustered Development) requests relief from LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b)ii.a) "Minimum yard requirements", which requires a minimum side yard of 6 feet and a minimum rear yard of 15 feet for single-family development, to instead Page 16 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 121 of 708 allow for a minimum side yard of 5 feet and a minimum rear yard of 10 feet for single- family development. Deviation 7C (Clustered Development) requests relief from LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b)ii.b) "Minimum yard requirements", which requires a minimum front yard of 30 feet, a minimum rear yard of 30 feet, and a minimum side yard of one-half the building height or 15 feet for multi -family development, to instead allow for a minimum front yard of 20 feet, a minimum rear yard of 15 feet, and a minimum side yard of 5 feet for multi -family development. This deviation excludes lots that abut an arterial or collector Page 17 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 122 of 708 EXHIBIT F GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS The purpose of this section is to set forth the development commitments for the development of this project. 1. GENERAL A, A. Two entities (hereinafter the Managing Entities) shall be responsible for RPUD monitoring until close-out of the RPUD, and these entities shall also be responsible for satisfying all RPUD commitments until close-out of the RPUD. At the time of this RPUD approval, the Managing Entities are Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC (Tract R1) and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc (Tract R2). Should either Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document, 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 a Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to the County that includes an acknowledgement of the commitments required by the RPUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity will not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the RPUD is closed out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsiblQr the monitoring and fulfillment of RPUD commitments. 16 B. 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 of 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 01agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. (Section , 125.022, FS) C. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. 1%941F 2. TRANSPORTATION A. The maximum total daily trip generation for the RPUD shall not exceed 861 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. B. All other transportation related commitments are set forth in a companion DCA. Page 18 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 123 of 708 3. ENVIRONMENTAL A. There is ±33 acres of existing native vegetation within the subject property. The minimum required native preservation is ±13.20 acres (40% of ±33 acres of existing native vegetation). The Master Plan preserves ±13.59 acres of native vegetation on site within Tract P. B. 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. In order to meet the requirements of a Type `A' buffer perimeter boundaries of the RPUD; a 6-foot-wide landscape buffer located outside of the preserve will be reserved. In the event that the preserve does not meet buffer requirements after removal of exotics and supplemental planting within the preserve, plantings will be provided by Owner 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 lands pe plans for the SDP or plat. 'A&-r C. A listed species management plan will be provided for the project at the time of development approval. The management plan will address how listed species will be protected, including the listed plant species observed within the development footprint and proposed preserve areas. 4. AFFORDABLE HOUSING A. Two -hundred sixty (260) units wil e sold to households whose initial certified incomes are up to an including 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. B. All 260 income -restricted units e on Tract R2. The income -restricted units will be constructed as single family detached, single family attached, multifamily %C�Oese wnhomes), or a combination thereof. 10, units will be committed for a period of 30 years from the date of the issuance of the ce 'ficate of occupancy and sold to households that qualify for the designated inco esholds. D. Households shall occupy the property as their primary residence as evidenced by maintenance of homestead exemption. E. Prior to the initial sale of any of the affordable set -aside units, the owner and developer will record a restrictive covenant in the public records of Collier County identifying the affordable set -aside units and the income threshold pertaining to each unit. The covenant will state that each unit will be initially sold and subsequently sold to qualifying households for a period of 30 years from the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for each unit. The covenant will also state that at least 30 days prior to the Page 19 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 124 of 708 initial sale or subsequent sale of any unit, the County's Community and Human Services Division, or its designee, will be notified in writing and provided documents for income verification and certification on forms acceptable to Collier County. The closing on the sale may occur after the County, or its designee, confirms that the household qualifies for the designated income thresholds. F. Income verification and certification may take the form of the most recent year's filed income tax return for each occupant who had filed and will occupy the affordable housing unit. Income verification and certification for households or household members who had not filed the most recent year's tax return may be based on written verification to verify all regular sources of income to the household member. The written verification shall include, at a minimum, the purpose of the verification, a statement to release information, employer verification of gross annual income or rate of pay, number of hours worked, frequency of pay, bonuses, tips, and commissions and a signature block with the date of verification. The verification shall be valid for up to 90 days prior to occupancy. Upon expiration of the 90-day period, the information may be verbally updated from the original sources for an additional 30 days, provided it has been documented by the person preparing the original verification. After this time, a new verification form must be completed. a. As part of the annual PUD monitoring ort, the developer will include an annual report that provides the progress and monitoring of occupancy of the income -restricted units in a format approved by the Collier County Community and Human Services Division. The developer agrees to annual on -site monitoring by the County, or its designee. G. By way of example, the 2024 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Income Limits are: 10�6illA G 2024 Collier County Inicome Limits for Affordable Housing 2024 Collier County Median Income Limit by Number of People in Unit Median Income 1 Percentage area Category Name 1 2 4 30% Extremely Low $ 21,930 $ 25,050 $ 31,290 50% Very Low $ 36,550 $ 41,750 $ 52,150 60% Ila $ 43,860 $ 50,100 $ 62,580 Household Income SOP/0Low $ 58,480 $ 66,800 $ 83,440 10011/0 Median $ 73,100 $ 83,500 $ 104,300 $104,300 120% Moderate $ 87,720 $ 100,200 $ 125,160 140°/a Gap $ 102,340 $ 116,900 $ 146,020 Source: HLD 2024 Median I "icome; Florida Housing Finance Corp. income Limits Page 20 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 125 of 708 5. UTILITIES A. At the time of application for subdivision Plans and Plat (PPL) and/or Site Development Plan (SDP) approval, as the case may be, offsite improvements and/or upgrades to the wastewater collection/transmission system may be required by County 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 Manager or designee 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. B. At the time of application for subdivision Plans and Plat (PPL) and/or Site Development Plan (SDP) approval, as the case may be, offsite improvements and/or upgrades to the water distribution/transmission system may be required by County to adequately handle the total estimated peak hour flow to 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 Manager or designee 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. 6. WILDFIRE P VENTIO AND MITIGATION A. Project Structural Design and Materials 1. Roofs shall be constructed us Class A asphalt/fiberglass shingles, sheet metal, terra cotta tile, and concrete. 2. Soffits shall be made of non-combustible material or (minimum) t/2-inch nominal ood sheathing. 3. \indow opening shall exceed 40 square feet and double -paned glass, or tempered glass shall be utilized. B. Locatio)nF/Defensible Space 1. A minimum 30 feet of "Defensible Area" shall be maintained around principal structures. The Defensible Area may include yards, green space, required landscape buffers, sidewalks, driveways or roadways, and customary accessory uses and structures such as decks, lanais, and so forth. Defensible area shall not be construed to mean a separation between structures. Page 21 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 126 of 708 2. Within this Defensible Area: Vegetation shall be thinned and maintained to eliminate vegetated or "ladder fuels" and tree crowns shall be a minimum of 10 feet apart. ii. Trees will be maintained to keep branches 6 to 10 feet from the ground. iii. Trees will be maintained at a maximum canopy spread of 20' at maturity, in order to prevent roof overhang. iv. The less -flammable trees and shrubs listed below shall be utilized within the defensible area. Other trees and shrubs not listed below may be utilized if approved by Collier County and the Florida Fire Service, Florida Forest Service, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Trees Ash Magnolia Sago/KingSago/King Sage Palm Sweet Acacia Citrus Maple Pecan Silver Button Crape Myrtle Redbud Willow Tabebuia Dogwood Sycamore Pygmy Date Palm Gumbo -Limbo Jacaranda Viburnum Red Mulberry Red Bay Lo uat Alexander Palm Winged Elm 7M Green Button Oaks Sweet Gum Catalpa Mahogany Pindo Palm Persimmon Satan Leaf Hawthorne Black Cherry Queen Palm Pigeon Plum Elm Sparkleberry &ea Grape Shrubs 04IPP Agave Philodendron Century Plant Aloe — Pittos orum Coontie Azalea Red Yucca Anise Viburnum Beauty Berry Indian Hawthorne Hydrangea P racantha Oakleaf Hydrangea Oleander Camellia Lv. Lava stone, gravel or other non-flammable materials shall be used in planting beds within 5 feet of a structure. 3. The managing entity shall be responsible to ensure these requirements are met. 7. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT A. Prior to the issuance of the first residential certificate of occupancy, the property owner shall provide a one-time developer's contribution of one (1) 45 KW (or higher) towable, diesel, rental -grade generator to Collier County specification to the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Management. Page 22 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 127 of 708 8. OTHER A. Excavation setbacks are subject to the minimum requirements of Sec. 22-112(1) of the Code of Ordinances. Reduction of the required minimum setback is subject to an exception review and approval in accordance with Section 22-112(1). Page 23 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent Tim (3-17-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (3-17-2025)(w-Draft Stamp).docx Page 128 of 708 RESOLUTION NO. 2025- 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 MAP SERIES TO CREATE THE GREENWAY - FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE AGRICULTURAL/RURAL, RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT -RECEIVING LANDS, TO ALLOW UP TO 1299 SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY UNITS WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 227.09f ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE NORTHEASTERN INTERSECTION OF GREENWAY ROAD AND FRITCHEY ROAD IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST; COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20220002063] 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, Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC, and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. requested an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to add the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay; and WHEREAS, on , 2025, 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 , 2025, 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 [22-CMP-01134/1751563/1] 24 Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay FLUE / 04-2-25 Page 1 of 2 Words stmek flifetigh are deleted, words underlined are added. Page 129 of 708 WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Florida Department of Commerce ("Department") have thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and the Department 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 the Department 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 Department, 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 Florida Department of Commerce 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 , 2025. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality:ff�� ''W)AC Heidi Ashton-Cicko 4-2-25 Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA USA Burt L. Saunders, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Proposed Text Amendment & Map Amendment [22-CMP-01134/1751563/1] 24 Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay FLUE / 04-2-25 Page 2 of 2 Words stmek flifetigh are deleted, words underlined are added. Page 130 of 708 PL20220002063 Exhibit A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT 11. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY (Page 9) Policy 1.9: Overlays and Special Features shall include: A. Area of Critical State Concern B. North Belle Meade Overlay *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** M. Immokalee Road Rural Village Overlay N. Collier Boulevard/Interstate 75 Innovation Zone Overlay O. US 41 East Overlay Incorporated Areas P. JLM Living East Residential Overlay Q. Greenway — Fritchey Residential Overlay *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES (Page 116) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** O. Greenway — Fritchey Residential Overlay (Page 177) The Greenway — Fritchey Residential Overlay is comprised of 19 parcels totaling gpproximatelX 227.09 acres and is located at the northeastern corner of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East. It is depicted on the Greenway — Fritchey Residential Overlay Map. The purpose of this overlay is to allow single- and multi -family dwelling units, including housing that is affordable. Development in this Overlay inject to the following_ a. The Overlay shall be rezoned to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district. b. Allowable uses are limited to residential, both single- and multi -family dwelling c. Density shall be limited to 5.72 dwelling units per acre (DU/A), yielding a maximum of 1,299 dwelling units. d. Income -restricted ("for sale") affordable housing shall be provided as follows: 04/02/2025 mrm Words underlined are additions; Words sttuek thfeugh are deletions *** *** *** *** are a break in text 1 of 5 Page 131 of 708 PL20220002063 1. Twenty percent (20%) of the total units will be sold to households whose initial certified incomes are up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income (AMID for Collier County. 2. These units will be committed for a period of 30 vears from the date of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy and sold to households that qualify for the designated income thresholds. 3. Households shall occupy the property as their primary residence as evidenced by maintenance of homestead exemption. 4. Prior to the initial sale of any of the affordable units, the owner and developer will record a restrictive covenant in the public records of Collier County identifying the affordable set -aside units and the income threshold pertaining to each unit. The covenant will state that each unit will be initially sold and subsequently sold to qualifying ing households for a period of 30 years from the issuance of the Certification of Occupancy for each unit. The covenant will also state that at least 30 days prior to the initial sale or subsequent sale of any unit, the County's Community and Human Services Division, or its designee, will be notified in writing and provided documents for income verification and certification on forms acceptable to Collier County. The closing on the sale may occur after the County, or its designee, confirms that the household qualifies for the designated income thresholds. 5. For the purposes of this Ordinance, income verification, and certification shall be based on the most recent vear's filed income tax return for each occupant who had 04/02/2025 corm filed and will occupy the affordable housing unit. 1. Income verification and certification for households or household members who had not filed the most recent year's tax return may be based on written verification to verify all regular sources of income to the household member. The written verification shall include, at a minimum, the purpose of the verification, a statement to release information, employer verification of gross annual income or rate of pay, number of hours worked, frequency of pay, bonuses, tips, and commissions and signature block with the date of verification. The verification shall be valid for up to 90 days prior to occupancy. Upon expiration of the 90-day period, the information may be verbally updated from the original sources for an additional 30 days, provided it has been documented by the person preparingthe he original verification. After this time, a new verification form must be completed. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Words underlined are additions; Words stmek�gh are deletions *** *** *** *** are a break in text 2of5 Page 132 of 708 FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES *** *** *** *** *** *** PL20220002063 (Page 178) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Boat House Commercial Subdistrict Map JLM Living East Residential Overlay Map Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict Map Greenway — Fritchey Residential Overlay Map 04/02/2025 corm Words underlined are additions; Words sttuek thfeugh are deletions *** *** *** *** are a break in text 3 of 5 Page 133 of 708 01 T46S T47S T48S F000lo®oloolo 0 j1j! 1 0 1 cc,,Ilil�illtl� 'llallll!!i!, j1l,��ttl„� _ �1111111111 A110111o11C Ix i I � � i 1 ! � � i ! i I i� � i� � }1 I� it ►1;1 i� W 1111101111111l��1111110011 ,"I ]I,, 1� 1all I 1001011111 0 1111, IIilI IN V` 111mi Tas T 51S I T52S I T53S N 111� dull Of t C ° Mex r rna I •era I rcoc 4. O PL20220002063 O�P(C GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY COT T 1FR COL'NW. FLORMA ADOPTED - X)OUC XXXX 0 1.000 2.000 4.OW Fort LEGEND Ord. No. XXXX-X 6.Y•I.00JlOW..o M. Y® 04/02/2025 corm Words underlined are additions; Words stt+tekthretigk are deletions *** *** *** *** are a break in text 5o(5 Page 135 of 708 RESOLUTION NO. 2025- 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 CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT TO AMEND POLICY 6.1.7 TO REDUCE THE LITTORAL SHELF REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE GREENWAY- FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 227.09f ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE NORTHEASTERN INTERSECTION OF GREENWAY ROAD AND FRITCHEY ROAD IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST; COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20220002063] 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, Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC, and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. requested an amendment to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, applicable to the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay; and WHEREAS, on , 2025, 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 , 2025, 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 Florida Department of Commerce ("Department") have thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and the Department must transmit, in [22-CMP-01134/1931882/1] 67 Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay CCME / 04-2-25 Page 1 of 2 Words stmek flifetigh are deleted, words underlined are added. Page 136 of 708 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 the Department 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 Department, 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 Florida Department of Commerce 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 , 2025. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: W/C Heidi Ashton-Cicko 4-2-25 Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA M. Burt L. Saunders, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Proposed Text Amendment & Map Amendment [22-CMP-01134/1931882/1] 67 Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay CCME / 04-2-25 Page 2 of 2 Words stmek flifetigh are deleted, words underlined are added. Page 137 of 708 PL20220002063 Exhibit A CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT II. GOALS, OBJECTIVES & POLICIES (Page 3) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** GOAL 6: TO IDENTIFY, PROTECT, CONSERVE AND APPROPRIATELY USE NATIVE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AND WILDLIFE HABITAT. OBJECTIVE 6.1: Protect native vegetative communities through the application of minimum preservation requirements. (The Policies under this Objective apply to all of Collier County except for that portion of the County which is identified on the Countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) as the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay.) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Policy 6.1.7: [re -numbered to reflect merger of Ordinance No. 2002-32 and 2002-54] The County shall require native vegetation to be incorporated into landscape designs in order to promote the preservation of native plant communities and to encourage water conservation. This shall be accomplished by: (1) Providing incentives for retaining existing native vegetation in landscaped areas; (2) Establishing minimum native vegetation requirements for new landscaping; and, (3) Wet detention ponds within the Urban Designated area shall have a littoral shelf with an area equal to 2.50% of the ponds surface area measured at the control elevation and be planted with native aquatic vegetation. Wet detention ponds within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, shall have a littoral shelf with an area equal to 30% of the ponds surface area measured at the control elevation and be planted with native aquatic vegetation. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Within the Greenway — Fritchey Residential Overlay, as identified in the Future Land Use Element, the total littoral planting shelf area rn be reduced to 10% of the wet detention pond surface area. Littoral planting shelf areas may be provided in one or more larger aggregated littoral planting areas, if it is determined during the permitting process that doing so will provide greater habitat value. Two rows of native grasses will be planted around the entire perimeter of the wet detention lakes to provide water quality enhancement. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 4/02/2025 rarm 1 of 1 Words underlined are additions; Words stmek�= are deletions *** *** *** *** area break in text Page 138 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) PRE -APPLICATION MEETING NOTES Page 139 of 708 Corer County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercountyfi.gov (239) 252-2400 Pre -Application Meeting Notes Petition Type: GMPA (Large -Scale) Date and Time: March 27, 2022 @ 8:00 a.m. Assigned Planner: Michele Mosca Engineering Manager (for PPL's and FP's): Project Information Project Name: GreenwaV FritcheV PL #: Property ID #: Current Zoning: Project Address: City: State: Zip: _ Applicant: Agent Name: Phone: Agent/Firm Address: City: Property Owner: Please provide the following, if applicable: i. Total Acreage: ii. Proposed # of Residential Units: _ State: Zip: 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 I 1 of 10 Page 140 of 708 Collier Coanty 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 revised 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://www.colliercount\lfl.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=75093 1. Address F.S.—163.3177 (1)(f), (6)(a) 2. And (6)(a) 8. Provide data and analysis to support the petition, i.e., demonstrate need for the use(s) proposed and the appropriateness of location to fulfill that need. (Specific to the subject petition, submittal of the AH ULI Study does not fulfill the data & analysis requirement. The ULI Study can be used as a resource; however, a narrative with supporting details specific to the site, such as but not limited to, income ranges, job/employment data, population served, etc. must be provided in support of need and project location.) It is strongly recommended that the petitioner's team meet with staff to review the data and analysis requirements prior to formal submittal. If the petitioner submits the GMPA consistent with the RFMUD transmittal amendments which provides for affordable housing at 12.2 DU/A per the LDC AHDB in 2.03.06, no data and analysis to demonstrate AH need will be required. 4. Address availability of public and/or private infrastructure to serve the uses, and impacts, if any, on environmental and cultural resources. FLUE Policy 5.6: Address compatibility with surrounding uses — existing and allowed (address noise, smell, visual design, lighting, buffering, parking, internal drives, heights, setbacks, etc.); provide line of sight profiles in all directions; and provide a detailed analysis of the project's impacts/uses/design on community's vision for the area based on studies and policies accepted or adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, e.g., Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. 6. Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands, open space requirement is 70%. Updated 1/12/2021 Page 12 of 10 Page 141 of 708 .. Fes. Coffer County 7. GMPA may be a site -specific Subdistrict under the Agricultural/Rural Designation of the FLUM. 8. Standard GMP Amendment Preapplication Meeting Comments document attached. 9. Environmental Comments: 1. Please provide Environmental Data: Please provide FLUCFCS aerial map of the subject property please include the invasive exotic plant percentage amounts and indicate which FLUCFCS are being considered Native Vegetation. Identify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified. Aerials and overlay information must be legible at the scale provided. Provide calculations for the acreage of native vegetation required to be retained on -site. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve selection criteria pursuant to 3.05.07 have been met. Where applicable, include in this report an aerial showing the project boundaries along with any undeveloped land, preserves, natural flowways or other natural land features, located on abutting properties. Please provide wetland functionality scores WRAP or UMAM if they have been created and or reviewed by the DEP or SFWMD. 2. Please provide a current Listed species survey, which should include listed plants for the subject property. Provide supporting exhibits (i.e. Panther zones ect.) be sure to include Black Bear and Florida Bonneted Bat as part of the evaluation. Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the guidelines or recommendations of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Provide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03 3. 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.B-D; 3.05.07.F; 3.05.07.H.1.d-e). (40%of native vegetation or 25% of the total acreage is required for preservation.) Label the Master plan with a note that the preservation is to be addressed off -site and provide the calculation in the packet submitted. (Note for the SDP/PPL, any wetlands set aside as preservation are required to have a 25 foot upland buffer adjacent to the preserved wetland areas in RFMU, LDC 3.07.05 F.3.f) 4. Please address how the proposed project is consistent with Conservation Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 6.1 and Objective 7.1. THIS needs to be address for both the GMPA/PUD Updated 1/12/2021 Page 13 of 10 Page 142 of 708 r110 Coer County 5. Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation requirements and minimizes impacts to listed species as required in the CCME. (The preservation Requirement is 40% of native vegetation or 25% of the total acreage). 6. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. (If found onsite). 7. Demonstrate that the design of the proposed stormwater management system and analysis of water quality and quantity impacts fully incorporate the requirements of the Watershed Management regulations of 3.07.00. 8. Soil and/or ground water sampling shall be required at the time of first development order submittal for sites that occupy farm fields (crop fields, cattle dipping ponds, chemical mixing areas), golf courses, landfill or junkyards or for sites where hazardous products exceeding 250 gallons of liquid or 1,000 pounds of solids were stored or processed or where hazardous wastes in excess of 220 pounds per month or 110 gallons at any point in time were generated or stored. The amount of sampling and testing shall be determined by a registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment and shall at a minimum test for organochlorine pesticides (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 8081) and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 8 metals using Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) soil sampling Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) FS 3000, in areas suspected of being used for mixing and at discharge point of water management system. Sampling should occur randomly if no points of contamination are obvious. Include a background soil analysis from an undeveloped location hydraulically upgradient of the potentially contaminated site. Soil sampling should occur just below the root zone, about 6 to 12 inches below ground surface or as otherwise agreed upon with the registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment. Include in or with the Environmental Site Assessment, the acceptable State and Federal pollutant levels for the types of contamination found on site and indicate in the Assessment, when the contaminants are over these levels. If this analysis has been done as part of an Environmental Audit then the report shall be submitted. The County shall coordinate with the FDEP where contamination exceeding applicable FDEP standards is identified on site or where an Environmental Audit or Environmental Assessment has been submitted. 10. Transportation Comments: Methodology meeting by email required and provide note on TIS cover sheet that fee will be collected at time of PUDZ-GMPA submittal. Address all transportation elements of the GMP. Provide trip limit based on TIS 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 Updated 1/12/2021 Page 14 of 10 Page 143 of 708 CAT T County trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval." Also provide interconnection commitment using standard language: "Vehicular and Pedestrian interconnection will be provided to the to allow access to all connection points with , consistent with the conceptual PUD Master Plan, . The final location of the access point will be coordinated with the adjacent property owner and a cross -access easement, or an access easement to the public for public use without responsibility of maintenance by Collier County, will be provided at time of the first Site 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 shall remain open to the public." Provide justification for no providing interconnections. Additionally provide developer commitments or address the following: • Provide -show turn -lanes and compensating ROW in master plan(s). • Provide additional ROW to extend Laredo Street if it doesn't extend fully to north boundary. The ROW may already exist however the aerial provided at the meeting appeared to stop short. Also confirm that Fritchey ROW extends to the east boundary, if not, provide the additional ROW to extend as well. • Provide operational analysis for Greenway including but not limited to pre vs post traffic counts, road capacity -service volume, existing conditions, and improvements to address safety -storm water swale conflicts -capacity -condition. • To address affordable housing component, indicate what multi -modal transportation techniques are proposed. This has impact on safety concerns related to Greenway operational analysis. • Fair Share contribution for signalization and intersection improvements at Greenway and 41. Contact Mark Clark @Clark, Mark, 225-1984 and provide confirmation as part of your application. • Developer Commitment to participation and contribution to NTMP initiated efforts. • If ROW vacation is proposed provide replacement public good -benefit as part of the request. Also address potential grid -network impact -loss if Laredo Street and or Fritchey are vacated. 10. Utilities Comments: Please contact Jennifer Rainey at 239-252-8836 to discuss the availability of water and wastewater to the site. Updated 1/12/2021 Page 15 of 10 Page 144 of 708 t Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercountyfl.Rov (239) 252-2400 Pre -Application Meeting Sign -In Sheet P L# Collier County Contact Information: 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@colliercountyfLgov ❑ Laurie Beard PUD Monitoring 252-5782 laurie.beard@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Craig Brown Environmental Specialist 252-2548 craig.brown@col IiercountyfLgov ❑ Heidi Ashton Cicko Managing Asst. County Attorney 252-8773 heidi.ashton@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Thomas Clarke Zoning Operations Analyst 252-2584 thomas.clarke@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Jamie Cook Development Review Director 252-6290 Jaime.cook@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Gabriela Castro Zoning Principal Planner 252-4211 gabriela.castro@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Maggie DeMeo North Collier Fire 252-2308 pdemeo@northcollierfire.com ❑ Eric Fey, P.E. Utility Planning 252-1037 eric.fey@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Tim Finn, AICP Zoning Principal Planner 252-4312 timothy.finn@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Sue Faulkner GMP - Comprehensive Planning 252-5715 sue.faulkner@colliercountyfl.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 ❑ Cormac Giblin, AICP Development Review -Planning Manager 252-5095 Cormac.giblin@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Nancy Gundlach, AICP Zoning Principal Planner 252-2484 nancy.gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Rachel Hansen GMP— Comprehensive Planning 252-1142 Rachel.hansen@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Richard Henderlong Zoning Principal Planner 252-2464 richard.henderlong@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ John Houldsworth Engineering Subdivision 252-5757 john.houldsworth@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Alicia Humphries Right -Of -Way Permitting 252-2326 alicia.humphries@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Anita Jenkins Planning & Zoning Director 252-5095 Anita.jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ John Kelly Zoning Senior Planner 252-5719 john.kelly@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Parker Klopf GMP — Comprehensive Planning 252-2471 Parker.klopf@colliercountyfl.gov Page 145 of 708 6 CAr County ❑ Troy Komarowski North Collier Fire 252-2521 tkomarowski@northcollierfire.com ❑ Sean Lintz North Collier Fire 597-9227 slintz@northcollierfire.com ❑ Diane Lynch Operations Analyst 252-8243 diane.lynch@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Thomas Mastroberto Greater Naples Fire 252-7348 thomas.mastroberto@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Jack McKenna, P.E. Engineering Services 252-2911 jack.mckenna@colliercountyfl.gov Updated 1/12/2021 Page 14 of 5 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercountvfl.gov (239) 252-2400 ❑ 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 richard.orth@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Eric Ortman Zoning Principal Planner 252-1032 Eric.Ortman@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Derek Perry Assistant County Attorney 252-8066 Derek. perry@colliercountyfLgov ❑ Brandi Pollard Utility Impact fees 252-6237 bra ndi.pollard@ col IiercountyfLgov ❑ Todd Riggall North Collier Fire 597-9227 triggall@northcollierfire.com ❑ Brett Rosenblum, P.E. Development Review Principal Project Manager 252-2905 brett.rosenblum@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ James Sabo, AICP GMP, Comp Planning Manager 252-2708 james.sabo@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Michael Sawyer Transportation Planning 252-2926 michael.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 ❑ Peter Shawinsky Architectural Review 252-8523 peter.shawinsky@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Mark Templeton Landscape Review 252-2475 mark.templeton@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Connie Thomas Client Services Supervisor 252-6369 Consuela.thomas@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Jessica Velasco Client Services 252-2584 jessica.velasco@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ 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.willoughby@colliercountyfl.gov ❑ Daniel Zunzunegui North Collier Fire 252-2310 Dan iel.Zunzunegui@coiliercountyfLgov Additional Attendee Contact Information: Name Representing Phone Email Page 146 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) GMPA APPLICATION Page 147 of 708 APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER DATE RECEIVED PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Growth Management Department, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252- 2400. The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98-18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC & Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc Company Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC & Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. Address 7742 Alico Road City Fort Myers State FL Zip Code 33912 Phone Number 239-208-4079 Fax Number N/A B. Name of Agent *Robert J. Mulhere FAICP Sr VP Jeremie Chastain AICP Lead Planner • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Hole Mantes, a Bowman Company Address 950 Encore Way City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34110 Phone Number 239-254-2000 Fax Number 239-254-2099 Name of Agent Richard Yovanovich, Esquire Company Coleman Yovanovich & Koester P.A. Address 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239-435-3535 Fax Number 239-435-1218 C. Name of Owner (s) of Record See Exhibit "I.C" Warranty Deeds D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. 1 H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA Application (rev 3-26-2024).doc Page 148 of 708 Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E., President Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, P.A. 1205 Piper Blvd., Suite 202, Naples, FL 34110 Telephone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Myers, FL 33912 Telephone: 239-274-0067 Email: bethanyb@passarella.net II. Disclosure of Interest Information: See attached Disclosures of Interest Form A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, Tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Stock C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Date of Contract: F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. G. Date subject property acquired (X): Greenwav Fritchey Land, LLC: 6/30/2021 & 7/2/2021 Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc: 8/28/2007, 1 /18/2018_& 7/16/2018 Term of lease—yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing: 2 H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA Application (rev 3-26-2024).doc Page 149 of 708 H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION See Exhibit "I.C" Warranty Deeds B. GENERAL LOCATION The subject property is located at the northeastern intersection Greenway Road and Fritchey Road C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Royal Fakal2alm E. SIZE IN ACRES 227.09± D. TAZ 2833 F. ZONING Aa, Aa(w/PU) RFMU Overlay G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN See Exhibit "V.B.1" Future Land Use Map H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S) AariculturaI/Rural, Receiving Lands IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Traffic Circulation Sub -Element Aviation Sub -Element Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element Solid Waste Sub -Element Capital Improvement Element X Future Land Use Element Immokalee Master Plan Recreation/Open Space Mass Transit Sub -Element Potable Water Sub -Element NGWAR Sub -Element Drainage Sub -Element CCME Element Golden Gate Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE(S) of - AS FOLLOWS: Use Strike-+„gI4to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: See Exhibit "IV.B.1 " GMP Text Amendment C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM N/A to D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: Exh. "IV.D.1" Greenway Fritchey Res Overlay E. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CHANGES REQUESTED: V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN I"=400'. At least one copy reduced to 8-1/2 x 1 1 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE Exh. V.A.I Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Exh. V.A.2 Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exh. V.A.3 Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION Exh. V.13.1 Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. 3 H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA Application (rev 3-26-2024).doc Page 150 of 708 C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exh. V.C.I Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. Exh. V.C.2 Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.). Identify historic and/or archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J-11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)(5), F.A.C.). IF so, identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J-1 1.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1) (c), F.S. ? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.b, F.A.C.) N Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County -wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. Exh. V.D.1 Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J-5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J-11.007, F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Exh. V.E.1 Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Exh. V.E.I Potable Water Exh. V.E.1 Sanitary Sewer Exh. V.E.3 Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS See TIS Exh. V.E.I Drainage Exh. V.E.1 Solid Waste Exh. V.E.1 Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. 4 H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA Application (rev 3-26-2024).doe Page 151 of 708 (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. Exh. V.E.2 Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. 3. Exh. V.E.1 Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: Exh. V.F.1 Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable N Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable N High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Y $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) N $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) Y Proof of ownership (copy of deed) Y Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) Y 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * If you have held a pre -application meeting and paid the pre -application fee of $500.00 at the meeting, deduct that amount from the above application fee amount when submitting your application. All pre -application fees are included in the total application submittal fee. Otherwise the overage will be applied to future proportionate share advertising costs. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1" = 400' or at a scale as determined during the pre -application meeting. 5 H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA Application (rev 3-26-2024).doc Page 152 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) AFFIDAVITS OF AUTHORIZATION Page 153 of 708 Exhibit V.G.4 AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) PL-20220002061 & PL-20220002063 1, DAVID E. TORRES (print name), as MGR (title, if applicable) of GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND, 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 ROBERT J. MULHERE, FAICR PRES/CEO & 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 stated in it are true, 14�T—1 -4 -2ti— Z2. David E.Torres,MGR Signature Date Greenway Fritchey Land, LL STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowleged before me by means of physical presence or © online notarization this '� day of , 20 Z2.fby (printed name of owner or qualifier) S SW h person(s) Notary Public must check applicable box: .... Are personally known to me Notary Public Stale of Florida , 0 Has produced a rre drivers ' se M Commission lar IIII HH 2O7,493 duced © Has proas identification. Exp.12/14/2025 Notary Signature: _ CPW8-COA-00115\155 REV 3/4/2020 Page 154 of 708 Exhibit V.G.4 AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION rNUMBERS(S) PL-20220002061 & PL-20220002063 I, L J S (k �f k- D J (print name), as (title, if applicable) Of HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY, INC. (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 ROBERT J. MULHERE, FAICP, PRESICEO a RICHARD YOVANOVICH, ESQ. 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 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 1 have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that he fat d in it are true. 7 �22 2 0 SignAtire I Date TJ STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The —e foregoing instrument was acknowleged before me by means of physical presence or ❑o line notarization this '2 D—day of 20 Z ,by (printed name of owner or qualifier)-� Such person(s) Notary Public must check applicable box: �;�+o '•• NORMA LALIBERTE Are personally known to me MY COMMISSION N GG 212836 •: m . ae EXPIRES: August 29, 2022 0 Has produced a current dnveTrs,4ice se Bonded Thru Notary pubiicUnderNdtets Has produced as identification. /l Notary Signature: CP\08-COA-00115\155 REV 3/4/2020 Page 155 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORMS Page 156 of 708 Exhibit II.D Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net Co*e-r 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 percentage of such interest: A C. Name and Address % of Ownership N/A If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage oT stocK ownea Dy eacn: Name and Address % of Ownership N/A If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the iercentage of interest: Name and Address % of Ownership N/A Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 Page 157 of 708 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net I e. f 9. Coffer County 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 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 Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC 7742 Alico Road, Fort Myers, FL 33912 David E. Torres Revocable Trust 50% George P. Bauer Revocable Truest 50% 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 t icers, stockholders, beneticianes, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or of I IU=I J, H a l.uI yuI aLluIII Nat 11 ICI JI IIN, ul LI UJ L. Name and Address Date subject property acquired 7/2/2021 & 6/30/2021 ❑ Leased: Term of lease years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3 Page 158 of 708 Coder County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 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 Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 4410 -2�-ZZ. Agent/Owner Date Agent/Owner Name (please print) ,n,,2n'✓OV� ' v'"�, Imo"` Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3 Page 159 of 708 Exhibit 11.13 Habitat for Humanity of Collier Mkei�'r County, Inc. GO-U-nty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 2S2-2400 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 ercentage or sucn mteresr: Name and Address % of Ownership NIA b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each: Name and Address % of Ownership Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. 100% 11145 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34113 (Lisa Lefkow, CEO) FLORIDA NOT FOR PROFIT CORPORATION C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the iercentage of interest: Name and Address % of Ownership N/A Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 Page 160 of 708 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net COAT 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 9 eneral and/or ►imitea partners: Name and Address % of Ownership N/A 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 ulcers, stocKnowers, Denericianes, 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 g. Date subject property acquired Leased: Term of lease i, or trust: Name and Address B/28/2007, 1/18/2018 & 7/16/2018 years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3 Page 161 of 708 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net Date of option: Date option terminates: Anticipated closing date: c0aer countv 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-5358 or 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 /i Naples, FL 34104 Agent/Owner Name (please print) Created 9/28/2017 7/22/2022 Date Page 3 of 3 Page 162 of 708 DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS Department of State / Division of Corporations / Search Records / Search by Entity Name / Page 163 of 708 Flynn -Fox, Kathleen 4851 Bonita Bay Blvd #603 Bonita Springs„ FL 34134 r111IM41*41 LEFKOW, LISA REV. 1490 NOTTINGHAM DR NAPLES, FL 34109 Title Vice President & CFO KACOS, DEAN 11145 TAM IAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2022 02/25/2022 2023 04/12/2023 2024 02/06/2024 Document Images 02/06/2024 — ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/12/2023 — ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 10/28/2022 —AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 08/17/2022 —AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT View Image in PDF format 07/22/2022 —AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format l 02/25/2022 —ANNUAL REPORT View Image in PDF format 01/26/2021 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format J 04/27/2020 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/01/2019 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/29/2018 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 08/29/2017 — AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/03/2017 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02101/2016 —ANNUAL REPORT _ View image In PDF format _J 01/12/2016 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/25/2014 — ANNUAL REPORT View Image in PDF format 04/22/2013 — ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/25/2012 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/25/2011 —ANNUAL REPORT View Image in PDF format 01/05/2010 — ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/23/2009 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/26/2008 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/08/2007 —ANNUAL REPORT View Image in PDF format 04/25/2006 —ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format Page 164 of 708 03/09/2005 — ANNUAL REPORT 01/20/2004 — ANNUAL REPORT 05/02/2003 —ANNUAL REPORT 02/04/2002 — ANNUAL REPORT 02/06/2001 —ANNUAL REPORT 03/06/2000 —ANNUAL REPORT 11/05/1999 -- Amendment 03/11/1999 —ANNUAL REPORT 02/04/1998 — ANNUAL REPORT 11/26/1997 -- Name Change 01/31/1997 —ANNUAL REPORT 01/24/1996 —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 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 View image In PDF format View Image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Divisl- or Corpnrah-s Page 165 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) WARRANTY DEEDS Page 166 of 708 INSTR 6091943 OR 5978 PG 1962 RECORDED 7/8/2021 2:49 PM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC@.70 $25,217.50 REC $18.50 INDX $1.00 CONS $3,602,500.00 This Instrument Prepared By: Raymond J. Bowie, Esq. 900 Sixth Avenue South, Suite 104 Naples, Florida 34102 (239)435-1007 Fax (239) 435-0021 File #21-06-4368 Consideration: $3,602 THIS WARRANTY DEEP „arr partnership, whose post office addzes GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND, Lt Road, Fort Myers, FL 33912, hereinafter EXHIBIT I.0 WARRANTY DEED A1�s � day of July, 2021, by K&B COMPANY, a Florida general 0110 Laredo Street, Naples, FL 34114, hereinafter called GRANTOR, to a Florida limited liability company, whose post office address is 7742 Alico WITNESSETH: That the said Gran`tdr; fer>.,4d in consideration of the sum of $10.00 and other valuable considerations, receipt of which is hereby acknotglge ;.1treby grants, bargains, sells and conveys to the said Grantee, their heirs, successors and assigns forever, the followiriland situate, lying and being in the County of Collier, State of Florida, to wit: Parcel A South % of the South'/2 of the Northw�so. fthe Northeast'/4, and North'/z of the Northwest'/4 of the Northeast '/, and North % of th' flr h '✓,y= of the Southwest '/4 of the Northeast '/4 of Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East;gfCpllier County, Florida, less any road right of way.�`..`� Parcel B North '/2 of the South '/2 of the Northwest '/4 of the N,oi, ea '/4, of Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, of Collier County, Florida, less ari`. `Oad.'ight of way. 4. Parcel C North '/7. of the North '/2 of the Northeast '/4 of the Northeast '/4 of Sect r ; , Township 51 South, Range 27 East, of Collier County, Florida, less any road right of way. SUBJECT TO: 1) Restrictions, reservations, limitations and easements of record common to the subdivision if any now exist, but any such interests as may have terminated are not hereby reimposed; 2) applicable zoning, land use, building code and other governmental restrictions; 3) outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any; 4) real estate taxes and assessments for the year 2021 and subsequent years. For Information Purposes Only: As to Parcel A: Tax Parcel I.D. No.: 00748400001 As to Parcel B: Tax Parcel I.D. No.: 00748400001 As to Parcel C: Tax Parcel 1.D. No.: 00750560007 Page 1 of 2 pages Z Page 167 of 708 *** OR 5978 PG 1963 *** AND Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whatsoever, except as above noted. 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor(s) have signed their names below on the date first above written: WITNESSES: (as to all Grantors) Name: Name: 4 Robin J. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER GRANTOR: K & B COMPANY, a Florida general partnership BY: ROBERTS. BEAN, as General Partner THLEEN BEAN, as General Partner The foregoing instrument was ackno A dged before me, the unc,'ers 4d`. otary Public by means of LX_] physical presence or [_] online notarization, this day of July, 2021, by RBS. BEAN and KATHLEEN BEAN, as General Partners of K&B COMPANY, a Florida general partnership, anronlli-e partnership's behalf, who are personally known to me or LXJ who produced driver's license as identification .4 otary Public of the State of Florida, and my commission expires on: =;gin+P�1 ROBIN J. RINCKEY (SEAL) W COWISSION # GG 366302 y E. ' RES 0: „h r 13 �3 NOT RY P _'�,_ I Robin J.Ri>ck- Page 168 of 708 INSTR 6091944 OR 5978 PG 1964 RECORDED 7/8/2021 2:49 PM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA Doc@.70 $17,313.10 REC $18.50 CONS $2,473,280.00 This Instrument Prepared By: Raymond J. Bowie, Esq. 900 Sixth Avenue South, Suite 104 Naples, Florida 34102 (239) 435-1007 Fax (239) 435-0021 File #21-04-4323 Consideration: $2,473,28D. ;..:._. WARRANTY DEED THIS WARRANTY DEF6 made this oQ-- day of July, 2021, by ROBERT S. BEAN and KATHLEEN BEAN, husband and wife, whose post office- ,a husband is 900 6th Ave. S., Suite 104, Naples, FL 34102, hereinafter called GRANTOR, to GREENWAY FRITGI3E'-AND, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose post office address is 7742 Alico Road, Fort Myers, FL 33912,11 emafter called GRANTEE, WITNESSETH: That the said Gfanto , or':tand in consideration of the sum of $10.00 and other valuable considerations, receipt of which is hereby ackriove ,gti hereby grants, bargains, sells and conveys to the said Grantee, their heirs, successors and assigns forever, the followrim';.declti'ed land situate, lying and being in the County of Collier, State of Florida, to wit: Parcel A South '/2 of the Northwest '/4, Less the'S '/2 of Government Lot 2 and Less the'4S South, Range 27 East, of Collier County Parcel B of Government Lot 2 and Less the North feet thereof, of Section 7, Township 51 South '/2 of the Southwest '/4 of the Northwest '/4, LgssA- e`.s,South 30 feet thereof and less West 30 feet thereof, of Section 7, Township 51 Sotitli,,, *Wge 27 East, of Collier County, Florida.�''`""� SUBJECT TO: 1) Restrictions, reservations, limitations and easements of recorii..:dfiin-i n to the subdivision if any now exist but an such interests as may have terminated are not hereby reimposed; 2 a cab dI nin land use building Y Y Y P ) PP g, g code and other governmental restrictions; 3) outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record; i -aay; 4) real estate taxes and assessments for the year 2021 and subsequent years. f For Information Purposes Only: As to Parcel A: Tax Parcel I.D. No.: 00748760000 As to Parcel B: Tax Parcel I.D. No.: 00748920002 AND Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whatsoever, except as above noted. Page 1 of 2 pages 3 Page 169 of 708 *** OR 5978 PG 1965 *** IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor(s) have signed their names below on the date first above written: WITNESSES: (as to all Grantors) Name: GRANTOR: �� / 020�� ROBERT S. BEAN KATHLEEN BEAN Na Robin J. Rinckev v' ALL' STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was ackn wledged before me, tb' ' de�r'I d Notary Public by means of LXJ physical presence or _] online notarization, this � day of July, 2021,`hy btQ .')E*.T S. BEAN and KATHLEEN BEAN, [1 who are personally known to me or LX_] who produced driver's license .fde'i4tification. I am a Notary Public of the State of Florida, and my commission expires on: ?�t�n;r,'yyc ROBA J, RNCKEY ,r t: h1Y COt: MISSI0W tt GG 366302 •'�' EXPIRES: October13,2023 ;e o,;�oa' Conded 7hru Nduy Public Undcrwrlters Page 170 of 708 INSTR 6091945 OR 5978 PG 1966 RECORDED 7/8/2021 2:49 PM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC@.70 $3,320.10 REC $18.50 CONS $474,220.00 This Instrument Prepared By; Raymond J. Bowie, Esq., .; 900 Sixth Avenue South, i/e 104 Naples, Florida 3410 (239)435-1007 + `, Fax (239) 435-0021 File 921-04-4323 Consideration: $474,220.00 WARRANTY DEED Mrn . THIS WARRANTY DEED mad this:S' day of June, 2021, by WILLIAM J. BEAN and KERRY L. BEAN, husband and wife, whose post office a( ,` 1s 93Q4 Olivia Place, Burke, VA 22015, hereinafter called GRANTOR, to GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND, LLC, 6: Plori"limited liability company, whose post office address is 7742 Alico Road, Fort Myers, FL 33912, hereinafter called t4ITI✓') s, WITNESSETH: That the said Grantor, for considerations, receipt of which is hereby acknowledge heirs, successors and assigns forever, the following des Florida, to wit: North '/2 of the South `/2 of the Sou 51 South, Range 27 East, of Collier consideration of the sum of $10.00 and other valuable rants, bargains, sells and conveys to the said Grantee, their �dsituate, lying and being in the County of Collier, State of Northeast '/4, of Section 7, Township , less any road right of way. SUBJECT TO: 1) Restrictions, reservations, limitations and easetfient's ; f record common to the subdivision if any eij e now exist, but any such interests as may have terminated are not hereby r; 2) applicable zoning, land use, building code and other governmental restrictions; 3) outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests;of record, if any; 4) real estate taxes and assessments for the year 2021 and subsequent years. For Information Purposes Only: Tax Parcel I.D. No.: 00750680903 . AND Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the satrreg`inst the lawful claims of all persons whatsoever, except as above noted. Page I of 2 pages Page 171 of 708 *** OR 5978 PG 1967 *** IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor(s) have signed their names below on the date first above written: WITNESSES: ::,`, GRANTOR: (as to all Grantors) Two sep rate witnesses required i .<.- " ;];. ^, WILLIAM J. BEAN If. RRY L. B rAN Name: STATE OF�t�Lt�" COUNTY OF�i'� The foregoing instrument was ack o vledged befor me, the underi presence or [_� online notarization, thi day of , 4, 2021, by WILLiA who are personally nown to me or who produced driver's licenses as ide of\Q(��tii,1 and my commission expires on: STEPHEN SOLAR SAMOY NOTARY PUBLIC COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEP.30, 2023 COMMISSION k 7B36366 NOTA tWUBLIC [Please affix visible or ary Public by means of LI/JPhysical BEAN and KERRY L. BEAN, [_] 49. I am a Notary Public of the State REAL) Notary Se'iAelowl Page 172 of 708 EXHIBIT I.0 \V $ -� -,5T Recordlnp $ 1],-) PDccumentary Stamps This Document Prepared By : C. Glenn Leonard LEONARD & MORRISON 1995 E. Oakland Park Blvd, Suite 105 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33306 PlacellDNumber:0075004006,00749400000 & others Warranty Deed 4065714 OR; 4275 PG; 2934 RECORDED in OFFICIAL RECORDS of COLLIER CO➢NTT, IL 08/29/2007 at 11:09AN DNIGRT 1. RROCK, CLERK CONS 206600.00 NEC FEE 52,50 INDEXING 2.00 Retn: DOC-,70 17266,20 NOORI & NAKSLIR 1107 N KARION AVE 1112 PUNTA GOR➢A FL 3395D This Indenture, Made this a84'4' day of Ld a c� S� , 2007 A.D.. Between Southern Tree Farms, a Florida general /partnership of the County of BROWARD , State of Florida , grantor, and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc., a Florida not -for -profit corporation exi:'s ing under the laws of the State of Florida whose address is: 1114,E , 1 am1 Trail East, Naples, FL 34113 of the County of Colll f,%�"� , State of Florida , grantee. Witnesseth that the GRANT R f 'arid in consideration of the sum of `_ TEN DOLLARS $10 t$ ) DOLLARS, and other good and valuable consi tid to GRANTOR in hand paid by GRANTEE, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold to the said GRANTEE and GRANTEE'S heirs, successors and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, lying and being in the County of Col• 'jeer ,' State of Florida to wit: Property located in Se 'ion 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Flori' more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by tls 7reference made a part hereof. Subject to reservations, resti'F•t''ons and easements of record, if L any, and real property taxes o q07 and subsequent years. �y d.t " L5 - + and the grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same again st ]a'wf tl claims of all persons whomsoever. In Witness Whereof, the grantor has hereunto set its hand and seal the d and year 6rsii---Zib�w't n. �t Signed, sealed and delivered in our S ut e n Tree Ftlsttj•I,))a Florida presence: hip' g ne part By (Seal) r.4,�pL �¢{Q%�L ie aid V. Morrison Witness General Partner P.O. Address: 3301 N.E. 16th Place, FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33305 Printed Name: J j: n 1 2 0 Witness STATE OF Florida COUNTY OF BROWARD The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 5f day of , 2007 by Richard W. Morrison, General Partner on behalf Cie Southern Tree Farms, a Florida General Partnership he has his he is personal lyknown to me or produced as identification. NWaryPublic State ofFlorida Printed Name: fan Carol Bartel Notary Public t,rxnmisslon DD504459 OF RLN•, Expwas 03/05/2010 My Commission Expires: SOUTHERNTREE I-- C—ntcd by t' Display Systems, Inc., 2DO7 (a63)763-5555 F—FL%%D-I Page 173 of 708 OR; 4275 PG; 2935 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantors have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: Printed Name: Witness: 1 Printed Name: Witness: 611, The foregoing instrument"u!a: 2007 by Graham C. Lount, President2 corporation authorized in Florida, Get general partnership who is personally Win. S:\WP51\CGL\S\Southetntree farm signatures wd.wpd Southern Tree Farms, a Florida general partnership By 63618 Manitoba Ltd, a Manitoba Corpora 'o thorized in Florida Genera r By,�j Graham unt, President and sole Shareholder 410 Charleswood Lane Naples, Florida 33942 wledged before me this � day of le shareholder of 63618 Manitoba, Ltd, a Manitoba rtner on behalf of Southern Tree Farms, A Florida �►� ,.' -me wed �s '. as lu F l'%e d Name: W 114-i._►i., �6 J/lx<_ :,Public RgvaNc-a- o Fvt• ,w,r'ij?4 , CANA 04 r>iission expires: Page 174 of 708 OR; 4275 PG; 2936 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantors have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: Printed Name: Witness. - Printed Name: L! : Witness: STATE OF MICHI COUNTY OF M Southern Tree Farms, a Florida general ryership Bruce D. Quayl�Gene�ral�, 461 North Lakeshore Drive Ludington, MI 49431 The foregoing insA ""d 'was acknowledged before me this-�?r day of Ou,4us4 2007, by Bruce D. Quayle, G�' eral.Pa�tner on behalf of Southern Tree Farms, Fa lorida general partnership, who is personally krlo 'ri'ta; me or who has produced his as identification. `�,. Name: E c.i tL1 i . Gil a� dl Public 9mission expires: q- �- ,,-2013 EMILY L. GARLANQtNotary Public Mason Co4h ' higan My Commission Fire g ifl9-06-13 Page 175 of 708 OR: 4275 PG: 2937 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor has hereunto set its hand and seal the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence Printed Name: Witness, Printed N Witness STATE OF SOUTH C`Ae'f�OLINA COUNTY OF The foregoing instrurftt vs 2007 by Charles, Partner, on behalf of Southern Trek known,to me or who has produced Southern Tree Farms, a Florida general Partnership By Bum 'de Associates, Inc., a Michigan torpor io , General P ner By .— Charles Hocevar, President 50 Palmetto Bay Road, PMB Hilton Head Island, South Carolina 29938-5313 nowledged before me this day of President of Burnside Associates, Inc., General a Florida general partnership who is personally I L_NCSc,.-� as identification. Printed Name: Notary Public Mir Commission expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 29, 2012. Page 176 of 708 OR; 4275 PG; 2938 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantors have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written. Signed sealed and livered in our pr ence: Southern Tree Farms a Florida general 0,4'l6v'-t 17partner ip r r By ,7 Printed Name: u �2�(,'., Paul Rompot, Gene Partner Witness 10600 Laredo Road Naples, Florida 34114 Printed Name: f Witness: STATE OF FLORIDA•'` COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instruri ` twas-.acknowledged before me this �o�- day of � 2007, by Paul Rompot, General 1 . ner n behalf of Southern Tree Farms, a Florida eral partnership and who is personally, gWvn,'t-o me e has prod 1 FL (� as°tifation. �/ Named'v Public mission expires: ` 3 p I 1� 1 DE SAN11S SION N DD 60W October 30, 2010 >hry Pick Vn&W-1, r1 Page 177 of 708 *** OR; 4275 PG; 2939 *** EXHIBIT "A" THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 112 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THE WEST 30' RESERVED FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY; LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NOTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RUN SOUTH 00°D59'06" WEST 692.65 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 88"21'12" EAST 327.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 00'59'06" WEST 200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88*21'12" EAST 140,00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00'59'06" WEST 362.35. F ET; THENCE NORTH 88'21'12" WEST 467.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTF{,E,A ,1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE NORTH 00°59'06" EAST 562.35 FEET ALdt' Q LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE WEST 30.00 FEET RESERVED 'fiP1R Fi AD WAY EASEMENT. CONTAINING 5.39 ACRES MORE OR LESS. AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF IE 'NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 114 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP a57,S0 TH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND pM THE NORTH 1!2 OF THE SOU. 1/210F THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SC QT' .N,"A.tA)yGE 27 EAST, LYING AND BEING IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. t: AND\,7' F THE SOUTH 112 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF'OE.S'Q • THWEST 1!4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE � ,??c�am§T, LESS THE SOUTHERNMOST 30 FEET AND THE EASTERNMOST 30 FEET AS RO�CD,..`. ENT. ANDx' THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUW'i�1, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EASfi;Y THE EASTERLY 30 FEET FOR ROAD RIGHT OF AY'A ROAD RIGHT OF WAY, CONTAINING IN ALL 10 ACRES I OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF !R COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS tl�SOUTHERLY 30 FEET FOR R LESS, Page 178 of 708 INSTR 5502337 OR 5471 PG 3076 RECORDED 1/29/2018 10:02 AM PAGES 2 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC@.70 $6,300.00 REC $18.50 CONS $900,000.00 F This Document Prepared By and Return to: Law Office of Ronald S. Webster 800 N. Collier Blvd. Suite 203 Marco Island, FL 34145 Consideration: $900,000.00 Parcel 10 Number: Warranty Deed This Indenture, Made this t day of January , 2018 An , Bchvicen Timothy Mullen, a single man of the County of Coll±. State of Florida , grantor, nod Habitat for Htfnia'\ y of Collier County, Inc, a Florida not for profit corporat�^-,'• whose address is- 11145 Trni' ,1s Trail East, Naples, FL 34113 of the County of Collier f` , Slate of Florida , grantee. Witnesseth That the GRANTOR, •(r and in constdcration of tlic sum of --------------------- - T DOLLARS ($10)----------------------- DOLLARS, and other good and valuable considera"tien, Co . RANTOR in Irnad paid by GRANTEE, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold to the said GRA. E and GRANTEE'S heirs, successors and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, r 7:. lying and being in the County of collie r State of Florida to wit Parcel One: A parcel of land lying in the Sotith P/Z. `of• he Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4; Commencing at the is t Northwest corner of the Northeast 1/4'0heN ,rtheast 1/4 of Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, of the Public Records of Collier County; i , Aida, run South 00°59'06" West 692.65 feet along the West line of said Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast,] f'(he Point of Beginning; Thence South 80e2VI2" East 327.00 feet along the North line of said Sotitif i"d2tsf't e Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4; thence South 00°59'06" West 200.00 feet; thence South SB?2i'13':''�Fast 140.00 feet; thence South 00°59'06" West 362.35 feet; thence North 88121'12" West 467.O0, f t}1 West line of the Northeast 1/4 of the 9r Northeast 1/4; thence North 00e59'06" East 562.35 feet alftAd line to the Point of Beginning. The West 30 feet reserved for a roadway easement. Parcel Two: The South 1/2 of the South 1/2 of the North 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 o£tkfe'Iokast I/4 of Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, less the West 30 Parcel Three: The North 1/2 of the South 1/2 of the North 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, less the West 30 feet thereof. Subject to restrictions, reservations and easements of record, if any, and taxes subsequent to December 2017, Parcel ID# 00750640008 Parcel ID# 00750682008 Parcel ID# 00749040004 and the grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against lawful claims of all persons whomsoever Luer G—,—d by C D,,plq Sy,—,, N,.:ate (163)762.5555 Form WNM-1 Page 179 of 708 *** OR 5471 PG 3077 *** WArranty Deed . Page 2 Parcel ID Number: In Witness Whereof, the grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal the day and year first above %vritlen S' nc , scaled an el vered in pr sencc: Wt (Seal) Pri ted Name: VClV1 (/(� Timgthy,,Mullen ft,r�Q99 / _ PO Address`985 Caxambns Dr., \Inrco Island, FL33145 Printed (Nhma: Witness!l STATE OF�C.' v" COUNTY Or �C _ � 1 The foregoing instrument %vas a o%vled 'ed before me this t day of January , Zl)18 by Timothy Mullen, a s1 man nho is personally kuo%%n to me or eha has proqu coos % ^/3 os rdenu utron Printed N e: Notary Pub2ic, \•:���. My Commission Expires j l.'AR'fA1J,'J CAVAtL+GH jpdf �'¢�^fY1�'�l •'i M1IY:Cp=,�,�i3gC;JIff213J3 rs 1 ;��.;% �`r�;, EXPIgES hpnl4,2o19 2 18-19 U,a c.,,.,-d by o ouphy Sp—,, In•:oie (963)763-5M Fain p.N'p-2 Page 180 of 708 INSTR 5589322 OR 5535 PG 1113 RECORDED 7/23/2018 8:30 AM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC@.70 $2,800.00 REC $18.50 CONS $400,000.00 Prepared by and return to: William G. Morris Law Offices of William G. Morris, P.A. 247 North Collier Boulevard Suite 202 Marco Island, FL 34145 239-642-6020 File Number: 18RE60 .,,.. CONSIDERATION: $46.0;110u.oq Above This Line For Recording Warranty Deed This Warranty Deed made flue' I'6 day of July, 2018 between Patrick C. Weber, as Guardian for Patricia Gutierrez, and as the Personal Rept ntativeof the Estate of Juan Gutierrez, deceased whose post office address is 4680 Cardinal Way, Unit 203, Naples, FL "1;'1 j, grantor, and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc., a Florida not for profit corporation whose post office d0r;s— 5 11145 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34113, grantee: (Whenever used herein the terms "grantor" and "grantee" individuals, and the successors and assigns of corporations, Witnesseth, that said grantor, for and in conside-af4o ' good and valuable considerations to said grantor in hatid has granted, bargained, and sold to the said grantee, anal situate, lying and being in Collier County, Florida to -wit: parties to this instrument and the heirs, legal representatives, and assigns of The South 1/2 of the North 1/2 of the Southwest 1 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, less Parcel Identification Number: 00750160009 sum of TEN AND N0/100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other F,.said grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, ��Pheirs and assigns forever, the following described land, Grantor warrants that at the time of this conveyance, the, homestead within the meaning set forth in the constitution of to or a part of homestead property. Together with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto To Have and to Hold, the same in fee simple forever. beast 1/4 of Section 7, Township 51 East side for Roadway purposes. property is not the Grantor's _of Florida, nor is it contiguous appertaining. And the grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawfully seized of said%l nd.,in fee simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land; that the grantor hereby. f,,llp warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; and hat said land is free of all encumbrances, subject to the following exceptions: (a) ad valorem and non ad valorem real property taxes for the year of 2018 and subsequent years; (b) zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental authority; (c) outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any, and (d) restrictions, reservations and easements common to the subdivision. DoubleTlme® Page 181 of 708 *** OR 5535 PG 1114 *** In Witness Whereof, grantor has hereunto set grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing instrument was acknowledged befo`t Patricia Gutierrez, and as the Personal Represents, [X] has produced a driver's license as identification. [No ary Seall_ SARAH SMITH 1,y.Y P4 i 4t State of Florida -Notary Public Commission S GG 112148 My Commission Expires June 16, 2019 Warranty Deed - Page 2 Patrick C. We er, as Guardian for Patricia Gutierrez, and as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Juan Gutierrez day of July, 2018 by Patrick C. Weber, as Guardian for Estate of Juan Gutierrez, who [_] is personally known to me or �Wclu ra)� Expires: LJ��_ DoubleTime® Page 182 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) LEGAL DESCRIPTION Page 183 of 708 LEGAL DESCRIPTION GREENWAY — FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY DESCRIPTION: (AS DESCRIBED IN AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION TITLE COMMITMENT FILE NO.: 1144051, COMMITMENT DATE: MARCH 8, 2022 AT 11:00 PM): PARCELI: THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS 30 FEET OFF THE EAST SIDE FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES. PARCEL 2: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RUN SOUTH 00-59,06" WEST 692.65 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 80°21'12" EAST 327.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 00°59'06" WEST 200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88021'12" EAST 140.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°59'06" WEST 362.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88"21' 12" WEST 467.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE NORTH 00°59'06" EAST 562.35 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE WEST 30 FEET RESERVED FOR A ROADWAY EASEMENT. PARCEL 3: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE WEST 30 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL 4: THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE WEST 30 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL 5: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THE WEST 30' RESERVED FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY; LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING: Page 184 of 708 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RUN SOUTH 0°59'06" WEST 692.65 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 88°21'12" EAST 327.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 0059'06" WEST 200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°21' 12" EAST 140.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0059'06" WEST 362.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88021'12' WEST 467.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE NORTH 0059'06" EAST 562.35 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE WEST 30.00 FEET RESERVED FOR A ROAD WAY EASEMENT. AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, LYING AND BEING IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE EAST, LESS THE SOUTHERNMOST 30 FEET AND THE EASTERNMOST 30 FEET AS ROAD EASEMENT. AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, LESS THE EASTERLY 30 FEET FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY AND THE SOUTHERLY 30 FEET FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY, CONTAINING IN ALL 10 ACRES MORE OR LESS. AND, (AS DESCRIBED IN AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION TITLE COMMITMENT FILE NO.: It 4405,8, COMMITMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 05, 2021 AT 11:00 PM): PARCEL 6: PARCEL B SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, LESS THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF AND LESS THE WEST 30 FEET THEREOF, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. Page 185 of 708 PARCEL 7: PARCEL A SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, LESS THE SOUTH 1/2 OF GOVERNMENT LOT 2 AND LESS THE NORTH 1/2 OF GOVERMENT LOT 2 AND LESS THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 8: SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, AND NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, AND NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS ANY ROAD RIGHT OF WAY. PARCEL 9: NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS ANY ROAD RIGHT OF WAY. PARCEL 10: NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS ANY ROAD RIGHT OF WAY. PARCEL 11: NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS ANY ROAD RIGHT OF WAY. Page 186 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) LIST OF FOLIO NUMBERS Page 187 of 708 LIST OF FOLIO NUMBERS GREENWAY — FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC: 00748920002,00748760000,00750680903,00748400001,00749360001,00750560007 Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. 00748960004,00750160009,00749000002,00749080006,00750520005,00749160007, 00749400000,00750640008,00750040006,00750682008,00749040004 Page 1 of 1 H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\Upload 3-26-2024\List of Folio Numbers (3-26- 2024).docx Page 188 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) EXHIBITS IV.D.1, V.A.1, V.A.2, V.A.3, V.B.1, V.E.2 & V.F.1 Page 189 of 708 ................ ... . ................ ................. ....... . .......... ............... ............ .............. . . . ....... ........ .. . ........ ...... ......... . ..... ..... ................I_ ........ .. F 4 111t Tal LT T. . . . . . . . . . . . SUBJECT SITE. j, T"- NTEI . . .... . ....................... . . ........... .. . . . . .............. . ....... T ..... . .... ITI-7171 M, IT filfffd --------- -- - 'W T, 11 1 "I"l . ..... .......... at fill g . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ............. ..... r f, -p ... .... ------- -------------- - - --- ------- 117, C' lilt, C °pJJT Su .... .. . .... . ........ 0 - - - ----- - rassy 6C1, L&Tt Al '44 FU ... ca a. KI i ........ 0 Z ) Trrff ---Sand..f....l......l..d......L....N Andre LU ....... JAR 7 : Jam sRE . co0w..1.1 < —.. . _.I._...--------- --------- Cecil RD a >- oz- > JA' W' --Marete DR=.=--, IA I . . ... ....... . .. . . .......... .. . .... . . .... T '6TR" -51�'�"'I'ATTIU`W "�WTW "T ------ - ------ - ----- 11 1 AC ---, 1 VI 11A ------ :. .. 1�111.twuwiuw -IMIlitmu.1.1.1.1111 I L-A . ...... ....... . ...... .. . .... - --- --- .......... . .... -4 .. . . ....... ...... ..... ---- ---- -- - _4 AR ..... ......... - ....... . ...... IPER ........ . ..... . . ............ . ........... . Lf:�szcur_u f \ I _ .. .... . ....... .. ....... . . . .. ............ . ............... ....... .... .. ... ............ 03 .... ... . .. 1-J IM 0 250 500 MEMEni E-1 SUBJECT SITE SCALE IN FEET Dimple Encore Way CHECKED BY : PROJECTNas, FL. 34110 EXHIBIT IV.D.1 JAC 2021.108 Phone: (239) 254-2000 GREENWAY-FRITCHEY DRAWN BY CAD FILE NAME HOLE MONTES Florida Certificate of RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY MK GMPA DATE : EXHIBIT -ITEM ENONEERS-PLANNERS-SURVEYORS Authorization No.1772 JAN-2022 INSET Page 190 of 708 �Z 1� F �k III �Vr u W o s n o cc v C a E E X J ' V . W x E rn c E °14daso/ % a 5 d _ f 1p p g euwuos s� V LP351 Y �Grl 0 � �D :11 UUV Wal a A o Fay 9/va ul sseg iyA2 Ct 1 lm �rial rlderq, w a w F- U w Mn W C/) LL O U) F- J Id o zs s a s A`l -t Q �a = U w > O 52 Q Q Q LLILU Ca/i,sta �� W (D ul opelop fi bn e c� o)nfl IWisr ZeOe'Of An':RGIB rdro Meer 00 0 ti 0 (0 w N �— N O LL (n W Y o 4 0 U X i N N u� U a H- w g co m 0 o J co N W w i E Q ��u S Q k S } Q J — i -- UJ N Q J J Q W Q m w x H =_ wuj U 00 to W w m U .o is oPvrl N _ ---� N `S W p w f o a 'G J V O Z m 1 U n. f— LL w s W Q LU D i Q U Cl) � >- f ILL EMPEROR LN Q Z w W Q rR� 1 LU N jr VT e 4; 8 a31S3H�NVly � �[t�c 2zoz bt An ':Ia0735 rem .xozzuz Page 192 of 708 a Q § \ § \ \ e § § » \ bf §k$\4#) $ Nk6kk3k k �8 § § d S o 4 w 5 A o \$ §i 4 0! M 01 Q ic § m e 0 § cn Iti � E 001 �A�: r| �co Q w Q 2-j �w LL LL 0. -. � Q 7 � 2 wLU q LU IN II I I zzzzzzzzzz M � O g N � 1 � N C•i sf M O IV N (- ao w D LU I— o mQ � — J H 2 W u X 0: m ' W D V) LL W N m U.o aLLa In K F- O E W J TE O y a rill e wa U w 8�> LLo 1� W aQ 0 ~ z r `0 Z w 5 cl c w w co LU 4 � p c z $` W z LL w 4 a p H �' LL s� p o v� 3 0 fh U_' rA 1qy cn W W QQ x p p LL J G1 (p w D 7 0. z QC C} J Q C i.� cr v i Eon 1' 10CL 00 W I�® u 4� �++[sr zcez br on hxoz3s r� anzzac OD C) 0 LL U W lLOf O � w F UU} Cyn F F O a D O O cr W U Lu U) OJ F z J OU W U) z W F U U W ZLU U w zi LL > W W U U ca W W O O d U z O w U W d U ULL J O W m U 0 U 0 w o W WF U)w O Q Hz F- w O Q aK W U` � C� U H U) r w W LL(L -10 U OW w Z) Q U W= W F ai U O � �a w0 WF= W C7 m 2 DQ W F r0 v U W U' J W F J U LL U > W U J CO d J U = to a H U S W z W Q w ❑ W LL LL LL W CA Nlia6el Nl ellelelel, .. � NI —I .- _ `� .. Nl�aPelGe1 � ..... Nl �Pel 4` Da rvavd sl xis - Oa NOIN—,. \'ake P.—S ld N!-I — AlO Renck RD I i I I I I 1 � 1 I / 'OOPPDO(N \ ..' ON190 OS -: �dS 9PT s .� ` W W H �1S3NON6 NI SStlB uuasE all Lu vn ao..A Soy wA Z 0 Z � �. AN Q J an 3vr3 CXR 'a0 uxleeiO 'CHERRY OANS TR 00.1 S 8 Da lsooa IWZ9f ZZOS 'Of-n'N0135 Vdn7 "MOL $ `q! § . g z CIJ w 2® 3 c , �{)!� ! ! i°° { b/w�\$ �d 2! �mz§§ 0E-\2�® E!-,.¥t o § c 6 k § M M !■2/ ||° �' .`/ ! ! 22200< 3§0ƒ®j 8 6elt ? 2 )|! / § \ b k||!/4/ Q E R.ylGi H g \ w .)_|} , , ■ . 2 !■!�!2 ii 2 | 2 § § ; / « k GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) EXHIBIT V.C.1- ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Page 197 of 708 EXHIBIT V.C.1 GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT February 2023 Prepared For: Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 208-4079 Prepared By: Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 274-0067 Project No. 21HLN3451 Page 198 of 708 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction...................................................................... Environmental Data Authors ........................................... Vegetation Descriptions................................................... Listed Species Survey ..................................................... Native Vegetation Preservation ...................................... References....................................................................... Page .............................................................. l ..............................................................1 ..............................................................1 ..............................................................5 ..............................................................6 ..............................................................7 n Page 199 of 708 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Native and Non -Native Habitat Types and Acreages............................................6 Page 200 of 708 Exhibit 1. Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 LIST OF EXHIBITS Project Location Map Aerial with FLUCFCS and Wetlands ................... Native and Non -Native Habitat Map Listed Species Survey Report Page ..................................... El-1 ..................................... E2-1 ..E3-1 E4-1 ill Page 201 of 708 INTRODUCTION The following Environmental Data (ED) Report is provided in support of the zoning amendment request for Greenway Road Parcel (Project). The ED report was prepared in accordance with the Collier County ED submittal requirements outlined in Chapter 3.08.00 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The Project totals approximately 238.92 acres and is located in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County (Exhibit 1). More specifically, the Project site is located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41) and Collier Boulevard (State Road 951), and 0.6f mile north of the intersection of U.S. 41 and Greenway Road. The Project is bordered by a tree farm and other agricultural land uses to the north, agricultural land uses to the east, Fritchey Road and undeveloped land to the south, and Greenway Road to the west. The Project site is comprised of forested and non -forested upland and wetland areas that contain high levels of cover by exotic vegetation including earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis) and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia). Portions of the Project site are used for cattle grazing and other agricultural land uses including aquaculture and a tree nursery. The following ED includes details regarding the authors of this report, vegetation descriptions for the various habitats on -site, results of the listed species survey, and the minimum native vegetation preservation requirement. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA AUTHORS This report was prepared by Bethany Brosious and Caitlin Ramsey. They both satisfy the environmental credential and experience requirements, per Section 3.08.00(A)2 of the Collier County LDC. Mrs. Brosious is a Senior Ecologist with Passarella & Associates, Inc. (PAI), with 18 years of consulting experience in the environmental industry. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Animal Sciences from the University of Florida and a Master of Science degree in Environmental Sciences from Florida Gulf Coast University. Ms. Ramsey is an Ecologist with PAI, with one year of consulting experience in the environmental industry. She holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Education from the University of North Florida and a Master of Arts degree in Biology from University of North Florida. VEGETATION DESCRIPTIONS The existing land use includes disturbed land with varying degrees of exotic infestation. The vegetation associations for the property were delineated using December 2020 rectified color aerials and groundtruthing was conducted on April 8, 2022. Page 202 of 708 The delineation was classified based on the nomenclature of the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) Levels III and IV (Florida Department of Transportation 1999). Level IV FLUCFCS was utilized to denote disturbance, and "E" codes were used to identify levels of exotic species invasion (e.g., Brazilian pepper and earleaf acacia). AutoCAD Map 3D 2021 software was used to determine the acreage of each mapped polygon, produce summaries, and generate the FLUCFCS map (Exhibit 2). A total of 24 vegetative associations on -site (i.e., FLUCFCS codes) were identified on the property. The dominant habitat type on the property is Tree Nursery (FLUCFCS Code 241), accounting for 22.5 percent of the property (53.76± acres). Other prominent habitat types include Low Pasture (FLUCFCS Code 262) (14.7 percent), Aquaculture (FLUCFCS Code 254) (10.7 percent), and Mixed Exotics (FLUCFCS Code 439) (10.1 percent). Exotic vegetation documented on -site includes, but is not limited to, Brazilian pepper, earleaf acacia, spermacoce (Spermacoce verticillata), and torpedograss (Panicum repens). The Project site is dominated by exotic vegetation and contains minimal cover by native vegetation species. , The Project site contains 66.92f acres of South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and State 404 jurisdictional wetlands (Exhibit 2). The jurisdictional wetlands identified by FLUCFCS code includes Low Pasture (FLUCFCS Code 262); Brazilian Pepper, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 4221); Mixed Wetland Hardwoods, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 6179 E4); Willow/Pop Ash/Pond Apple, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 6189 E4); Exotic Wetland Hardwoods (FLUCFCS Code 619); Cypress, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Codes 6219 E1 and E4); Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 6249 E4); and Disturbed Land, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 7401). The resulting acreage and a description for each FLUCFCS classification are outlined below. Residential (FLUCFCS Code 110) This land use type consists of a residential property including the driveway and maintained yard. Improved Pasture (FLUCFCS Code 211) This land use type consists of an open field utilized for cattle grazing. The canopy is open, and the sub -canopy is primarily open with scattered Brazilian pepper. The ground cover consists of spermacoce, caesarweed (Urena lobata), bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum), and broomsedge bluestem (Andropogon virginicus). Tree Nursea (FLUCFCS Code 241) This land use type consists of a tree farm. Aquaculture (FLUCFCS Code 254) This land use type consists of the remaining stocking ponds and ditch systems associated with an inactive aquaculture business. Low Pasture (FLUCFCS Code 262) This wetland land use type consists of a pasture that is utilized for cattle grazing. The sub -canopy is primarily open with very few scattered Peruvian primrose willow (Ludwigia peruviana). The 2 Page 203 of 708 ground cover is primarily torpedograss (Panicum repens) with scattered Asiatic pennywort (Centella asiatica), climbing hempvine (Mikania scandens), water pennywort (Hydrocotyle umbellata), musky mint (Hyptis alata), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), false fennel (Eupatorium leptophyllum), bushy bluestem (Andropogon glomeratus), and paragrass (Urochloa mutica). Pine Flatwoods Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4119 E4) The canopy of this upland habitat type includes slash pine (Pinus elliottii), earleaf acacia, and Java plum (Syzygium cumini). The sub -canopy includes earleaf acacia, Brazilian pepper, Java plum, and saw palmetto (Serenoa repens). The ground cover includes saw palmetto, muscadine grapevine (Vitis rotundifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), caesarweed, and Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia). Pine Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4159 E4) The canopy of this upland habitat type is primarily slash pine with few scattered cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), earleaf acacia, and Java plum. The sub -canopy includes Brazilian pepper, cabbage palm, Java plum, and earleaf acacia. The ground cover includes caesarweed, bahiagrass, spermacoce, earleaf acacia, Brazilian pepper, and broomsedge bluestem. Brazilian Pepper (FLUCFCS Code 422) This disturbed upland habitat type consists primarily of Brazilian pepper in the canopy and sub - canopy. Other species in the canopy and sub -canopy include few scattered Java plum and earleaf acacia. The ground cover includes Brazilian pepper, earleaf acacia, caesarweed, and Boston fern (Nephrolepis exaltata). Brazilian Pepper, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 4221) This disturbed wetland community type consists of Brazilian pepper in the canopy and sub - canopy. The ground cover is open. Mixed Exotics (FLUCFCS Code 439) The canopy and sub -canopy of this disturbed upland habitat type consist primarily of Java plum, earleaf acacia, and Brazilian pepper. The ground cover includes caesarweed, earleaf acacia, Java plum, and spermacoce. Ditch (FLUCFCS Code 514) This "other surface water" (OSW) community type includes agricultural ditches that support the pasture areas, aquaculture land use and tree nursery. The edges contain Brazilian pepper, earleaf acacia, and Java plum in the canopy and sub -canopy, in addition to Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana). The ground cover ranges from open ground to densely vegetated with paragrass. Shallow Pond (FLUCFCS Code 525) This OSW community type has an open canopy with few scattered Carolina willow and Peruvian primrose willow in the sub -canopy. The ground cover includes pickerelweed, creeping primrose willow (Ludwigia repens), dotted smartweed (Persicaria punctata), viviparous spikerush (Eleocharis vivipara), and Baldwin's spikerush (Eleocharis baldwinii). Page 204 of 708 Mixed Wetland Hardwoods Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6179 E4) The canopy of this disturbed wetland habitat type includes laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), slash pine, bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), Java plum, earleaf acacia, and Brazilian pepper. The sub -canopy includes Brazilian pepper, Java plum, wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides), laurel oak, bald cypress, and earleaf acacia. The ground cover includes swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum) and Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica). Willow/Pop Ash/Pond Apple Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6189 E4) The canopy of this disturbed wetland habitat type includes Carolina willow, pop ash (Fraxinus caroliniana), pond apple (Annona glabra), and bald cypress. The sub -canopy includes Brazilian pepper, Carolina willow, pop ash, pond apple, Peruvian primrose willow, fig (Ficus sp.), and buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis). The ground cover consists of fireflag (Thalia geniculata), buttonbush, water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes), and Florida pellitory (Parietaria floridana). Exotic Wetland Hardwoods (FLUCFCS Code 619) The canopy and sub -canopy of this disturbed wetland habitat type consists of Java plum, Brazilian pepper, earleaf acacia, and few scattered bald cypress. The ground cover includes swamp fern, chain fern, water pennywort, and Asiatic pennywort (Centella asiatica). Cypress, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 62.19 El) The canopy of this wetland habitat type includes primarily bald cypress with a few red maple (Acer rubrum). The sub -canopy consists of scattered bald cypress, buttonbush, saltbush (Baccharis halimifolia), Java plum, and Brazilian pepper. The ground cover includes scattered swamp fern, fireflag, buttonbush, water lettuce, and Florida pellitory. Cypress Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6219 E4) The vegetative composition of this wetland habitat type is similar to that of FLUCFCS Code 6219 El; however, the canopy and sub -canopy is highly infested with Brazilian pepper, Java plum, and earleaf acacia. Cypress/Pine Disturbed and Drained (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6245 E4) The canopy of this disturbed wetland habitat type consists of slash pine, bald cypress, cabbage palm, Java plum, and earleaf acacia. The sub -canopy includes Brazilian pepper, Java plum, earleaf acacia, and cabbage palm. The ground cover includes water pennywort, Asiatic pennywort, spermacoce, bushy bluestem, torpedograss, climbing hempvine, caesarweed, and false fennel. Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6249 E4) The canopy of this disturbed wetland habitat type consists of slash pine, bald cypress, cabbage palm with Java plum and earleaf acacia. The sub -canopy includes Brazilian pepper, Java plum, earleaf acacia, and cabbage palm. The ground cover includes water pennywort, Asiatic pennywort, spermacoce, bushy bluestem, torpedograss, climbing hempvine, and false fennel. M Page 205 of 708 Disturbed Land (FLUCFCS Code 740) This land use type consists of disturbed lands including a storage facility. The canopy and sub - canopy are open and the ground cover consists of bahiagrass, spermacoce, caesarweed, and largeflower Mexican clover (Richardia grandiflora). Disturbed Land, Hydric FLUCFCS Code 7401) This hydric disturbed land use type has an open canopy with scattered Carolina willow, Brazilian pepper, and Peruvian primrose willow in the sub -canopy. The ground cover is dominantly paragrass with scattered Peruvian primrose willow and false fennel. Spoil Areas (FLUCFCS Code 743) This land use type includes a vegetated spoil pile made up of rock, tile, and brick. The canopy is primarily open, but includes Java plum and ficus. The sub -canopy includes Brazilian pepper and castor bean (Ricinus communis). The ground cover includes beggar -ticks (Bidens alba), spermacoce, castor bean, bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon), and largeflower Mexican clover. Berm (FLUCFCS Code 747) This land use type consists of a system of berms running parallel to one or more ditch systems. The canopy and sub -canopy are vegetated with earleaf acacia, Java plum, and Brazilian pepper. The ground cover is primarily open, with scattered paragrass. Roads FLUCFCS Code 814) This land use type consists of a paved roadway. LISTED SPECIES SURVEY A listed species survey was conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. on the Project in April 2022 to determine if the site is being utilized by wildlife species listed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services as threatened, endangered, or for species protected by Collier County. During the survey, two American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) and two little blue herons (Egretta caerulea) were observed in the aquaculture ponds located on the northern portion of the Project. Additionally, Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) sign (i.e., tracks) were observed on both the northern and eastern portions of the Project. The listed species survey methodology and results are provided as Exhibit 4. The American alligator is listed as a state and federally designated threatened species due to its similarity of appearance to the American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus). The little blue heron is listed as a state threatened species. The Florida panther is listed as a state and federally endangered species. Scattered occurrences of Florida butterfly orchids (Encyclia tampensis), twisted air plants (Tillandsia flexuosa), inflated wild pines (Tillandsia balbisiana), and stiff -leaved wild pines (Tillandsia fasciculata) were observed on -site within the forested wetland areas. Page 206 of 708 The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services lists the stiff -leaved wild pine as endangered, the inflated wild pine and twisted air plant as threatened, and the Florida butterfly orchid as commercially exploited. In addition, these species are considered Less Rare Plants by Collier County LDC Section 3.04.03. Although the plants are protected at the state and local levels of government, they are rather ubiquitous to Southwest Florida. No federally listed plant species were documented on the Project. NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVATION The 238.921 acres Project site is comprised of 33.0+ acres of native vegetation. Areas comprised of agricultural land uses, melaleuca or other mixed exotics, the on -site ditches, shallow pond, spoil areas, berm, disturbed lands, and roadway, were classified as non-native vegetation and have been excluded from the native vegetation calculation. The Project site is designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use — Receiving Land. Section 3.05.07.C.1.a of the Collier County LDC requires retention and preservation of 40 percent of the on -site native vegetation for a residential development for Rural Fringe Mixed Use — Receiving Land, which for this Project equates to a 13.24: acre preserve requirement (i.e., 33.04: acres of native vegetation x 40 percent = 13.2t acres of required native vegetation preserve) (Exhibit 3). Table 1 provides a summary of the native vegetation communities on -site and the native vegetation preservation calculation. Table 1. Native and Non -Native Habitat Types and Acreages FLUCFCS Code Description Native ' Vegetation Acreage Non -Native Vegetation Acreage 110 Residential - 5.92 211 Improved Pasture - 7.45 241 Tree Nurse - 53.76 254 A uaculture - 25.51 262 Low Pasture - 35.22 4119 E4 Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed 76-100% Exotics 1.18 - 4159 E4 Pine, Disturbed 76-100% Exotics 2.35 - 422 Brazilian Pepper - 3.61 4221 Brazilian Pepper, H dric - 1.98 439 Mixed Exotics - 24.12 514 Ditch - 17.73 525 Shallow Pond - 2.35 6179 E4 Mixed Wetland Hardwoods, Disturbed 76-100% Exotics 3.49 - 6189 E4 Willow/Pop Ash/Pond Apple, Disturbed 76-100% Exotics 2.41 - 619 Exotic Wetland Hardwoods - 5.01 6219 E1 Cypress, Disturbed 0-24% Exotics 0.43 - Page 207 of 708 Table L(Continued) Native Non -Native FLUCFCS Description Vegetation Vegetation Code Acreage Acreage 6219 E2 Cypress, Disturbed 76-100% Exotics 12.90 - 6245 E4 Cypress/Pine, Disturbed and Drained 76-100% Exotics 6.06 - 6249 E4 Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm, Disturbed 4.18 - 76-100% Exotics 740 Disturbed Land - 8.09 7401 Disturbed Land, H dric - 1.30 743 Spoil Areas - 3.16 747 Beim - 6.98 814 Road - 3.73 Total 33.00 205.92 Minimum Retained Native Vegetation Requirement for Residential or Mixed -Use Development 13.21 acres (Native Vegetation Acreage, 33.0± Acre x 40 Percent) The applicant proposes to preserve and enhance a minimum of 13.2± acres of native vegetation in the western portion of the Project site. Please see the Master Concept Plan for the location of the on -site preserve area. Due to the overall lack of native vegetation on -site, the location of the proposed preserve area was selected to include on -site wetland habitat, which is contiguous with off -site wetland areas, in accordance with Section 3.05.07.A.5 of the Collier County LDC. Enhancement activities within the on -site preserve area will include the removal of exotic vegetation and supplemental plantings of native vegetation where needed. In addition, the on -site preserve area will be protected in perpetuity via a conservation easement. REFERENCES Florida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Procedure No. 550-010-001-a. Second Edition. Page 208 of 708 EXHIBIT I PROJECT LOCATION MAP Page 209 of 708 F, mr- L BAL PALMRD my N i 9 ' � 3N.�—, � � J N � � -.- TOWERe� W 102ND AVE SE MANATEE RD_,"101 i .W , A ( M`(n 14,. s-V i.,. I A 1AMq_ J m-aChl4MPl .o r SH 9UN � g )L'I - _ - iz v I ��T? i •, Q MOCK� INSA\L DR,awi1�,, 4e ---- _ SAN.MARC0 RD --- EXVIBIT 1. PROTECT LOCATION EXHIBIT 2 AERIAL WITH FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS Page 211 of 708 00 0 0 N N (6 d EXHIBIT 3 NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE HABITAT MAP Page 213 of 708 O a a� CC 1/ L a u 3� ryM, a a z m A 4 _ ^a a.Q m ry Q a as �< a 'n a n ��♦ N11Q oaa 6S� .. '•,: a I�J�e�N��NONm�xxxxxxxx�p�x��o o r a o xoNm�m W +I H+I +I+I H+I +I+I+I+I +I+I+l+l+l+l+l +I+I+I +I+I+�!I H Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 6 6 Q Q Q Q Q g Q ¢ u¢��nv{iym a%mm��cmiveoiSi�mocmi_mym�R Om mNt7iN m N NNm ym�N U yhW W� O U or CC C no to n C~X ❑ O O�x O F O ¢ W Opa Ox`d aQ ~ F W 4 p Wp O O= F Z- t J O U z z QaN 12021aialaF l]Za W >¢ 2 K U g O 17_IVV 171VV W 60 �� V N N N m Q 2 Q m¢ W a 3 z Z¢¢ W F Q% O¢¢¢¢ N N a¢ Q ¢¢ Q a a m m f O N W U U U U O 0. m¢ U D w a W W W W W W m E¢ o ¢LL zQ wa 3 � >Q 3 a y oa as ,mio n ¢ Ea LLo u� �F mi ozza Wo Z a^i .. 44 F �a w LL m¢ * ti Q N Q > Q r� W d >0 Q d oQ Q V Zp QH J Z QN K Q x aw f� m W ZQ J¢ V LLm y~o Z.-. zs o mJ u W Z mm x �p a�a• Wm~ ® ❑ ul m � W m i- �o pu U. uEo ;ow awN z u3 ¢ a JLLLL ¢ rca -aa AYMN338e- u�Q my• 7 IQ m Ln w u Q � b b s y 6 ^ a rxo�o emu; �ai �x �ci jai a � «w 0 O N 0) co IL EXHIBIT 4 LISTED SPECIES SURVEY REPORT Page 215 of 708 GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL LISTED SPECIES SURVEY REPORT February 2023 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report documents the results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. in April 2022 for the Greenway Road Parcel (Project). The Project totals approximately 238.92-± acres and is located in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County. The Project is approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41) and Collier Boulevard (State Road 951), and 0.6 mile north of the intersection of U.S. 41 and Greenway Road (Appendix A). The Project is bordered by a tree farm and other agricultural land uses to the north, agricultural land uses to the east, Fritchey Road and undeveloped land to the south, and Greenway Road to the west (Appendix B). 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD SURVEY METHODOLOGY A literature review and field survey was conducted to determine if the Project site was being utilized by state or federally listed species as identified by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. In addition, the Project site was surveyed for plant species listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) and the USFWS as endangered, threatened, or commercially exploited and for plant species that are included on the Collier County Rare and Less Rare Plants lists (Land Development Code (LDC) Section 3.04.03). 2.1 Literature Review The literature review involved an examination of available information on listed species in the Project's geographical region. The literature sources reviewed included the FWCC's Florida's Endangered and Threatened Species (2021); Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies (Runde et al. 1991); National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007); Landscape -Scale Conservation for the Florida Panther (Kautz et al. 2006); the Audubon EagleWatch database of bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nest locations and database information from the USFWS and the FWCC for telemetry locations of the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), bald eagle, red - cockaded woodpecker (RCW) (Picoides borealis), and wading bird rookeries (e.g., wood stork (Mycteria americana)) in Collier County. E4-1 Page 216 of 708 The Audubon EagleWatch, FWCC, and USFWS database information is updated on a periodic basis and is current through different dates, depending on the species. The database information that was reviewed is current through the noted dates for the following species: Florida panther telemetry — June 2021; bald eagle nest locations — May 2021; RCW— 2021; and scrub jay locations — 2021. 2.2 Field Survey The field survey was conducted during daylight hours by qualified ecologists walking parallel belt transects across the Project site. Transects were spaced to ensure that sufficient visual coverage of ground and flora was obtained. At regular intervals, the ecologists stopped, remained quiet, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. The survey was conducted with the aid of 8x or l Ox power binoculars. 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 Literature Review According to the Audubon EagleWatch and FWCC databases, the closest bald eagle nest (CO-039) is located approximately 0.6 mile to the south of the property (Appendix Q. This distance is beyond the FWCC and the USFWS recommended 660-foot buffer protection zone for active and alternate bald eagle nests. The bald eagle was delisted under the federal Endangered Species Act in 2007, but it is still protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies (Runde et al. 1991) and the FWCC database were referenced for the locations of breeding colonies for both listed and non -listed wading birds including, but not limited to, snowy egret (Egretta thula), roseate spoonbill (Ajaia ajaja), little blue heron (Egretta caerulea), and tri-colored heron (Egretta tricolor). The FWCC information is current through 1999. According to these sources, there are no wading bird colonies on -site or in the vicinity of the Project site (Appendix Q. The Project is located within the USFWS consultation area for the RCW (Appendix D). The FWCC database indicates that the nearest RCW occurrence is approximately 2.7 miles northwest of the Project site. The Project and adjacent surrounding properties contain potential RCW habitat which includes forested habitat with pines in the canopy. The RCW is a state and federally listed endangered species. The USFWS Draft Standard Local Operating Procedures for Wood Storks (Mycteria americana) recognizes a 30-kilometer (18.6-mile) zone surrounding a colony as a core foraging area (CFA) (2002). The Project is not located within the CFAs of any documented wood stork colonies but contains wetland habitat and surface waters that may be considered as suitable foraging habitat (Appendix E). The wood stork is a state and federally listed threatened species. E4-2 Page 217 of 708 The Project is located within the USFWS consultation area for the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) (Appendix F); however, there are no documented occurrences of Florida scrub jays on the Project site and the Project does not contain scrub jay habitat. The Florida scrub jay is a state and federally listed threatened species. The Project is located within the USFWS consultation area for the crested caracara (Caracara cheriway) (Appendix G) and contains potential nesting and foraging habitat. The crested caracara is a state and federally listed threatened species. The Project is located within the USFWS Secondary Zone for the Florida panther (Appendix H). Per the FWCC database, historical panther telemetry has been recorded on -site and within the vicinity of the Project. The most recent telemetry recorded was from Florida Panther 193 on June 5, 2019 (Appendix Q. The Florida panther is a state and federally listed endangered species. The Project is located within the USFWS consultation area for the Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus) (FBB) (Appendix I). The Project site contains potential FBB roosting and foraging habitat. The FBB is a state and federally listed endangered species. 3.2 Field Survey A field survey was conducted on April 8, 19, and 22, 2022 to determine if the Project site is being utilized by wildlife species listed by the FWCC and the USFWS as threatened, endangered, or for species protected by Collier County. Approximate transect locations and spacing are shown on (Appendix J). Weather conditions during the survey are described in Table 1. Table 1. Summary of Weather Conditions Date Weather Conditions Temperatures ranged from the low to high 70s, 10-15 mph winds, April 8, 2022 and -partly cloudy skies. Temperatures ranged from the high 70s to the high 80s, 10-15 mph April 19, 2022 winds, and partly cloudy skies. Temperatures ranged from the high 70s to high 80s, 15-25 mph April 22, 2022 winds, and partly cloudy skies. During the survey, two American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) and two little blue herons were observed in the aquaculture ponds on the north part of the Project (Appendix J). In addition, tracks from a Florida panther were observed on the northern and eastern portions of the Project. The American alligator is listed as a state and federally threatened species due to its similarity of appearance to the American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus). The little blue heron is also listed as state threatened species and the Florida panther is a state and federally listed endangered species. E4-3 Page 218 of 708 In addition, scattered occurrences of Florida butterfly orchids (Encyclia tampensis), twisted air plants (Tillandsia flexuosa), inflated wild pines (Tillandsia balbisiana), and stiff -leaved wild pines (Tillandsia fasciculata), were observed on -site within the forested wetland areas (Appendix J). The FDACS lists the stiff -leaved wild pine as endangered, the inflated wild pine and twisted air plant as threatened, and the Florida butterfly orchid as commercially exploited. In addition, these species are included on the "Less Rare Plant" list per the Collier County LDC Section 3.04.03. Although the plants are protected at the state and local levels of government, they are rather ubiquitous to Southwest Florida. No federally listed plant species were documented on the Project site. 4.0 SUMMARY The literature search and review of agency databases identified historical telemetry for Florida panthers on the Project site, with the most recent telemetry recorded in June 2019. The Project is not located within the vicinity of an active bald eagle nest and is not located within the CFA of a documented wood stork colony. The Project is located within the USFWS consultation area for the RCW, Florida scrub jay, and FBB and is within the USFWS Secondary Zone for the Florida panther. Field surveys for listed species was conducted on April 8, 19, and 22, 2022. During the surveys, two American alligators, two little blue herons, and tracks from a Florida panther were documented on the Project site. In addition, scattered occurrences of Florida butterfly orchids, twisted air plants, inflated wild pines, and stiff leaved wild pines were documented within the forested wetland areas. 5.0 REFERENCES Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2021. Florida's Endangered and Threatened Species. Official Lists, Bureau of Non -Game Wildlife, Division of Wildlife. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Tallahassee, Florida. Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, J. Comiskey, D. Jansen, D. Jennings, J. Kasbohm, F. Mazzotti, R. McBride, L. Richardson, K. Root. 2006. How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation, Volume 130, Issue 1, Pages 118-133 Runde, D.E., J.A. Gore, J.A. Hovis, M.S. Robson, and P.D. Southall. 1991. Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies, Update 1986 - 1989. Nongame Wildlife Program Technical Report No. 10. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. E4-4 Page 219 of 708 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Draft Standard Local Operating Procedures for Endangered Species - Wood Storks. South Florida Ecological Services Office. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. E4-5 Page 220 of 708 APPENDIX A PROJECT LOCATION MAP Page 221 of 708 o r j ou :? .y _ .,. ,� JSABAL PALM RD m UERN, y,��'� � I NO i iA l.f PROJECT LOCATION SEC 1 W • _.. 45 TOWER ( °Cz - �- - �� - 102ND AVE SE.. - i J' I %FAR M,PfIONSF/jA. Q y ? W z s. SN� ten" F1J OP3�d�f.e KSS } t jER Q e LL y r O o: Y 7,.2 F tr¢. F a.LL a O �0 w s f\O�y RGy �ayiApSyDR:: �� SUNNYGROUE•PVE �W',A�arl\ L Q S� Qca - t" APPENDIX A. 5 4 J 1 _, SANMARGO'RD - J PROJECT• • APPENDIX B AERIAL WITH BOUNDARY Page 223 of 708 'e sm _ • � W tU„fit t oar o FW W :.. pMtE ¢ ' auu 1E. 5 t W O � o a O V o O Q o Z ¢ O N W (7 ON N IJ W J mW 00 0 0 N N (6 d ,�, APPENDIX C DOCUMENTED OCCURRENCES OF LISTED SPECES Page 225 of 708 Z 0 a U O J O F W F W Y a V U W Q O Z a J F p o o F ci a W 2 U I W o Z z w p J � � J G i a n- r a < a r V a a K a OJ U m U- f co • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •'L•• • • W • • • • • '•• •• : • • •• J • • ¢ i • �'i • • �• do o w • • •• • • • ti • •• • i • •. r�1 • •• • ' • • • to oop �• •• ® j ' U O SM• �' ' v W 00 0 r- 0 CD N N m a_ APPENDIX D RCW CONSULTATION AREA WITH LOCATIONS Page 227 of 708 ' NOTES: RED -COCKADED WOODPECKER LOCATIONS b 4 K WERE ACQUIRED FROM THE FWCC ON - SEPTEMBER 2021. e �l i RED -COCKADED WOODPECKER CONSULTATION AREA WAS ACQUIRED q FROM THE USFWS ON SEPTEMBER 2021. O DRAWN BY DATE 3 APPENDIX D. RCW CONSULTATION AREA WITH LOCATIONS D /TEE/22 WPASSARELLA REVIEWED BY - GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL - C.G. EC-0�Op,18I5 & SSOCIATES REVISED DATE ATE DATE _ Page 228 of 708 APPENDIX E FLORIDA WOOD STORK NESTING COLONIES AND 18.6 MILE CORE FORAGING AREAS Page 229 of 708 z 0 m O Q � V � a a z 0 W 0 uj �o Y o J= o m o W > o w V Z 0 J Q F _ ZEn 0 10 an d o W o o N a rn W O V O O O O K J H F O Q (D J �O .o .O .o ID M U too#", O CO • } T t0 \ W { wi Ir Q } � E O KS PK R h� le - . OM Z LL N Z!K 2 ¢ d W F NWow � U 0;0� O y u 3 rn3 r ^ v N O Z = r `^ V ) Z J o F Q Cgag, �O o Q o ❑ oar 2FQ a i a100 s3Gvl�0a3A3:- a J m - W / z W O J. (7 m _ LIVINGST� AIRPORT -PULLING RD � p k H O v� u P4 V Z. W O P. w Op A A U 0O dw ' w c7 wq z APPENDIX F SCRUB JAY CONSULTATION AREA WITH LOCATIONS Page 231 of 708 s Ai —• v st- � g�^ t LEGEND' e D GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL SCRUB JAY LOCATION o a o > }? Q SCRUB JAY CONSULTATION AREA N O �S`eQv' q7 ' NOTES: 4� SCRUB JAY LOCATIONS WERE ACQUIRED o FROM THE USFWS ON SEPTEMBER 2021. J SCRUB JAY CONSULTATION AREA WAS � g ACQUIRED FROM THE USFWS ON SEPTEMBER 2021. ' APPENDIX F. SCRUB JAY CONSULTATION AREA T.S. 5/4/22 REVIENED BY DATE WPASSARELLA w WITH LOCATIONS C.G. 5/4/22 GREENWAY ROAD PARCELD��O & SSOCIATES 2 REVISED DATE �� r Page 232 of 708 APPENDIX G CRESTED CARACARA CONSULTATION AREA WITH LOCATIONS Page 233 of 708 .�.. N: ........... ........... is :©: r } j . --� - .... :..........: .:.: : ..... .. ............ :....: .............. ,i t Gulf......................................................................................:.............. of o \ Mexico -p, 4 PROJECT LOCATION 2 LEGEND dF GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL CRESTED CARACARA LOCATION Q CRESTED CARACARA CONSULTATION AREA NOTES CRESTED CARACARA LOCATIONS WERE ACQUIRED FROM THE USFWS ON SEPTEMBER 2021 AND ARE CURRENT TO 2021. CRESTED CARACARA CONSULTATION AREA WAS ACQUIRED FROM THE USFWS ON SEPTEMBER 2021. APPENDIX G. CRESTED CARACARA CONSULTATION AREA T.S. WITH LOCATIONS C.G. GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL I REVISE[ v m��-10 N R 0 Q DATE PASSARELLA DATE DATE c�m�l'ox & SSOCIATES 2 DATE , E losiaca U Page 234 of 708 APPENDIX H FLORIDA BONNETED BAT CONSULTATION AREA AND PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT MAP Page 235 of 708 Old APPENDIX I FLORIDA PANTHER ZONES WITH PANTHER FOCUS AREA Page 237 of 708 Guff of Mexico LEGEND GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL PANTHER FOCUS AREA 'FLORIDA PANTHER ZONES 0 PRIMARY ZONE 0 SECONDARY ZONE II COLLI t PROJECT LOCATION P s,ON ROE o� Miles NOTES: •±-� PANTHER FOCUS AREA WAS ACQUIRED {j FROM THE USFWS FTP SITE MARCH 2O07. () 41l1 ' PANTHER ZONES WERE ACQUIRED FROM �i THE USFWS WEBSITE ON SEPTEMBER 2021 AND ARE CURRENT TO 2017. DRAWN BY DATE APPENDIX I. FLORIDA PANTHER ZONES WITH PANTHER REVIEWED BY D %4/22 PASSARE LLA FOCUS AREA C.G. 5/4/22 C.......1, GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL REVISED DATE - :.- & ASSOCIATES raye Z30 UI i uo APPENDIX J AERIAL WITH SURVEY TRANSECTS Page 239 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) EXHIBIT V.D.1- NARRATIVE & JUSTIFICATION Page 241 of 708 EXHIBIT V.D.1 NARRATIVE, JUSTIFICATION AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION GREENWAY — FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY GMPA Existing Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The subject property is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road and is comprised of 19 parcels that total ±227.09 acres in size. The land use designation is currently Agricultural/Rural, Receiving Lands. The property is zoned A - Agricultural, allowing for low density residential development and limited agricultural activities; and is within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use (RFMU) Overlay. The surrounding lands to the north, south, east, and west are zoned A — Agricultural and within the RFMU Overlay. The zoning and existing land use on the surrounding lands is as follows: North: Zoned Agricultural, active agricultural operations. South: Across Fritchey Road, zoned Agricultural (Provisional Use), undeveloped and single-family residential. East: Zoned Agricultural, active agricultural operations. West: Across Greenway Road, zoned Agricultural, single-family residential. Requested Changes The proposed GMPA will create the Greenway — Fritchey Residential Overlay to allow for up to 1,299 single family and multi -family residential dwelling units; and allow for the total littoral planting shelf area to be reduced to 10% of the wet detention pond surface area. There is a companion PUD rezoning. Justification This request is a joint effort between Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC, and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. Due to the nature of the area, extensive infrastructure improvements will be required to support the proposed development. This working relationship allows for the applicants to share the costs of future roadway improvements, as well as permitting fees and wetland mitigation, which will reduce the costs associated with the development of the project on both development entities. The applicants will jointly extend utilities to serve the site, further reducing development costs for Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. This overlay is also unique in that it provides market rate units and provides for income restricted for -sale housing utilizing the Habitat for Humanity model. The Habitat for Humanity model sells homes at appraisal value and requires that their portion of the project be developed independent of the market rate units and utilize different floor plans and construction materials from the market rate portion to ensure that the units remain affordable. The proposed overlay is approximately a mile north of commercial goods and services (including a Publix Supermarket) located at the intersection of Greenway Road and Tamiami Trail E. The property is served by CAT transit services. Route 24 (US 41 East — Charlee Estates) serves the subject property. Stop 634 (James Rd.) is withing walking distance of Page 1 of 6 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HAOATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Email to Michele (4-8-2025)\Exhibit V.D.I - Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information (rev 4-7-2025).docx Page 242 of 708 the property, just under a quarter mile south. The companion RPUD will provide development standards and buffering to ensure compatibility with adjacent rural neighborhoods. The total 2024 population in Collier County is 404,735 people, and is expected to increase 3% between 2023 and 2028 (Collier County Economic Development Office). Based on U.S. Department of Housing Development, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) dataset and population projections by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Florida, The Shimberg Center estimated that in 2022 approximately 22,883 owner occupied households making 80% or below of the Collier County AMI were housing cost burdened (housing costs were more than 30% of the household income) and provides the following projections of owner occupied cost burdened households: Year Household Count 2025 42,424 2030 44,326 2035 49,047 2040 51,280 2045 53,041 2050 54,848 In 2017, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) prepared a ULI Advisory Services Panel Report on Expanding Housing Affordability, which concluded that "Collier County absolutely has a housing affordability problem" that if not addressed "will become a crisis". According to the draft 2021 — 2025 Consolidated Plan for Housing and Human Community Development (Consolidated Plan) prepared for the Collier County Public Services Department, Community and Human Services division, "There is not a sufficient supply for low- and moderate -income households in Collier County" and "A significant lack of affordable housing existing particularly for the approximately one in four households that are at the low or very -low income levels" (Consolidated Plan, pg. 86). The Consolidated Plan goes on to identify housing affordability as "high priority level" need. The need for affordable housing is reflected in the GMP amendments to the RFMUO prepared by Collier County staff, which allows for an affordable housing density bonus of 12.2 units per acre. The applicant is proposing 1,299 dwelling units (::L5.72 units per acre), of which 20% of the units (260 units) will be for -sale housing units reserved for low-income households earning up to or below 80% of AMI, which helps the County achieve the overarching goals of the Consolidated Plan "To provide decent housing by ... increasing the availability of affordable housing" and "To provide a suitable living environment through safer, more livable neighborhoods, greater integration of low- and moderate -income residents throughout the County, [and] increased housing opportunities" (Consolidated Plan, pg. 112). The County's economy is "focused on retail, hospitality, services, and agricultural" (Consolidated Plan, pg. 145) and there is a need for "development of affordable rental and owned housing, including projects located near job centers" (Consolidated Plan, pg. 123). Page 2 of 6 Q:\FL-NAPL-I Mil-,MATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Email to Michele (4-8-2025)\Exhibit V.D.1 - Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information (rev 4-7-2025),docx Page 243 of 708 Per the most recent Shimberg Center for Housing Studies 2023 Annual Report, Florida rents "increased steeply between 2020 and 2022, then held steady at this higher level in 2023" and estimates that 34% of all renters in Collier County are low income and/or cost burdened (>40%). The most recent Shimberg Center for Housing Studies 2022 Rental Market Study estimates that 68% of 0 — 60% AMI renter households, 29% of 60 — 80% AMI renters, and 9% of 80-120% AMI renters are cost burdened. Furthermore, "Single-family home prices have surpassed mid-2000s boom era levels. Florida's median single-family home price rose 66% from 2013 ($249,599) to 2023 ($400,000), adjusted to 2023 dollars for inflation." Although the proposed affordable housing is not comprised of rental units, the for -sale units will provide relief from increasing home prices and offer an affordable path to homeownership. The proposed overlay will fill the aforementioned need, as the overlay is approximately 3.5 miles east of Mixed Use Activity Center 18 (located around the intersection of Collier Blvd. and Tamiami Trail East) which is mostly built -out with a wide array of commercial uses. The property is also adjacent to two active agricultural facilities: FTG Nursery and Syngenta Seeds. The GMP allows for density bonuses of up to 12 units per acres in the RFMUD. The GMPA requested density is consistent with the GMP. Littoral Shelf Planting Area The reduced littoral planting area will result in a significant reduction in development costs associated with grading the littoral shelves and loss of fill. The reduction in costs creates a significant public benefit by allowing for the cost savings to be reallocated into the development of the affordable housing units, and the required infrastructure improvements to support the development. The littoral areas will be designed to create, enhance, or restore wading bird/waterfowl habitat and foraging areas. Additionally, they will be designed to maximize habitat value and minimize maintenance efforts. Two rows of native grasses will be planted around the perimeter of the proposed lakes. These native grasses planted around the perimeter of the lake(s) will trap sediment and absorb extra nutrients, thus providing water quality enhancement. Consistency with Florida Statutes and Collier County GMP: Section 163.3177(6)(a)2 The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. Page 3 of 6 . Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HIvIDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Emai( to Michele (4-8-2025)\Exhibit V.D.1 - Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information (rev 4-7-2025).docx Page 244 of 708 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. The property is not located within proximity to an airport or military installation. Paragraphs f and g, above, do not apply. With respects to paragraphs a., b., c., d., e., and h., public facilities and services exist and have the capacity to serve the proposed development. The subject property is designated Receiving Lands on the FLUM. Receiving Lands are those lands which have been identified as being most appropriate for development and have a lesser degree of environmental or listed species habitat value. Regarding paragraphs i. and j., this project diversifies the County's housing stock, enhances the local tax base through increased property values in the area, and will provide for significant job creation during the design and construction. The proposed GMPA is consistent with the intent and procedural and substantive requirements set for the in the Florida Statues referenced above. In addition to this Narrative, we have provided additional documents which collectively constitute sufficient data and analysis. Consistency with GMP Policy 5.5: Discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl in order to minimize the cost of community facilities by: confining urban intensity development to areas designated as Urban on the Future Land Use Map; requiring that any additions to the Urban Designated Areas be contiguous to an existing Urban Area boundary; and, encouraging the use of creative land use planning techniques and innovative approaches to development in the County's Agricultural/Rural designated area, which will better serve to protect environmentally sensitive areas, maintain the economic viability of agriculture and other predominantly rural land uses, and provide for cost efficient delivery of public facilities and services. The subject property is designated Receiving Lands on the FLUM. Receiving Lands are those lands which have been identified as being most appropriate for development and have a lesser degree of environmental or listed species habitat value. 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 proposed uses are compatible with and complementary to the surrounding land uses, which include agricultural operations and residential development. Development standards and perimeter buffers proposed within the companion RPUD will ensure compatibility with neighboring properties. Page 4 of 6 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Email to Michele (4-8-2025)\Exhibit V.D.1 - Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information (rev 4-7-2025).docx Page 245 of 708 Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The project has access to US 41 (a four -lane principal arterial) via Greenway Road. 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 project will be designed to utilize internal roads, a pedestrian network, and provide amenities to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby roads. 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 project proposes connections to local roads Greenway Road and Fritchey Road. The master plan accommodates potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnections between the tracts, and to property to the north and east. 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 proposed overlay will result in the development of both single and multi -family dwelling units, of which 260 units will be reserve for affordable housing, resulting in a community with a blend of densities and a range of housing prices and types that provides common open spaces and residential amenities. The master plan accommodates potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnections between the tracts, and to property to the north and east. Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 6.1.2: For the County's Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved on site through the application of the following minimum preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria... Preservation and Native Vegetation Retention Standards: a. Receiving Lands: Page 5 of 6 Q:\FL-NAPL-HIv1\HIvIDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Email to Michele (4-8-2025)\Exbibit V.D.1 - Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information (rev 4-7-2025).docx Page 246 of 708 A minimum of 40% of the native vegetation present, not to exceed 25% of the total site area shall be preserved. The proposed overlay and companion RPUD rezoning will meet the required minimum preservation and vegetation retention standards. Approximately 33 acres is considered native vegetation. The project will preserve approximately 13.20 acres in accordance with this policy. Objective 7.1: Direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their habitats... The literature search and review of agency databases identified historical telemetry for Florida panthers on the Project site, with the most recent telemetry recorded in June 2019. The Project is not located within the vicinity of an active bald eagle nest and is not located within the CFA of a documented wood stork colony. The Project is located within the USFWS consultation area for the RCW, Florida scrub jay, and FBB and is within the USFWS Secondary Zone for the Florida panther. Field surveys for listed species was conducted on April 8, 19, and 22, 2022. During the surveys, two American alligators, two little blue herons, and tracks from a Florida panther were documented on the Proj ect site. In addition, scattered occurrences of Florida butterfly orchids, twisted air plants, inflated wild pines, and stiff leaved wild pines were documented within the forested wetland areas. Based on the hierarchy of native vegetation preservation as identified in Section 3.05.07A.4, the Project site does not support habitat with the characteristics identified in Section 3.05.07.A.4.a-e. Therefore, the preserve location was selected to abut off -site wetland habitat and provide connection to the limited amount of native habitat remaining within the vicinity of the Project, which will direct wildlife away from the proposed development via a connected habitat system by the connection to off -site, adjacent wetlands and higher quality habitats. Page 6 of 6 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Email to Michele (4-8-2025)\Exhibit V.D.1 -Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information (rev 4-7-2025).docx Page 247 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) EXHIBIT U E.1 - PUBLIC FACILITIES REPORT Page 248 of 708 EXHIBIT V.E.1 PUBLIC FACILITIES REPORT GREENWAY — FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY Per the 2023 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities (AUIR), the potable water LOS standard is 130 GPCD; and per the 2023 AUIR, the wastewater treatment LOS standard is 90 GPCD. The proposed Greenway — Fritchey Residential Overlay potentially increases population by approximately 3,248 people at buildout (1,299 dwelling units at 2.50 persons per household). Per the 2023 AUIR the estimated potable water and wastewater average requirements for the proposed amendment are as follows: Potable Water 422,175 GPD (Peak 548,828 GPD) Wastewater 292,275 GPD (Peak 362,421 GPD) Collier County Utilities will provide water service for potable and fire protections needs and wastewater service. The subject property is within the South Service Area. Collier County Utilities has sufficient capacity to provide water and sewer service. According to the Collier County 2023 AUIR, currently there is an existing landfill capacity of 12,665,407 tons, and a ten-year remaining landfill capacity of 3,088,013 tons. The estimated life of the landfill is 37 years. The proposed amendment will increase the population by approximately 3,248 people at buildout. Using a ton's per capita disposal rate of 0.67 (per the AUIR), a population increase of 3,248 people will generate an additional 2,176.16 tons disposed per year. There is adequate landfill capacity to accommodate the expected tons per capita generated by the proposed amendment. Stormwater retention and detention will comply with SFWMD requirements, and State and County standards for off -site discharges will be met, resulting in no adverse impacts to stormwater management (drainage) level of service. The adopted level of service for schools based upon permanent FISH capacity: 100% for high school Concurrency Service Areas (CSAs); 95% for elementary CSAs; and 95% for middle school CSAs. The subject site with within the E3, Southwest Area North for elementary schools; the M2, Southwest Area for middle schools; and the H2, Southwest Area for high schools. The E3 CSA includes two elementary schools, Avalon and Lely. They have a combined FISH capacity of 1,305 students, a 2022/2023 peak enrollment of 844 students, and a projected 2027/2028 enrollment of 847 students (65% capacity). The M2 and H2 CSAs include Lely and Naples High Schools, and East Naples, Gulfview, and Manatee Middle Schools. The high schools have a combined FISH capacity of 3,916 students, a 2022/2023 peak enrolment of 3,238 students, and a projected 2027/2028 enrollment of 3,110 students (79% capacity). The middle schools have a combined FISH capacity of 3,014 students, a 2022/2023 peals enrollment of 2,180 students, and a projected 2027/2028 enrollment of 1,889 (63% capacity). Page 1 of 2 H:\2022\2022036\wP\GMPA\Resubmittal\Exliibit V.E.1 - Public Facilities Repoit (rev 4-2-2024).docx Page 249 of 708 According to the Collier County 2023 AUIR, there is a projected 5-year deficit of 6.38 community park acres, and a projected 5-year surplus of 173.06 regional park acres. Per the 2023 AUIR, a population increase of 3,248 people necessitates an additional 3.90 community park acres (LOS of 0.0012 acres per person) and 8.77 regional park acres (LOS of 0.0027 acres per person). There is sufficient community and regional park acreage to serve the proposed development. An EMS/Fire Station is located approximately 4 miles west at 6055 Collier Boulevard. The subject site is within the Greater Naples Fire Rescue District. According to the 2023 AUIR, the LOS standard is a 24-hour life support unit (vehicle, equipment, station space) per 16,400/population, or 0.000061/capita and there is a projected 5-year surplus of 0.10 24-hour life support units. Based on the projects estimated population increase of 3,248 people, there will be a deficit of 0.20 24- hour life support units. Please see the attached Traffic Analysis for transportation impacts and further details. Page 2 of 2 H:\2022\2022036\wP\GMPA\Resubmittal\Exhibit V.E.1 - Public Facilities Report (rev 4-2-2024).doex Page 250 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) EXHIBIT V.E.3 - TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT - SECTION I Page 251 of 708 EXHIBIT V.E.3 TIS—SECTION 1 TREBILCOCK CONSULTING SOLUTIONS Traffic Impact Statement Section 1-Road Segment Analysis Greenway Fritchey GMPA/RPUD Application Prepared for: Hole Montes, a Bowman Company 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-254-2000 Collier County, Florida 01/28/2025 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* — Malor Study — $1,500.00 Fee Note — *to be collected at time of first submittal Page 252 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 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. . "TRF �<��� Digitally signed by Norman `,`Q�QN;cENse .c'os Trebilcock No 47116 °� DN: c=US, sn=Trebilcock, givenName=Norman, STATE OF 'cc: email=Ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz, cn=Norman Trebilcock F' NA� E;.�°, Date: 2025.01.28 16:55:12-05'00' 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 g e 1 2 Page 253 of 708 Green woyFritchey— GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Rood Segment Analysis —January 2025 Table of Contents ProjectDescription.................................................................... TripGeneration.......................................................................... Trip Distribution and Assignment .............................................. Future Background Traffic Volumes .......................................... Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Without Project ....... Future Conditions With Project ................................................. Site Access Management........................................................... ImprovementAnalysis............................................................... Mitigation of Impact.................................................................. Appendices .................................................... 4 .................................................... 5 .................................................... 5 .................................................... 9 .................................................. 10 .................................................. 12 .................................................. 14 .................................................. 14 .................................................. 14 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan........................................................................ Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) ................................ Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Excerpts................................................................. Appendix D: FDOT Generalized Level of Service Tables ............................................ Appendix E: 48 Hour Volume Counts......................................................................... Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 3 Page 254 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Project Description This petition seeks a growth management plan amendment (GMPA) and to rezone to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), on property located within eastern Collier County, to be known as Greenway Fritchey. The property is within Section 7, Township 51S, Range 27E and consists of ±227 acres. Figure 1— Project Location Map Refer to Figure 1— Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. The RPUD will consist of 1299 single family and multi -family dwelling units. A methodology memorandum was transmitted via email to the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on July 26, 2022 (ref. Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting)). The project access connection to the surrounding roadway network is proposed as direct connections onto Greenway Rd. and Fritchey Rd. A detailed evaluation will be performed at the time of site development permitting. The analysis year is 2028. This analysis consists of two reports: • Section 1— Road Segment Analysis; and • Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 14 Page 255 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Trip Generation The RPUD is treated for trip generation purposes as 539 single family detached homes, 200 single family attached homes, and 560 low rise multi -family homes. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) rates or equations are used for the trip generation calculations, as applicable. The ITE 111h edition data pages are provided in Appendix C. The trip generation associated with the proposed build -out condition is summarized in Table 1. No internal capture or pass -by capture is proposed. Table 1- Trip Generation Single -Family 210 Dwelling 539 2 2 2 1 4,753 305 179 1 484 1 90 255 345 Detached Housing Units Single -Family 215 Dwelling 200 2 2 2 1,474 66 50 116 30 68 98 Attached Housing Units Multifamily Housing Dwelling (Low -Rise) Not 220 Units 560 2 2 2 3,665 164 97 261 47 149 196 Close to Rail Transit 1 1 1,299 1 ( ( ( 9,892 1 535 1 326 1 861 1 167 1 472 1 639 Trip Generation Rates from ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th Ed. 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 2023 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for the adjacent roadway network is PM peak hour. Trip Distribution and Assignment County staff provided a District One Regional Planning Model (D1RPM) loaded highway network to be used to determine project traffic distribution. That distribution pattern is shown in Figure 2. The companion PDF file Exhibit A contains a plot of distribution percentages further from the project. The combination of page size and font size is intended not to be legible when printed, but to legibly display needed information without overlap when viewed sufficiently enlarged in any PDF viewer. Because the County provided the D1RPM network they also possess the loaded network file whose information is displayed. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 5 Page 256 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Figure 2 - Trip Distribution North n 0 ui r � q�71lq��9�4 y ,�0 'o.+ lFly'PF 6, ti� o T �18 0 0.8 SAS o 0 0.3 0.3 0 p MANATEE ,y Sp gMfgy 10.8 'QLgT 68,q l� a 8.7 MANATEE RD 11.412.3 12.3 TgAjf - � 2 N w o 2956 100 Greenway Fntchey n mz a; z rn � 440, TgMl w 9'a v� m 8 z6sa Fiddlers Creek 8g O q� 38 R9N�H z N 160 7 u Number of Lanes 2 4 6 8 04 0.1 10 �MpaR7 o Facility Type Toll Facilities n O.q Freeways & Ramps CAP Minor & Major Arterials Collectors ## Percent of External Project Traffic Centroid Connectors Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 6 Page 257 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 In Table 2, the distribution percentages are the averages of those at the segment endpoints in Figure 2 or Exhibit A. Table 2 contains the arterial and collector road segments on which the project has a significant impact or were reviewed to confirm the limit of significant impact. It also provides information on Manatee Rd., though it is a local road. For arterials and collectors, roadway configuration and minimum standard service volumes are from the 2023 AUIR. Service volumes on arterial and collector facilities are normally used to determine when an impending level of service deficiency should trigger the need for additional lanes. When traffic volumes become a concern on local roads, they can be analyzed for potential traffic calming solutions. The County has not suggested that either (widening or traffic calming) is their intent for Manatee Rd., but they did require comparing its future traffic volume with a "service volume." The recommendation below is in response to a service volume suggestion by the County. Manatee Rd • Posted speed limit 25 mph • Criteria 2023 FDOT Q/LOS Handbook and 2020 FDOT Context Classification Guide • Context - C4 - General Urban • LOS D - 870 x 0.9 (non -state) x 1.05 (exclusive RT lane at signalized intersections) = 822 • Recommended: 800 vph. Compare this with Shadowlawn Drive (800 vph) - 25 mph roadway with elementary school and numerous driveway cuts). 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. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 17 Page 258 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 1- Road Segment Analysis -January 2025 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) dard (3) (4) Volume Y/N Rattlesnake US 41 Collier 35.0 Hammock (Tamiami 10.1 54 33 6D E 3200 3 1.7 No Boulevard Road Trail) US 41 Collier Wal-Mart 36.1 (Tamiami 0.0 0 0 6D E 2500 3 0.0 No Boulevard Driveway Trail) Collier Wal-Mart Manatee 36.2 0.4 2 1 4D D 2000 3 0.1 No Boulevard Driveway Road Collier Manatee Mainsail 37.0 8.5 45 28 4D D 2200 3 2.0 No Boulevard Road Drive Rattlesnake US 41 Charlemagne 72.0 Hammock (Tamiami 0.6 3 2 4D D 1800 3 0.2 No Boulevard Road Trail) Rattlesnake Tamiami Airport 92.0 Hammock 9,4 50 31 6D E 2900 3 1.7 No Trail East Road Road Rattlesnake Tamiami Triangle 93.0 Hammock 19.2 103 62 6D E 3000 3 3.4 Yes Trail East Boulevard Road Tamiami Triangle Collier 94.0 27.7 149 89 6D E 3000 3 5.0 Yes Trail East Boulevard Boulevard Tamiami Collier Manatee 95.1 46.2 248 149 6D E 3100 3 8.0 Yes Trail East Boulevard Road Tamiami Manatee 95.1 Joseph Lane 68.6 368 223 6D E 3100 3 11,9 Yes Trail East Road Tamiami Greenway 95.2 Joseph Lane 75.2 404 243 4D D 2000 2 20.2 Yes Trail East Road Tamiami Greenway Auto Ranch 95.3 11.8 38 64 2U D 1075 2 6.0 Yes Trail East Road Rd. Tamiami Auto Ranch San Marco 95.3 2.9 9 16 2U D 1075 3 1.5 No Trail East Rd. Drive Manatee Collier Tamiami 13.2 71 43 2U D 800 3 8.9 Yes Road Boulevard Trail East Notes: 1) Figure 2 and Exhibit A 2) Percentage times PM peak hour net new external directional project traffic totals Table 1 3) 2023 AUIR except Manatee Rd. (see report discussion). 4) Collier County TIS Guidelines Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 18 Page 259 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Future Background Traffic Volumes Tables 3 through 5 contain the significantly impacted road segments as identified in Table 2. The existing roadway conditions for arterials and collectors are from the Collier County 2023 AUIR. The existing condition for Manatee Rd. is based on 48-hour volume counts conducted on February 8 and 9, 2023 (see Appendix E), factored to peak season condition. The volumes were collected at either end of Manatee Rd. and averaged. 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) (2) (1) 1 Volume Volume (3) Rattlesnake TamiamiEast Triangle Hammock 2023 2290 E 2.0% 1.104 403 2528 2693 2693 TrailEast Boulevard Road Tamiami Triangle Collier 94.0 2023 1690 E 2.0% 1.104 234 1866 1924 1924 Trail East Boulevard Boulevard Tamiami Collier Manatee 95.1 2023 1030 E 4.0% 1.217 367 1253 1397 1397 Trail East Boulevard Road Tamiami Manatee Joseph 95.1 2023 1030 E 4.0% 1.217 367 1253 1397 1397 Trail East Road Lane Tamiami Joseph Greenway 95.2 2023 1030 E 4.0% 1.217 288 1253 1318 1318 Trail East Lane Road Tamiami Greenway Auto 95.3 2023 250 E 0 3.0% 1.161 97 290 347 347 Trail East Road Ranch Rd. Manatee Collier Tamiami 2023 207 W 2.0% 1.104 0 229 207 229 Road lBoulevard Trail East Notes: 1) 2023 AUIR or (Manatee Rd) February 8-9, 2023 48 hour counts. 2) IF the analysis year is beyond 5 years, the Growth Factor assumes 2% annual growth after the first 5 years, consistent with the AUIR. 3) Greater of Growth based estimate or Existing + Trip Bank In Table 3, the annual growth rate listed for arterials and collectors is the one used in the 2023 AUIR to predict future deficiencies and is used to inflate the existing year peak hour peak direction volume from the 2023 AUIR to the analysis year 2028. The county minimum of two percent is used for Manatee Rd. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 9 Page 260 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 For arterials and collectors, the growth rate derived result is compared with the 2023 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. Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Without Project For arterials and collectors, the future roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5- Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction, scheduled to be constructed within the five-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement Program (CIP) are considered committed improvements. There are no scheduled improvements to significantly impacted roadway segments. Though not significantly impacted, it is noted that the widening (i.e., six-laning) of CR 951 from Manatee Road to north of Tower Road (FPN 435111-2) is programmed for construction in Fiscal Year (FY) 2028 and is included in the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for FY2024— FY2028. Existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 4. The significantly impacted segments are operating at an acceptable level of service in existing conditions and under future background traffic. 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. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 10 Page 261 of 708 OD O ti O N Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 (.0 N 0) M Table 4 — Existing and Future Roadway Conditions a_ :' N N LA.- 0 } Z z Z z z z Z Z O U N Y C U M O Ol d' l0 tf1 d Ln ct l0 lD N M Ol Na N Co 0 CO > to O O O O O O O O al u u 7 @ � M W a) M M M N N C v m 0 i O ~ N M M N aJ > a > V U 00 N (a M® O W> O O O O O n O aJ N i C N E u O M O M 1-1 M c—I M O N O �--I 00 O O 3 > 'o O O O O O O O z z z z z z z a c a,00 in 0 in 0 N O O `(0.. `� l0 (.0 l0 l0 � N N u- U 3 O Z > v u ¢m O z O z O z O z O z O z O z J Vf Q } 4 m �o m m N M �0 ao M r, Un m m (n N N X >> LLI O o 0 0 0 0 0 ti O O O O CD CDr- m M3 m CU> M 0)M O M O M O N o WU a= a°1 D o E N c O O O> O O O O O to O in al 3 O m m U I O O O O O c-I O O O r, O O u L W a s a i. c( Q U E m M m m N 00 O 7 C O 00 ct bb C 'N C 0 a 0 0 (� 0 0 .x O fL6 ... W <0 l0 CD N N vUU :a N O W U 3 a O SZ � W V E bn L N +-� -O L 0.(0 W a 5 � OJ CU Q) M O " C O O O O O :3 "O (a - L CoUco �C _5c�� aOf FT 1 — a, v W o o v a) E MC u J 0 LL (" > L > QJ T M -O Q Qj-0 > Lu 2 Q C �6 .f E (a (a Z — 7 (a aj N M — al M ru O L O O O O O L O t7 O O X L ar = cc F cn U m Cr —, or U COai tr O Ur > 5 5 3 Y E OM E OM o E o E L E o.1 a s m 6= (a L (a L (a L (a L (a L (a L m m 0 ,� E= E ,� E .� E .@ E .� M O o ru (a L (a L (a L (a L (a L (D L O O O c-1 ri N M Q M 1t u1 to v1 U) o a— rn rn rn rn M rn z Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 11 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 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 most cases the peak direction of project traffic aligns with the peak direction of background traffic, In those cases, the background traffic portion of the total traffic is the peak hour peak direction volume from Table 3. In 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 D). 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 segments are projected to operate at an acceptable level 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 analyzed roadway segments are not located within Collier County's Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). In addition, the proposed development is not situated within a County designated Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA). The TCEA's and TCMA's designations are provided in Policy 5.4 and 5.6 of the Transportation Element — Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 12 Page 263 of 708 OD 0 ti O Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statemen t Section 1 —Rood Segment Analysis —January 2025 N N Table 5 -Future Roadway Total Traffic Conditions a m CO J O d Z z Z z z z z z N } to u N U M LT m lfl (.0 to ate+ O O L6 \ 0) to Ln Ln 00 M M N f- > O O O O O O O 00 .x i Y t; O a O O O O O Lfi O 0 cc(ULn] O O O O O O O r- O O N v L N d S r1 CO OE O M O -1 ci O O 00 0i 7 (C �' O (ll 0 LD 0) M r- Ln d' Ln lD N N Ln N t+ v- Fa E ~ N O N CD L. � 00 M 00 N FBI Q H -1 U 0 F- " N m M r\ N U m -_ LO 00 0 Z 00 M N 'a U _ 3 M m 0 H U N N N D U � O yam„ Z m to F- M N U M lD N O w O Lfl to m 0 r- 0 '� a CD CD Ln Y i U Utj aM 0 0 N 01 N rn d M a = 0 @ 3 lD 00cI N N d' CL F Lj +' u .'d U '~ fV M C 1 Co 00 'cr' 00 �--I n. O O M\ a S c M a Z 6 u ++ Ln U 3 a o z z z z z z CO o Ln Y N CO Y i Y v (U6 C it. E M O m U .F. E M 01 d' N Ol r� 01 00 rI t\ a')N m t- N N n. S C- O CA > "'O -6 Lll � U J N H bn O M W (0 n — 7 M N M ++ E L O I- CO O O U Co O O �- O C7 CC O 'Q Q aC co L F- O U -6 -6 N N '6 E J M ll .� C QJ OJ fll (O _0Q. .� Q1 N E (O (O 7 75 C (0 NM — O O O Cr M� F- Co U CO Cr -, C7 (Y-1 U m � T x LC 3 Y E m E 'Mna E L`n E a E (`moo E m v N d' a a v v a w o w L0 w LU w (a w m W Q O E E '� E' _ o _ E 'Lo E '_L6 E _ (o C (o n to LC D- L6 r- Q r N L ML ML ML M L (6 L O Q Ln 0 00) 0Y1 CY) 001 00) 0!1 Z Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 13 Green way Fritchey—GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Rood Segment Analysis —January 2025 Site Access Management Greenway Rd. and Fritchey Rd. are classified as local roads. The site connections to them will be analyzed at the site development approval stage. Improvement Analysis Based on the results illustrated within this traffic analysis, the proposed project has a significant impact on segments of US 41 E. All significantly impacted segments are currently operating at an acceptable level of service and will operate at acceptable level of service in 2028 with or without project traffic. The maximum total daily trip generation for the proposed development shall not exceed 861 two-way PM peak hour net trips, based on the land use codes in the ITE Trip Generation Manual in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval, as applicable. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes paying the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as applicable. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 114 Page 265 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Rood Segment Analysis —January 2025 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 15 Page 266 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 1- Road Segment Analysis -January 2025 i s31VIDOSSY13 nvaoit lurlr a'usrw r" �, a.uRllxr. t+. 40 A3H31R13 xVMN33Tl'J `"^ y w UI IdN ANI ;I.IINN-AYMIW:RI-J E8u r C h LI lv^drflnola9V q w 3sr W/l ? f w ld2Jr11n01210d } nG J =) w :E)NINGZ a _� m w 0 9 m / TPA T "R-2",4 vn Tr_ I J Z' LU F-UF N I! N`1 `1 I 2 �LLLLLLJJIx of �. I I� iV 1 �jnZd nagg -� �1�•�F I I I I f l�= I ��,'� I .UlY'1 i NW7 MWOH / OiU OU�U i IN' wnn �125 �QW �'I nln I I I rN~`�\ I r t Jj��` 'V �r' rn w Li LL I I , 1 Y I I fY I I K! 1 , f V I�, 1n,� < Q W 1 1 I LL 1- / `\\ �m �a7-�\\ Mr I 1�02CJ__- 4 \ I r W >( J �w <TR/C7 "P. 2"�__—II_ �L_I LL w r_i D 1 1 ( i Ly 1 1 w 7 ELM z I�yy I(�III. 1I I I £- 1 I w r l: I w 1 ' MLs wk'.r4OJ �3IoaJZ —s- e1uU4�y ".t-aR'.. ZLLoY �LLll��vai III F56 5 1-UWr6'"J�O4V c > a Gm ? 8SQ ;F \\ \ \ Z0 L) V Cl V �� w a�IVV u U f w¢� �Y a I a s nN~ Z W m N W Li J lil Sy IU z .-. Q < W LE H Q u7 �1J7�7 wV 01 �• w�/ N OUZZ) H. ..... Oa O Qtee Wto _ 1200 \ i ~ 1� ZZI- �a1 o o:� rn '-a I I 11 I I I a{ J WWz c w aco o ON o z 1 Q U w W Of W 1, U T. O LL :J LL a<0 le7 LL ILv LL vv0f 71 C NU7.�T a l IF I I 1, O`� {j �.II�IIYID; U"cc Z 3 t7 Ul �W d p N h n N V I I~ I I 1 I V W LL W Q Fes--• W W h Y 1 11 11 1I I I I Jm yi W Z W LL W I lJ I�J J i 'I m W W > p � p in W N m �'- m O O 6 W Z LL, V v U ----------- w i z (Lz e I w o I W o CNIMMIMN33 3'-------- --- --� --- F...-----------. c L� �t z L REz ¢t > lVIIN7(IISlN AIINVi I v n~ x {I o c) o c 319tJls 3sn ONtlI z c s S Iran �nolro� a 1 v } :ON NOZ 00 0 0 CO N Q) c>3 d Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 116 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 1 Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 117 Page 268 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPOD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Rood Segment Analysis —January 2025 INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no importantt elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply, or N/A (not applicahle). Date: July 12 and 26.2022 Time: NIA Location: N/A — Via Email People Attendine: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1) Michael Sawyer. Collier County Growth Management Division 2) Nelson Galeano. CCGMD 3) Greg Root, AIM Engineering, CCGMD Consultant 4) Norman Trebilcock, TCS 5) Gavin Jones, TCS 6) Ciprian Malaeseu, 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: Hole Montes Address: 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 Telephone Number: 239-254-2000 Proposed Development: Name: Greenwav Friteliev Location: Northeast quadrant of the intersection of Fritchey Rd. and Greenwav Rd. (refer to Figure 1). Page 1 of 7 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 118 Page 269 of 708 Greenway Fritchey—GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Figure 1— Project Location Map N m f 0 S Project LocatioO I �,j J �. ►, A ..._ Land Use Type: Mix of single family and multi -family homes. ITE Code #: LUC 210 — Single family detached housing Description: 1408 Single family and multi -family homes. Zoning Existing: Agricultural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay (RFMUO) - Receiving. Comprehensive plan recommendation: Agricultural / Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving Lands Requested: RPUD. Findings of the Preliminary Study: Studv tvpe: Since proiected net external AM orPM 2-wav peak hour proiect traffic exceeds 100 and creates significant impacts on US 41 E., this study gualifies for a Major Study TIS. Proposed TIS will include trip generation, traffic distribution and assignments, significance test (based on 20/o/20/o/3% criterion), and operational site access analysis. The report will provide existing LOS and document the impact the proposed proiect will have on designated arterial and collector roads. Roadway concurrency analysis —based on estimated net external PM peak hour traffic. The TIS shall be consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures. Page 2 of 7 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 19 Page 270 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Site access is via direct access from Greenway Rd. and Fritchev Rd. Access operations will be evaluated at the time of development order application. No intersection analysis will be provided with the initial report and there will be a follow up operations analysis coordinated with the FDOT. A follow up traffic count on Greenway Rd is planned as well as evaluating that roadwav's link: capacity in comparison to a most shnilar existing CIE roadway. Internal capture and pass -by rates are not considered based on ITE and Collier County guidelines recommendations. Studv Tvpe: if not net increase, operational study) Small Scale TIS ❑ Muior'rIS ❑ Migor TIS Study Area: Boundaries: Arterial and Collector roads significantly impacted. Additional intersections to be analyzed: N/A Build Out Year: 2027 Planning Horizon Year: 2027 Analysis Time Period(s): PM peak hour Future Off -Site Developments: NIA Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 1 Ph Edition Reductions in Tiia Gener-ation Rates: None: N/A Pass -by trips: N/A Internal trips: N/A Transit use: N/A Other: N/A Horizon Year Roadway Network huprovenients: 2027 Methodoloov & Assmnntions: Non -site traffic estimates: Collier County traffic counts and 2021 AUIR Page 3 of 7 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 120 Page 271 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Site -trip generation: ITE 11°i Edition. Ichedmily 210 DUnitsg 1,4081 2 1 2 ( 2 11,498 752 442 1194 215 612 827 (Trip Generation Rates from ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th Ed. 11 Trip distribution method: District I Regional Planning Model with adjustments to the surrounding input socio-economic data and resulting project traffic distribution patterns by Collier County staff - refer to Figure 2. Traffic assignment method: proiect trio generation with background growth Traffic growth rate: historical growth rate or 2% minimum Turning movements: Site Access: direct access onto Greenway Rd. and Fritchey Rd. Page 4 of 7 P a g e 121 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 272 of 708 Green way Fritchey—GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Rood Segment Analysis —January 2025 Figure 2 — Project Trip Distribution N m j a 4IF Project Location1901 ter. Go pit Page 5 of 7 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 1 22 Page 273 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Special Features: from preliminary study or prior experience) Accident locations: N/A Sight distance: N/A Queuing: N/A Access location & configuration: N/A Traffic control: MUTCD Signal system location & progression needs: N/A On -site parking needs: N/A Data Sources: CC 2021 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: N/A Small Scale Study — No Fee Minor Study - $750.00 Major Study - $1,500.00 X Methodology Fee $500.00 X Includes 0 nrtersections Additional Intersections - $500.00 each All fees xdll be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and must be paid to Transportation prior to our sign -off on the application. SIGNATURES Norwi.avi, TrebUcocl. Study Preparer—Norman Trebilcock Reviewer(s) Applicant Page 6 of 7 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 123 Page 274 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPt1D Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Methodology Review, Analysis Review, and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional meetings or other optional services are also provided below. Methodology Review - $500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement, including review of submitted trip generation estimate(s), distribution, assignment, and review of a "Small Scale Study" determination, written approval/comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confirmation of a re -submitted, amended methodology statement, and one meeting in Collier County, if needed. "Small Scale Study" Review - No Additional Fee (Includes one sufficiency review) Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review includes: a concurrency determination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study 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, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of off -site improvements within the right-of-way, review of site access and circulation, and preparation and review of "sufficiency" comments/questions. "Mai or Study Review" - $1,500 Fee Qncludes riyo intersection analysis and two sufficiency reviews Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, special trip generation and/or trip length study, distribution and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data 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 necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates, and preparation and review of up to two rounds of "sufficiency" conunentslquestions and/or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional intersection Review" - $500 Fee 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 "Major Study Review" "Additional Sufficiency Reviews" - $500 Fee Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. Page 7 of 7 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 124 Page 275 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis— January 2025 Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Excerpts Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA °age 125 Page 276 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Rood Segment Analysis— January 2025 M O7 M CO � CO O O O r N CO LO U? O pj O N d O CO O (O V Z O O O V r C. O O N N N o O O O to Cq O to N N O) L M O O O N O 00 O r V � O O O CO 0 CO N CD Ln N N M Cfl V O r CO t N r � M O d d N r M r •C C N > > c m rn :D c c m ❑ ❑ 3 m m a) m ca o > > 0 o m LL m LL CD o 0) C •Y) N _M•� z c p C O N CAS O n N N N N 00 0 0 N N Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 126 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application - Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 -Rood Segment Analysis -January 2025 Land Use: 210 Single -Family Detached Housing Description A single-family detached housing site includes any single-family detached home on an individual lot. Atypical site surveyed is a suburban subdivision. Specialized Land Use Data have been submitted for several single-family detached housing developments with homes that are commonly referred to as patio homes. A patio home is a detached housing unit that is located on a small lot with little (or no) front or backyard. In some subdivisions, communal maintenance of outside grounds is provided for the patio homes. The three patio home sites total 299 dwelling units with overall weighted average trip generation rates of 5.35 vehicle trips per dwelling unit for weekday, 0.26 for the AM adjacent street peak hour, and 0.47 for the PM adjacent street peak hour. These patio home rates based on a small sample of sites are lower than those for single-family detached housing (Land Use 210), lower than those for single-family attached housing (Land Use 251), and higher than those for senior adult housing -- single-family (Land Use 251). Further analysis of this housing type will be conducted in a future edition of Trip Generation Manual. Additional Data The technical appendices provide supporting information on time -of -day distributions for this land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip generation resource page on the ITE website (https_//www.ite:orq/technical:resources/topics/trip- and: parking.�eneration/). For 30 of the study sites, data on the number of residents and number of household vehicles are available. The overall averages for the 30 sites are 3.6 residents per dwelling unit and 1.5 vehicles per dwelling unit. The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Ontario (CAN), Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. Source Numbers 100, 105, 114, 126, 157, 167, 177, 197, 207, 211, 217, 267, 275, 293, 300, 319, 320, 356, 357, 367, 384, 387, 407, 435, 522, 550, 552, 579, 598, 601, 603, 614, 637, 711, 716, 720, 728, 735, 868, 869, 903, 925, 936, 1005, 1007, 1008, 1010, 1033, 1066, 1077,1078, 1079 218 Trip Generation Manual I1th Edition • Volume 3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 127 Page 278 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 1- Road Segment Analysis -January 2025 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 JehiCle Trip veneration per meumg unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.43 4.45 - 22.61 2.13 Data Plot and Eauation 30000 X 20000 ---------------------------- 6......... Ju X i' H n X ~ X _-../.'.... ................................... i---------------------------------------------- X X �X 0 0 1000 2000 3000 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve — — — — — Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: LnM = 022 Lno Q + 2.68 R = 0.95 General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 219 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 128 Page 279 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 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 Trip Generation per uweiiing Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.70 0.27 - 2.27 0.24 Data Plot and Eauation 2000 -_..- X i i X i X +� w` ?C i a � l000 ` ~ 'J X X X XXi X X( X hSC 00 1000 2000 3DOD X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve - - - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: LnM = 021 Ln0 Q + 0.12 R'= 0.90 220 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 3 W Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 129 Page 280 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 1- Road Segment Analysis -January 2025 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 ehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.94 0.35 - 2.98 0.31 uata riot ana tquatlon 3000 2000 M .' �X X ---..........................................+....-----------.......--------................:...--,r_........... -- ..._..------....... X X X X /' ........................................ ,^...... X / ---------...........---X............;..------ / / X X X X X X 0 0 1000 20W 30M X =Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve -- - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: LnM = 024 Lno g + 0.27 R'= 0.92 r General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 221 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 130 Page 281 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Rood Segment Analysis —January 2025 Land Use: 215 Single -Family Attached Housing Description Single-family attached housing includes any single-family housing unit that shares a wall with an adjoining dwelling unit, whether the walls are for living space, a vehicle garage, or storage space. Additional Data The database for this land use includes duplexes (defined as a single structure with two distinct dwelling units, typically joined side -by -side and each with at least one outside entrance) and town houses/rowho uses (defined as a single structure with three or more distinct dwelling units, joined side -by -side in a row and each with an outside entrance). The technical appendices provide supporting information on time -of -day distributions for this land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite:org/technical resources/topics/trip; and parkin�.�e.. ........ The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in British Columbia (CAN), California, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ontario (CAN), Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Source Numbers 168, 204, 211, 237, 305, 306, 319, 321, 357, 390, 418, 525, 571, 583, 638, 735, 868, 869, 870, 896, 912, 959, 1009, 1046, 1056, 1058, 1077 ,``— General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 237 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 131 Page 282 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPOD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment A nalysis— January 2025 Single -Family Attached Housing (216) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 22 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 120 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 7.20 4.70 - 10.97 1.61 n:;ta Pint and Eauatinn 5000 X 4000 � 3000 ------ --- --------- --------------------------------"-'----------.......----------.... W F H X X X 1000 ------ -----------------�(-.------------- ...............--------------------------.-----...................... ......................... XX 0 0 200 400 600 X =Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve -- - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T= 7.62(X) _ 60.48 R'= 0.94 238 Trip Generation Manual 111h Edition • Volume 3 its Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 132 Page 283 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Rood Segment Analysis —January 2025 Single -Family Attached Housing (215) 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: 46 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 135 Directional Distribution: 31 % entering, 69% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.48 0.12 - 0.74 0.14 Liam I loi ana t_quailon 500 400 100 X X: ...................................................................... �y.................... i .................................... ........... ........................ X ........ i X ............................................ X X ..................... .--------------- ......'---"._...... IX X XX XX X 0 0 200 400 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T= 0.52(X) - 6.70 600 800 — — — — — Average Rate R'= 0.92 107— General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 239 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 133 Page 284 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Single -Family Attached Housing (215) 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: 51 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 136 Directional Distribution: 57% entering, 43% exiting ✓enicie i rip veneration per uwening unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.57 0.17 - 1.26 0.18 Plata Plnt and Fni atinn 500 X X 400 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 300 li! i F II � �� F I X 200 i XX X X XX 100 X..... - ... ;....... - X X XX X X X X 00 200 400 600 Boo X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve -- - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T= 0.60(X) - 3.93 R'= 0.91 240 Trip Generation Manual 111h Edition • Volume 3 W Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 134 Page 285 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis— Jon uory2025 Land Use: 220 Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) Description Low-rise multifamily housing includes apartments, townhouses, and condominiums located within the same building with at least three other dwelling units and that have two or three floors (levels). Various configurations fit this description, including walkup apartment, mansion apartment, and stacked townhouse. • A walkup apartment typically is two or three floors in height with dwelling units that are accessed by a single or multiple entrances with stairways and hallways. • A mansion apartment is a single structure that contains several apartments within what appears to be a single-family dwelling unit. • A fourplex is a single two-story structure with two matching dwelling units on the ground and second floors. Access to the individual units is typically internal to the structure and provided through a central entry and stairway. • A stacked townhouse is designed to match the external appearance of a townhouse. But, unlike a townhouse dwelling unit that only shares walls with an adjoining unit, the stacked townhouse units share both floors and walls. Access to the individual units is typically internal to the structure and provided through a central entry and stairway. Multifamily housing (mid -rise) (Land Use 221), multifamily housing (high-rise) (Land Use 222), affordable housing (Land Use 223), and off -campus student apartment (low-rise) (Land Use 225) 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 viz mile or less. Additional Data For the three sites for which both the number of residents and the number of occupied dwelling units were available, there were an average of 2.72 residents per occupied dwelling unit. For the two sites for which the numbers of both total dwelling units and occupied dwelling units were available, an average of 96.2 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 ITETripGen web app or the trip 252 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition -Volume 3 "17, Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 135 Page 286 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application - Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 -Rood Segment Analysis -January 2025 generation resource page on the ITE website (hitps://www,ite:org/technical resources/topics/trip: and parking: generation/). For the three sites for which data were provided for both occupied dwelling units and residents, there was an average of 2.72 residents per occupied dwelling unit. 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 all multifamily housing should attempt to obtain information on occupancy rate and on the mix of residential unit sizes (i.e., number of units by number of bedrooms at the site complex). The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, the 2010s, and the 2020s in British Columbia (CAN), California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ontario (CAN), Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Washington. Source Numbers 188, 204, 237, 300, 305, 306, 320, 321, 357, 390, 412, 525, 530, 579, 583, 638, 864, 866, 896, 901, 903, 904, 936, 939, 944, 946, 947, 948, 963, 964, 966, 967, 1012, 1013, 1014, 1036, 1047, 1056, 1071, 1076 General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 253 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 136 Page 287 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPOD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit (220) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 22 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 229 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 6.74 2.46 - 12.50 1.79 Uaia Yloi ana Ciluation 4000 3000 w` 2000 1000 X X ......................... ............. .__.........i.._....................... :........................... ------------ . ........... X x X .X� ............... .... --.._........------------- x ix x x :x XE x x 'X X x' 0 0 100 200 300 400 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve - - - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 6.41(X) + 76.31 R'= 0.86 254 Trip Generation Manual 111h Edition • Volume 3 100 W Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 137 Page 288 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 -Rood Segment Analysis -January 2025 Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit (220) 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: 49 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 249 Directional Distribution: 24% entering, 76% exiting ✓enicie Trip Generation per uweinng Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.40 0.13-0.73 0.12 Data Plot and Eauation 300 r r X r r X r r r r NKr r X 200 w` XX r u X Xr r � Xr r X X--- X m0 ----'--... ------------- -----------------••--------------- ..----....-------------'-----------......--------------------- X X X X X r r r X Yx 0 0 1000 2000 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve — — — — — Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T= 0.31(X)+ 22.85 W= 0.79 General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000-399) 255 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 138 Page 289 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) Not Close to Rail Transit (220) 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: 59 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 241 Directional Distribution: 63% entering, 37% exiting Jehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.51 0.08 - 1.04 0.15 Data Plot and Fauation 500 , i i i X i 400 ........................................ ..............r_____....... Y----------------------------------- .----- . --------- .................. ; i i i i X i w N X i� X X X , n , X , i �0 . ........................�r-.......---- -........- - -•-------.......•--•-•-•---------•----------------- X X X X mo -X' .......................................................................................... .........------------------ X X X X 0 0 1000 2000 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Study Site Fitted Curve - - - - - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T= 0.43(X) + 20.55 R'= 0.84 256 Trip Generation Manual 111h Edition • Volume 3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 139 Page 290 of 708 OD O ti O Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application - Traffic Impact Statement Section 1- Road Segment Analysis -January 2025 rn N N O7 (0 CL ITE 11th Ed. Errata y N N N N N N N N N OJ O N N U U U U U U U U U U U U U 2 > > > > > > > > > > > > oe oe oe 1A of oe oe `oE e \ oe oe W* m M Ln r` ',r F- O r m O r, M h CD -zr W N C Ln CD <7 Ln Lf1 W G •L L Q , o o o 0 0 0 C N M Ln ci r, Ln 4 M Ln ct Lb r-i O W n M Ln & 101� lop, 10� 10-1 1.1Z 1.R e "0 X Ln Ln e-1 w CD T Ln Cr OO Ln r- OO W tW r- r• cr oo N W cn r- cn r` CV r, m E L L O G1 \ o c c \ \ \ \ \ \ \ o e C N N LM CN N Lh °n H D Co r` N N CD W IU Ma E 0 Q Q n Q a Q n Q a_ Q a_ Q a a � C7 C7 C7 0 � C7 C7 C7 C7 � � C7 C7 o o LY 0 0 0 0 v O O O O 0 0 a a 0 0 0 0 a a U V O O D U U U 0 0 0 0 v v 0 0 0 0 Z Z Z Z Z Z C W bO ,� -` N N N N N N C C U N N 41 M N_ M Ln An M 0 = • 7 = = LY tl' O i S = _ "6 •D "O 'O � SbiD �hq �bD �bO �bA --- -= S 2 S 2 S d t .� L bA hA bD bO bA bA EO bq bO bA y U � C C C G C C C C C C U U f0 f0 'O N �' V j 7> > 7 7 7 7 7 7 c o Q Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O J T >• �. S S S S= 2 2= S S E >. � >. a > >- _T Z _a E E � Ep � Ep E E E � Ep E E C C C 7 7 5 3 ill in in5._22:EM:E 5:22 0 0 F-F� oe oe of `o, `0 oe oe oe `oe oe o oe oQ Ln M Ln N 0 lO M W O W t-I M Ln r 'cr N w W Ln ci Ln CD Ln N Ln Ln o I.A o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N Ln r� rrn dt 14t Ln d .4, 11 n at d 1 4 00 vi N " t N N -4 co Ln 00 M rn LO Ln W ct lD Ln r- M r, 0 0 o a \\ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ND aco Lnenn M In A N a 4 LN CD N Q a- Q a. Q a. Q a. Q a. Q a Q > M ` M _ M 00 'a •C •C •C •C •C = Y ++ +� M M M M C C C C M M M O O I i a' w= w y0 i O O O O M .2 H � 0 0 0 0 0 W 0 0 0 0 0 U U U U O O O 0 U U U 0 0 O O D U U U O O O Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Ln M C •7 a N N O N N M M M LA M M 0 M LA 7 � � 0-" a_0 CO = _ 'O 'a '0 — 'C '0 bO bO b9 5 5 5 S S S WO b.o bO L t " W W" W W" W W C C U U C C C C C C C C C •N 'N fa 19 •M M M M VL M M M .M O O Q Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E EE E E E �E�pp 4•� ,i ,i �E�pp Z (E(pp �E�pp (E� 7 C C C 7 7 7 7 75 5 CI O Ln Ln H H a 1 H N N N N N N N N Ln Ln a i r-1 `-1 rq .•i H N N N H r-1 ri N N N N N N N N N N N N H H N N N N N N N N N ..J N N N N N N N N N N [V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 140 Green way Fritchey— GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Appendix D: MOT Generalized Level of Service Tables Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 141 Page 292 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 -Road Segment Analysis -January 2025 TABLE 7 Generalized Peak Hour Directional Volumes for Florida's STATE SIGNALIZED ARTERIALS FREEWAYS Class (40 mph or higher posted speed limit) Core Urbanized Lanes Median B C D E Lanes B C D E 1 Undivided * 830 880 ** 2 2,230 3,100 3,740 4,080 2 Divided * 1,910 2,000 ** 3 3,280 4,570 5,620 6,130 3 Divided * 2,940 3,020 ** 4 4,310 6,030 7,490 8,170 4 Divided * 3,970 4,040 ** 5 5,390 7,430 9,370 10,220 Class II (33 mph or slower posted speedlimit) 6 6,380 8,990 11,510 12,760 Lanes Median B C D E Urbanized 1 Undivided * 370 750 800 Lanes B C D E 2 Divided * 730 1,630 1,700 2 2,270 3,100 3,890 4,230 3 Divided * 1,170 2,520 2,560 3 3,410 4,650 5,780 6,340 4 Divided * 1,610 3,390 3,420 4 4,550 6,200 7,680 8,460 5 5,690 7,760 9,320 10,370 Non -State Signalized Roadway Adjustments Freeway Adjustments (Altereeatespordingstate wlum es Auxiliary Rarap by& itdicated percent) Lem Metering Non -State Signalized Roadways -10% +1,000 +5% Median &Turn Lane Adjustments UNINTERRUPTED FLOW HIGHWAYS Exclusive Exclusive Adjustment Lanes Nbdian Left Lanes Right Lanes Factors Lanes Median B C D E 1 Divided Yes No +5% 1 Undivided 580 890 1,200 1,610 1 Undmded No No -guy. 2 Divided 1,800 2,600 3,280 3,730 Multi Undivided Yes No 5% 3 Divided 2,700 3,900 4,920 3,600 Multi Undivided No No -25% - - - Yes +5% Uninterrupted Fbw Highway Adjustments One -Way Facility Adjustment Multiply the corresponding directional vohunes inthis table by l.2 BICYCLE MODEZ (Multiplyvehicle whures shownbelowbyrwnberof directional ioadwaylates io dete n ire two-way maxfimmservice volumes) Paved Shoulder/Bicycle 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 ** PEDE STRIAN M ODEz (Miltiplywhcle volumes shvvnbelvvbynmberof aimctional roadwayla es b detenrdre two-waynAxhmmser7ioe vobunes) Sidewalk Coverage B C D E 0-49% * * 140 480 50-84% * 80 440 800 85-100% 200 540 880 >1,000 BUS MODE (Scheduled Fixed Route} (Buses inpeak hear inpeak direction) Sidewalk Coverage B C D E 0-84% >5 >_4 ?3 >2 85-100% > 4 > 3 > 2 > 1 OUALITYILEVELOF SERVICE HANDBOOK( Lanes Median Exclusive leftlenes Adjustment factors 1 Divided Yes +5% Multi Undivided Yes -S'/° Multi Undivided No -25°% Talo?s damn are>:sesatedas peahhaa direasamlvolffies fa levels d setvice and aze fortle doesnet cor,db& a stadaidand slouldbeused orofa geremlplanrmigalplkdior s.The compvtumod:kframmdtihllti;table is daivedd,orddbeusedf rmore specific phitftepplieatims.TPetable arrddertfte npubrmodeL-shouRrottouedfor cw'i&r a imerve cdni desigit,nhue more refinedu drupaes exist. C akuhtiorn are based onpl=67e; atplicubw dt✓. HCM andike Thuu3 Camcivard QmliyS savke.Mamml. 'Lew.lof service forthebi>el, andpedeslrianmodes inthis table is base d m x mberofvrd&hs,rwtnmberofbicyclidsorpedesa'imnxiigthefacilinT. ' Buesperhnrdtumwe oriJfathepeakharieitle siisge ditcdxrdatelAg"tmffY flaw.. e Cumbe a rliievedusfitgtable apvfvahu ddeals. °• Natapp3cabk fathnlevelof service kttagcade. Footle m mmobik mode, volmes ereatarthuilevelof sauke Dbecome Fbecause-itter�cdmi capaz%ieskam beennidted. Forth bicycle mode, tlieiwel d service letter grade (ichtdmg F)isnot azkiuvable becaysethae is no maximum vehicle vohm a tlresholdvsligmbk irpiv. vahmdefaults. sow6e: FloriU Departmera.cf Ttzmamtion Systems lapkmeeteakm Qffk e kdrps:/Rvasvfdotgw/plaiamigls}st�s! Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 142 Page 293 of 708 Green way Fritchey-GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 1- Road Segment Analysis -January 2025 TABLE 7 Generalized Peak Hour Directional Volumes for Florida's (continued) Urbanized Areas Ja n ua ry 2020 INPUT VALUE ASSUMPTIONS Unmtenuptled Flow Facilities Interruptea Fbw Facilities State Arterials Class I Freeways H4ew Highways ClassI Class II Bicycle Pedestrian ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS Area t (urban, mral) urban urban Number a f through lane s (bo th dir.) 4-10 4-12 2 4-6 2 4-8 2 4-8 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 (rs n n Median (d, twlt, n, n; r) d n r n r r r Terrain (l,r) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 % no passing zone 80 Exclusive left turn lane impact (n, 3) [n] Exclusive right turn lanes (n, y) M22 n n n n Facilitylergth(mi) 3 3 5 51.9 1.8 2 2 TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS Planning analysis hour factor (IC) 0.090 0.085 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 Directional distabutionfactor(D) 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.550 0.560 0.565 0.560 0.565 0.565 Peak hour factor(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 Speed Adjustment Factor (SAF) 0.975 0.975 0.975 Capacity Adjustment Factor(CAF) 0.968 0.968 0.968 • leflturns 12 1 12 1 12 12 12 12 • right turns 12 1 12 1 12 12 12 12 CONTROL CHARACTERISTICS Numberof ' 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 ( IC) 0.44 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 MULTIMODAL CHARACTERISTICS Paved shoulderlbicyule lane (n, y) n, 50K,y n Outside lane width (n, t, w) t t Pavement condition (d, t, u) t On -street parking (n, y) Sidewalk (n n, 50%, Sidewalklroadway separation(a, t, w) t Sidewalk protective barrier (n, y) 1 n LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLDS LervicTwo Servicensity ewa Arterials Bicycle Pal Bus LaneMultilane Class I Class II Score Score BusesQv. %ffs Densityats ats B-:17 439, > 83.3 < 17 > 31 mph > 22 mph < 2.75 < 2.75 <6 C24 > 75.0 < 24 > 23 mph > 17 mph 53.50 < 3.50 <4 D31 > 66.7 < 31 > 18 mph > 13 mph _< 4.25 < 4.25 < 3 E > 58.3 < 35 > 15 mph > 10 mph 55.00 < 5.00 < 2 % tts = t'ercera Tree row speea ars= Average rravei speea QUALITYA-EVELOF SERVICE HANDBOOK Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 143 Page 294 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Appendix E: 48 Hour Volume Counts Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 144 Page 295 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1 —Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 C Y 00 Y M (A M U ar m a) a, (1 a) a L O Ln O 0000 0 0 7 r1 N 0) a(N) O W Lr) 00 00 O 00 O O O Z 71 E 'P F cLnI �Ln-i cLnI > Q m m m N N N N O O O N 0000 M N N N M O a a a a a) a C m a) a) iv V Q) Q) QJ Q) C C C C J C C C G (6 (II f6 (B iY a M a a) a) a � � co M ca ca C C G C (0 (6 M f6 N O N d' N Lli Lf1 O O N LLr) 00 r, 0000 M M M (n M .-i Lr) (.0 1-H 41 I Q) O ci N ei N �t N 00 1--1 r-I c-I r-I c-I v O Lr) Lr) 40 O r 15: Lr) Lr) "M (3) -i _q c-I > M m M N N N O O O \ \ \ t\ 00 (9) N N N a a a 0- N N (N N a) a) (3) (1) a) a) aJ (1) r0 M M M G G C C (6 f6 (6 l0 2 2 2 2 a) a) a) a) � � 4� ate+ C C C C M M ra M 2 2 2 �E 00 ,-i v bn v Q N co 1-4 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 145 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 1- Road Segment Analysis -January 2025 2021 PEAK SEASON FACTOR CATEGORY REPORT - REPORT TYPE: ALL CATEGORY: 0300 COLLIER COUNTYWIDE MOCF: 0.91 WEEK DATES SF PSCF _-101/01/2021�- 01/02/2021 0-98----------1-08-_-----�---_-----�-_--_�---_ 2 01/03/2021 - 01/09/2021 1.00 1.10 3 01/10/2021 - 01/16/2021 1.02 1.12 4 01/17/2021 - 01/23/2021 1.00 1.10 5 01/24/2021 - 01/30/2021 0.98 1.08 6 01/31/2021 - 02/06/2021 0.96 1.05 * 7 02 07 2021 - 02 13 2021 0.94 1.03 * 8 02 14 2021 - 02 20 2021 0.92 1.01 * 9 02/21/2021 - 02/27/2021 0.91 1.00 *10 02/28/2021 - 03/06/2021 0.90 0.99 *11 03/07/2021 - 03/13/2021 0.89 0.98 *12 03/14/2021 - 03/20/2021 0.88 0.97 *13 03/21/2021 - 03/27/2021 0.89 0.98 *14 03/28/2021 - 04/03/2021 0.90 0.99 *15 04/04/2021 - 04/10/2021 0.91 1.00 *16 04/11/2021 - 04/17/2021 0.92 1.01 *17 04/18/2021 - 04/24/2021 0.93 1.02 *18 04/25/2021 - 05/01/2021 0.94 1.03 *19 05/02/2021 - OS/08/2021 0.95 1.04 20 05/09/2021 - 05/15/2021 0.97 1.07 21 05/16/2021 - 05/22/2021 0.98 1.08 22 05/23/2021 - 05/29/2021 0.99 1.09 23 05/30/2021 - 06/05/2021 1.00 1.10 24 06/06/2021 - 06/12/2021 1.02 1.12 25 06/13/2021 - 06/19/2021 1.03 1.13 26 06/20/2021 - 06/26/2021 1.03 1.13 27 06/27/2021 - 07/03/2021 1.03 1.13 28 07/04/2021 - 07/10/2021 1.03 1.13 29 07/11/2021 - 07/17/2021 1.04 1.14 30 07/18/2021 - 07/24/2021 1.05 1.15 31 07/25/2021 - 07/31/2021 1.07 1.18 32 08/01/2021 - 08/07/2021 1.09 1.20 33 08/08/2021 - 08/14/2021 1.11 1.22 34 08/15/2021 - 08/21/2021 1.13 1.24 35 08/22/2021 - 08/28/2021 1.13 1.24 36 08/29/2021 - 09/04/2021 1.14 1.25 37 09/05/2021 - 09/11/2021 1.14 1.25 38 09/12/2021 - 09/18/2021 1.15 1.26 39 09/19/2021 - 09/25/2021 1.14 1.25 40 09/26/2021 - 10/02/2021 1.13 1.24 41 10/03/2021 - 10/09/2021 1.12 1.23 42 10/10/2021 - 10/16/2021 1.11 1.22 43 10/17/2021 - 10/23/2021 1.09 1.20 44 10/24/2021 - 10/30/2021 1.07 1.18 45 10/31/2021 - 11/06/2021 1.05 1.15 46 11/07/2021 - 11/13/2021 1.03 1.13 47 11/14/2021 - 11/20/2021 1.01 1.11 48 11/21/2021 - 11/27/2021 1.00 1.10 49 11/28/2021 - 12/04/2021 1.00 1.10 50 12/05/2021 - 12/11/2021 0.99 1.09 51 12/12/2021 - 12/18/2021 0.98 1.08 52 12/19/2021 - 12/25/2021 1.00 1.10 53 12/26/2021 - 12/31/2021 1.02 1.12 * PEAK SEASON 08-MAR-2022 12:36:22 830UPD 1 0300 PKSEASON.TXT Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 146 Page 297 of 708 anate- Legend l-u�� Sat.7'Jh- 1 Park y ��. J'.C.• I� �;kY•• �Y�iP 'YI[5V(,��r.� E ,hanl nr].. hor.S� _. RR H ateAlgr . JIM • � � YuY uo�.5e i is LdS'.(!ilA 5 ^t .. � �r4:�!�1Mr1�_'FjRca - •r sgr[�s • `%yifkl s oo le Earth g I Inn tt.. Green way Fritchey—GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Rood Segment Analysis —January 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Location 1: Manatee 1 Naples FI 34104 Serial Number. 29736 Location Verified: East and West Serial Number: 29736 Latltude:38.861231 Station ID: Longitude:-95.741185 2/7/2023 EB WB Combined 2/8123 EB WB Combined Time Tue A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. Wed A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 26 " 43 0 69 0 32 1 39 1 71 12:15 26 " 42 0 68 2 29 2 44 4 73 12:30 31 52 0 83 2 37 0 44 2 81 12:45 " 38 31 0 69 0 31 1 43 1 74 01:00 28 49 0 77 2 33 1 28 3 61 01:16 40 33 0 73 1 43 3 34 4 77 01:30 35 40 0 75 2 40 0 40 2 80 01:45 36 31 0 67 0 44 0 30 0 74 02:00 42 26 0 68 1 35 0 32 1 67 02:16 40 39 0 79 0 42 0 47 0 89 02:30 " 40 33 0 73 1 44 0 52 1 96 02:45 58 39 0 97 1 44 1 40 2 84 03:00 37 55 0 92 0 36 0 48 0 84 03:15 53 55 0 108 0 61 1 56 1 117 03:30 47 34 0 81 0 51 1 46 1 97 03:46 43 54 0 97 0 54 1 50 1 104 04:00 42 52 0 94 0 42 1 67 1 109 04:15 38 " 43 0 81 1 48 0 42 1 90 04:30 34 42 0 76 0 32 3 48 3 80 04:45 46 ' 41 0 87 0 35 3 36 3 71 05:00 39 25 0 64 1 48 6 43 7 91 06:16 43 41 0 84 1 41 5 47 6 88 05:30 47 36 0 83 2 44 6 45 8 89 05:46 32 32 0 64 2 51 8 28 10 79 06:00 38 " 37 0 75 6 36 14 24 20 60 06:15 27 27 0 54 7 24 23 14 30 38 06:30 29 24 0 53 9 38 23 30 32 68 06:45 31 20 0 51 18 27 24 29 42 56 07:00 " 23 19 0 42 15 18 25 14 40 32 07:15 30 11 0 41 29 18 44 19 73 37 07:30 18 " 9 0 27 29 22 74 16 103 38 07:46 21 12 0 33 24 19 53 14 77 33 08:00 ' 32 5 0 37 42 26 51 8 93 34 08:15 19 6 0 25 30 20 52 9 82 29 08:30 16 15 0 31 28 16 57 8 85 24 08:45 18 5 0 23 27 18 55 10 82 28 09:00 19 7 0 26 19 18 47 5 66 23 09:15 13 " 9 0 22 29 12 36 12 65 24 09:30 15 6 0 21 29 16 41 6 70 22 09:46 " 10 7 0 17 25 9 50 8 75 17 10:00 22 10 42 9 64 19 33 10 42 1 75 11 10:15 19 6 46 5 65 11 28 15 59 3 87 18 10:30 19 6 38 2 57 8 32 10 33 5 65 15 10:45 35 8 37 5 72 13 26 5 33 5 59 10 11:00 34 4 44 2 78 6 26 3 47 1 73 4 11:15 20 4 39 4 59 8 34 8 50 2 84 10 11:30 49 5 44 6 93 11 24 4 35 4 59 8 11:45 41 3 47 3 88 6 44 1 40 1 84 2 Total 239 1346 337 1223 576 2569 632 1390 1052 1277 1684 2667 Day Total 1685 1560 3146 2022 2329 4351 % Total 7.6% 42.8% 10.7% 38.9% 14.5% 31.9% 242% 29.3% Peak 11:00 02:45 11:00 03:00 11:00 03:15 11:00 03:15 07:30 03:15 07:30 03:15 Volume 144 195 174 198 318 380 128 208 230 219 355 427 Peak Factor 0.735 0.841 0.926 0.900 0.855 0.880 0.727 0.852 0.777 0.817 0.862 0.912 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 148 Page 299 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Location Number. 29736 Naples FI 34104 Location Verified: East and West Serial Number: 29736 Latitude:38861231 Station ID: Litude:-95:741185 2/9/2023 EB WB Combined 2/1023 EB W8 Combined 12:16 1 31 1 50 2 81 3 2 5 0 12:30 2 28 1 33 3 61 3 0 3 0 12:46 1 34 0 43 1 77 2 2 4 0 01:00 0 38 0 30 0 68 1 1 2 0 01:16 2 29 1 34 3 63 1 0 1 0 01:30 0 34 1 36 1 70 0 1 1 0 01:45 0 38 1 28 1 66 0 0 0 0 02:00 1 45 1 42 2 87 1 3 4 0 02:15 0 42 1 26 1 68 1 0 1 0 02:30 1 45 0 30 1 75 0 3 3 0 02:45 1 40 2 40 3 80 0 0 0 0 03:00 0 56 1 53 1 109 0 0 0 0 03:15 0 55 0 49 0 104 1 0 1 0 03:30 0 47 1 44 1 91 0 1 1 0 03:45 0 50 0 46 0 96 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 43 1 55 1 98 0 0 0 0 04:15 2 35 1 46 3 81 2 3 5 0 04:30 0 36 3 33 3 69 1 0 1 0 04:46 0 43 1 37 1 80 0 2 2 0 05:00 2 42 8 41 10 83 2 3 5 0 05:16 0 35 7 44 7 79 1 4 5 0 05:30 5 31 7 33 12 64 2 9 11 0 05:45 1 38 8 27 9 65 0 12 12 0 06:00 3 35 12 33 15 68 2 8 10 0 06:15 8 24 21 25 29 49 5 19 24 0 06:30 4 32 29 24 33 56 6 26 32 0 06:45 9 35 25 25 34 60 7 23 30 0 07:00 23 30 23 20 46 50 18 29 47 0 07:16 15 34 42 21 57 55 21 39 60 0 07:30 31 27 57 10 88 37 33 63 96 0 07:45 33 24 58 15 91 39 42 59 101 0 08:00 25 22 33 12 58 34 30 43 73 0 08:15 30 22 32 11 62 33 30 42 72 0 08:30 21 15 45 8 66 23 34 48 82 0 08:45 26 10 41 5 67 15 28 42 70 0 09:00 25 14 41 12 66 26 22 33 55 0 09:15 19 18 48 4 67 22 25 48 73 0 09:30 24 19 55 4 79 23 25 46 71 0 09:45 21 11 49 14 70 25 26 31 57 0 10:00 29 8 35 3 64 11 0 0 10:15 28 17 49 2 77 19 0 0 10:30 25 13 39 3 64 16 0 0 10:45 28 9 40 1 68 10 ' 0 0 11:00 38 12 52 6 90 18 0 0 11:16 25 9 45 2 70 11 0 0 11:30 38 3 43 3 81 6 0 0 11:45 23 5 42 2 65 7 0 0 Total 577 1401 1 1006 12021 1583 2603 377 01 646 0 1023 0 Day Total 1978 2208 4186 377 646 1023 %Total 13.8% 33.5% 1 24.0% 28.7% 136.9% 0.0%1 63.1% 0.0% Peak 10:45 03:00 09:00 03:15 10:45 03:00 07:45 07:30 07:30 Volume 129 208 193 194 309 400 136 207 342 Peak Factor 0.849 0.929 0.877 0.882 0.858 0.917 0.810 0.821 0.847 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 149 Page 300 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 50 Page 301 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Locaon 1: Naples Fl34104 Serial Number29737 Location Verified: East and West Serial Number: 29737 Latitude:38.861231 Station ID: Longitude:-95.741185 2R/2023 EB WB Combined 2/8/23 EB WB Combined Time Tue A.M. P.M. AM. P.M. A.M. P.M. Wed A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 26 ' 39 0 65 0 22 1 36 1 58 12:15 26 ' 33 0 59 1 19 2 35 3 54 12:30 " 33 44 0 77 1 31 0 39 1 70 12:45 ' 34 32 0 66 0 29 2 37 2 66 01:00 23 34 0 57 3 27 1 22 4 49 01:15 36 28 0 64 0 37 0 37 0 74 01:30 27 32 0 59 1 29 0 35 1 64 01:45 27 " 23 0 50 0 28 0 30 0 58 02:00 35 20 0 55 1 28 1 40 2 68 02:15 32 39 0 71 0 34 0 38 0 72 02:30 ' 33 40 0 73 1 33 0 48 1 81 02:46 45 38 0 83 0 42 1 36 1 78 03:00 33 " 59 0 92 0 28 0 51 0 79 03:15 43 51 0 94 0 47 1 50 1 97 03:30 46 29 0 75 0 46 2 51 2 97 03:45 42 52 0 94 0 46 1 51 1 97 04:00 32 57 0 89 0 33 0 63 0 96 04:15 24 " 34 0 58 1 33 0 37 1 70 04:30 31 40 0 71 0 19 2 35 2 54 04:46 33 ' 53 0 86 0 28 2 43 2 71 05:00 35 29 0 64 3 36 5 47 8 83 05:16 36 49 0 85 1 40 2 41 3 81 05:30 35 37 0 72 3 34 5 41 8 75 05:45 25 36 0 61 2 39 7 27 9 66 06:00 24 36 0 60 7 30 11 21 18 51 06:15 ' 16 " 30 0 46 10 17 18 22 28 39 06:30 23 23 0 46 20 25 20 25 40 50 06:46 26 23 0 49 19 25 17 24 36 49 07:00 " 15 " 30 0 45 19 11 20 20 39 31 07:15 20 9 0 29 39 11 31 16 70 27 07:30 9 " 16 0 25 41 16 61 15 102 31 07:45 14 12 0 26 28 11 49 16 77 27 08:00 18 6 0 24 40 18 39 11 79 29 08:15 13 7 0 20 30 17 33 14 63 31 08:30 13 11 0 24 32 15 46 14 78 29 08:45 10 7 0 17 27 13 34 7 61 20 09:00 " 14 9 0 23 20 11 27 6 47 17 09:15 8 " 11 0 19 27 8 21 8 48 16 09:30 " 11 5 0 16 23 8 33 11 56 19 09:45 ' 7 5 0 12 24 5 40 7 64 12 10:00 20 8 30 8 50 16 31 8 36 0 67 8 10:15 16 6 31 4 47 10 32 12 38 4 70 16 10:30 23 3 35 3 58 6 27 7 26 4 53 11 10:45 37 6 31 4 68 10 26 5 39 3 65 8 11:00 28 1 32 2 60 3 34 2 42 2 76 4 11:15 15 5 34 2 49 7 25 7 34 2 59 9 11:30 50 4 31 5 81 9 25 2 28 2 53 4 11:45 23 4 37 3 60 7 35 0 28 2 63 2 Total 212 1070 261 1199 473 2269 659 1072 806 1226 1465 2298 Day Total 1282 1460 2742 1731 2032 3763 % Total 7.7% 39.0% 9.5% 43.7% 17.5% 28.5% 21.4% 32.6% Peak 10:46 02.45 11:00 03:00 10:46 03:00 07:15 03:15 07:30 03:15 07:16 03:15 Volume 130 167 134 191 258 355 148 172 182 215 328 387 Peak Factor 0.650 0.908 0.905 0.809 0.796 0.944 0.902 0.915 0.746 0.853 0.804 0.997 Page IS1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 302 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 1— Road Segment Analysis —January 2025 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Location 1: Serial Number 29737 Naples Fl 34104 Location Verified: East and West Serial Number: 29737 Latitude:38.861231 Station ID: Longitude:-95.741185 2/9/2023 EB WB Combined 2/10/23 EB WB Combined Time Thu A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. AM. P.M. Fri A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M. 12:00 4 28 2 34 6 62 1 1 2 0 12:15 1 24 0 34 1 58 1 3 4 0 12:30 2 24 2 35 4 59 2 1 3 0 12:45 1 27 0 34 1 61 1 1 2 0 01:00 0 26 0 30 0 56 1 1 2 0 01:16 2 32 0 38 2 70 0 0 0 0 01:30 1 21 1 28 2 49 1 0 1 0 01:45 0 26 1 31 1 57 0 0 0 0 02:00 0 39 1 25 1 64 1 1 2 0 02:15 0 36 0 27 0 63 1 0 1 0 02:30 0 37 0 33 0 70 0 2 2 0 02:45 1 41 1 42 2 83 1 0 1 0 03:00 0 49 0 52 0 101 0 0 0 0 03:15 0 49 0 52 0 101 0 0 0 0 03:30 0 39 1 50 1 89 1 0 1 0 03:45 0 40 0 38 0 78 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 29 1 49 1 78 0 0 0 0 04:15 2 34 1 44 3 78 2 2 4 0 04:30 0 35 3 32 3 67 1 0 1 0 04:45 1 38 0 35 1 73 0 2 2 0 05:00 2 26 4 40 6 66 3 3 6 0 05:15 0 34 4 52 4 86 1 1 2 0 05:30 5 24 6 39 11 63 5 7 12 0 05:46 3 34 6 35 9 69 0 7 7 0 06:00 6 24 7 21 13 45 6 6 12 0 06:15 9 20 16 26 25 46 4 17 21 0 06:30 15 21 22 15 37 36 14 23 37 0 06:45 12 17 16 23 28 40 10 15 25 0 07:00 18 22 21 16 39 38 18 17 35 0 07:15 25 25 24 25 49 50 31 32 63 0 07:30 37 17 50 12 87 29 41 56 97 0 07:45 30 13 44 10 74 23 38 47 85 0 08:00 24 12 31 13 55 25 33 42 75 0 08:15 26 16 23 11 49 27 25 21 46 0 08:30 25 9 30 11 55 20 20 36 56 0 08:45 34 4 25 5 59 9 31 39 70 0 09:00 28 10 27 12 55 22 19 29 48 0 09:15 23 12 26 3 49 15 21 32 53 0 09:30 21 11 40 3 61 14 26 37 63 0 09:45 23 7 33 10 56 17 18 21 39 0 10:00 28 6 26 3 54 9 0 0 10:16 27 15 36 3 63 18 ` 0 0 10:30 25 10 28 3 53 13 0 0 10:45 20 9 34 4 54 13 0 0 11:00 27 10 41 4 68 14 0 0 11:15 18 7 33 4 51 11 0 0 11:30 33 1 28 3 61 4 0 0 11:45 23 3 36 1 59 4 0 0 Total 582 10931 731 11501 1313 2243 378 01 502 01 880 0 Day Total 1675 1881 3556 378 502 880 % Total 16.4% 30.7% 1 20.6% 32.3% 1 43.0% 0.0% 1 57.01% 0.0% Peak 07:30 02:45 07:15 02:45 07:15 02:45 07:16 07:15 07:15 Volume 117 178 149 196 265 374 143 177 320 Peak Factor 0.791 0.908 0.745 0.942 0.761 0.926 0.872 0.790 0.825 ADT N/A Page 152 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 303 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) EXHIBIT V E.3 - TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT - EXHIBIT A Page 304 of 708 a a �K� a � � LL o$S C o a � IVYmm� gF-L.�U or), ZIIII'a�Illl C O U M o , a G' V s° H' T 0 OD 0 ti 0 C) M N LL GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) EXHIBIT V.E.3 - TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT - SECTION 2 Page 306 of 708 EXHIBIT V.E.3 TIS—SECTION 2 TREBILCOCK CONSULTING SOLUTIONS Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 -Intersection Operational Analysis Prepared for: Hole Montes 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-254-2000 Greenway Fritchey GMPA/RPUD Application Collier County, Florida 07/05/2024 Prepared by: Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock(@trebilcock.biz Page 307 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 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. `O 2: No 47116 STATE OF Digitally signed by Norman Trebilcock DN: c=US, sn=Trebilcock, givenName=Norman, email=Ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz, cn=Norman Trebilcock Date: 2024.10.25 10:49:14-04'00' Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, PE 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 g e 12 Page 308 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Table of Contents Description....................................................................................................................................................4 IntersectionConfigurations..........................................................................................................................4 Intersection Traffic Volumes.........................................................................................................................6 IntersectionCapacity Analyses.....................................................................................................................7 Intersection Improvements.......................................................................................................................10 Improvement Analysis and Mitigation........................................................................................................11 Appendices Appendix A: Intersection Lane Configurations.........................................................................................12 Appendix B: 2023 Intersection Traffic Counts..........................................................................................16 Appendix C: Projected Traffic at Subject Intersections.............................................................................23 Appendix D: Intersection Signal Timings...................................................................................................35 Appendix E: FDOT 2021 Annual Vehicle Classification Report - Statistics................................................38 Appendix F: Intersection Analyses — Synchro Reports..............................................................................42 Appendix G: Fair -Share Mitigation for Operational Impacts....................................................................79 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 3 Page 309 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Description The purpose of this report is to evaluate traffic operations for the following intersections: - US 41 (Tamiami Trail S; SR 90) and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive - US 41 and Manatee Road - Collier Boulevard (SR 951) and Manatee Road Consistent with the companion document titled Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) — Section 1, the horizon year of 2028 was selected as the analysis year to evaluate the potential transportation impacts. Traffic analyses are conducted for the subject intersections based on the following scenarios: - Projected 2028 Peak Season Background Traffic Conditions - Projected 2028 Peak Season Background Plus Project Traffic Conditions Intersection Configurations Existing intersection lane configurations are depicted in this report based on field observations and are illustrated in Appendix A. Intersection Turn Lane Lengths US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive - US 41— Southbound (SB): one left -turn lane — 450 feet (ft); one right -turn lane — 350 ft - US 41— Northbound (NB): one left -turn lane — 375 ft; one right -turn lane — 350 ft US 41 and Manatee Road: - US 41— SB: one U-turn lane — 510 ft; one right -turn lane — 480 ft - US 41— NB: one left -turn lane — 650 ft - Manatee Road — Eastbound (EB): one left -turn lane — 205 ft Collier Boulevard and Manatee Road: - Collier Boulevard — SB: one left -turn lane — 430 ft; - Collier Boulevard — NB: one U-turn lane — 330 ft; one right -turn lane — 325 ft; - Manatee Road — Westbound (WB): one left -turn lane — 175 ft. As an initial step, future geometric configurations reflect existing lane configuration, as applicable to each intersection. Covered in separate traffic analyses, current geometric configurations are altered to reflect committed roadway improvements and/or needed improvements to address transportation deficiencies without the project traffic. It is noted that roadway facilities maintained by Collier County are evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the requirements illustrated in the Collier County Construction Standards Handbook (Resolution 2016-136), Section III -A: (a) two-lane roadways — 40 vehicles per hour (vph) for right -turn lane/20 vph for left -turn lane; (b) multi -lane divided roadways — right -turn lanes shall always be provided; and (c) when new median openings are permitted, they shall always include left -turn lanes. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 14 Page 310 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 In addition, consistent with the guidelines presented in the FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) Design Manual (FDM), Section 232.2, a double left -turn lane is considered for all analyzed signalized intersections, where left turn volumes exceed 300 vph. Non -Project Related Improvements Additional intersection analyses may be required to capture projected 2028 Peak Season Background Plus with Non -Project Improvements (committed or required to address a transportation deficiency, as applicable). Intersection Committed Improvements Consistent with the Collier County's TIS Guidelines, projected 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 intersection improvements were identified in the Collier County Five -Year Work Program for the analyzed locations. The intersection of US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive is currently operating as a two-way stop - controlled intersection with stop signs and stop bars on the minor street approaches. This intersection is proposed to be signalized. The signal design plans are currently under County permit review. Therefore, for the purposes of this report the intersection of US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive is considered signalized. Improvements to Address Transportation Deficiencies In agreement with Florida Statute, the developer is not responsible to address transportation deficiencies which occur regardless of the project's traffic. The improvement necessary to correct the transportation deficiency is the funding responsibility of the entity that has maintenance responsibility for the facility. Per Florida Statute, the term transportation deficiency means a facility or facilities on which the adopted level -of -service (LOS) standard is exceeded by the existing, committed, and vested trips, plus additional projected background trips from any source other than the development project under review, and trips that are forecast by established traffic standards, including traffic modeling. The improvements needed to restore subject intersections to a minimum acceptable LOS include the addition of geometric improvements such as turn or through lanes. The improvements proposed in this report are intended to address the minimum LOS requirement for a specific deficiency and are not intended to optimize the overall intersection performance. Project Related Improvements Consistent with Florida Statute, the analysis of the project traffic impacts assume that turn lanes and other improvements needed to correct transportation deficiencies without the project would be in place prior to the addition of project traffic. The analysis would reflect applicable additional project related improvements needed to restore the LOS to the adopted standard. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 5 Page 311 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis— July 2024 Intersection Traffic Volumes 2023 Peak Season Background Traffic To support this traffic analysis, intersection traffic counts were conducted on Wednesday, February 8, 2023. AM and PM peak period turning movement data were collected in 15-minute intervals from 7-9 AM, and from 4-6 PM. A summary of the intersection turning movement counts is provided in Appendix B: 2023 Intersection Traffic Counts. Traffic count volumes collected are adjusted for peak season conditions by using the peak season conversion factor (PSCF) for the week of the count as illustrated in the latest Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Peak Season Factor Category Report (reference Appendix C). 2028 Peak Season Background Traffic Intersection traffic projections coincident with the future 2028 forecast year are presented in Appendix C: Projected Traffic at Subject Intersections. The method used in the TIS Section 1 to predict future roadway segment volumes provides projected annual growth rates in approach volumes for every leg of all intersections. At each intersection, the growth rate for each leg was weighted by the total background approach volume's share of the total intersection approach volume and the resulting products summed to produce a volume weighted average growth rate that was applied to all movements. This method results in an average rate that is most similar to the growth rate projected for the heaviest approach volume, with more noticeable adjustments to the growth rates predicted for the minor approach volumes. The weighted average growth rate was calculated using the PM peak approach volumes as the basis for the weights given to each approach's growth rate. The resulting average growth rate is also used to adjust the background AM peak turning movements into the future. While the different collection of AM volumes would produce a different set of weights and a different weighted average rate, the assumption here is that traffic will not grow at different rates in the two peak periods. This growth rate (compounded annually) is used to estimate future 2028 background traffic volumes. While all the growth rates, link and average, are shown to one decimal place, the calculations are done with all decimals, so using only the decimals shown will yield slightly different results. Project Traffic The development traffic volumes are added to the projected 2028 peak season background volumes to estimate the future 2028 peak season traffic volumes with the subject project. The various percentages of project traffic that form turning movements at the intersections are consistent with the project traffic distribution percentages reported in the TIS Section 1. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 6 Page 312 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 2028 Peak Season Background with Project Traffic Appendix C contains the volume development tables and graphical depictions of their content. Intersection Capacity Analyses An assessment of the Level of Service (LOS) and volume to capacity (V/C) ratio analysis of the subject intersections are conducted using Synchro software, Version 11. Synchro computes the signalized intersection, unsignalized intersection, and arterial LOS according to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). For signalized intersections, Synchro provides the user with two additional intersection LOS methods: Synchro's Percentile Delay Method and the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Method. The Percentile Delay Method uses the same numerical delay thresholds as the HCM. In most situations, the delays calculated by the Synchro Percentile and HCM methodologies are similar and will be within a few seconds of each other. One of the key differences between the two methods (Synchro vs HCM) is the Right -Turn -On -Red (RTOR) operation. In the HCM methods, the RTOR is a volume input by the user and is used as a volume reduction (not a capacity increase). As illustrated in the HCM 6, Volume 4, Chapter 31, page 31-121, the treatment of RTOR operation in the motorized vehicle methodology is simplistic. In addition, HCM 61h Edition states that it may be preferable to use an alternative tool to evaluate RTOR operation. Based on these considerations, all signalized intersections are evaluated in this report based on the Synchro Percentile Method. LOS Criteria LOS is defined in terms of the average vehicle delay. For the purposes of this report, an adequate LOS for each movement is considered when the LOS E is not exceeded. Signalized intersection LOS Signalized intersection LOS is defined in terms of the average total vehicle delay of all movements through an intersection. Volume to Capacity Ratio The volume to capacity ratio (V/C), also referred to as degree of saturation, represents the sufficiency of an intersection to accommodate the vehicular demand. A V/C ratio less than 0.85 generally indicates that adequate capacity is available, and vehicles are not expected to experience significant queues and delays. As the V/C ratio approaches 1.0, traffic flow may become unstable, and delay and queuing conditions may occur. Once the demand exceeds the capacity (a V/C ratio greater than 1.0), traffic flow is unstable and excessive delay and queuing is expected. Under these conditions vehicles may require more than one signal cycle to pass through the intersection (known as cycle failure). For design purposes, a V/C ratio between 0.85 and 0.95 is generally utilized for the peak hour of the horizon year. As such, each intersection movement is analyzed to ensure that the threshold value of V/C failure (1.0) is notreached. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 7 Page 313 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPOD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Siena[ Timines To support the signalized intersection analyses, the existing programmed signal timings were provided by Collier County Transportation Staff. For details refer to Appendix D. The intersection analyses for each traffic scenario used signal phasing and timing adjustments aimed at eliminating or reducing operational deficiencies without requiring geometric improvements. Where operational deficiencies could not be avoided with signal optimization, geometric improvements were identified, and signal phasing and timing adjustments were made to accommodate the recommended improvement(s). Percent Heavy Vehicle The Percent Heavy Vehicle (PHV) —the percent of trucks expected to use the roadway segment during the peak hour. Based on standard practices, a minimum PHV value of 2% is considered for all movements. The intersection analyses for future traffic conditions reflect counted peak hour truck percentages as illustrated in the peak hour turning movement counts (Appendix B). Based on the review of the FDOT 2021 Annual Vehicle Classification Report, the following statistics are presented in Appendix E: - Site 0005 — US 41, northwest of CR 92 — 24-hour Truck and Bus (24T&B) = 16.06%; Design Hour Truck (DHT) = 8.03%. - Site 0194 — US 41, southeast of SR 951— 24T&B = 9.25%; DHT = 4.62%. - Site 0157 — SR 951, south of US 41— 24T&B = 7.69%; DHT = 3.85%. Based on the above considerations, a maximum PHV value is utilized for the intersection analyses as follow: - 9% for US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive - 6% for US 41 US 41 and Manatee Road - 5% for Collier Boulevard (SR 951) and Manatee Road Peak Hour Factor (PHF PHF is the ratio of the hourly volume to the peak 15-minute flow rate for that hour. As illustrated in Appendix B, the raw intersection turning movement counts provide the current 2023 traffic PHF value for each intersection. Per data illustrated in the latest FDOT 2023 Quality/Level of Service Handbook (Q/LOS Handbook), Section 6.3, the PHF values were updated to be based on FDOT context classification. These values were previously based on area type. The FDOT GIS Preliminary Context Classification feature class provides spatial information regarding preliminary context classification on selected Florida roadways. This dataset is maintained by the Transportation Data & Analytics office (TDA). Based on the available FDOT Preliminary Context Classification data, the analyzed roadway segments provide the following context classification: C2 — Rural for US 41 and C3C— Suburban Commercial for Collier Boulevard. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 18 Page 314 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 The Florida's Generalized Service Volume Tables utilize a PHF of 0.92 for the C2 — Rural Context Classification and a PHF of 0.95 for the CK — Suburban Commercial Context Classification, as referenced in the 2023 QJLOS Handbook, Section 6.3 (Table 5). Based on the projected vehicular volumes, intersection geometric lane configuration and engineering judgement, this report utilizes the following PHF minimum values: 0.95 for the intersection located on Collier Boulevard and 0.92 for the intersections located on US 41. SVnchro Analyses Results The results of the Synchro intersection analyses for AM and PM peak hour conditions are summarized in Table 1. Synchro intersection worksheets are provided in Appendix F: Intersection Analyses — Synchro Reports. Table 1 Intersection Capacity Analysis — Level of Service US 41 and Greenway Rd US 41 and Manatee Rd Collier Blvd and Manatee Rd Peak Signalized Signalized Signalized Intersection Hour LOS Max V/C LOS Max V/C LOS Max WC Int/Mvtl�1 Mvt/Ratio Int/Mvt(1) Mvt/Ratio Int/Mvt(1) Mvt/Ratio AM B/D WBT/0.51 B/C SBT/0.60 C/E SBT/0.89 2028 Background Traffic PM C/D NBT/0.71 B/C SBT/0.61 D/E NBT/1.08 2028 Background Traffic AM B/D SBL/0.36 (N/A) (N/A) B/D SBT/0.69 with Non -Project Related PM C/D NBT/0.70 (N/A) (N/A) B/E NBT/0.80 Improvements 2028 Background with AM C/E WBR/0.80 B/D NBL/0.69 B/D WBL/0.71 Project Traffic (2) PM E/F NBT/0.80 B/D SBT/0.66 C/E NBT/0.81 2028 Background with AM C/D WBR/0.79 (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) Project Traffic with Project I�1 PM C/E SBL 0.79 / N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) Related Improvements Note(s): (N/A) = Not applicable; Int = Intersection; Mvt = Movement. (1) Int = overall intersection LOS reported / Mvt = maximum LOS reported for a movement. (2) Assume intersection improvements needed to correct transportation deficiencies are in place prior to the addition of project traffic. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 9 Page 315 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GIOPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Intersection Improvements In agreement with Florida Statute, the developer is not responsible to address transportation deficiencies which occur regardless of the project's traffic. Intersection improvements needed to address transportation deficiencies are recommended based on the Synchro analyses results illustrated in Appendix F. The improvements proposed in this report are intended to address the minimum LOS requirement for a specific deficiency and are not intended to optimize the overall intersection performance. Projected 2028 Peak Season Background Traffic Conditions The analyzed intersections do not exceed the minimum acceptable level of service standard. The intersection of Collier Boulevard and Manatee Road is projected to perform with a maximum V/C ratio of 1.08 (Northbound Through movement). Non -Project Related Intersection Improvements 1. Committed Improvements There are no turn lane improvements scheduled to be constructed as part of the current Collier County Five -Year Work Program. Consistent with the FDOT's request received as part of the signal design plans review for the US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive intersection, the eastbound approach will provide the following geometry configuration: one exclusive left -turn lane; one shared left/through lane and one exclusive right -turn lane. 2. Improvements to Address Transportation Deficiencies This analysis assumes that beyond committed improvement, turn lane additions and/or other improvements needed to correct transportation deficiencies without the project would be in place prior to the addition of project's traffic. US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive Intersection Per County's turn lane requirements, the westbound approach is required to provide one exclusive right -turn lane or one exclusive left -turn lane. For the purposes of this report the westbound approach will provide: one shared left/through lane and one exclusive right -turn lane. Collier Boulevard and Manatee Road Intersection The intersection capacity analysis documents a maximum V/C value greater than 1.0 (Table 1). Projected 2028 background traffic volumes (Appendix C) exceed the minimum standard LOS volumes for the northbound and southbound approaches. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 10 Page 316 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Southbound approach — The peak hour, peak direction minimum standard is 2,000 vph (2023 Collier County AUIR — Link ID 36.2 — Collier Boulevard from Walmart Driveway to Manatee Road). Construction is funded in FY 2028 to widen Collier Blvd. to six lanes north from this intersection to the southern end of the existing six lane section at Henderson Creek Dr. (FPN 435111-2). Northbound approach — The peak hour, peak direction minimum standard is 2,200 vph (2023 Collier County AUIR — Link ID 37.0 — Collier Boulevard from Manatee Road to Mainsail Drive). To remedy this deficiency, Collier Boulevard is projected to widen from 4 through lanes to 6 through lanes. Projected 2028 Peak Season Background Plus Project Traffic Conditions The southbound left -turn movement at the intersection of US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive is projected to exceed the adopted minimum LOS standard. Project Related Intersection Improvements The addition of one southbound left -turn lane is the recommended improvement needed to address project related LOS deficiency at the intersection of US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive. Improvement Analysis and Mitigation Based on the results illustrated within this traffic analysis, the proposed project adversely impacts the intersection of US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive. This report presents proposed project related improvements needed to restore subject intersections to a minimum acceptable LOS. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting to determine traffic operational requirements, as more accurate parameters will be made available. The developer is not responsible for correcting preexisting deficiencies. Once preexisting deficiencies are corrected, the developer is responsible for project related mitigation requirements. The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as applicable. The mitigation plan will include specific improvements to be undertaken, fair share contribution commitments and site related improvements. Contribution requirements for the operational transportation related impacts total $600,000 as described in Appendix G. The developer proposes to provide transportation commitments that will be incorporated into the Development Document for the project. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 11 Page 317 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Appendix A: Intersection Lane Configurations Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 12 Page 318 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPOD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 N Q N/S Street: Greenway Rd/Sandpiper Dr Specd: 3o/15 i f 7-Eleven _ I � . Tr l- _ _ l \ \ I V A rt I 1. Houses l _ �j / Propose / Configu FDOT F Publix N Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 13 Page 319 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P i g e 1 14 Page 320 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 N 0 N/S Street: Collier Blvd (CR 951) Speed: 45 I = ;I Race Trac i i I LJ i m Il i A t� ti I I , I , €r. i i .� I a CL IL TreesAL _ i I I0 i ! i 1 1 / � � I .._ J. : I L.. I I! i i w O ' I .ONLY C' e K Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 15 Page 321 of 708 Green way Fritchey— GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Appendix B: 2023 Intersection Traffic Counts Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 16 Page 322 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Tvoe of peak hour bein¢ reoorted: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume I LOCATION: Greenway Rd/Sandpiper Dr -- US 41 CITY/STATE: Collier, FL QC JOB #: 16068501 DATE: Wed, Feb 8 2023 115 M3 Peak -Hour: 8:00 AM -- 9:00 AM 119 136 + . 82 9 25 1 + 4. Peak 15-Min: 8:30 AM -- 8:45 AM 13A 125 16 + ' L 510 67 .f t 32 f 374 475 + R ♦ 333 10.6 ♦ 104.t t A8 4. 115 9.7 * • 108 684 * 142 , C 9 * 522 ti ♦ r 93 6 22 117 + 19 n, r 111 * 98 w • e 7.5 16.7 45 7 159 121 Quality Counts 182 7A DATA MAT DRNESCaMMUNMES L 1 1 + - L o� � �o L 0 j 16* O «s ~ 2 a ♦ r 3 0 0 1 1-- N+A �' � � � ✓ NSA ♦ J N/A * � t ♦ • • w N/A � J � L WA * w N/A WA err r WA r + R* = RMR 15-Min Count Period Greenway Rd/Sandpiper Dr (Northbound) Greenway Rd/Sandpiper Dr (Southbound) US 41 (Eastbound) US 41 (Westbound) Total Hourly Totals Left Thru Right U R *Right* Left Thru U R Left Thru Ri ht U R * Left Thti Right U R * Be innin At g g 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7 1 3 0 16 0 7 0 0 0 4 3 3 34 0 0 2 43 0 0 30 12 86 19 0 104 39 1 0 0 1 1 65 10 0 0 107 6 0 0 263 341 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 15 2 7 0 13 0 7 0 0 0 10 7 3 54 0 0 2 30 0 0 20 25 86 27 0 116 36 0 0 0 3 5 99 7 0 0 80 6 0 0 333 327 1264 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 17 1 4 0 24 1 5 0 0 0 5 7 1 22 0 0 4 12 0 0 16 14 96 31 1 116 43 1 0 0 4 4 73 4 0 0 94 10 0 0 275 335 1276 1270 8:30 AM 28 2 5 0 0 8 3 27 0 0 19 129 29 0 0 1 95 5 0 0 351 1288 45 AM 24 2 8 0 0 5 0 21 0 0 16 134 39 0 0 0 71 13 0 0 333 1294 k 15-Min wrates Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Vehicles vyTrucks r 112 8 20 0 4 0 4 0 32 4 12 108 0 0 0 16 76 12 516 116 0 56 12 0 4 0 380 20 0 0 40 4 1404 152 Buses estrians Bicycles 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 4 4 8 16 Scooters Comments.• Report generated on 2/15/2023 1:16 PM SUUKLL: Quality uounts, ccu Inttp://www.quamycounts.net) 1-ot i-oou-cuz Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 117 Page 323 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2— Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Tvne of peak hour beine reoorted: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: Greenway Rd/Sandpiper Dr -- US 41 CITY/STATE: Collier, FL QC JOB #: 16068502 DATE: Wed, Feb 8 2023 87 15B Peak -Hour: 4:30 PM — 5:30 PM 69 89 + • 62 5 Zl L Peak 15-Min: 4:30 PM — 4:45 PM + 6.5 0 + 10 J + 4 *0 + —1 4 797 4.126 J t 26 *. 579 421 .► M • 539 72 ♦ 79 t 59 t 15A ♦ 75 7A 733 .* 195 7 r 14 i 476 190 22 35 F 52 * 2 � 6.8 45 r 0 r 53 0 215 247 Quality Counts 1.9 57 DATA THAT DRNES COMMUNMES J + y L 1 /� 11 L 0 J J,�/�\\ 0♦ C (JJ t 0 j♦ 1 f�I � 0 0 0 1 t N/A + L +A 4 L • J t « Z 1 t <4> r , r . ti N/A r 1 ? P , ti WA Ir r F + + R*=ROR 15-Min Count Period Greenway Rd/Sandpiper Dr Northbound Greenway Rd/Sandpiper Dr Southbound US 41 Eastbound US 41 Westbound Total Hourly Totals Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Beginning At 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 45 5 11 0 45 4 6 0 0 0 6 6 0 19 0 0 5 16 0 0 32 29 90 40 1 101 35 0 0 0 7 8 138 17 0 114 7 0 0 0 411 376 4:30 PM 54 5 7 0 0 6 2 8 0 0 24 112 54 0 0 1 144 5 0 0 422 4:45 PM 39 9 10 0 0 3 2 27 0 0 24 100 57 0 0 5 123 5 0 0 404 1613 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 52 4 11 0 45 4 7 0 0 0 4 7 0 13 0 0 1 14 0 0 30 32 100 51 2 109 34 4 0 0 3 5 135 9 0 137 7 0 0 0 414 406 1616 1 1646 530 5#15Min 38 7 2 0 4 2 0 0 0 11 3 2 17 0 0 3 16 0 0 29 23 105 43 0 92 33 0 0 0 0 2 129 7 0 104 10 0 0 0 390 322 1614 1532 Pea FlLeft Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* All Hea 216 20 28 0 20 0 0 0 24 4 8 32 0 0 0 4 96 0 448 216 0 24 0 0 4 0 576 20 0 40 8 0 1688 100 Pedestrians Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 2/15/2023 1:1b PM auurcLt: 4uauiy counts, cat-tnnP:7twww.yuaniywwiib.uny i-o..-ooU-cu< Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 118 Page 324 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Tvna of naak hnur heinw renorted- Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume I LOCATION: Manatee Rd -- US 41 CITY/STATE: Collier, FL QC JOB #: 1.6068503 DATE: Wed, Feb 8 2023 0 0 Peak -Hour: 8:00 AM -- 9:00 AM 0 0 + + 0 0 0L Peak 15-Min: 8:45 AM -- 9:00 AM + + o o 0 J i 4 __1 J + 4 903 « 2 ! t 0 * 892 7A * 0 - t 0 6.6 763 F--] « 754 118 r « 62 915 r lYl '1 r 128 r 847 152 0 84 F 11 * 7.3 'i r 89 l(1b 132 0 0 278 236 Quality Counts 79 85 EWA THAT ORMS COMMUNMES J L J •+ a L 0 0 o t 11 . t 0 11 rI 4 ► r 0 0 , + r2 0 —► r J N/A , AL • J N/A r 1� t WA �29 —i J N/A � ! • N/A r N/A �1 r WA r� �+ +� R• = RTOR 15-Min Count Period Manatee Rd (Northbound) Manatee Rd (Southbound) US 41 (Eastbound) US 41 (Westbound) Total Hourly Totals Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Beginning At 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 10 0 3 0 20 0 3 0 8 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 23 0 0 140 27 0 7 11 21 47 154 0 187 0 0 0 0 0 339 442 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 51 0 5 0 59 0 8 0 10 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158 41 0 0 169 41 0 15 26 43 43 229 0 199 0 0 0 1 0 552 555 1888 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 47 0 9 0 15 0 11 0 15 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163 17 0 0 182 21 0 14 7 31 22 135 0 219 0 0 0 0 0 431 488 1980 2026 8:30 AM 8.45 AM 34 0 8 0 56 0 12 0 11 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 201 29 0 0 217 37 2 8 17 40 35 218 0 182 0 0 0 0 0 549 565 2023 2033 Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Flowrates Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* All Vehicles Heavy Trucks 224 0 76 0 60 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 869 216 8 0 96 32 68 140 20 728 0 56 0 0 0 2356 264 Buses Pedestrians Bicycles 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 4 0 0 0 0 4 32 Scooters Comments: Report generated on 2/15/2023 1:16 PM aUurcLt: uuaiiryt-ouncs, ut-tnc[p://www.yuauLycuunu.nny i-oi 1-aoU-cuc I Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 119 Page 325 of 708 Green way Fritchey— GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 120 Page 326 of 708 Green way Fritchey— GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 21 Page 327 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2— Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 T—a of naak hnur hainw rennrtedt Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: Collier Blvd (CR 951) -- Manatee Rd CITY/STATE: Collier, FL QC JOB #: 16068506 DATE: Wed, Feb 8 2023 1652 20U 1 + t L0 ]A74 178 Peak -Hour: 4:00 PM — 5:00 PM Peak 15-Min: 4:15 PM -- 4:30 PM 2 + 0 2 6 22 0+ 0 J 0 rt r + s t 197 + 343 R + 0 r + _j 0+ 0 J 0* #0 t 5.6 + 5 + 0 a rt 0 r 146 rt 305 1 �� M F 0 rt 0 7 � 0 61 r Al rt 55 98 Imi 1943 Quality Counts 22 63 DATA THAT DRNES COMb1UNMES 1� 1 1 b 14 ^+ U L o f t o 0� �0 L /.�_\\/\� 0'4 +0 0 V t o a r o + WA * L WA L + J � t • _J J t 7 r r r ♦ 1 3 i + * + WA F 1 t � WA r R• = RTOR 15-Min Count Period Collier Blvd (CR 951) Northbound Collier Blvd CR 951 Southbound Manatee Rd Eastbound Manatee Rd Westbound Total Hourly Totals Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Beginning At 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 0 445 27 1 0 446 31 0 12 3 31 55 399 0 0 0 393 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 34 0 38 0 0 36 0 14 15 1013 1014 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 0 446 22 0 0 472 24 0 7 7 49 38 374 0 1 0 308 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 28 0 28 0 0 31 0 22 13 987 924 3938 :00 P :15 PM 1 0 469 27 0 0 472 19 0 0 12 40 37 344 0 0 0 318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 35 0 29 0 0 21 0 17 19 978 933 3903 3822 :30 PM :45 PM 0 478 35 0 0 481 35 0 15 9 38 52 304 0 1 0 286 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 18 0 33 0 0 21 0 13 15 944 917 3779 3772 ak 15-Min owrates L Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right U R* Left Thru Right Ul Vehicles Heavy Trucks 0 1784 136 0 0 112 28 12 220 4 1572 0 4 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 136 16 0 204 0 0 16 60 4128 212 Buses Pedestrians Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Scooters Continents: Report generated on 2/15/2023 1:16 PM suuttCt: Quality Counts, rrU lnttp://www.yuauLywunL5.ney i- ! f—U-cuc 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 122 Page 328 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Appendix C: Projected Traffic at Subject Intersections Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 123 Page 329 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 - Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 2021 PEAK SEASON FACTOR CATEGORY REPORT - REPORT TYPE: ALL CATEGORY: 0300 COLLIER COUNTYWIDE MOCF: 0.91 WEEK DATES SF PSCF ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 01/01/2021 - 01/02/2021 0.98 1.08 2 01/03/2021 - 01/09/2021 1.00 1.10 3 01/10/2021 - 01/16/2021 1.02 1.12 4 01/17/2021 - 01/23/2021 1.00 1.10 5 01/24/2021 - 01/30/2021 0.98 1.08 6 01/31/2021 - 02/06/2021 0.96 1.05 * 7 02 07 2021 - 02 13 2021 0.94 1.03 * 8 02/14/2021 - 02/20 2021 0.92 1.01 * 9 02/21/2021 - 02/27/2021 0.91 1.00 *10 02/28/2021 - 03/06/2021 0.90 0.99 *11 03/07/2021 - 03/13/2021 0.89 0.98 *12 03/14/2021 - 03/20/2021 0.88 0.97 *13 03/21/2021 - 03/27/2021 0.89 0.98 *14 03/28/2021 - 04/03/2021 0.90 0.99 *15 04/04/2021 - 04/10/2021 0.91 1.00 *16 04/11/2021 - 04/17/2021 0.92 1.01 *17 04/18/2021 - 04/24/2021 0.93 1.02 *18 04/25/2021 - 05/01/2021 0.94 1.03 *19 05/02/2021 - 05/08/2021 0.95 1.04 20 05/09/2021 - 05/15/2021 0.97 1.07 21 05/16/2021 - 05/22/2021 0.98 1.08 22 05/23/2021 - 05/29/2021 0.99 1.09 23 05/30/2021 - 06/05/2021 1.00 1.10 24 06/06/2021 - 06/12/2021 1.02 1.12 25 06/13/2021 - 06/19/2021 1.03 1.13 26 06/20/2021 - 06/26/2021 1.03 1.13 27 06/27/2021 - 07/03/2021 1.03 1.13 28 07/04/2021 - 07/10/2021 1.03 1.13 29 07/11/2021 - 07/17/2021 1.04 1.14 30 07/18/2021 - 07/24/2021 1.05 1.15 31 07/25/2021 - 07/31/2021 1.07 1.18 32 08/01/2021 - 08/07/2021 1.09 1.20 33 08/08/2021 - 08/14/2021 1.11 1.22 34 08/15/2021 - 08/21/2021 1.13 1.24 35 08/22/2021 - 08/28/2021 1.13 1.24 36 08/29/2021 - 09/04/2021 1.14 1.25 37 09/O5/2021 - 09/11/2021 1.14 1.25 38 09/12/2021 - 09/18/2021 1.15 1.26 39 09/19/2021 - 09/25/2021 1.14 1.25 40 09/26/2021 - 10/02/2021 1.13 1.24 41 10/03/2021 - 10/09/2021 1.12 1.23 42 10/10/2021 - 10/16/2021 1.11 1.22 43 10/17/2021 - 10/23/2021 1.09 1.20 44 10/24/2021 - 10/30/2021 1.07 1.18 45 10/31/2021 - 11/06/2021 1.05 1.15 46 11/07/2021 - 11/13/2021 1.03 1.13 47 11/14/2021 - 11/20/2021 1.01 1.11 48 11/21/2021 - 11/27/2021 1.00 1.10 49 11/26/2021 - 12/04/2021 1.00 1.10 5o 12/05/2021 - 12/11/2021 0.99 1.09 51 12/12/2021 - 12/18/2021 0.98 1.08 52 12/19/2021 - 12/25/2021 1.00 1.10 53 12/26/2021 - 12/31/2021 1.02 1.12 * PEAK SEASON 08-MAR-2022 12:36:22 830UPD 1_0300_PKSEASON.TXT Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 124 Page 330 of 708 pN M 4'f ID h M N lac �l a1 ul (+N'1 00oc m N MO M M T h ul c1' co M m m ti N N l0 N N ti M H h h N � ti V M F M M M en co M 01 m W. M M m M O V M O O M 3 M M M R CI N N N M ID O N rl m 7a: V m N m `� a° N N tc O O co n M M m 7 O m, h h m C W .i rj ti M rl rl 'i '.i N V W M N N m C1 Do h �`'; h h N O M O m M m N lD W h lD fP. O N N N N .N-1 d. N M in N to R N M O iR c0 O N i M N to u'1 C N W O M In N ut m 'n M ul h m h N N m to F' M 00 'D �D vl 4 o r! m D m N N cC m o0 4 ao m cn m v a Ln ^ m m m to sY M rl N O m N t0 oc m N N Nj M C N ID •-i O •--1 V1 .-1 M 'i `1 N M M a� o m o m o m N a-1 ryj eV m Do N Mp m r, h M p lc N N z N .i N N N M M m rq N N O: m z �D .-1 tD M ry: h Cf1 .-1 '�-� N N N m 14 N D� to h J M cT` M M O m �D O O Z m ti O1 M .-i •--1 .i �.y rl nj N M N M m O M O M M 00 p c0 O O O h W O C O M li/ N M 7 J V ry ♦a,' m a .w+ w � c a� N 3 N E ? C 3 3: } Y.. o 3 ° n. j 0 3 R u w y u ) 5 w aj V a dC � C ate+ C :C X C X p� t QD G C >C x 1n N N > -a d d N N _ N Q L �� N U o r0 a > 'o > ¢ c L z z z z r y cwn a z U z U z V z V 12 U F �� ��p V U U U U f- N t pLp Y � f- � iE � eC V 1 w " i 2 i 2 `� o t O O O O O r3o ULLU N 'x O O O O O 'p Vui n LL a a` a` LL K a w J W � a` a a` a` LL 'o a a a v -a -6 ti v -o -o v -o ti ti -c cc ce w s cc s cc w ac oe ae w ce w ce z ac cc cc w 4d ac ac c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c m m w a: w w w V a w w w w a v( l7 (9 0 (9 Q V' (9 0 (7 D W (7 U' V' 0 C7 0 V' l7 (9 (D 0 (7 t�i w u�' w —a �' 'a w w C 2 i E 2 V i 2 2 i r_v �o m �c fo �o m �o nt ry ry .o m �c io io m n ro ra �a m g A ti o v R v as c OD 0 ti O cM M CL O M M N V' N l0 Ln ID d W V W. M N o0 m Q n] ~ N ON N ~ N V N N N Q1 ry M N 1+1 n to to o .a o? n] v ci e oo N O] °0 ^ tD M ti e o ry LA V'1 u1 9 ? ^ ^ M In ry N mONy C J co N M N In m h M oo N oo m O.h-I M O .-1 ,--i n C e m V n m N oo N H m C m Q C m m M C Lo co h h m M N a� oo m Q N W T O m oo O c cn N mC CO ( 4 C N N N D M e e C pp O O m w .�-j �.j tf M K C o O W Im/f In mao N C ti m Cf .i M J M Z° M Z° m Lft C m O m ap M O ` m O m K m o (Y: O W e• m - h O N VI N n O M O e. C O �! 9 G7 M m m Ln al cO N cM-1 In ca C m Z .-1 pj •-1 N M Do Ln c uhi Ln w oo co o o oa °o m C CJ O W A \ M 00 C N NON N ID .-� h V \ O .-I N N N M N > ~ N N w L y w O A w ` . w j w cj ` w O .0 IC O u d O 7 i 01 O O 2 V_ E l U d O i O1 3 p w y yV_� V- U U w u y U Z O V U Y a z i w O = N w < ~ c u W N W p = U U w Q ~ C u w w = z z z z �- � a° w c c 70 = � z z z z F- � In s p°� Y �V V � V r g ° Y V V r- r Ip ry aj N V- ryryaj O d m r r r r r b L c w U no c w t v u u i� ii m U m E = Q m c i ii u u ii i O 'O 'D .� C .y 2 =pOOOO OG d W d LL d a d L d LL d W J u d LL a d d d d LL O 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 y a < ¢ < < < d < < < < < L a L a a a a a a a a d L a= w a w s w � w rt oc w w ac oc w cc cc w � cc w w oc nc w oc w w cc w � w s w ao � w oc ac w 0o a: w � w cc w oc w a w rr w = _ _ rC mamm c = N N m rJ W m W rD W O u M m W w N W N W mt0 W N W W O W N W N W W N W N W W W W W W W W 5 E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E .9 .5 a m Em a .@ .E a .� a .5 � � �a !2.� .9 m m !2 a 5 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r OD 0 0 N cM M N CL lC M u1 M C1 N rl O N W M lI1 ul N d' N (^ OC N Q1 N p co ul M M V N V N h Fml MM, M he O oa N m n n m Lh'1 Ohj Ohj Q O M N �j .-I ri •-1 N •-1 .-1 .-i .y N N N N f. M M m • o -4 M o m m i0 M N e. f� h .d .-1 oo ID O a'. oo OC 00 3 O N M N oo 3 3 N �1 N N co N N N m O M O C M NA In W .-1 M rj M N m O M m O M M m O M O W e-1 N M o a� p� O M O N M of y ry ti m, N F M M ^ a. IDW oo ti M N in O m aC co M V' N N Uj M h h N N ry 'i •-1 e-1 M d' N �-1 ei J aC M .i �A N 00 M M u 't t0 O co '-1 M N N fl O w N m M O O In.-1 ../ N rl �-/ ti 'i '-1 M, N N N N M e. in O M O N M N N M N CC O M N e\'\' N h i� M M n a cr h a' V h K •� m Qa O tl M M O N O N M N Z rl N N N F M LO 'g N N O M ° lPlpp) IDCN71 QN1 co O M .� .+ W 00 n to O O Z '-� e-1 N e4 '-1 •-1 "� '-I N M N N N M m M O M M M M r1 O rl O O ei rl Z N :3 ap O M O O M Z IN N N U co fV M M o0 p ooc O O O h 0\0 O O O M N as \ ti N N �-1 V N .i N N tll M `S Iv w O fY tYp b S w E w 5 i = u C d w >+ D 2 7 i O N lr y O aj V w F- va W W W W w F M G uo Z C ix w O t E > d . C a`g N C O i Z U z u z U Z L rG N w H m ry n N w rc ° m F E- r F° m° 5 m c w Y Y Y G d c9 c d p0 o Y d Yj Yi 'X 4•O w N O O U O w LL (�, M C •�+ •X G ) OI O O U O C U1 O roc CC N S W t a LL G. G a d a LL a X W J W a LL a d a a a. O W � ° cc G cc G cc G cL g c G G G G G G C G CL G y d < Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a a a a a a a a a a a a a a -a w � �e aC rt tt oe a: w ua rt o= w oG n: w oC ce rt w � oC a; a: Ix cc oc tc a: of a w w w w v w w v w w w w w w w w w w w w a w w o w w w w w w w w u w w w w w w w w w w w u Y w Y w w Y UYC �0 IO Y N Y �O 1-' f0 �a � w C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C �a rc0 cN rG CCN ccO 1C0 N c R cc cc'J N 2N 2'O LN <<O cca 5N cN 2 0 cN 2N 2rJ 2�C SN iN w G C G G 5 y > 7 > tl m m m m !9 CD m [G [b L9 Ntl m m m CJ m CI tl m m m m 00 w w w w w a w w w w w w w w w w ai w w u_ w w w O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O D O O I O O I O U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U IL-)U U U U U U •:] U L M M M M M M ML OD 0 O cM cM M CL IC St lC ''1 h 41 O1 n t0 N cn n m 00 M M M O Ln NLMn Ln ID N Lo N F N N N V C1 N N 00 O O N .-i .-f .--1 m O o O NO i N O N m e }' •-i N •-1 N 03 O N N N 7 M in O O 3 L-1 N e•1 N m on0 M O O O W e4 ry In O O O 11 O W 1 ry f N In O 'J O YO O W i ry N m In O e\'\' O N7 O a` O W ry N dr m p p 0 O O O 1n L-i N '4 N N fv O O o M C? o of tD LG m O O N O 0 O C '-1 '-I '•I to O p O O O N N K In e oc h h f- ro z .4 N N T. Ln Ln W. In .-1 m N O coo m m m p z .-i Ly .� .-i •-� .y e.j N •-1 0 m O O O O m O p M O O O w 0 N M N N h N \ q N C) N N N `..� N .-i Ln M L w U O r U cc w L7 m ix L N E = w O w I w O P y 0 u - > 3 E m Q m d o > i 3 d > V w m ' •X U r to i w W '` IJ xx W U z r m C w i 'O F C W = w L i n z w o> 3 3 3 u o y E > a 3 3 3 3 w Q = = a z z w z w 0 z r 1O m 's w 08 w Q = = 3 a z w z w z w z 0 r �V: cw G tn Y Y v_ v_ � U_ � (emu (�v fz f= L� t j 0 ° (�v v_ u v u_ Ft V L' :° V- 'L° i S c a `� awto r- O V bb w w V w U w ++ t, u w U L O v M = C < 2F- C Ovi w 0 aVi cui � LL .X 3 Q O O O O LL N Y •K C •X O O O O O = G. W d LL d L d 1 d O 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 `2 2 2 2 2 2 g 2 a inn N VI Vl (yr. In VL V~1 Ul � V~i IYIL V1 L/Yl N y N � � N N UY1 c w w w w u a a w a u v_ w w w w w u w_ w d w v u li y U U U LL U U LL LL U U LL .0 V � u U LL .0 u U U LL u U LL u V LL = U LL L U LL L V u yyU++ LL .= U LL t V LL U u LL LL LL LL LL LL LL 5 s s ce s s s s ce s s s s s � s s s s ac s s s s s LO N N LC N LO f0 rJ �C � tD LO IU fJ �L �D LO �U m A fD 10 t0 N C w C w C w C w C u C w C w C w C C w u L w C w C w C C w w C w C d C w C a C w C w C w C u C w l7 �7 L9 0 L7 0 0 0 0 L9 0 U' 0 L7 L7 U' 0 L7 l7 0 0 U L7 0 F- OD 0 ti O cM M CL 0 n n 0 C .=r 0 c 0 v D N A c A r m � N N C O L o C W L 0 A N ? A Mantee Rd. 0 Collier Blvd C. d > 0 1-�� c:NJOI m N w� m �. A N I V, In N O O In m n e4 C A n.� ej n 4 T 4 m 'O Lillc o Sandpiper Greenway Rd. c T A J r m S C u, t�0 �p F. lNrl l0 � A OI • ti lW0 Page 335 of 708 0 77 n 0 0 C rF UQ 0 c: O D NW N N W O W w VI W V C Ln m 4m O o m w V I ~ N N J VI w u C 4 U cm.NNa w A Q� W J! pC In W W w N l(I O lC t0 � V J V Mantee Rd Collier Blvd c ti er � m f D "n N LM N N A O- N m Q� A r ;IV O Llb0CL "S to w N N In w c �n1, w No lW0 1~1. W � lD Sandpiper Dr Green way Rd C � A r m W � t0 w m ri n s rD M 0 0 0 b N Page 336 of 708 w L m 40 Y W O w w L 4m o rn N po W N N tNil V w N 1 Uc u� M� .13 t r N ~ W N a l°00 m o°i LM a c. I Mantee Rd Collier Blvdkc �- a a w V N n N A F� m Y N kc ? a o LA A JI lD p u A p ID Y w W la V N Sandpiper Dr W Greenway Rd C Gil J A F� m A Y ~ 0. O w O N A Nu w T P n 3 fD � N lwD Page 337 of 708 N QO rD N w o p� N O O O J1 L L m 4m 4m V p p O N 1 Uc W 1 u� pp rm V N Mantee Rd. Collier Blvd m "0 U V 3 K f0 01 N pNWp V W Ij d 0 � VI W CO N � m L N C � � �+ N N W N 1 uC v j U� V ~ Sandpiper Greenway Rd. �-, N � K r m � G Y� tj r Page 338 of 708 N J cn L L m 0 U. 1Lk C J 1 L6UC o yNj W 00 00 Mantee Rd Collier Blvd N d W � d N A w w ONi ro m 70 p O. T C 1 m r W pl n m w °' 0 CL w: In ti A W N O N N OC O Cm O N m C, 1 �� wrw En b N O w�� O, W N W N N r� Sandpiper Dr N Greenway Rd c p, ° .n r to �.I m I I'' O � N rt N O N Page 339 of 708 Y O A N N CA L L N m N A v 41 A tIc n4, t A N J o N � W N Mantee Rd Collier Blvd N N N 61 o O rat N fU ypa a N A F-� m a o o o o w o w Lw L 0 W ~ r N N M O N W W Sandpiper Dr Lc GreenwayRd o T C 1 r� (Aw N A {. S r m ro N In W 00 �T tNn O N N GN'i Y O Page 340 of 708 Appendix D: Intersection Signal Timings Page 341 of 708 Green way Fritchey— GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 US 41 and Manatee Road Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 136 Page 342 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Collier Boulevard and Manatee Road Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 137 Page 343 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Appendix E: FDOT 2021 Annual Vehicle Classification Report - Statistics Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 138 Page 344 of 708 00 0 ti 0 V) Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 M N ca CL US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive VI b V o �Ql� (Q Ipp�d q N rN-1 Q �M A3 rl O rl W [M, RS 00 O M 1(/-�r F p wwww www Mw ..www �w wwr►w rl Fr (Si N IDhriNO �p V1Nrf1 Vi b.IJrNv 1 ry� NNNO NONNO OrD/DN .foY�Ot O c NM 6MNri Ay rbl rdpV �O�GO rp rUx�pi p [ ray N r l r / r pp r N }p41 hFMX�MN t,j FFnIaC tg01.- (r f�Vryryry AAAriN NNNN MNfy'INN � W b {� ('{ 41h Oa0YOrOoo0+100 � o yl rIMh MMoo7 afOMOONOO r {f0 A �N SVJ r'a" r'r�0�00'140D �1006000 � O fJ M rl �OW010 rIh O�ON000o0 � Opy� fPL r o H�ohODONO0000o00001 O V r�j�OMNON rvo wNo0 o0oo i o�V O WN Ad h.i � � r3 v1N i O�DDD� e F W Vy1 M .i .1O O�Or IDhMV000N00 i N N r NryM r+N V10100 OOrl00 O p .eR A ug.-IVNhh.lh+r t O O} NWOWNMOr�Ur. 'i O rC71 r0 ���TTSia, ry r IN n'1 to 7ttSi A N rl N r•1 t IoA O rt 99 p`pa~pJ� •s ° g s� IVy Ll1 r( VWOAH. jy U MEE r O N� HHF�NM pnN3 FFH�Nn d pq � ►�'��NpppppCC4C4 [�,`p`�p�!j�pF.p77~ ��pp wW `" � &..�r pCt����p .. ��O r R � NV1VI��NS�OW No � ti8�}.0 � NV1N�WHW ptWA y�0.1 �NO~ ��jMOM` ti+7 NMOW ��MrLRayh�oG y N �CUM8 O r W Kai a M O 4WNtnYNMMin�O O WIQNMVrvMM1Ab 0. N 1. 00*0Q0 OOOro1He1 rI 14 0000 O OOOOrIHrl H Pq N Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 139 00 0 r` 0 co Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 co co n US 41 and Manatee Road K w ww N m tl W rl tq tl N N UMl Q 1wNll wppFm JIA 1f10PM 'Or,� ryO�N�N 1{NM0I IAN A m q O �10 m1AM y y N■ N■ z N N N■ 1 r I. H 19x �0l+too) U O NMN NN-00NN m b MP10 {AM 001b gA00g00 1 O i r/ U 'II tlWtlMOIHgtlP000000 1 O ' o U 1a1��w owmommoN0000000 : Op (V �4 ON LLii 1 W w ILA btOm OIgPWN P W00 m 001 A QaI OI ION P W fNVMm MN 1 d Vf �0.1 r-1 N i N a > a a O K R �N 1AV N�M4 Sri veya4hHH�NIn /p>q, Nh O PH3t k r ►1 p K H F S xZZ�pp"+��66-1-g p pq ��pq� � � NNNa�H��QW tpil 0v �.J N+ .INmOUI IphAAONNr1yM VV OOOOOOOOOHeI rf rlHrl m w ww w n0o VOo MyVM � P1 W rl QW p N N N NFU Nh�M ra�h A NrppNr W rvorowyoar H .� OVvM ;So M10 PN0 10 �{ b IA N M y7�J�4yC b O IA M '1 fO/G� a VVVVVVIII)11 rrTTii I7 O �yy rlf Ttl P N NNN qM (VNNNN r !R N O ti rogOmm♦♦NOOIH00000 �/ NgMn101 VI NION000000 1 OIO qp 1 O11/1 W w4�NONOOri0000000 DDT �lCCD 1 � Y NggPIANHrHry000001m� � O ■Nb OMIf110gm 1 O� 1 O/jWmrrNl q 1P0 N ;N�1 R rl � 1 o Q N 1 M W i�H H 0 NNF+�NM �}a:JS�UVFh� ��G~NWNMIOfVrIr11n10K�iP n1NMgMy� PaD b.O nlNn1 N VI 600000000HWH.IHr1 qv OWN Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 140 00 0 ti 0 r` Green way Fritchey— GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 M N ca CL Collier Boulevard and Manatee Road r/ N OD �40 4Pa .1 N 6 I 0 1 � T No aw 4P OP MMMO ;r►M IqO1� :� r1oMs t;�:�a�m wIM�ON IAO WINO H Q fINNN NNf�'IN f7 0 O P H 01 O V 0001 H 00 N 001 'y� yOD O�HNMOO)0000000 I 01p IOON4000006000 I 1 W NrllIVO�VHr YI 1flH 00000 I (tl'1 N+OONHrN1NVV i /T 01 H I M I I U1 H j02 (y Nd 0. i7 1 H M04 01M A� c Ma U U�rpl� INON• M 08 O O y �rUT7 94 No�N R a F M F+ F+ F+ 0; N M Q� i AMA., .•1N o141A �pn aOrOHryry NI/1 000000400HH.i�Hri (� 0 O I0n ►1 MpVQ3yM HH W N QLI pQ �� 1.. a •�O 7roNAo W�b�M 0%ko 10 AHpwz WWpWU N Nei NNNNN N O M Yt VNry // r r O VH0000010° Q r 'rl MMW NIO0MMN000000 �O%0 (4 /+i00N0000000 1 OG W HF v M '101O t•INNOD ODO H M 00000 1 OH IR r0001NMA 1 O 1 W V m M H w1 h in H as H H fro u 7 N J � b � F O 1 vl ^I zz QLA H M W 01 OA Aai�a,� o DGP�] M HMbN .1 x Q 1 1 � �F3i HH vl o � Q • H � � 6 tSd1 cx� H Na�� (pVVVa� PPPUtpN�7P]4j��t�]��rNP t�1 vN� pa T.�WWCINMVN/+IM1/I,IOi�73 a N G OO000 000 OHHHr1 Hr1 W I o Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 141 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Appendix F: Intersection Analyses - Synchro Reports Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 142 Page 348 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 - Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive Lanes, Vdumes, Timings 1 Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 000a023 --* --v 4- -- k -N t `► 1 tvwOr0y1 EBL EST EBR WBL WST WBR NBL N07 NB(i 68L SOT e�_l Lank, QN119raliar, 4 e 4b ft• r ft r Traffic Volume (►ph) 113 7 27 31 9 99 11 493 39 Et 676 172 Future Volune pph) 113 7 27 31 :+ 99 11 403 39 81 676 172 Ideal Row (Irpttpt) 19M 19o0 1900 1900 19M 1900 1900 1900 19M 19M 19M 19W 510raq? lenu�lh 11t) 0 0 o tiAj 326 300 00 300 Storage Larte4 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 Tafpr Length 0) 0 0 60 6u two W Factor 096 096 100 too 1.00 100 1.00 0,96 1,00 100 0% 1.00 Frt OW 0 9N 0460 0.460 Ft Protected 0960 0.96t 09" 0.960 0960 Said Flowpol) IE88 1699 1E53 0 1668 0 16E6 3312 1482 1W 3312 1482 Fl Permitted 0960 0.96E 09E9 0,960 0.960 S41d Fbw(perm) 152a 16'?9 1663 +r 0 1(-64 012 1482 1656 3312 1462 P#t Turnon Red Yes Yes Yes Yet Satd Flow(RTOR) 246 92 r26 187 Lk* Speed "ph) 20 30 60 so Unk Chance 0) 788 746 1306 1660 Travel Tkne (s) 262 17.0 14.E 17.6 Peak Four Factor 0.92 092 092 0 92 0.911, 0 92 0 92 0.K 092 092 0.92 092 Heavy Vehicles M E% 9% 4% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% Ad1 now (") 123 8 29 34 10 102 12 432 42 €2 b26 127 Shared Late Treftic (96) 47% Line r3" Flow (µph) 65 66 29 0 162 0 12 438 42 83 426 187 Tun Type $09 NA Ram Split NA Prat NA PNm Prot NA Perm Prolactal Phase; 4 8 4 4 1 6 6 2 Permlled Phases E 6 2 Delector Phase 8 8 8 4 4 1 6 6 5 2 2 SwriCh Phase Mnimum Mial(s) 60 60 6C 60 60 60 ISO tE0 60 ISO 160 MnMnun Sol (s) 62.1 62.1 $2.1 47.1 47J 129 369 34.9 12.9 37.9 37$ Total V, 1(s) 150 16.0 15.0 30o 300 200 400 400 360 6.50 650 Total $plc (%) 12.6% 12.6% 12b% 25.0% 25.0% 16,7% 333% 333% 292% 453% 46,E% Wxmrm +3rppn (s) 91 91 91 23 1 2118 121 32 1 121 271 47 1 47 1 YsIW Time (s) 3A 3.4 3A 17 37 69 5.9 69 61 63 69 Ail -Red Time 26 25 26 26 2G 20 2,0 20 2.0 20 2.0 Lost 11meAdpAt (s) OA Oil) 0.0 9.0 00 00 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost rime (s) 69 69 69 62 79 79 79 79 79 79 LeadAag Lead Leg Log Lead Leg Lag Lead -Lag 001mlle^ Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3 0 30 3.0 3.0 3,0 30 30 F•ecalI Mode None None Norw Nx)e Norte None Mn 1dr1 None Min Wn Walk Time (s) 7,0 7.0 TA 7.0 70 7.0 TO 7,0 70 Flash Cunt WA(s) 370 370 370 320 320 22.0 22.0 230 23.0 Pedeatnan Cans (Nhr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AiIMt131een(s) 36 85 86 93 69 262 252 99 358 358 Actuated grCRatio 0.13 0.13 0,13 0.14 Oil 0.39 on 0.16 06 056 vA Kalio ux 32 032 0 07 0.61 007 0 34 006 036 034 0 21 Conhd Delay 36.7 36.E 0.3 211 352 24,6 02 34.4 16.3 3A Queue Delay 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0.0 2028 9ackgrornd • Am Pk R Srrxtxo 11 Report Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 143 Page 349 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis— July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 oar.+�r..o23 -. --* f, ♦- k- -� t r `► 1 Lam OW EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NOT NOR SBL SBT $09 Mal DeWy 36.7 368 0.3 21.1 352 24.6 02 344 153 3.9 LOS D D A C D C A C B A Approach O913y 341 21.1 224 US Approach LOS C C C B Queue two 601h (11t) 27 27 0 24 6 tt 0 36 86 0 QuL(b Lffgh Yan (1l) 77 78 0 Er; 23 ifb 0 $1 2W 44 rterral tlnk Dbt f 1) 6Rt 666 I M 1470 Turn BayLorx3lh fin) 325 300 400 300 we Cawty00) 264 266 464 706 362 11t24 918 790 2367 1112 Rarvkon Cao Re"n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5pliback Cap Reducto 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �lor3je Cap Redudn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prduced vk Ratio 026 0 26 006 022 003 024 006 Oil 0 26 017 htenecttorl Summary------- M 2- Area Type. O►het Cycle Lertl h 120 Actuated Gila Length 66 3 Natural Cycle 1�) Corirol Type: Actuated-ftwdruM Maximum vh Rat10 0 61 ttwitictiorl Slgrlel pate* 19.1 htemedion LOS, B irtersecoon wpacty LUNzatlon 63 3% ICU WvO o1 Serrlce A ArWysls Period (min)16 2028 Backgrotrld • AM Pk Fr SyrKtvo 11 Report Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 144 Page 350 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2- Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 04W2023 -A -. v r '- 4- t �► 1 EBT EBR W8L WOT WOR NBL NBT NBR 88L Lane Cod1gurations 4 r" 4 r +) TT r Tt � Traffic Wk ne CO) 113 7 27 31 9 99 11 403 39 e1 676 1T2 Future Volurno (*ph) IQ 7 21 31 9 99 11 403 39 81 67S 172 Ideal Flow (Irp" 1900 1900 1900 19M 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 dotage Lenjh 01) 0 0 0 100 326 300 400 300 30foge Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 Taper LAngth 0) 0 60 60 Lane LRI Factor 096 096 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Fd 0.860 086 0 860 0.860 Fit Protected 0,960 09" 0.963 OS60 0.960 ,Ad Fiow(prol) IRS it" I 0 1679 1412 16d5 3312 1482 1456 3312 1482 Fit Pwm/ted 0,960 096E 0963 0960 0.960 EAd Flow (porn) 1688 16" 1663 0 1679 1482 1666 3312 1482 IW 3312 14;2 PAp Turn on Red , Yes Yes We Yes Paid Fiow(RTOF,) 246 242 226 167 Luck Speed (mph) 20 30 60 60 1.0, Ustarxe M) 768 746 1306 1650 Travel Tyne (s) 262 17.0 1414 176 Feati Hour Fart or 092 092 092 0 92 0 92 0 92 Owl 0,92 0 92 0 92 01.421 0 yrz " whides (94 4% 9% 4% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 996 9% 9% 996 Ail now(vph) 121 £ 29 34 1C1 108 12 438 42 83 626 1 £ 7 Shared lane Trafk (%) 47% lane r3"tp Flow (rph) 611, 66 4 0 44 lop, 12 438 42 $& 626 1£7 Tum Type eve NA Perm spot NA Perm Prot NA Plan P1d NA Perm N(Aected Phases 8 4 4 1 6 6 _ Permtted Phases £ 4 6 2 Oet *4 Phaw 8 b 4 4 4 1 6 6 6 2 2 SwI(h Phase Krianlnn lnlh.d (i} 60 6,0 60 611 r, l 6.0 60 160 ISO 60 160 160 Minimum Spll (s) 62.1 62.1 62 t 47.1 471 47,1 12.9 369 36.9 12.9 379 37$ TotalSol (s) 150 16.0 160 300 300 300 200 400 400 360 660 660 lots SPI(%) 12$% 126% 126% 26.0% 25.0% 260% 16.7% 333% 333% 292% 46.4% 461% Maximum Green (s) 91 91 9.1 23.8 23.8 234 12.1 32 1 32.1 271 471 47.1 Yellow Time 0) 3A 3A 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.7 6.9 69 6.9 6.9 69 61 Al -Red flrne(s) 2,6 26 25 26 26 2.6 20 20 2.0 20 20 2,0 Lost Time Adpt 0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 00 0.0 0.0 00 0,0 TotaiLAslTime(s) 6•) 69 69 62 62 79 79 79 79 79 79 1 awA ig Lmd Log Lag Lead Lag V9 Lead -Lag Optimize^ Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Ert mion (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 pvt4l Mcde W* Nv* Foxw lixre NOrw None Nate Mr) Trutt Norte Mrr Mn Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 70 70 7.0 To 7.0 Flash(bntWA (s) 170 370 37.0 320 320 32.0 220 220 230 230 Psdolrian Cats (Mitt) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PcIE30 Green( 1 81 8.1 81 77 77 6.5 261 251 96 364 369 iktuated 91C Ratio 0.12 012 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.10 039 029 0.16 0.66 056 wk R410 0,13 033 007 022 028 007 034 0Ot. 034 034 021 Cortrd Delay 353 36.3 03 33.1 14 332 23.6 02 332 144 3.7 Queue Delay 00 0.0 0,0 00 0,0 0.0 00 0.0 00 00 0.0 2028 BacKground Improved -AM K H• Synchro I Report Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 145 Page 351 of 708 Green way Fritchey— GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Sandpiper Dr/areenwayRd & US 41 aaoao2a worn M11 NBL NBT NOR SBL OBI, Total Delay 353 363 0.3 33.1 19 332 236 02 332 144 3.7 LOS 0 D A C A C C A C B A Approach Ootay 211.9 10.9 210 140 Approach LOS C 8 C B Queue Length 601h pt) 26 27 0 17 0 6 $6 0 34 $3 0 rxreUe Langlh `.O.dn (t) Q 74 0 61 0 22 14: 0 83 188 42 trtermv Link Dist (1) 4" 666 1226 1470 lum Bay Lierjh (h) 100 326 300 400 300 Base Capadty 00) 239 240 442 $61 730 321 1769 11113 742 2421 1133 amhon Cap Reducin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spllback COP RI 19M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Elorage Cap RPductn 0 0 0 t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced toll Ratio 027 028 0.07 0.07 016 ON 026 0.06 0.12 026 017 Intersection Summary Area Type 011*1 C: k It, Let';ph I _:u A hided CytP Ltttglh i.4 a Nahaal Cjn le 1 f" Control Type Actuated-Uncoadnated hlartrtmm vh Ratoo ti Jb lydersectton 8gro Delay 17.4 ttem9cilon LDS: B W.-twOm Capacty lUBzabon 48.1 % ICU L.ovel o1 Servke A Analysis Penod (min)16 Ianr, Fh.ise> 1 Sand r Dr/0reenwa Rd & US 41 wA \ 01 02 704 11*0S 1 t06 2026 Background knproved -AM Pk W Synchro t t Report Pogo 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 1 46 Page 352 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2- Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Oreenway Rd & US 41 04AV023 Larre r;aligurations 4 r 4 r Ij TT i Tj tt F Traffic Volume (kph) 113 23 27 100 0 464 11 403 64 207 676 172 Frrtue Vokune (r h) 113 23 27 100 66 4" 11 40s 64 207 676 172 Ideal Flow (Upt0 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ryorayy lrnrfh (1t) 0 0 0 100 326 300 400 300 yorage Lm1es 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 lapo lorxlth 0) 0 0 60 60 Lam LAI Factor 096 096 1.00 1.00 1.00 I.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 Fit 0.860 OW 0860 0.9r6 Fill Protected 0.960 0.96E 0.969 OS60 0.960 £atd Fk:wo F.t 4) 1£38 1613 1563 0 109 1482 1066 3312 W2' 16,66 3312 1482 Fn Permited 0.960 09B3 0969 0960 o960 f3td Flurv(Avn) 1698 1013 1553 0 1689 102 1666 3312 1482 1&% 3312 1482 Rlgfi Turn on Red Yes Yes Ys$ Yes fald FF.nv(RTOF.) 246 433 226 187 Ur* Speed (mph) 20 30 60 60 bnk Distiowe M) 768 746 1306 1550 Travel Time (s) 262 17.0 14.E ITS Fed*. tMxa Far.lcq 0 92 0 W . 072 0 92 0.92 0 92 0 92 0 92 0 92 0 9z 0 92 0.92 H" vt"Cks (46) 4% "li 4% 9% 9% 9% 96 9% 9% 9% 9% 996 M1 now (vph) 1236 29 109 60 493 12 438 70 226 626 187 Seared Lane Traffic (9b) 40% Line 3rrA4) FlOua (ti ih) 74 74 29 0 169 493 12 438 70 22f 626 187 Tum Type 001 NA Penis Split NA Pam Prot NA Pon Pict 14A Perm Ndeded Phases 8 8 4 4 1 6 6 2 Permitted Phases E 4 6 2 Qeledor Phase 8 8 8 4 4 4 1 6 6 6 2 2 Switch Phase kiaian on ku14 (s) 60 6.0 £0 60 6!) 6.0 60 160 16.0 6A ISO 16.0 Minimun Vl (s) $2.1 62.1 62.1 47.1 47.1 47.1 129 369 36.9 12.9 379 379 Total &p11(s) 150 16.0 16.0 300 300 30.0 200 400 40 0 35 0 560 660 lots spa (%) 12S% 12.6% 12b% 26.0% 260% 26.0% 16.7% 333% 33.3% 292% 45 E% 46.E% ►la■mun Green (s) 91 9.1 9.1 239 23 3 23.8 12.1 J2 i <21 271 471 47.1 Wlow Time 4) 3.4 3.4 3A 3.7 3.7 3.7 69 69 69 69 69 69 All -Red Time¢;) 26 26 26 26 26 2.6 20 20 2.0 20 20 20 Lost Time AdMt 0) 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 00 0.0 Totallosl Time (;) £? £9 59 62 62 79 79 7,9 79 19 7? 1.921l>f.eg lRad tag Lag Lad Lag Lag Lead -Lag OpPmlze^ Ye' Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Whole Edemlon (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 Patin MWe None Norpe Mire Nx* Nury Nixie Nuw Wn Mhr Haw till kan Walk Time (s) 70 70 7.0 7.0 70 70 7.0 7.0 70 7.0 Flash DMt chalk (s) 37.0 3Lo 37.0 320 320 32.0 220 22.0 230 23 0 Pedesttlan Cans (my) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act End Green fi t 8.5 s 6 8 6 157 15.7 6 4 186 18 t. 17 4 42 0 42.0 Acturted 97C Rab0 0.10 010 0.10 0.11 0.10 0.07 021 0.21 020 0.47 00 vt Ratio 0.49 049 00 067 0 to 010 0 63 014 0 0 0.40 0.23 o"dDegy 663 64.E 0A 435 17.3 47.7 3E.4 0.6 462 179 34 Queue Delay 0.0 00 00 00 00 0.0 00 0A 00 00 00 2028 Background knpowd w PJ • AM Pk Fk Synctro 11 Repoli Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 147 Page 353 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 044012023 Mow WOO WBT WBP NBL Total Delay 662 64.1 0.4 43.6 173 47.7 314 0.6 462 179 3A 015 E D A D b D D A D B A Approach Way 46.1 24.0 336 216 Ppi_uua(h LOS D C C C Queue Lencth 60th 01) 41 41 0 16 29 6 120 0 117 111 0 rxx L * length :76t4 (It) 0121 0120 0 179 M 28 Z06 0 221) 2a0 46 kdm)W U1* Dist (it) 6" 666 123 1470 turn Bay LPrvjh (tt) 100 326 300 400 300 Ease Capacity(") 167 169 3$2 464 721 231 1229 692 611 1120 191 Mivkwri Cw PEihMn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spliback Cap Rb"tn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �Ic,rage Cap Pedwln fi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PeducedwtRatio 044 044 0.01 0.36 061 006 0.36 010 043 034 021 kiersectan SUmfna Area TWO Other Cycle Ler4jh 120 ActUaled CyC10 Length S9 2 Natural Cycle tfo Control Type: Aduated-tlrlcDmdn0M M.3xrmurn vk Ratio 0 80 kderiection Signal Delay, 26.6 ktemection LOS C ir4mwdion O"Ay Urzation 61411. ICU LevO of Sermo B Analysis Pedod (min) 16 N Nh percentile w*ne erxeeds capacity, queue maybe longer QM* shown is maximum after NOcydes. 2028 Background knproved w PJ • AM Pk Hr Synchro 11 Repoil Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 148 Page 354 of 708 Greenway Fritchey-GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 - Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 04/34023 -� -* ti r -- 4-4\ t r `► 1 Lure Cottipabco, 4 r 4 r 1j Tt r tt r Traffic Wlume (0) 113 23 21 100 66 464 11 403 64 207 676 172 FlAure Vckmrb ('t)) 113 23 27 100 66 4(A 11 40 C4 207 67S 172 Ideal Flow (kKro) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 fl0nago lPnjh QI) 0 0 0 100 ,Y.>6 300 366 300 Storage lanes 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 lapur Loru3lh ft) u 0 £0 100 LaneUl4 Factor 096 096 1.00 100 1.00 1A0 1.00 0,96 1.00 0.97 0.96 1,00 Fit 0.MO 0 860 0 £60 0.860 FA Protected 0.960 0 964 0" 0_%0 0.960 bald Flow(piot) 1£88 103 1663 0 1689 1482 1(565 3312 1482 3213 1312 1482 F1 Pe mled 0.960 096E 041" 0960 0.960 .and Flow (perm) 1688 1613 150 0 1689 1482 1666 3312 1482 3213 3312 1482 Plat Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yell Eatd Flow(RTUP) 246 433 226 187 to* Speed (mph) 20 30 60 60 1.0, Distance 01) 768 746 1306 1560 TraW Tme (s) 262 17.0 14A 176 F'e*. H ou Fart or 0 92 0132 0 1j2 0 92 092 0 32 052 092 092 0 92 0 ;r2 0,92 He" 1 Mcles (94 11% 996 4% 9% 9% 9% 996 9% 996 9% 9% 9% MI now (kph) 123 26 24 109 60 493 12 438 70 226 625 187 Stwxed lane Traffic (%) 40% Lino Group Flow (ph) 74 74 29 0 169 493 12 438 70 226 626 187 Turn Type 001 HA Pam OpM1 NA POM Prot NA Perm Pid NA Perm Protected Phases 8 8 4 4 1 6 6 2 Permitted Phases 11 4 6 2 Detedot Phase 8 8 8 4 4 4 1 6 6 6 2 2 'batch Phase Mrnanurnkuti-l(>) 60 6,0 60 60 60 6.0 60 160 15i0 60 ISO 16.0 Mnfinum Spill (s) 62.1 62.1 62.1 47.1 47.1 47,1 12.9 36$ 36.9 121 379 37A T0t]ISF44(s) 160 16.0 16.0 300 300 30.0 200 400 400 35.0 660 660 Total Split (%) 12b% 12$% 126% 26.0% 26.0% 26,096 16.7% 333% 33.3% 292% 46.1% 461% klaximmi Green (i•) 91 9.1 9.1 23 8 23.6 23.8 12.1 32 1 32A 27.1 471 47.1 Yelkw Time (s) :,dM, 3.4 3.4 3A 3.7 3.7 3.7 6.9 69 69 69 69 0 AI•Rnd Tiine(s) 2.5 26 25 26 2£ 2.6 2A 20 2(.11 20 20 20 Lost (Ime A qAt 0)` 0.0 0,0 0.0 OA 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0A 00 00 Total Lost Tirre(s) 51? 69 69 62 62 79 79 7' 79 19 79 Lea" teed Lag Lag LOW Lag L Lead- Lag C)*m1ze" Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lteNcleEdensan(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 30 3.0 P,ialt WAV Wie r(rw Wne low Harx N orie hula Min Mm HLRw kfn Mn WalkTime (s) 7.0 TA 7.0 70 7.0 7.0 70 7.0 TO 1.0 Flash [loot teak p>) 37 0 37 0 37.0 32.0 320 320 22 0 22.0 230 230 Pedestilan Us (itlhr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 POI Eliot Green C) 8 4 8 4 $ 4 151 15.1 b 3 17 6 17.6 113 346 34.5 Actuated gtC Ratio 010 010 0.10 0.19 0.19 0.01 022 0.22 0.14 0,43 0.43 uk RAN) 0 46 046 ON 064 079 009 0.61 014 0 Sr! 0.44 0 26 Cortrd Delay 472 46.E 0.4 373 16.6 416 33.E 0.6 37.9 197 4A Queue Delay u!! 0.0 0'0 0.0 0'0 00 00 0.0 00 00 00 2028 Background Improved w PJ'proved • AM Pk R Syrictwo 11 Report Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 149 Page 355 of 708 Green way Fritchey— GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 04/,�0ro23 WA (3 SOL SST Sea Total Delay 472 461 0.4 373 165 416 3$ 06 379 197 4.4 U)S D D A D 8 D C A D B A Approach DB13y 394 210 29.6 209 /4�pi0ath LOS D C C C Queue Lsrlgttt 60th 0) 36 36 0 76 26 6 106 0 64 tot 0 (Mue lknglh 96tn (1l) 91 % 0 164 147 25 l Et 0 105 234 48 ktom Unk Dist #1) 4" 666 1226 1470 lum Bay Lermfih 0) 100 326 300 360 300 Base Capacity00) 11112 1S6 396 60T 747 262 1341 734 1091 1967 966 ;tarvltion Gap Reckxtn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SpIlback Cap Iaeauttn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 storage i.ap Pedudri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pefteddt Ratio 041 040 0.07 0,33 0.66 006 0,33 0.10 020 032 020 kilymmal 8ummery Area Type Other r,ydo Lergh 120 Atualed Cyc le I englh 80 9 Nrflural ("rile IS('' Cordrol Type Actuated-0no►drtel6d hla> rnum vA Palo) A 79 kaersectnn Sgnai Delay: 242 neliedlon Los: C kdersecton -: ,pa(dy llikzatlon 61 446 ICU Lovei of Semee B Analysis Period (min)16 wi aria Phases: 1: Sand r Dr/Oreenwa Rd & US 41 1 AM 0 1 02 764 1*OS to6 2028 Background Improved w PJ Improved - AM Pk Fk Syrxhro 11 Report Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 150 Page 356 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application - Troffic Impact Statement Section 2- Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Tirninga 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 04a01202a -. ~- 4\ t l Maw NBT NBR SBL Lane iXq*guratwn.. 1 4 TT r 'i TT r Traffic WIUMU (0) 230 27 42 26 6 76 16 60 32 140 610 23t FlAuro vokime (") 230 27 42 26 6 76 1(, 663 32 140 610 23 Ideal Flow (aphpl) 19M 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 �Iora,r_ Liarph Qt) 0 0 10) 325 300 400 304 Storage Lanes I 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 Tarr Ler(yh 11) 0 0 60 60 lane l4f Faclor 0.96 0.96 1.00 100 1.00 100 1.00 0.96 1.00 1,00 096 1.00 Fit 0 860 OW, 0,860 0,860 Ft Proteclea 0.960 0.962 0.9Es 03N 0.950 5'atd Flovr (r(4) 1603 1633 103 0 16'76 0 1770 337E 1482 1671 34% 1663 Ft Permitted 0.960 0.962 099E 0.960 0.960 0,3td Flow (perm) 1603 1633 1683 0 1696 0 1770 3374 1482 1671 3406 1683 Fqt Tun on Red Yrf Yes Yet Yes Said Flour(RTOR) 246 77 226 243 IA* :seed (mph) 20 30 60 60 L►ik luslaoce M) 768 746 1306 1650 Travel Time (s) 262 17.0 14.8 17A Fvah Nuts Fait a Or% 0.98 0 98 096 0 98 0 % 096 0 % 0 % 0 98 0.98 098 Neavy mot* (9l) 7% 4% 2% 9% 2% 6% 2% 7% 9% 1% 6% 2% All Flow (vph) 235 28 43 26 6 77 16 666 33 143 620 243 Shared Large Traffic (4G) 44% L:V'ie ! "Tj Fbva (4h) 132 111 43 0 109 0 115 666 33 143 620 243 Twin Type Splt NA Perm 8p" NA Prd r1A Pem Prot NA PKm notPtecf Pha;s, 8 8 4 4 1 6 6 2 Permitted Phases E 6 2 0(4#�- cx Rose 3 8 8 4 4 1 6 6 5 2 2 Switch Phase Morn= NU (s) 60 60 60 50 60 60 160 ISO 60 1£0 160 k4tri eta Spit (s) 62.1 621 62.1 47.1 47.1 12.9 369 369 12$ 37.9 37.9 Total Sell (s) 240 240 240 200 200 200 410 41 0 360 % 0 66 0 Tom 304 (%) 20.0% 20.016 20.0% 161% 167% 16.7% 342% 342% 292% 46.7% 46,7% Maximum Orem (S) 18.1 181 1 8 1 13 $t 13.8 12 1 311 3,l 1 271 4r 1 43 1 Yellow Tine (s) 3.4 34 3A 31 3.7 6.9 6A 69 69 6.9 6$ All -Plod Time 26 26 2.6 2.5 26 20 20 20 2.0 20 20 Lost 0.0 00 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 00 Tot.➢ILo Tinc.O 59 69 69 62 79 79 79 79 79 79 Laftbig LsW Lag tag LAW lag Lag Lr?ad•1,3g Vptlmt.e^ Yes Yes YaS Yes Yes Yes vencleEterdl n(s) 3.0 30 3.0 4.0 3.0 30 30 30 3.0 3.0 3.0 Re,(all M090 fkm None thxr0 Pone I' ie f10n0 Min W None Mrt An Walk Teie (s) 7.0 70 7.0 7.0 7.0 70 70 7.0 7.0 FI3shDonlWA0) 370 370 370 320 320 220 t^4) 230 23.0 Peftilda0 Cell Mir) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 At EBct Oreen (s) 12.9 129 129 e 1 6 8 236 236 13.E 404 40.4 Aehaw gfC PAO 016 015 0.16 010 001 021 029 0.16 0 4E 0 4E vk Ratio 064 062 010 049 Oil 0 11 006 0 54 032 027 COr"ploy 46A 464 04 262 46A 33.6 02 44.7 174 3.4 rNww Delay 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0,0 2028 Background • PM Pk fk Sym two 11 P.epod Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA hage 151 Page 357 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 040012023 NBL NOT NOR SBL SBT SOR Total May 46 o 46A OA 252 46.5 33.6 02 44.7 17.4 31 LOS 0 D A C D C A D B A. Appr03rh Way 394 262 322 1=1 Arlxcach WS D C C B Owue lPn"601h (ft) 68 6$ 0 16 t 166 0 70 76 0 :1u?tr U-)q1h?Gih 01) 161 168 0 76 34 20 0 151) 183 48 traemal UNc Gst (4) 6" 6" 1226 1470 Ann Bay Lewoll 01) 325 300 400 300 we Capacity (rph) 369 376 M3 344 273 1424 766 677 2M 1066 ,Iarv,4lon Cap F,r;lucIn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spliback 4 Redxtn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,ter.ge Cap Pedu:ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fedwed * Ratio 0.36 0,36 008 0.32 006 0.47 4011026 026 023 werwilon SUMMM Area Type Other cycle Lpo lh 120 AC1Ualed Cycle Length $4 Natural C)Kle 150 Cortrol Type Actuuated-ftoordhal9� ` Maxanum uA Paho n 71 htersectrcn Slgn4 Delay 25 7 kilenecUon LOS C rnler>Prixn C)f):vAy Llihzbonfa i 4M, 10.1 Lpwe4 cil 8ervke B Analysts Fenod (min)16 as ana Pnases 1, sa cv(3reenaa Rn s us 41 01 01 'r04 tO6 202 8 B:-xAgwwf1 PN PA. N+ Sy'ndxo 11 Pkpc.d Rage Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P 1 ;; e 1 52 Page 358 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2- Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/GreenwaYRd& US4t 1, __4 -. r *- 4__ 4\ t r `► 1 1 W1 EBL WBR NBL N81 NBR SOL SBT SBR L** COrligurations lj r Q r tt r tt r tiellic Wnone (0) 230 27 42 26 6 76 16 60 32 140 610 23t Future 11Nrrne (,ph) 230 27 42 26 6 76 16 6.53 32 140 610 239 Ideal Flow (rphpl) 1900 19M 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 `:Tara-p Lmoh Qt) 0 0 0 100 325 300 400 300 Storage lanes 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1apvt L(aI'lII h) 0 0 60 60 Lane LAI Factor 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0% 1.00 Fit 0 81140 0 850 0.860 0 860 Ft Protected 0.960 0.962 0 961 0960 0.960 Wd Flowaxo4) I£•W IQ'I 1633 0 1W, 1624 1770 3374 1482 1671 3406 1683 Ft Permitted 0*0 0 962 0 961 0960 0960 Said Flow(perm) 103 1633 1683 0 1696 1524 1770 3374 1482 1671 3406 1683 RP An On Red Yes Yes Yet Yet Ud Flow(RTOR) 246 242 226 243 Link Speed (mph) 20 30 60 60 L6 (*,lance M) 768 746 1306 1f6o Travel Tine (s) 262 17.0 14.1 17.6 Fv, A Hour Faslor 095 0.98 0 ?8 098 0118 0 98 094 1) 95 0 98 0 98 096 098 Heavy %ANclet (IN 7% 4% 2% 996 2% 6% 2% 7% 9% t% 6% 2% Mi Flow (rPh) 235 28 43 26 6 77 16 666 33 143 620 243 Stood Lane lralft (%) 44% Lane OMW Flow ( 1h) 132 131 43 7; 16 666 33 143 620 243 Tum Type Spit NA Perm Sra,t NA P,rn Prof NA Pam Prat 14A Pam Protected Pales s 4 4 1 6 5 2 Permitted Phases 8 4 6 2 0c*dv Phase 8 8 8 a 4 4 1 6 6 5 2 2 Switch Phase MnIIIIIM ru11A(s) 50 60 60 50 60 6.0 60 150 160 60 160 15.0 Mhlmcm Sol(s) $2.1 62.1 62.1 47It 47.1 47.1 129 369 369 12.9 37.9 379 Total sot (s) 24 0 24 0 24 0 200 20.0 20.0 200 41 0 410 160 66 0 66 0 Total $04 (%) 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 16.7% 16.7% 16.7% 16.7% 342% 92% 292% 46.7% 46.7% Navonum r3rom (s) 181 181 181 13 8 13 8 13 8 121 33 1 331 27 1 42 1 4B 1 Yellow Time (s) 3A 3.4 3A 3.7 3.7 3.7 6.9 61 69 6.9 69 69 AI�F.etl11me6) 2.6 26 2.6 25 25 26 20 20 20 2.0 20 20 Last TlmeAgMl 0) 0.0 00 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 00 1r.01 -A firnt, 59 69 69 62 G2 79 79 79 79 79 79 LeadAA Lsod 1ag Leg LAW Lag Lag Le'�"1•Lag 001•nV0 Yes Y?S Yos Yes Yes )'es vehldeEltension(s) 30 30 3.0 30 30 3.0 3.0 30 30 3.0 3.0 3.0 Po"I Mode None None rlom None Nonh: purr Wxi Min Mtn None Mtn An Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 70 7.0 7.0 70 70 70 7.0 7.0 Flash Lint Wall, (s) 370 370 370 120 3140 320 220 220 230 230 Pecimtdan Cals (IAtr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act ERctOreen(,) 124 128 128 75 75 G.7 236 1136 131 400 400 Actuated WC t7et10 016 0.15 0.16 009 009 002 021 021 016 048 042 vk Pa10 064 062 0.10 021 on Oil 0 70 006 0.64 032 027 Cor" Delay 452 446 0A 462 1.4 46.3 32.7 02 441 16.9 3.6 (UPWeCtwy 00 0.0 00 00 0.0 00 00 00 00 00 0.0 2028 Background tnproved • PM Pk FY Syrx two I 1 Peport Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 153 Page 359 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 04/30#2023 681. Total Delay 462 445 0.4 462 1.4 46.3 327 02 44.1 169 36 LOS D D A D A 0 C A D B A Approach Delay U6 142 31A 176 ry)ptoach LOS D B C B Queue Len)h601h (1I) 68 67 0 16 0 t 166 0 TO 76 0 QUeua LPrr Wt Nri 01) 165 1E3 0 62 0 33 276 0 164 174 47 kternal Unk Dist (11) 6ttr 966 1226 1470 Tum Bay Lendh fin) 100 32,11, 300 400 300 Base COWAY(0) 373 311 667 301 469 276 1439 761 6t3 2111 1073 ✓tarvation Cap Reducin 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 $01back Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3taage tip Red Ain 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced * PaUO 0.36 ON 0.00 0.11 0.16 006 0.46 0.04 026 026 023 ktff$KD SUMMWI AM, Area Type other - - C)cle Lergt) 1 �q) Actuated Crtie Length 82 9 D itufal crrie iro Control Type, Actuated-ftoordnaled klaxhurn vA R.4ro 0 70 Irtersectlon S174 Delay. 25.6 Iter Kbon LOS. C blersactkn Capacly UWatlon67 ICrJ Levelol Servke B Malysis Penod (min)16 its and Fhasers 1 Sandpiper Ur/Ureenway Rtt G US 41 w `t\ O 1 01 �04 9 rJ 5 1 06 2028 Background Improved • PM Pk Hr Synchro 11 PRPOrl Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 154 Page 360 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application - Traffic Impact Statement Section 2- Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 --* ti 1f 4- *\ t P `► 4 d Lane Co Aqurahow, Tj 4 r 4 r t? r ?? r Trallit Vokrne (0) 230 79 42 73 3$ 320 16 60 111 642 610 3 . Future vcvixne ( h) 230 79 42 73 U 320 16 663 III SA" 610 Ideal Flow (rphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 19M 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 I xg.) Storage Um1h (i1) ) 0 0 100 325 300 40) Jul Storage Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Lerglh (1) 0 0 60 so lane LAI Factor 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1,00 096 1.00 Fri 0 860 0 860 0 860 0.860 Ft Protected 0.960 0.976 03" 0960 0.960 Said Flow (pr0) 1(103 1610 103 0 1726 M4 1770 3374 102, 1671 340E 1683 Ft Permited CAM 0.976 0-40 am 0.960 Sald Flow(perm) 103 1670 1683 0 1726 1624 1770 3374 14V 1671 34% 1683 RgM Ttm on Red YYt Yes YM Yes Said Fiow(RTOR) 246 327 226 243 Unk Speed (mph) 20 30 60 go Link Distance M) 768 746 1306 1650 Travel Time 0) 262 17.0 14.4 17.6 Peak Hour Factor 095 0.98 0 98 098 0 *M 0 98 093 0 in 0.94 0 93 0118 098 Heavy Witide0 (9q 7% 4% 2% 9% 2% 6% 2% 7% 9% 9% 6% 2% Art) Flow (vph) 235 81 43 74 39 327 16 6" 113 663 620 243 Stwred lane Traftt (96) 34% Lane 0Mup Fqw (+h) 165 P 1 43 0 11.' 327 16 W 113 663 620 243 Tun Type 801 NA Perm Spit NA Perm Prd NA Fenn Prot NIL Perm Protected Phase; 3 4 a 1 6 6 2 Permitted Phases 8 4 6 2 Detector PtQse 3 8 4 4 d i 6 6 6 2 41 &with Phase Wmuminitial (5) 5O 60 60 60 60 6.0 60 1SO ISO 60 160 Is kmft n *1(s) 62.1 62.1 62.1 47.1 47.1 47.1 129 36.9 369 12.9 37.9 379 Total Spit (s) 240 240 240 200 200 20 0 20 0 41 u 410 36 r) 56 0 66 0 Total V111(y%) 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 16.7% 167% 16.7% 14.7% 342% 342% 292% 46.7% 46.7% Mavirniun G") (s) 191 181 18 1 13 9 13 8 13.8 12.1 3,11 331 27 1 42 1 4� 1 Yellow Ttme (4) 3A 3A 3.A 3.7 3.7 3.7 6.9 6.9 69 6.9 69 6.9 All Red Time(>) 25 26 2.6 25 26 26 20 20 20 2A 20 2.0 Lost TimeR4%t (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 OA TM,alLost Time (s) 69 69 6a 62 3.2 79 79 79 79 79 79 LgWAA LOSS L89 Lag Oad Lag lag Lead -Lag 00irnite^ Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle E>lensrorl(s) 30 30 3.0 30 30 3.0 30 3.0 30 3.0 3A 3.0 Pvcall MOie MMA NOM None two WW. twow ikxw Min Mn None Mn Mn Walk Time (s) 7.0 70 7.0 7.0 70 7.0 7.0 70 7.0 7.0 Flash CuntW*(s) 370 370 370 320 410 320 220 220 23.0 23.0 Ptrmtrian Calls (Mv) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act End 13r"nC,) 147 147 147 114 114 66 268 26.8 27.4 566 66.6 JrttuatedgrRft 014 0.14 0.14 010 010 006 026 OX 029 062 0.62 vk RAW 071 072 0.10 0 62 0 72 0.16 00 021 1.31 029 026 Cortrol Delay 662 $44 CA $4.1 163 663 46.7 09 191.7 17.6 32 rjurto U0.1y 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0,0 0.0 2028 Background Improved wPJ • PM Pk 4 Symctvo 11 Report Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 155 Page 361 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/GreenwaY Rd & US 41 04PON23 --► ti 4-- t `- ♦ J Law Grow MT IJOR NBL NOT NOR BBL 8BT SBR Total May $62 $44 0.6 64.1 163 66.3 46.7 09 1917 17.5 3.3 LOS E E A E B E D A F 6 A Approach calay 671 274 40A Et 1 Approach LQS E C D F 0ueue Leroh60th QI) 112 116 0 78 0 11 236 0 •624 96 0 Vljeue Lffgh 9Stri (n) 19T 204 0 147 93 35 314 0 006 183 47 Bernal Unk DO (1) 60 6" 1226 1470 Tum Bay Lengh m) 100 325 300 400 300 Base Capacity(0) 270 211 470 221 4*0 199 1040 $13 421 1772 $40 sixy4ion Cap PBQucin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SM11back Oap R eductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap PiDdAin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rafted vk Ratio OS? 047 0,09 0.61 0.6$ 001 0.64 0.19 1.31 029 026 hartatltlM BUMM Y A Area Type Other Cale Lencith 120 Actuated &ck isnglh:108,6 Wljrhd Crle 150 Cortroi Type; Actuated•LIrlwordtrlated Maximum vkRaW 131 Intersection 81" Delay. 62.1 Mrsedion LOS E lrtersoclkn CapxRy Uiw.alion 81 31% Iris Levelol Servke D Analysis Period (min) 16 vokme exceeds capac ty, queue is Iheoretk ally d irde Queue ov%n is maamum after two cycles. 6 1ith p^rcenW vokme eweed�, capacty, queue maybe lor> Queue Shown iS maxinlm alter 1w0 CydeS 'ldsandMmes i sand _rDrlCreerwa Rd&VS41 _ 01 02 + Oa AW dos Ica 2028 Background improved w PJ • PM Pk R Synctwo 11 P*pon Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 156 Page 362 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 -Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/GreenwaY Rd & US 41 04M2023 Liw.1Ar11gln4lom, 4 F 4 F I TT F M tt F Trafflc Volume (141h) 230 79 42 73 3$ 320 16 6% 111 542 610 23E Future Volume (0) 230 79 42 73 39 320 Ib 6f3 111 S42 610 23R Ideal Flow (4hpi) 1900 1900 1900 1900 19M 1900 1900 1900 19M 1900 1900 1900 t'torajo Lianrh (11) 0 0 0 100 325 300 360 300 Storage lanes 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 1. Fpvr Lerdih It) ri 0 60 100 Lye M Factor 0.96 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 bl) 1.00 0.96 1.01) 0.97 096 1.00 Fit 0, 850 0 960 0 960 0 860 Fit Protected 0.960 0.976 0969 0960 0.960 `ratd Fk)vr (1xr,4) 16W 1670 1(.,1 0 17Z, . 1621A 1770 3374 102 3242 3406 1683 Ft Permitted 0960 0976 0-90 0.960 0.960 Ud Flnin0itirn) 1603 1670 IM 0 1T26 1524 1770 3374 1482 3242 3406 1683 F4ght Tun on Red Y0t Yee Yet Yes &7td Ftour(RTOR) 246 327 226 243 LA Speed (Mph) 20 30 60 60 Unk (rslance 11) 76E 746 1366 166o Travel Time (s) 262 17.0 141 17.6 Feat, Wxr Fa!1w 0 % 0 S•s p 3z 09g a .4$ 0 99 ri 98 0 9s 0 93 0911 0.98 098 Heavy VoNcW f } 7% 4% 2% 9% 2% M 2% 7% 916 t% 696 2% All 11rav (aph) 235 El 43 74 D 327 16 F4 113 663 520 243 Stood Lane Traffic ('A) 34% Lane (3roup F13W (J)h) 155 10 43 I t . ? Z 7 t c Ili 663 620 243 Tun Type S l Rk Perm Gro NA Perm Pr 4 11A Pam Prot NA Perm Protected Phases E 4 4 1 6 6 2 Permitted Phases 8 4 6 2 Mectc4 Phase 3 E E 4 4 4 1 6 6 6 2 2 witch Phase Mtriantnn'rnlr:4(S) 50 SA 60 60 60 6.0 6o 150 160 60 160 15.0 MntmLIM 4AI (s) 62.1 621 62.1 47.1 47.1 47.1 129 369 369 12.9 37.9 37.9 Total$plA(S) 24.0 240 24.0 200 200 20.0 200 410 410 360 Geri 660 Total spit(%) 20.0% 20 0% 20.0% 16.7% 16.7% 16.7% 161% 342% 342% 29,2% 46.7% 461% "Awl mrun Breen (S) IAI 1 R 1 1 R 1 13 R 13 R 13.9 121 3,11 331 27 1 0 1 4R 1 Yellow Tine (t) 3A 3.4 3A 3.7 3.7 3.7 6.9 6.9 59 6.9 6.9 6.9 Al-Red11me 26 26 26 2.5 25 26 20 20 20 2.0 20 2.0 Lost nmeAL"I 0) 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 Total WxATltne(s) 69 69 6.9 62 62 79 79 79 79 79 79 Leedllag lead Leg u9 LM IA1 LN U,30. a9 Cj*-TN.e? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Versde EttMlon (6) 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 30 30 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 3.0 Pkall Made None Nore None Nom rmne hone Notw Mn Mn None Mn Mn Walk Tyne (s) 7.0 70 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 70 7V 7.0 Flash Cbnt Wat, (s) 37 0 370 37 0 320 320 32.0 22.0 220 230 23.0 Ped it"a" Cal$ (Atr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act EllctOrotn(;) 146 146 146 113 113 67 262 262 223 $12 612 Actuated gtC Ratio 014 014 0.14 Oil oil 006 026 026 022 090 060 vkRA10 069 069 010 060 071 r?14 07$ 021 0.79 031 027 Corttrol Delay 61 3 606 0z 610 14.9 C4 6 43.6 09 40.6 179 3.4 CtuN ua Uetiy 0 0 0,0 00 Q i. 0 it n 1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U.0 2028 Background Improved W PJ Improved • PM Pk 14 Sync►xo 11 Peport Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 157 Page 363 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis— July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Sandpiper Dr/Greenway Rd & US 41 04/3012023 :NBL N81 NBR SBL SBT SBR Total Delay 613 606 05 610 149 64.6 43.6 09 49.6 179 3.4 LOS E E A E 8 D D A D 8 A Approach Delay 637 26.11 37.9 2t 2 approach LOS D C D C am usLffgh6001) 107 Ill 0 76 0 11 224 0 Its 96 0 (mue LEfighxtri (4) 1?i AA U 147 93 35 314 0 M 133 47 tterral Unk Dist (t) 6t! 666 1226 1470 Tum Bay Length fin) 100 326 300 360 300 Base Capacity (1ph) 290 302 447 M 492 214 1116 641 M 1769 939 siaivation Cap ReoWn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sptbwk 0ep Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SlOrage cap Pedudn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Y* FAo 0.63 Obi 0.09 0.47 0,66 0.07 0.60 0.18 0.0 029 026 Intersection Summary Rea tie Other Cycle l erx4h 120 ktualed &ycle Length to3 t N.Alxal Cale tro Control T)pe Actuated•Lkxoordihated Maxknurn v,t Paint 0 7'� ktersection Signal Delay 33.7 �� ` iterseMon LOS C brtersec Wr1 C"Iy Wi.ation".7% ICJJ LeevelU Servke C Malysls NOW (min)16 Sots and Phases 1 SaWplpet Lq/Qreemay HO G U:<41 O 1 14 02 70� $ 1*OS 1 t O6 ?Q-)8 8xi,gtoinxl knpro*d w PJ knptoved • PM Pk Nr Synchro 11 Pop .11 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 158 Page 364 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2- Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 US 41 and Manatee Road Lanes, Vdumes, Timings 6: US 41 & Manatee Rd 04r0r.02a f ti 4\ t 1* 4 -' Lane ContigLalons I F I ♦ttf A f f t F Traffic %tl me (vph) 149 106 169 931 2 949 117 FUuu Volume W') 199 106 169 i3:i 2 949 187 Ideal now (upl" 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 19M Storage Lctngth (tt) 110 0 60 460 430 Slorege Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 T4ar Length (1) 96 $0 60 lane W Factor 100 1,00 1,00 091 1.00 0.91 1.00 F4 0450 0160 Pt Protected 0.960 0.950 0.960 SAd FWw(prd) 1703 160 17W 4893 1770 AIM IS24 Ft Perml led 0.960 0,168 0269 S.4d Flow(C,erm) 1703 1583 301 4893 601 AIM 1624 " Turn on Rea Yes Yes c:Ad Flow(P.TOP) 114 .03 Link Spered arlph) 26 60 60 " Eularxe 0) 3720 1686 1916 TWO Time (s) 101 A 21.6 26.1 Peal, Harr F act a 092 0 94 0 92 0 92 0 92 0 92 092 Fleavy Viehcles (%) 6% 2% 6% 6% 2% 6% 6% Ail Flow (ugh) 206 114 173 ir;;ii 2 1032 203 Sl►ared lane Tr8t1K (96) Lane Oran now (0i) 205 114 17; 1! 'a 1032 203 Turn Type Prd Perm prr40 M Perm NA Perm Pn-P<led rb-r'P. 8 i 6 Permitted Phases i 6 2 2 u:dedor rna,e 8 4 1 4 2 2 SSultth Phase 14mmuin IiAlol(s) 6.0 60 60 160 16.0 160 16,0 Mnrmum Spit (s) 49.9 49.9 12.1 26.1 21.1 21.1 211.1 Nal;I0(:) 40A 40(r ;I!) $0,0 660 (40 560 Total Spit (rb6) 33 30A 33 3% 201% 66 7% 461% 46.111% 46 9% ML)xxnunl'+")(s) 341 341 179 729 479 47.9 479 Ye(W Time 4) 3A 3A 6.1 61 6.1 6,1 6.1 All•Feu Time (s) 25 26 20 20 20 20 .0 Lost TimeA4W (t) 0.0 00 0.0 00 0.0 00 00 Total Lost Time (s) 69 C. 9 1.1 7.1 71 7.1 7.1 LsadAa9 Lead V9 U9 Lag Lead -Lag VinweY Iles lies Yes Yes \kNde E awkon 0) 3.0 3A 3.0 3.0 3o 3A 3.0 Ratan Mode None Nona None Mat $An bin lAn Walk Time (s) 7.0 7,0 7.0 7.0 7.0 1`13;hEoniWaM1 37.0 370 14.0 14.0 14.0 Pedestrian Call (Mv) 0 0 0 0 0 Alt End R een h) 14 6 146 40.8 408 24 2 242 242 Actuated g1C Ratio 021 021 049 0.69 0.36 0.36 036 VA, Rao 0 57 027 0.47 0 35 Out 0 60 030 Control Delay 324 7.4 112 7.7 16.6 20.1 42 Qxit *lay 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 00 00 0.0 2028 Background • AM Pk Hr Synctx0 I 1 Report Pegs 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 159 Page 365 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2— Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6 I_IS 41 & Manatee Rd 1,4t nr:r' 1 --v t 1, 1 Eel E $67 SBR Total Delay 32.8 76 112 7,7 1S$ 20.1 42 LOS C A B A B C A approach Way 23.! 82 17b ipptoaih LOS C A B rnmue Lerxjth 50(h (11t) 76 0 28 69 1 123 0 fmto Letgh'+61n p 167 40 0 120 5 243 42 hwal uM Nt It) 364o 1606 1f136 stun Bay Le%Ah0) Ito 600 460 4.10 Bas a Capacity w) $76 169 666 4683 361 3632 1166 ;iarvAion aao Redudn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :Vlback Cap P4xkxtn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 fIoiaje Cap Redudn 0 0 u 0 0 0 0 Reduced wk Ratio 023 013 031 022 0.01 029 0111 htecsecaon Summary _,— Area Typo Olh(.r C}Clo Lpi'(111 1 -"I Actuated Cytla Lerxin 63 7 Natieal Cyklo 95 Control TV Aduated•VrxoOrdnated hlahununi VA- P31v) 11 t;0 raersection Sgnal Delay 14 2 "91SWIlon LOS: 8 kimectbn :apa(tty Uibruion 67 >`;:> ICU Level of Gmice B Analysis Penod (min) 16 3pIwAS am Phases. 6 VS 41 & Manatee Pxl 01 02 08 t06 ?I128 B.xirlropid- AM FA 4 Synctr011 Repot Pap 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 160 Page 366 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 -Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: US 41 & Manatee Rd 1 t 14 lane 0 L N81 SBU SET S8 Lnrle C01119trations jr i of A ttt If Traft Ubkane (4h) 10 136 243 1176 2 1033 i future Vckxne (*h) 189 136 243 1176 2 1033 187 MW Row Mil" 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 forage Length (11) 110 0 600 460 430 amp Lam 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Longth (t) 96 60 60 Lade LO. Fedor 1.00 100 1.00 091 1.00 0.91 1,00 Fd 060 0.860 R PratKted 0.960 0460 0*0 Said Flow Oxot) 1703 1683 1703 4893 1770 4893 1524 FI Pwmited 0960 0,146 6206 Satd Fbw (perm) 1703 1683 260 4893 382 4893 1524 PV% Ttm on Red Yet Y111 ,atd Flow (RTOR) 147 203 tktk Speed (mph) 26 60 60 LK* OrsIaxe (11) 3720 16 6 1915 Travel Tine (s) 1016 214 26.1 Peak 11our Fart or 0 92 0 92 0 92 0 921 0 9Y 0 92 0 92 He" VhNdes (94 6% 2% 6% 6% 2% 6% C% Pd1 now (vph) WM 147 264 1278 2 1123 :03 Stlared Line Traffic (96) Lane Oroup Flow (vph) 205 147 264 1278 2 1123 203 lun Type Prot Perm prn NA Penn NA Perm Noteded Phases 1 n 2 Permtted Phases 8 6 2 2 Qeted(x Phase i 1 6 _ 2 2 Switch Phase MxlanlxnNot (s) 6!) 60 60 160 160 160 160 Mnnun Sptl (s) 499 499 121 261 2111.1 231 2t.1 low Sell (s) 400 400 25 0 WO 660 650 66 0 Total Sptl (%) 33 3% 33 3% 20 t% 66.7% 46.11% 45.89b 46.3% 1.laxonum Green (s) 34 1 34 1 179 729 479 479 47.9 Yelk)w Time 0) 3.4 3.4 6.1 61 6.1 6.1 6.1 Ail -Red Tlrne(;) 2.5 26 20 2.0 20 2.0 20 Lost time Aunt 0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OP 0,0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.) G 9 71 7 1 71 7.1 7 1 Lea" Lead Lag LaD Lag Lead -Lag CIA mite? Yes Yes Yes Yes %*Nde 6Qembn (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Pt?t41 MGde Fkxre Wriv Wle kin Mn W1 Min Walk Time (s) TO 7A 7.0 TO 70 NO Dxt Wat () 370 370 140 140 140 Pedestdan Cats (Mfv) 0 0 0 0 0 P..1 Eno ween (,1 163 153 466 466 275 276 276 Attualed 9/C Ratio 020 020 042 OA2 0.39 0.36 OU vh RAJO 069 034 0.69 042 001 00 030 Control Way 36A 7.9 21.6 8 t 11.0 22.0 42 QueuePtl3Y 0.0 0.0 0n o0 01) 00 00 2028 BackWardw PJ -AM Pk Ft Syrdwo 11 Report Pepe 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e 1 61 Page 367 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application — Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: US 41 & Manatee Rd 04902023 1 t I 1 LriYQiOlp EBL EBR NOL NOT SBU SET SBR Total Delay 36.8 79 21.6 8.1 190 220 42 l.riS 0 A C A B C A Approach Delay 24.7 104 19.3 "oach LOS C B B Queue Lwgh both (Tt) 84 0 49 96 1 148 0 r;rrEue Urqh `eel (Rt 149 49 166 1t4 6 263 44 ktemat ur* Qfst 01) 3640 1606 1836 ]urn Bay Lerx%h 0) 110 600 460 430 We Capacity (0) 800 06 617 4497 263 3246 1079 tarv�trort Caa Reduttn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sp oback Cap Reduttn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �tiaa3e Carr Pedudn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PrcAxed A Patio 026 018 061 02E 0.01 0.36 0.1$ Merw(ton Summary_ Area Type Other ryr le lerylh Actuated CyC10 Lffgh 76 4 rin(ur .I Cycle �4f Cordrol Type Actuated-ftoordmated NI3xwnurn vh Pato 11 G, tsersectnon 99M Delay.16.6 nenealon LOS: S kder sec tm G*wc ly LUY zati on 62 4% ICU Love) of S erik e 9 Andysls Pend (min)16 As ana Phases 6. VS 41 & Manatee Pot 'Not x \ 01 02 03 tO6 2028 SackgrwWw PJ -AM PK R Syrictro 11 Report Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 1 62 Page 368 of 708 Green way Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application - Traffic Impact Statement Section 2- Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: US 41 & Manatee Rd SBU SET SBR Lane COrllguralions r W A ttt r Traffic Whine (Wh) 111 133 134 1226 1 1194 147 FlAure Volume (*h) Ili 133 134 12N 1 1194 147 Ideal Flow MI" 19M 1900 19M 1900 19M 1900 1900 Length pt) 110 0 600 460 4,10 Storage Lades 1 1 1 1 1 l�jlw-r Lc iqh 0) 96 60 60 Cane Lid Factor 1.00 100 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 Fit 0 850 0.W F1 Protected 0,960 0.960 0.960 SAd row(prc4) 1703 1683 1770 4893 1770 603G 1624 F1 Permitted 0960 0130 0206 ,,old Flow( *tin) 170s 16.83 242 4893 (82 6036 1624 Fj" Tun on Red Yes Yes Said Fkrcv(RTC)F,) 139 163 Unk Speed (mph) 26 60 60 Link ChsWp01) 3720 16s5 1916 Travel Twne (s) tots 21.6 26.1 F'ek F"j Facl or U Al U 96 0 ,% 096 U 9D 0 rf; 0 96 He." VeNcles (94 4+% 2% 2% 6% 2% 3% C% Ad) flc" (4ph) 116 1,19 140 1277 1 1244 10 Stlared lane Trdk (%) Lane Group Flow (ph) 116 119 140 1277 1 1244 163 Turn Type Prot Perm pm+pt W Perri; NA Perm. __ ..... ... .. . Ftoteded Phases 8 1 6 Permitted Phases 1 6 2 2 betedor Pnaae 8 S 1 6 2 2 2 eaeitch Phase Kodmmn InnN (s) 60 6!71 s0 160 160 150 160 wNmtun Split (s) 493 49.9 12.1 26.1 2$.1 211 2:,11 Taal 004 (s) 40,0 400 26 0 WO 650 650 55 0 Total Sol (%) 33 3% 333% 20.1% 66.7% 46.#% 45R% 46.3% 143ximLon Green (s) 341 34.1 17.9 729 47.9 479 47.9 Yellow Time 0) 3.4 a.4 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6: . All -Pod Tnneh) 2.5 26 2.0 2.0 20 20 20 Lost time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0 IrAalLn;ILrre(s) 6? 6? 71 71 71 7.1 71 Leadn.ay lead lag La® Lag Lead Lrl 1:1,lmize^ Yes Yes Yes Yes NeNcle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 PetjI WA* Hare Na>e Noma W1 Mn 1An ken Walk Time (s) 70 7.0 7.0 7A 70, Flash D3n1 WalK p) s76 370 140 14.0 14.0 Pedestrian Cats (0y) 0 0 0 0 0'"_ Ftt Encl !Keen (I I U 6 106 41 6 416 264 26A 26 4 A4lu3ted 91C RA10 OJ6 016 0,63 0.63 0,40 0,40 0.40 vk R3ta) 042 037 042 041 001 061 022 Control Dewy 31.7 19 19 6.5 12.0 17,0 3 d Queue Dewy 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 00 i r i i n o 2028 Background • PM Pk FM Syrxhro 11 Report PVT Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 163 Page 369 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: US 41 & Manatee Rd 04402023 _-* 4\ t I 1 -' Weftlp EBL EBR NBL NBl SBU SET SBR 1A Total Delay 31.7 89 89 66 120 17.0 3.4 WS C A A A 8 B A Approach Delay 193 67 W Ppr4oa(h LOS B A 8 Queue Lwgh 601n 01) 41 0 18 76 0 134 0 (Metre L"h `.+'•lrl (11) 102 46 44 126 3 299 31 irternal Uric Dist it) 3640 isx 1$X luin Bay Ler' l#h m) 110 600 460 430 Base Capwty (1ph) 912 912 6*2 4774 21117 3790 111116 :lawAion Cap Redlxln o 0 U 0 0 0 0 SpIlback cap Rea,ctn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Slora3e Cap Retlucln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rafted %*Ratio 0.13 016 024 027 0.00 033 013 "room 111� Area Type Cycw Let'41) 120 Actuated Cycle Length 66.6�� WvLxal Cyrla 1�s Cortrol Type Actuated-Uncoordnated Maxntiun vh Palm i) G1 ttersection Sgr181 Delay 11 3 tltersection LO8: B Wtsecfmn 4,,xAy llilizetion 01% ICU Level of Serrko B Analysis Period (min)16 ' wIs aria Phases. F US 41 & Manalee Rd O I 02 08 t06 ?0?ti Ba:'.gralnii - FM Fk Flt Syrxhro 11 Report Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 1 64 Page 370 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 - Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: US 41 & Manatee Rd i o4aorzo23 4 t Lane (Mig rations W A r Traffic Wlurne (to) 111 22$ 192 1391 1 1464 147 FtAurp v,aunti. ('111) 111 228 192 1391 1 WA 147 Ideal Flow 4hpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 forage Length 01) 110 0 600 460 430 8torege lames 1 1 1 1 1 Loper Length 0) 96 5o N) Lane UN Factor 1.00 100 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 Fr1 0 860 0.860 Fill Protected 0960 0.960 0.960 fatd FW4(rnc4) 1703 IM 1770 403 1770 64d6 116"24 FT Permitted 0960 0.094 0.171 :did Flow(wo) 1703 1683 176 4893 319 60s6 1624 Tun on Rod Yes Yet` .did FIOw(RTOF) 23S 163 Lit* Speed Oph) 26 60 60 Lmk Orslarxe01) 3720 1f"R6 1916 Travel TNne (s) 1016 21.6 26.1 Feats Kw FW Ot 0 1*1 0 A. 0 96 0 96 0 % 0 % 096 HeOvy Wide$ (94) 6% 2% 2% 6% 2% 3% 6% MJi now "h) It(. 21; 200 1449 1 1626 163 Shared Large Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (0) 116 233 200 1449 1 1525 163 Tun Type Not Perm pm+pt NA Perm NA Perm , Protected Phases S 1 6 2 Permitted Phases i 6 2 2 Medot Phase 8 1 6 2 2 2 Switch Phase Militaxn intlr;l (s) 6.0 60 50 16.0 15!) 150 1f.0 10r11nun Split (s) 499 499 12.1 26.1 2ST 28.1 2t,1 70131 spit (S) 400 400 26,0 800 660 65 0 65,0 Toles bill (9G) 33 3% 33 4% 20.9% 66.7% 464 % 454% 45 . Maxwnum Green (s) 341 141 17.9 72.9 479 479 479 Yellow Time 0) 3.4 3.4 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1 _:�... NI•RedTime (5) 26 26 20 2.0 20 20 2.0 Lost Time Ad)ist 0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0, total lost Time (s) 59 6 3 71 71 71 7.1 71 t lead Lag Lag Lag Lead-LagOp►,mlz0 Yes Yes Yes Yes Whlde FAenslon (s) 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 Px�%jl WA* 1`0w Nape Wive w bkt W1 ktn Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 70 Flash Nnt Walk (i) 070 37 0 140 140 14 0 Pedestrian Calls (MtM) 0 0 0 0 0 r c1 Etli1 ween (51 11.4 114 G 2, 1 62 1 35 2 35.2 362 A tuated WC Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.0 0611 0.49 0.46 0.46 VA,, Ratio 046 056 0.0 044 001 0 66 020 CoMol Delay 39.4 102 22A 62 13.0 179 3.1 QUQU0 [Mlay 0,0 0,0 OA 00 09 0.0 0.0 20'18 Backgroundw PJ . PM Pk Hr Synchro 11 Report Pegs 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 165 Page 371 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — In tersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: US 41 & Manatee Rd 040012023 1 --V -4\ t" 1 1 larioOroup EBL EBR NBL NBl SBU SB1 SBR 101al Delay 39.4 102 22 4 62 130 I T9 3 1 LOS G 8 C A B B A Approach Delay 19.e 111 16.6 Ppproach L 0 8 B A B Queue Length Wh (tt) 60 0 37 96 0 119 0 QUt1IY3 ti9gh `YM (II 121 6; 122 149 3 301 32 ktern0l Unk Dist 01) 3610 1606 I $X lure Bay Liery)th M) 110 600 460 410 Base Capedty(1ph) 7$2 IN 60 4464 206 3262 1038 lwvatrun Cap Redudn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spllback Cap ReUtn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rorap Cap Peductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vk Palle 0 IS 0 28 040 033 000 047 016 MRe wIlion Summaro Area Type Other Cycle Ler(p) 1 2i1 Actuated Gila Length 769 Narur3l CyCia 105 Control Tjpe Actualed•Uncoordnaed Max"wil vh Pal» n F6 teersectlon Slgro Delay 13 1 ntemechon LOS' B Irterv,clinn 4,acly LUNzatlun h.,1% ICU Level of Serrlce B Pnaiysls Perrod (min)16 Aks am Pluses i. us 41 & Manatee Pr1 \O1 I Ir 02 08 + 1 O6 2028 Backgroundw PJ - PM Pk W Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 1 66 Page 372 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 -Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Collier Boulevard and Manatee Road Lanes, Vdumes. Timings 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd o4�3oro23 r � �, t r `► 1 Lane OW19lra lom I F A TT r 11 TT Trattic Wkrne (vph) 221 197 3 1129 92 126 20116 FiAleO volml :+ (yI*) 227 197 2 1129 92 12`rl 211A1", Ideal Flow (S ).V) 19M 1900 19W 1900 1900 1900 1900 k, tenth (4) 126 0 175 210 380 SSOrage tares 1 1 1 1 1 TaperLenglh p) 60 IS5 60 Lure W. factor 100 1.00 1.00 0196 1.00 100 096 Fit 0.860 0 8W Ft Protected 01%0 0.950 0.960 Said. Flow(prof) 1719 1SO 1770 0471 160 1719 3438 Fl Permfied 0960 0,063 0.16E Said Flow(Wrri) 1719 1683 99 3471 1663 28(• 3438 RP Taman Red Yes Yes Said. Flow(P.TOP) 201 73 U* Speed pnph) 26 45 46 1JM Distance 0) 3720 1990 2398 TMO Tine (S) 101.6 2EA 36.3 Peak HM Fad or 0 % 096 0 9S 096 0 96 09, 091, flWO VaMdes (9q 6% 2% 2% 4% 4% 6% 6% AA Flow Mph) 239 20, 3 1188 97 132 2196 Snared tens Traft (96) lane Oraa Flow (iph) 239 20i ? 1188 97 132 NX Tum Type Prot Perm Perri 1% Penn pmjpt NA Pl(Ott''d Fba"s 4 �'• ` 2 Permitted Phases 4 C ( 2 DMedor tR185e 4 4 C. 6 is 6 2 Srwtch Phase htnamum Ir>Itrai(s) 60 60 160 150 ISO £0 15.0 Mlninurn Spit (s) 46.7 46.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 11.E 23.5 IQ" $j?I4 (s) 460 450 860 860 860 200 105.0 Total Spit (%) 30 0% 30 0% $6.7% 66 7% 66 7% 132% 70 0% klaxinurnGreen (s) 394 394 782 782 782 132 932 Yellow Time (s) 3.4 3.4 4.E 44 4.E 4 s 4.E All -Rod llrnv() 22 2.2 20 20 20 20 20 Lost Tlme Adµ I (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 00 0,0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 66 66 68 68 6S 6? h3 1_08" Lag Lag Lag LAW LeaU-Lx) (14rmtze Iles Yes lies lies Vkhide fitemlon (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 30 3.0 3.0 PcxalI Mode None None None Pone Nine None k4n Welk Trne(s) T.0 70 7.0 70 7.0 FW,h Cunt WlalK ¢) 33.0 3110 16.0 160 160 Pedestrian Call (Mrr) 0 0 0 0 0 Alt Elld (ireehi (>) 237 23 7 76 2 762 752 911 91.1 Actuated 91C Rahn 0.19 0.19 00 059 0.69 0.72 0.72 VA; Rto 076 046 0.05 0611 010 043 0,89 Cordrol Delay 66.4 104 16.0 1E2 4,E 10.7 21.1 Q.lerie Delay 0.0 0.0 00 00 00 0.0 00 2026 Backgrumd • AM Pk Pi Synchro I 1 Report Pop 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 167 Page 373 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd 04/3012023 t `► 1 Ltari9 0ttiiip WBL WBR NBU NBI NBR SBL $81 Total Delay 66.6 100 160 192 48 10.7 211 LOS E A B B A B C Approach Delay 39.11 172 206 fp{403ih LOS D B C Queue Length 64th 0) 202 4 1 "0 t 30 670 (x8l1M) Lerx(lh )"In (a) 2% 72 1 451 31 63 1(131 trterral Ur* Dist 01) 3640 1910 2314 Turn Bay Lpn�gh M) 126 176 210 JW We Capacity (0) 641 636 63 2221 1020 366 206 :1arv3hurl Cap Re"n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sp liback Cap Re"In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W,tag+ Cali RMudn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Relied %* Ratio 044 033 006 O bi 010 0 s7 Ott MTK*Cd0119UMI'llwy Area Tjpe' Other Cycle Length 160 Actuated CyCle LaVh. 12T 4 Natual Cycle 140 Control Type: Actuated-UrlcoO►&AW MaMUnUrn vk PAW 0 39 nerll bon Sorrel Delay 21.6 nenechon L08' C lyder:e,ctm Capa(dy ltilizatlon - 7% ICU Level o1 SerAce F Analysis Penod Own)16 2028 Background • AM Pk R Synctro 11 Report Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 168 Page 374 of 708 Green way Fritchey- GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2- Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd 047342023 r t n t r `► t tale Codigurallons E" A Traffic Whims ( ") 227 197 3 1129 92 126 201116 Future Volume (*h) 227 197 3 1129 32 126 20R6 ideal Flow M 9" 1900 19M 1900 1900 1900 19M 1900 Roiage Length 11) 126 0 176 210 310 Storage tales 1 1 1 1 1 lalrir Lorgh (1) (4) 166 60 Lanelltt Factor 1.00 100 1.00 0.91 1.00 100 091 _ Fri 0 850 0 E6i� Fit Protected 0.960 0.960 0.9w Catd Fhaw Ti t) 1719 1683 1770 4988 1653 1719 4940 R Permitted 0960 0.093 0166 $Ad Flow()xrmj 1719 1683 173 4988 16bs 2E0 4944 Rlghl Ttn on Red Yet Yes ,dAd Fww(RTgP.) 2101 97 Unk Speed (►mph) 26 45 Unk Plane (1) 3720 IF90 2398 Travel Time (s) 1016 28,15 366.3 Freak Hrxr Fan or 0 95 u 95 0 95 U 95 u 95 0 ;t5 0 95 H" VeNcles (94 6% 2% 2% 4% 4% 6% 6% Ail now (,rph) 239 1407 3 1188 97 1s2 2196 Shared Lame Traffic (%) Lane Oroop Flow (rph) 219 207 3 118$ 97 132 2146 Turn Type Prat Perm Perm Wk Perm Pm4$ NA ; koteded Phases 4 6 5 2 Permtted Phases 4 6 6 2 Detector Phase 4 4 E• 6 6 5 2 Solch Phase kluianurri hIt'i (s; 5 0 6 0 16 0 ISO 161) 6,0 16 0 strlmun S l (s) 467 46.7 297 29.7 29.7 11.41 23.6 Total Spits) 460 460 ?50 $60 860 200 1050 Total Spit {96) 30.0% 30.0% 66.7% 66,7% 56.7% 132% 70.0% Wixmun Breen (s) 394 39 4 78 2 78 2 782 132 912 Yellow Time (s) 3A 3.4 4.111 4.0 4.0 41 4,$..- - All -Red Time (s) 22 22 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 Lost Time AgAt 0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6 6 $ 6 6 8 68 68 6,8 6.8 L aaalla9 Log VA Lag lead y Lead .Lag 00mrze" Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehide Eterrmn (s) 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Pt�L 41 Maio rkme Nurw none l4xm None I'We Mri Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7A 7.0 Flash Cent walk () 330 11110 16.0 16,0 16.0 Pedestdan Calls (M11r) 0 0 0 O 0 Act Enct ween (sl 19 $ 19 $ 424 42.4 42.4 69A 59.4 Actuated cyC Pa110 021 021 0.46 OAS OAS 0.44 0.44 Vk pA k) 0 65 042 004 052 013 040 0.69 control C" 44.6 8.6 167 1186 3.6 10.6 12.1 Queue Delay 0,0 00 00 00 00 00 0.0 2028 13ackcirdund knraowd • AM Pk Fk Syrxtv011 Report Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 169 Page 375 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd 044012023 4- k' " t `► 1 larwtioup __ WBL WBR NBU NBl NBR SBL SBT Total Dewy 44.6 96 167 196 3 6 106 121 U?:i D A B B A B 8 Approach Daley 279 17A 12.0 Approach LOS C B B (Mue Length 60th It) 123 3 1 166 0 26 267 rntre 67 7 .b` 2r. 62 431 ktorral UAnk East at) 3640 1*10 2318 turn Bay Uvo'ith m) 125 176 210 3fi0 Ease Capacity IN") 710 128 146 4226 1330 3" 4646 £13rv3tl011 C� Rrckltln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spilback cap Re"tA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51or3le Cap Pedudn o u l 0 0 PecturedvkPatio 031 025 002 028 007 033 047 littersectiat Sumer Area Type ('11W4 Cr to Length 160 /1Cl sdW C)tb Llrlgth. 92 4 NalLeal Cycle 90 Cult T":Adultedkhoordnated Maximum Vk Ratio 0 69 ttenactlorl agrrel Delay: 16 5 Irttemection LOS: B Intersection Ca"Ity 11tlization 81 4% 1 0J Level of Serike D Malytils Period Qaln)16 is and Phases: 7: Manatee Pd &Thor Ryd 02 `r04 *05 106 202E BaNyo- xt -AN1 I'N H, Sync Na 11 RMW Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 170 Page 376 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPOD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 -Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd 04400)2023 4- `� 1n t `► Lane Configurations `j F a tti F 1 ttt Tra11a Wlums (4h) 20 19T 3 1129 for 126 20t6 FIA MP Vol.une (4h) 268 197 3 1129 107 1215 2086 Ideal Flow prphp() 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 tixa}i length (tl) 126 0 176 210 NO Storage Lades 1 1 1 1 1 Tapia Ler4hi 11) 60 166 60 I&*Utl Fador 1.00 too 1.00 0.91 1.00 1,00 091 I'd 0 860 0 860 F1 Prctetted 0.960 0.960 0.960 'Ad Fkiru (Trot) 1719 1683 1770 4988 1653 1719 4940 F1 Permded 0990 0087 0166 :Ad Nw o,.trn) 1719 1683 162 4988 1663 280 4940 Pip Turn on Red Yes Yes :Ad Fknv(R10F,) 201 113 Unk Speed (mph) 26 46 46 Urr, IN514Kd(it) ;s720 IS90 239.1 Travel TRne (s) 1016 21.6 36.3 Fe.M Hr.ds Faa or 0 96 u 96 09111 0 96 096 0 X� 096 H" wh ickw (44 6% 2% 2% 4% 4% 6% 6% 141) Flia+o 6ph) 282 207 3 1188 113 132 2196 Shared tare Tratk (°b) Lane Group Flow (tph) 282 207 3 1188 113 1:2 2196 Tun Type Prot Perm Perm NA Perm pm4o NA Proteded Phases 4 6 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 6 6 2 tech Phase 4 4 6 6 6 6 2 WWI Phase Mo nrnnlndi.9(s) 60 60 I60 160 16.0 60 160 Aerlinum Spill (s) 461 46.7 29.7 29.1 29.7 It.4 23b Total 440(s) 460 450 $50 850 860 200 1050 Total Sol (%) 30A% 309% 66.7% 56.7% 56.7% 13.3% 70A% Wxtnunn 13wen (s) 194 194 782 78 2 78 2 132 98 2 Yellow Time 0) 3.4 3A 4.4 4.4 4.4 44 4A AI -Red Time (s) 22 22 20 20 20 20 2.0 Lost time A1d)4s1(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total LoslTime(s) G6 66 68 68 68 6.8 6.e Leaetla9 Lag Lag Lag LOW Lead•Lag irp M1,97 'ies Yes Yes Yes Vehicle E dension (s) 3.0 3 0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 Fe,,alI kMxre Fkxv Nara Fbrxr (brie Nom WrK. Mn Walk Time (s) 7.0 TO 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flasti Cwt Wale C.) 330 310 160 160 16.0 PeftIdan Celt (Mr) 0 0 0 0 0 Act Endureen(s) 49 229 467 467 457 Ve7 6:7 Actuated 91C PWW 023 023 0,46 0A6 0.46 0.63 0.0 A; Ratio 071 040 0 04 062 0.16 041 070 Cortrol Delay 480 42 11.7 19.6 3.6 111 13.6 Queue cvoy 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 2028 BacV.1ound Irnprowd wPJ • AM Pk 14r Syrutxo 11 Report Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 171 Page 377 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd 04402023 W101010 A ttlt61. WBR NBU NOT NBR SBL 88T Total Delay 48.0 82 177 196 3 6 118 136 LOS D A B B A B B Approach Delay 312 142 13b Approach LOS C B B Queue Length 60tn fit) 167 3 1 178 0 211 287 Qtjekie W1511 :1,tn (1i) 332 67 7 286 31 70 482 Internal Link EMst 01) 3640 1t10 2310 turn Bay Length Ot) 125 176 210 3$0 Base Capaclty W) 721 M 130 4028 1276 382 4R6 ;1awbon Cap P* Mdn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5p11W1ck Cap PftxIn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,1orar. Cap PprAkIn 1i 0 0 Redr<ed Vk PAIL) 039 0 26 0.02 0 29 009 0 z 0.49 li tersecti n Srmmary Area Type Olhur Cycle LeVh 160 Actuated Cycle Length: 98 n Natural Cycle �40 Control Type Actuated- txoor"ed MaxNnurn vk Patio n 71 ttersecti n a" Delay.17.1 neiseclion LOB, B Intersection Capacity Ltiltzlion IQ 7% ICV Levan of Semite E klalysis Period Qaln)16 2028 Bacgwnd Improved w PJ • AM Pk Hr Synchro I Report Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 172 Page 378 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 -Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd ngptir1023 t n 1 �' `► 1 L "E T =4 Lane r;Orfl(jrualioos I r a Tratirt vblume CO) 10 224 1 2092 164 206 1706 FrA o Volume (y 1) M 221 1 2092 154 206 1705 Weal Flow (uFhpi) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 !Af.gar Li•nrftr (tt) 125 0 176 210 U0 Storage lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1•;txr lr-rvplr 0) 60 166 60 Ly*(Rd Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 096 1.00 1.00 096 I'll 0 850 0 860 FI Protected 0960 0.960 0960 ,,aid F1ocd (prd) 17s6 1638 1770 7438 1636 1770 1G)9 FI Permitted 0 960 0.131 0 048 Satd Flowgmrn) 1736 1638 244 34" 163R 0 d`49 P t Turn on Red Yes Yes Eatd Flow (RTOR) 231 04 Lmk Speed Qnph) 26 46 46 Uri, Distance (0) 3 72 0 13W 2393 Travel tine 0) 1016 24.6 36 3 Pe•k• H0r3 Facto 097 097 0 97 0.97 0 v7 0 97 o?i H" VeNdit (46) 4% 6% 2% 6% 6% N6 2% M) Row Mph) 173 236 1 2167 169 212 1768 Shared Lane Trafee (%) Lane Group Fbw pph) 173 236 1 2157 159 212 1768 Tum Type __ Prot Perm Perm W Perm pm41t NA Roteded Phaset 4 6 6 2 Permitted Pt t*_Ml , 4 6 6 2 IN Detedo Phase 4 4 6 6 6 5 2 Switch Phase IM Mnunutri hI.d (.} 60 61) 1160 160 161) 60 160 Mnknun Spll (s) 45.7 467 29.7 29.7 29.7 114 235 Total 5Fdi (S) 400 400 $3 0 83 0 810 270 1100 Total Spit (%) 26.7% 26 T% 663% 56 3% 56.3% 1110% 73.3% 113ximen (:n3en O 344 344 762 76 2 762 1.0.2 103 2 Yellow Time (s) 3A 1A 44 4.1 4.1 41 AA __ A1.R,ed litne• ) 22 22 20 2,0 20 2.0 2.0 Lost rime Aqust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 Total Loa Time (;) 6 6 66 6 8 6 8 6 6 6,8 64 Leadflay Lag lag Lag Lead Lead•L.xT (TA rmz�" Yes Yes Yes Yell Vehcle Edension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 P.etjI kMA1e to* Nave WK4 tow Nare None Mn Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Cwt W* (,) 330 33 0 160 ISO 16.0 Pedestdan Calla (MM 0 0 0 0 0 Act Endt3rme ) 183 183 766 765 766 loll iu1.1 Actuated VC Ratio 0.14 014 0ba 0.6a OSS 0177 0." vk R.)Iro 072 067 0,01 109 017 072 0 66 Control Delay 71.7 12.3 16.0 742 9.1 40.6 9.1 Queue Delay 00 0,0 00 00 00 00 00 2028 Background- PM Pk Fi Symtwo 11 RWd pop 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 173 Page 379 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd 04MV23 r 1,-- f, t `► 1 Wr6GM WBL WBR NOV NBT NBR SBL SBT To1ai Delay 717 123 160 742 91 48 0 ! 1 LOS E B B E A D A Approach Dolay 376 697 133 fkiptoadi LUa D E B queue Length 6Un �l) 146 3 0 -1116 36 122 316 Hmta? (i 221 W 3 1070 32 228 02 Irtemal Ur* NO Qt) 3640 11t10 =2 turn BaylerxAh M) 125 176 210 30 Ease Capacity W) 464 673 141 1496 919 326 2M %'jivilim Cap P.educin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spilback tap Re"M 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 fIorage Cr,P Pedwtn 0 0 0 0 0 it 0 Reduced v1t Rah o 039 041 001 109 017 0 i6 0 63 wrseclion Summary _ Area Type Other Cycle Lergh 160 ktueled Cycle Length.131.1t NaluralCycle 1&0 Corllyd Type Adualed•Uxoordtir#ed Maxinwin vh Pala 1 t13 litersection fx 9M Delay: 43 2 nemeo9en LOS, D IrderSeciron Ca"LAy ltrkzatlon N M, ICV Low d of Serrke F Analysis Period (min)16 Vokine exceeds capacty, queue is thmelkaly klir4e Queue shown 1s m"hurn attar imcydas, N 961h percenik, volume , - k+,ds cap acily, queue may be kxrger. Quaup shrmn is maximum 410rtwo icytfft, 2028 Backgraxd- PM Pk R Synctvo 11 Report Page 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 174 Page 380 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPUD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2- Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7; Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd 04/30/2023 Lam Cortlguratiom I F A ?f? F I ftf Tranlc Volume (ph) 16t 22$ 1 2W 164 206 17% FiAur0 Vttane (+h) 16? 22R 1 2042 154 206 1706 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 19M 1900 1900 IWO 1900 1900 1900 Sorage Letn}Ih 01) 11:5 0 176 210 380 Storage lanes 1 1 1 1 1 Taper Ler31h S) 60 166 60 lane Litt Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 091 1.00 100 0.91 Fd it 8f0 it °f0 Ft Proletled 0.959 0960 0960 Ud Fbw(ir<4j 1736 163s 1770 4840 1034 1770 60e:6 F1 Permitted 0.960 0123 0063 Said Flowgmm) 173(. 1fJ8 229 4440 163s ?') 60,01 NP Tun on Red Yes Yes Said Flow(RTOR) 231 92 IJr* Speed (mph) 26 45 46 tJr* (*A"e fit) 3720 too 2398 Travel Time (s) 1016 23.6 36.3 Fe,A Hour Fxitn 0 97 0 9T 097 0 97 0 97 0 97 0 97 Heavy VON clot (N 4% 6% 2% 6% 6% 2% 2% Frig F1(,w (q,h) 173 46 1 2157 15'3 212 1768 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lade croup Fbw(4)h) 17< 236 1 2157 165 212 1764 Turn Type Prot Perm Ptxm M Pam PM." NA Protected Phases 4 6 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 6 6 2 N10(tot Plose 4 4 6 6 6 5 2 WIch Phase Mnmtnn'rdlL4(s) 61) 50 160 150 160 6.0 150 Untnum Spit (a) 46,7 46.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 I t .$ 23.6 1 C-I'A Shlt (5) 400 400 S3 0 83 0 83 r) 27 0 1100 Total spit (°) 26.7% 26.71E 663% 563% 6639E 14.0% 13.39i lldxunum Oruol(5) 3d4 344 762 792 7f2 262 1032 Yellow Time (1) 3.4 34 4.1 4.1 44 4.1 4.4 All -Red Rme6) 22 22 20 2.0 20 20 20 LOU 1meA*N1 0) OV 0.0 0.0 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 Total Lost ilme (s) 6 4 6 r, Ci 69 6 8 6't 6 t LOWAag lag W tap lead bmd•Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Uension (s) 3.0 30 30 3.0 30 3.0 JA F'inall Moto W" None Norm Nme None NOW. Min Walh Time (s) 7.0 7.0 70 7,0 7.0 FW,hCont WA 330 330 160 ISO ISO Pedastdan Calls (Nix) 0 0 0 0 0 AI EBct Oreem (s) 18 1 181 678 678 678 928 920 Actuated 970 Ratio 0116 0.16 6j% 066 OBIS 0.76 0.71'< vk 14410 068 0% 001 080 0.18 0.67 046 COrttrol Delay 66.6 12.0 16.0 266 72 422 6b 4ueue NWY OA 00 00 0,0 00 0.0 00 20,18 Back9totrul lnpowd • PM Pk Fk S o., I I Page 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 175 Page 381 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 —Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd 00012023 < < n t 1 `- 1 ll1MGuy WBL WBR NBU NBT NQR SOL SBT TOM Delay 66.5 12.0 Mo 26.6 72 42 2 65 L0S E 8 8 C A D A Approach D240y 36.1 243 104 Ppproach LOS D C 8 Cuous Len" 60 Ql) 146 3 0 604 26 116 169 1.1WIP lxvlgth?6lh 01) 227 to 3 643 67 221 24$ kwai UM Drct �) 3640 1t10 2310 Aran RaylP.rKph m) 125 176 210 380 we Capacity (>rph) 497 606 146 3133 1009 366 4216 `aatv*on Cal) Reltxtn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Splback Cap Redxtn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap P.edcrtn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced A Rollo 036 039 001 069 016 060 042 ftif'IKUM Bummay _ Area Type 01W Cycle Len31h 150 Actuated Cycle Length 123 6 N tur al C)r le.120 WWI Tppe:Actuated- Lkxoordnaled Maxrnum uR Ubo 0 4rteraeUrm SlgrwtN4 q 194 kilenetbon LOS, 8 444SP wn CapawAy I.libUion 17 1% lal Levu d Serwre D Pnalym Penod (min)16 2028 Background knplo*d - PM Pk Hr SymNo 11 Report Ptrl-, Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 176 Page 382 of 708 Greenway Fritchey - GMPA/RPOD Application -Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 - Intersection Operational Analysis -July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Blvd 04/3012023 r 4- ., t `► l Lane Corllguations I r A ttt F I tilt Tralllc VbUne (0) 196 22$ 1 20$2 201 206 1706 RAW V041m0 (4)h) 196 22A 1 2092 201 206 1706 Ideal Flow MV) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 19001 Slora'}e Lettgih (it) 126 0 ITS 210 380 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 Tapet Length (t) 64 166 60 Lane Utl Factor 1,00 1.00 1.00 091 1.00 1.00 F4 0 860 0 $60 Ft PMec led 0360 0360 0960 Ud Flowg-roO 1736 IWS 1770 4040 1638 1770 60$6 Ft Permitted 0.960 0.123 0063 Said.Flow(petm) 1736 IW$ 229 4940 1638 99 6085 Rght Tun 0n Red Yet Yes Ud Flow(RTOR) 231 120 LJnk Speed (mph) 26 46 46 Unk (*stare (11) 3720 1890 2398 Travel Time (s) 1014 23.6 362 FeakHo(xF.Arx 097 0,97 0,97 097 0.97 097 097 Heavy Vehicles N 4% 6% 2% 6% 6% 2% 20A Mil now (Vph) 202 236 1 2157 207 212 1768 Shared Lane TrattK (S6) Laren OMW Fpw 236 1 2157 207 212 1768 Turn Type Prot Perm Perm NA Penn pm+pt �1�1�1tst1�1�■� NAik, F7ote(ted Phases 4 6 6 2 Permitted Phases 4 6 6 2 DOP(tor Phase 4 4 6 6 6 6 2 Switch Phase Mtrimumn'nlLai(s) 54 6.0 16A 160 150 60 150 Ai 1mum Sot(s) 467 467 29.7 29.7 29.7 11.3 234 NalS141(s) 400 400 830 830 831r 270 1100 Total Split (96) 26.7% 20 7% 663% 663% 653% 110% 73.3% klaxrnum Green (s) A 4 3144 7 02 N 2 X 2 262 1032 Yellow Ttee (s) 3A 34 4111 4.8 411 4.11 4.11 Al -Red Time 0) 22 _. 20 20 20 2.0 20 Lost ttmeA*Xt (1) 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 ao 0.0 0,0` Total Lost Time (s) 6 ti 66 6.9 6 8 69 62 F, t Leadlleg U9 Lead Umd•Lag (jAirn1z0 Iles lies Yes Iles Vlehtde Etensloll (s} 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 30 3,0 3.0 PL•(all MoJ.: Men Nom Nom tam Notes Nof* Min Walk Tine (s) 7.0 70 7.0 7.0 TO FlashDOMWalkO) 330 330 160 160 160 PedeSMan Calls low) 0 0 0 0 0 At Ellct Oreen (s) 20.4 204 6$ $ 6t 8 698 93.8 9311 Achratad g7C Rft 0.16 016 01i4 094 064 074 071" vk P.ilp 072 0 63 0,01 0 81 023 0.68 047 Control Delay 67.7 111 16.0 272 7.1 443 7A r�uru.? Geldy 00 0.0 00 00 00 0.0 00 ?028 Backgrotrxl trnlxoued w PJ • PM Pk It Syrdwo 11 Relx,rI Page I Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 177 Page 383 of 708 Greenway Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Lanes, Volumes, Timing--. 7: Manatee Rd & Collier Dlvd 041302023 f' 1 1, t /' �► 1 Group WBL WSP. NBU NB1 NBR SBL SB1 Total Delay 677 Ill 160 27 2 7 7 443 74 LOS E P B C A D A Ipprowh Delay 373 26.6 113 Approach LOS D C B 0Aue Lw4h6ft Qt) 174 3 0 62t 36 120 186 k;nreLP Lengln95trj (11) 262 79 4 676 87 227 273 Irterral Unk Dist #1) 3640 1111110 2311 Tum Bayl.enclh m) 125 176 210 3$0 ease capacity w) 4#2 6% 140 3040 M 346 4134 Sla 0lon Cap Reducin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0011back Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 gorage Cap Peduttn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 hefted vk Ratio 042 040 0.01 071 021 061 043 klersectlon Summary Area Type Other C)tleLergh 150 Actuated Cycle Lerch: Naltxal (')elp 126 Cortrol Type: AcivatedD&iMW'"°V- — -"- Maximum vk Ratio 0 E1 adersecti n 817W Delay. 20.7 , trsersectian LOS C kdws? kn Capacty Uiwzatlon7a 7% ICU t.evolO Sewke D Analysts Period "n)15 2026 Background Improved w PJ • PM Pk R Synchro 11 Report Pop 2 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PAS Page 178 Page 384 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 Appendix G: Fair -Share Mitigation for Operational Impacts Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 179 Page 385 of 708 Green way Fritchey — GMPA/RPUD Application —Traffic Impact Statement Section 2 — Intersection Operational Analysis —July 2024 The developer is responsible to pay appropriate fees required by the County's (toad Impact Fee Ordinance, as building permits are issued for the proposed project. Proposed internal roads, driveways, internal alleys, internal sidewalks/pathways, and interconnections to adjacent developments are site related improvements and are not subject to Impact fee credits. In addition, the developer is required to provide appropriate turn lanes at project entrances as required at the time of site development approval. These improvements are considered site related. If turn lane improvements require the use of County's Right -of -Way (ROW) or easements, compensating ROW along the development frontage may need to be provided without cost to Collier County because of such improvement, Operational Impacts of the development traffic are mitigated for those intersections failing to achieve acceptable performance characteristics. Consistent with the information illustrated in the adopted Collier County Traffic Impact Study guidelines, mitigation improvements are considered acceptable if capacity is added that restores or Improves the delay and v/c (volume/capacity) ratio to the levels provided in the base scenario. Base scenario is defined as the analysis of existing traffic plus background traffic for the estimated build- outyear 2028 on the E + C (existing plus committed) significantly impacted roadway network, Synchro 11 software was used to perform intersection level of Service (LOS) analysis at specific locations. Based on the intersection analyses results presented in the TIS Section 2, the following roadway improvements are necessary to address project related traffic impacts: US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive — add one southbound left -turn lane on US 41(450 feet). A proportionate share cost estimate was developed for each intersection that fails to achieve the minimurn acceptable operating conditions due to the proposed developments traffic, Tim fair share percentage is based on the traffic impacts In the AM and PM peak periods. For the subject impacted intersection, the project share of improvement cost is evaluated as a site related improvement (100% contribution by the developer). In the 2019 Collier County Road Impact Fee Study each new lane mile of road was estimated to cost 535 million in construction cost alone, Design and CEI can add anywhere from 20 to 22 percent, or $4,27 million per lane mile in total (using 22 percent). This equates to $809 per lane -foot. This fair share analysis uses $1,000 per lane -foot to reflect the economies of scale that are absent in small jobs but likely affected the published impact fee study estimates, and inflation since the 2019 figures were published. The estimated cost will also account for any ROW needs as applicable (corner clips). US 41 and Greenway Road/Sandpiper Drive Intersection - Turn lane Improvements — $450,000 . Signal/Intersection Modifications — $150,000 Project proportionate Share Cost — $600,000x 100.00A Y $600,000 Contribution requirements for operational transportation related Impacts total $600,000. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page 180 Page 386 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) BLACK BEAR TELEMETRY MAP Page 387 of 708 ll ■(ri ....I N J a --� W � L C a 04 O 0 W (� J l LU z r m z Qom W ` r . � o {n U'i 3 J z > 0�� �JJJ W Q tr LLZ IJJ 3 P �_w ' �• z Qow �' 0 z mLLa N N J 0 o r�� �. « G a «� w Ga Q CO w as ® o e �� d « U a Ne . z� Q, U H Z co W r\ W O P4 r c� i 2a W,! /1:02:4 a CZOZ/C/Z - O%W,£ZLOZO-dVW-NOIIVJ01-S3IJ3d S\S3tlODIA\S3 NOd538-ONINOZ-A1NO0D\£ZOZ\SI9\I91£N'IHIZ\IZOZ\:r OD 0 ti 0 co co N 0) LL GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) CONCEPTUAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Page 389 of 708 xvIa ixidvnia3 x� of 9ivm C3H� LRId 1CdMPIB�IfJ `" Egg •. pg� tp u 0 df )dN A3HJ.LNd - A AKFIRUm� uma p k a -iwin11n01NOv :3Sn ONvI w o 1v21n11noidov :DNINOZ am. m a �7)Ini _ J J I I \ �\ \ Y I ZJ7-J W Z7C) I I I I I I I W _—� I NQ� di OOZC) 1 �tc LJ ¢ ¢ J J (n :pp I I I I C) I. mX0 �U U \wWa Y 000 I I gz i 3 mf-o s?o Z O a w g dZ m0 am II III I II I I II I III � �� I I I I w w * Zc l0v- k II III IIIIIIII III Y¢ �, � I I i t I I I I I I I I I J UU�UUUUU I w V' x ¢wg o x o (n \ Z o E J J I \ W II \ OfWw o Z�1 I ' Z D p=) I Y 1 OUZO g I d E 6 0 �\ I I ao < H r) ( / _ UU I I I I I I I Wo �Z I I I I 07 I am nz II II II �I I I 1 I 5k m 0 I I i t I I M021 i am II II II I A9 I I I I I I g II II II I �ZZ U U ow w—o (0o Z QYQ Q W iii w ¢ J < O W p W,i Z J WOJ Q<wZ} OVOEF.� — --_—_-11 U0af Za-W Y w ¢ IL 5 LOU 0 > lvI1N301S321 1lIWv3 p w U w w Z Z a¢ w 310NIS :3Sn 4Nvl z=om -o¢Z— lvNnllnowov F-J¢ aoMo3 am¢ :9NINOZ g 00 O O O CY) co t� (6 d GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS TABLE Page 391 of 708 1-Auq-24 STORMWATER AREA 44 AC RESIDENTIAL AREAS 38.8 AC RECREATION AREAS 9.3 AC PRESERVE 13.6 AC LANDSCAPE AREAS 10.9 AC Total Site Area: Total Usable Open Space Required: Total Usable Open Space Provided: TOTAL USABLE OPEN SPACE SURPLUS 229.2 AC 114.6 AC 50% 116.6 AC 51 % 2 AC Page 392 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) WILDLIFE PREVENTION AND MITIGATION PLAN Page 393 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY WILDFIRE PREVENTION AND MITIGATION PLAN A. Project Structural Design and Materials 1. Roofs shall be constructed using Class A asphalt/fiberglass shingles, sheet metal, terra cotta tile, and concrete. 2. Soffits shall be made of non-combustible material or (minimum) t/2-inch nominal wood sheathing. 3. No window opening shall exceed 40 square feet. B. Location/Defensible Space A minimum 30 feet of "Defensible Area" shall be maintained around principal structures. The Defensible Area may include yards, green space, landscape buffers, sidewalks, driveways or roadways, and customary accessory uses and structures such as decks, lanais, and so forth. 2. Within this Defensible Area: i. Vegetation shall be thinned and maintained to eliminate vegetated or "ladder fuels" and tree crowns shall be a minimum of 10 feet apart. ii. Trees will be maintained to keep branches 6 to 10 feet from the ground. iii. Trees will be maintained at a maximum canopy spread of 20' at maturity, in order to prevent roof overhang. iv. The less -flammable trees and shrubs listed below shall be utilized within the defensible area. Other trees and shrubs not listed below may be utilized if approved by Collier County and the Florida Fire Service, Florida Forest Service, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Trees Ash Magnolia Sago/King Sage Palm Sweet Acacia Citrus Maple Pecan Silver Button Crape Myrtle Redbud Willow Tabebuia Dogwood Sycamore Pygmy Date Palm Gumbo -Limbo Jacaranda Viburnum Red Mulberry Red Bay Loquat Alexander Palm Winged Elm Green Button Oaks Sweet Gum Catalpa Mahogany Pindo Pahn Persimmon Satan Leaf Hawthorne Page 1 of 2 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\Wildfire Prevention and Mitigation Plan (7-31-2024).doex Page 394 of 708 Black Cherry Queen Palm Pigeon Plum Elm Sparkleberry Sea Grape Shrubs Agave Philodendron Century Plant Aloe Pittosporum Coontie Azalea Red Yucca Anise Viburnum Beauty Berry Indian Hawthorne Hydrangea Pyracantha Oakleaf Hydrangea Oleander Camellia v. Lava stone, gravel or other non-flammable materials shall be used in planting beds within 5 feet of a structure. 3. The managing entity shall be responsible to ensure these requirements are met. Page 2 of 2 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\Wildfire Prevention and Mitigation Plan (7-31-2024).docx Page 395 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) STAFF/APPLICANT RESPONSE LETTERS Page 396 of 708 INM HOLE MONTES ENGINEERS -PLANNERS •SURVEYORS 950 Encore Way • Naples, Florida 34110 • Phone 239.254.2000 - Fax: 239.254.2099 September 14, 2022 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay Growth Management Plan Amendment Application (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 Dear Ms. Mosca: The proposed GMPA will create the Greenway — Fritchey Residential Overlay to allow for up to 1,408 single family and multi -family residential dwelling units. There is a companion PUD rezoning. The subject property is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road and is comprised of 19 parcels that total 1227.09 acres in size. The site is within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. The land use designation is currently Agricultural/Rural, Receiving Lands. The property is zoned A - Agricultural, allowing for low density residential development and limited agricultural activities; and is within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use (RFMU) Overlay. In support of this application, we enclose the following: • One (1) copy of the cover letter (this is the cover letter); • One (1) fee check in the amount of $16,200; • One (1) copy of Pre -Application Meeting Notes; • One (1) copy of each Property Ownership Disclosure Form; • One (1) copy of each Affidavit of Authorization; • One (1) copy of the Growth Management Plan Amendment Application along with the following: o Exhibit "I.C" — Warranty Deeds o Exhibit "IV.B.1" — Proposed GMPA Amendment Language o Exhibit "IV.D.I" — Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay Map o Exhibit "V.A.1" — Location Map o Exhibit "V.A.2" — Aerial Overlay o Exhibit "V.A.3" — Zoning Map o Exhibit "V.B.1" — Future Land Use Map o Exhibit "V.C.1" — Environmental Data Report o Exhibit "V.D.1" — Narrative and Justification o Exhibit "V.E.1" — Public Facilities Report o Exhibit "V.E.2" — Public Service Facilities Map o Exhibit "V.E.3" — Traffic Impact Statement o Exhibit 11V.F.1" — Firm Data Map HA2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\MM 220914 Cover Letter.dom Naples • Fort Myers Page 397 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 September 14, 2022 Page 2 If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, HOLE MONTES, INC. /111 Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP President/CEO RJM/sek Enclosures as noted. cc: David E. Torres w/enclosures Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. w/enclosures HA2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\MM 220914 Cover Letter.docx Page 398 of 708 ON IHM HOLEMONTES a Bowman company March 24, 2024 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 Dear Ms. Mosca: We are in receipt of the County comment letter dated October 28, 2022, and offer the following responses: COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING REVIEW — MICHELE MOSCA Exhibit II, Disclosure of Interest Form 1) Label Exhibits as "Exhibit II.B for Habitat for Humanity" and Exhibit II.D for Greenway Fritchey, LLC; and 2) Provide the list of officers for Humanity. Response: Exhibits H B and ILD have been revised as requested. A list of officers for Habitat for Humanity of Collier County has been provided with this resubmittal. 2. Exhibit IV.B.1- Revise text to conform to the approved affordable housing commitment structure noted in the Housing staff s review below. Please note that an approved Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement will be required for this project, consistent with LDC Section 2.06.00. Response: Please note that the applicant seeks approval of the proposed Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay with specific density allowances for providing affordable housing. The applicant does not seek to utilize the provisions of LDC Sec. 2.06.00 to request a density bonus, and as such an Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement is neither necessary nor required. 3. Exhibit V.D.1 (1) Remove the reference to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and insert reference to the Future Land Use Element. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 399 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 2 Response: The reference to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan has been removed and the correct reference to the Future Land Use Element has been inserted. Please see the revised Exhibit V.D.1, Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information, included with this resubmittal. (2) Remove reference to the transmitted RFMUD amendments and provide justification for the GMPA if the project is unable to comply with the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District/Receiving Lands clustering provision, and LDC Section 2.06.00, "Affordable Housing Density Bonus," i.e., intermixed affordable housing (AH) units, AH units constructed the same as market units, and AH units constructed per the phasing schedule. Response: The reference to the transmitted RFMUD amendments has been removed. The narrative has been revised to provide further analysis and justifications. Please note that it is not the intent of this GMPA or accompanying petition to rezone pursuant to the provisions of LDC Sec. 2.06.00. Please see the revised Exhibit V.D.1, Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information, included with this resubmittal. We are meeting the intent of the clustering provisions via the development standards proposed in the PUD rezoning, and requesting deviations that will allow for an even greater clustering than what is required by the LDC. (3) Provide justification for the request to reduce the littoral planting area, i.e., provide cost savings figure and provide details about delivery of "higher quality" affordable housing units. Response: Exhibit VD.] has been revised to provide further justification discussing the benefits associated with the reduction in the littoral planting area requirements. (4) Remove referred to "SSGMPA" and insert "large-scale" GMPA. Response: References to "SSGMPA" have been removed. Please see the revised Exhibit V.D.1, Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information, included with this resubmittal. (5) Explain in detail how the proposed project "directs incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their habitats..." (refer to Obj. 7.1). 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254,2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 400 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 3 Response: The consistency analysis with Objective 7.1 has been revised to discuss how the preserve area has been located in such a way as to protect listed species and their habitats. Please see the revised Exhibit VD.1, Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information, included with this resubmittal. 4. Exhibit V.E.1 - Document how the proposed increase in residential density will affect fire and EMS services (refer to the Public Facilities section of the GMPA application). Response: Exhibit VE.1 has been revised to document how the proposed increase in residential density will affect fire and EMS services based on the Level of Service (LOS) standards established in the Collier County 2022 AUIR. Include the exhibit title (Exhibit V.G.4) on the Affidavit of Authorization. Response: The Affidavit of Authorization has been revised to include the exhibit title, Exhibit V. G.4. Application for GMPA — Revise W.A. to reflect that the requested amendment is to the Future Land Use Element, not the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Response: Section IV.A of the application has been revised as requested. HOUSING REVIEW 1. The affordable housing commitment should conform to the approved structure below. A. Two hundred eighty-two units will be rented to households whose incomes are up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. These units will be committed for a period of 30 years from the date of issuance of certificate of occupancy of the first unit. Income and rent limits may be adjusted annually based on combined income and rent limit table published by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation or as otherwise provided by Collier County; or B. Two hundred eighty-two units will be sold to households whose initial certified incomes are up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. These units will be committed for a period of 30 years from the date of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy and sold to households that qualify for the designated income thresholds. Households shall occupy the property as their primary residence as evidenced by maintenance of homestead exemption. Prior to sale of any of the 282 units, the owner and developer will record a restrictive covenant in the public records of Collier County identifying the affordable units and the income threshold pertaining to each unit. The covenant will state that each unit will be initially sold and subsequently sold to qualifying 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239,254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 401 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 4 households for a period of 30 years of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for each unit. It will also state that at least 30 days prior to the sale of any unit, the County's Community and Human Services Division will be notified in writing and provided documents for income verification and certification on forms acceptable to Collier County. The closing on the sale may occur after the County confirms that the household qualifies for the designated income thresholds. C. As part of the annual PUD monitoring report, the developer will include an annual report that provides the progress and monitoring of occupancy of the income restricted units. Of the income restricted units, including rent data for rented units, and homestead data for owner -occupied units, in a format approved by Collier County Community and Human Services Division. Developer agrees to annual on -site monitoring by the County. Response: The number of affordable housing units proposed has been adjusted to 260 units based on a reduction to the overall density proposed. The requested language with respect to owner occupied units has been included in the companion PUD rezoning application. COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW — HEIDI ASHTON-CICKO Both the Narrative and the application state that the property is within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan element. Please revise. Response: The narrative and application have been revised to remove the incorrect reference to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. 2. Property Owner Disclosure Form -Habitat for Humanity - please state it is a not -for -profit corporation. Response: Revised as requested. Exhibit IV.B.1 page 1: What Growth Management Plan Element are you amending? Please label the Element on the top of the page. Response: Exhibit IV.B.I has been revised to label the Future Land Use Element at the top of the page. 4. Please confirm that the provisional use for aquaculture has ceased? [PU 87-6C] Response: The provisional use for aquaculture has ceased. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 402 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 5 Please revise the proposed GMP text regarding affordable housing to use staff s standard language for rentals and staff s standard language for owner -occupied units. Response: The GMP text has been revised to conform to staffs standard language regarding owner -occupied affordable housing units. Please see the revised Exhibit IV.B.1, Proposed GMPA Amendment Language, included with this resubmittal. 6. As to the application: Please provide the list of Folio numbers for the property that is part of petition and one legal description. Response: A list of folio numbers and a legal description have been provided with this resubmittal. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING REVIEW — CRAIG BROWN Please provide information in the listed species data relating to black bear. Response: The Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) was delisted by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) in 2012 and is no longer considered a state threatened species. However, as requested, please see the attached exhibit depicting the publicly available FWCC black bear telemetry and the Project location. As noted in the figure, there is no black bear telemetry located on or within the immediate vicinity of the Project site. 2. Please provide an exhibit to show the proposed preserves location in relation to the vegetative communities indicated. Staff needs supporting information that the preservation selection criteria has been meet. LDC 3.05.07 A.6. Response: The Master Plan has been revised to provide one preserve area that meets the size requirements. The proposed preserve location was chosen in accordance with the selection criteria listed in Section 3.05.07A.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). In addition, the selected preserve location provides connectivity to similar off -site habitat. Please see the attached Native Vegetation Preservation Area map. Based on the hierarchy of native vegetation preservation as identified in Section 3.05.07A.4, the Project site does not support habitat with the characteristics identified in Section 3.05.07.A.4.a-e. Therefore, the preserve location was selected to abut off -site wetland habitat and provide connection to the limited amount of native habitat remaining within the vicinity of the Project. The habitat within the proposed preserve area contains high levels of exotic vegetation; 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Lettendocx Page 403 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 6 however, in most of the proposed preservation area, the coverage estimate of native vegetation meets or exceeds 25 percent cover when ground cover, sub -canopy, and canopy cover are considered. Therefore, the majority of the proposed preserved habitat contains 25 percent or more coverage by native plant species and was thereby classified as native vegetation. Habitat within the on -site preserve area that does not currently meet the Collier County definition of native vegetation will be enhanced through the installation of native plantings upon initiation of preserve enhancement activities. 3. An aggregated littoral planting area can be supported by ES staff, however, the request to reduce the littoral coverage from 30% to 10% cannot be supported by ES staff. Please provide supporting data to substantiate the request for the reduction. Response: Similar requests for a reduction in littoral planting have previously been approved. The littoral areas will be designed to create, enhance, or restore wading bird/waterfowl habitat and foraging areas. Additionally, they will be designed to maximize habitat value and minimize maintenance efforts. Two rows of native grasses will be planted around the perimeter of the proposed lakes. These native grasses planted around the perimeter of the lake(s) will trap sediment and absorb extra nutrients, thus providing water quality enhancement. There is an off -site preserve related to this project consisting of ±130 acres within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District designated Sending Lands (Parcel Number 00460120009 and 00459320001). The native vegetation on these parcels is greater than 50% of the native vegetation within the project boundaries and the off -site preserve is larger than 20% of the overall property. Parts of the off -site preserve will be enhanced/restored via the removal of exotics; revegetation and restoration where feasible. The off site preserve area meets the requirements found in LDC Sec. 3.05.07.F.3.g.ii, allowing for a 50% reduction in littoral coverage from 30% to 15%. Please see the revised Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information (Exhibit Y.D.1) for additional information. 4. Please provide supporting data and justification relating to why the preserve proposed is not in one location and connected. CCME 6.1.2 g.(2). 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com ( bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Lettendocx Page 404 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 7 Response: The Master Plan has been revised to provide one preserve area that meets the size requirements. Exhibit V D.1 has been revised to further discuss the quality of the vegetation on -site and the location of the revised, singular preserve area. PUBLIC UTILITIES - PUED REVIEW - DREW CODY 1. 10.19.2022 On "Exhibit V.E.1 ", the water and wastewater demands should be calculated with the follow formulas: (A) Potable Water Demand: #DU x 2.5 people/DU x 130 gpd/person = #### gpd (B) Peak Water Demand: Potable Water Demand gpd x 1.3 = #### gpd (C) Wastewater Demand: #DU x 2.5 people/DU x 90 gpd/person = #### gpd (D) Peak Wastewater Demand: Wastewater Demand gpd x 1.21 = #### gpd * The 1.21 factor is for the North Collier Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) is from the 2021 AUIR. Please note, this factor varies by wastewater facility. * Response: Revised as requested. Please see Exhibit V.E.1 for additional information. 2. 10.19.2022 Approval of this GMPA will be contingent on the resolution of the two following comments from the companion PUDZ: (1) Please provide transmission capacity modeling/calculations from the project location to the servicing wastewater reclamation facility (South Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility). (2) Please provide distribution capacity modeling/calculations from the nearest potable water treatment plant (South Regional Water Treatment Facility) to the project location. Response: After a meeting with Collier County Utility Planning staff, this comment will be withdrawn upon resubmittal. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING REVIEW — MICHAEL SAWYER The following is provided consistent with the companion PUDZ petition for this request: 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.doex Page 405 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 8 l . Page 5, of the TIS, Last Sentence — This sentence indicates that some of the percentages needed for the analysis were replaced by multiplying the ones west of Greenway Road by the ratio 75.4/69 and the ones east by 14.6/12.7. Please use the project trip percentages estimated by the revised District One Regional Planning Model (DIRPM) that was created by Traf-O-Data for this specific project for all roadway segments. Response: Distribution pattern is now based on the revised DIRPMprovided by Collier County. 2. Page 8, of the TIS, Table 2 (Project Traffic Distribution and PM Peak Hour impact) — The segment of US 41 from Collier Boulevard to Joseph Lane should be subdivided to account for the change in project traffic distribution that occurs at Manatee Road. The revised roadway segmentation should be US 41 from Collier Boulevard to Manatee Road and US 41 from Manatee Road to Joseph Lane. Response: Segmentation was revised. 3. Page 8, Table 2, of the TIS, (Project Traffic Distribution and PM Peak Hour impact) — The portion of Manatee Road from Collier Boulevard (CR 951) to US 41 needs to be included in the roadway segment analysis because the revised DIRPM indicates the average project trip distribution percentage for this roadway segment is approximately 13.2%. Similarly, the portion of Greenway Road from US 41 to Fritchey Road also needs to be included in the roadway segment analysis because the revised D1RPM indicates the project trip distribution percentage for this roadway segment is approximately 99.8%. This will require that p.m. peak hour peak direction service volumes be derived for these roadway segments. It is recommended that the Applicant provide the service volumes they would like to use for these roadway segments to Collier County (for their review and approval) prior to updating the roadway segment analysis. Response: The report was revised using 800 vph for Manatee Rd. and 900 vph for Greenway Rd. The report contains justifications for both. 4. Page 9, of the TIS, 1 st Paragraph and Table 3 (Future Background Traffic) — The future background traffic volumes for the portion of US 41 from Collier Boulevard to 6L Farm Road were derived using a 4.0% per year growth rate for the five-year period from 2021 to 2026 and a 2.0% per year growth rate for the one-year period from 2026 to 2027. A growth trend analysis conducted using the FDOT's Traffic Trends software and AADT volumes for the years 2015 through 2021 recorded at FDOT Count Station No. 030194 (US 41 southeast of CR 951 at Milepost No. 20.45) indicates a historic growth rate of approximately 6.4% per year. A similar growth trend analysis conducted for US 41 using peak hour peak direction volumes for the years 2015 through 2021 documented in the 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 406 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 9 County's 2021 AUIR database for US 41 from CR 951 to Joseph Lane indicates a historic growth rate of approximately 5.7% per year. Given the growth in land use that has occurred for the portion of US 41 southeast of CR 951 over the last five years, coupled with the construction that is currently ongoing and the future development that will likely be built in the next five years, the use of a 4.0% annual growth rate to derive the 2026 background traffic volumes and a 2.0% annual growth rate to derive the 2027 background traffic volumes is too low. We feel that a 5.5% annual growth rate should be used to derive 2027 background traffic volumes for the portion of US 41 from Collier Boulevard to 6L Farm Road. Response: A 4% maximum growth rate is utilized in the currently adopted AUIR — reference Appendix F or Attachment G (2022 A UIR Update Programmed Improvements and Deficiencies Report). As required by the TIS Guidelines and Collier County LDC, the proposed TIS is consistent with the A UIR determinations. 5. The derivation of the 2027 p.m. peak hour background traffic volume for the segment of Greenway Road between Fritchey Road and US 41 should take into account any/all approved future development that is scheduled for construction in the next five years that is located north of Fritchey Road and will have direct access to Greenway Road. Although the primary access to and from the Naples Reserve development is via Naples Reserve Boulevard, there is a secondary access to this development via Greenway Road. Google Earth indicates that this development is not yet complete, and construction is ongoing (including portions of this development that would likely use Greenway Road for entering/exiting). If the completion of this development is likely to occur within the next five years, then a portion of the peak hour trips associated with the remaining residential development should be assigned to Greenway Road. Response: The Naples Reserve Community is nearly built out and plans to use the Greenway Rd. access as a secondary emergency entrance, since using it daily would introduce traffic on some of the loaded residential streets that they do not have elsewhere in the community. As a result, it is our understanding that this section of the roadway will be used exclusively for emergency access and not daily commuting traffic. 6. Since US 41 is a state roadway, the maximum peals hour peak direction service volumes used for the US 41 roadway segment analysis needs to also include analysis accepted by FDOT District One (i.e., Kyle Purvis). Provide both County and FDOT accepted analysis for side -by -side comparison. Use the most conservative volume generation in the resulting analysis and TIS calculations. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmitta(\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 407 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 10 Response: Collier County establishes Levels of Service (LOS) standards to be used per the Collier County AUIR and the FDOT defers to the county established LOS Standards, which we rely on and believe is appropriate. Since US 41 is a state roadway, the extent of the roadway segment analysis (Collier County 2%/2%/3% criteria) that will need to be conducted on US 41 needs to also include analysis accepted by FDOT District One (i.e., Kyle Purvis). Provide both County and FDOT accepted analysis for side -by -side comparison. Use the most conservative volume generation in the resulting analysis and TIS calculations. Response: Collier County establishes Levels of Service (LOS) standards to be used per the Collier County A UIR and the FDOT defers to the county established LOS Standards, which we rely on and believe is appropriate. Page 10, 1st Paragraph — The text indicates the widening (four-laning) of US 41 from Greenway Road to 61 Farm Road is included in Period 2 (2026 — 2030) of the Collier MPO's 2045 Cost -Feasible Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). Since US 41 is a state roadway, please provide documentation that demonstrates the four-laning of this roadway segment (i.e., construction funding) is included in the FDOT's Five -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Five -Year State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). If construction funding for this roadway improvement is not included in the adopted TIP and STIP, the inclusion of this roadway improvement in the TIS roadway segment cannot be used in your analysis (see also Developer Commitment Comments below regarding this Issue). Response: Improvements programmed outside of the 5-year work program may be approved by County staff. TRI of the 2040 Cost Feasible Network indicates the subject segment to be fully funded in the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Reference Deviation 8: Transportation Planning Staff does not support this deviation. Standard requirement for single loaded roadways is to provide a 6' wide sidewalk. The location of this deviation is not shown on your master plan. The location of your proposed alley deviation is also not shown and not supported by staff. Response: Deviations are not submitted as part of a GMPA application. This comment will be addressed as part of the PUDZ review process. 10. Revise your Master Plan to provide potential interconnects from this development to surrounding parcels to the north and east. There are several locations where potential interconnections can be provided. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254,2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubtnittal\MM 240326 Response Lettendocx Page 408 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 11 Response: The Master Plan is not submitted as part of a GMPA application. Revisions to the Master Plan will be addressed as part of the PUDZ review process. 11. The documents indicate this is a Habitat for Humanity development. Indicate the number of residential units to be constructed by -for Habitat for Humanity. Response: Habitat for Humanity will be constructing a minimum of 260 residential units and will likely exceed this number. 12. Provide a Developer Commitment to improve the Fritchey roadway to County Standards along the southern perimeter of the proposed development. Also include with the commitment that the Fritchey will remain open to the public in perpetuity and shall be maintained by owner or assigns. This commitment needs to be completed at time of first Site Development Plan (SDP) or Plat. Response: Fritchey Road shall be developed consistent with the proposed Fritchey Road Section found in Exhibit C, Master Plan, along a portion of the southern perimeter of the RPUD up to the easternmost access to the development. Fritchey Road is currently a county -maintained roadway and will remain as such. A developer commitment has been added to Section 2, Transportation, Exhibit F, List of Developer Commitments, of the Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document. 13. Provide a Developer Commitment to pay Fair Share costs for the improvement of Greenway Road along the western perimeter of the proposed development to the intersection of US 41. This Fair Share payment shall be paid at time of first SDP or Plat. Response: The intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road and Greenway Road along the western perimeter of the development will be improved as site related improvements. No fair share payments are necessary. Additional improvements to Greenway Road beyond the above are not warranted, as Greenway Road has sufficient capacity as a two-lane roadway and will operate at an acceptable Level of Service at project buildout. 14. Provide a Developer Commitment to pay Fair Share costs for intersection improvements at Greenway Road and US 41 as determined by Collier County and FDOT. This Fair Share payment shall be paid at time of first SDP or Plat. Response: It is anticipated that fair share costs for intersection improvements at Greenway Road and US 41 will need to be addressed. We will schedule a meeting with transportation staff to discuss a Developer Contribution Agreement and methodology. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 409 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 12 15, Provide a Developer Commitment to pay Fair Share costs for the widening (four-laning) of US 41 from the intersection of Greenway Road to 6L Farm Road. This Fair Share payment shall be paid at time of first SDP or Plat. Response: It is anticipated that fair share costs for improvements to US 41 will need to be addressed. We will schedule a meeting with transportation staff to discuss a Developer Contribution Agreement and methodology. ENGINEERING STORMWATER REVIEW - RICHARD ORTH The following is provided consistent with the companion PUDZ petition for this request: Please provide a stormwater management plan that address how import flows to the property will be addressed. Response: Please see the submitted conceptual water management plan for the proposed project. The two tracts each have separate surface water management systems that will be permitted together. The environmental resource permit for the project is currently in progress with South Florida Water Management District. Through permitting, offsite flows and floodplain compensation are addressed. There are no offsite flows for the project to be considered. For floodplain compensation, the project will not store any less stormwater post -development than the project boundary provided pre -development for the 100 year, 3-day event. 2. Please modeling justification that the roadside drainage system has the conveyance capacity to manage the two outfall point source discharges without adverse impacts to adjacent or downstream properties. Response: The project is designed to comply with the maximum discharge rate specified by the latest county restrictive discharge ordinance (Ord. No. 2017-19). The specified discharge rate for the Henderson Creek — Belle Meade Basin south is 0.04 cfs/acre, which is the most restrictive discharge rate in Collier County. Both basins for the project will comply with this discharge rate. The post -development discharge will be significantly less than the pre -development runoff from the project site. The project will store stormwater within the wet detention lakes and the control structure for both basins will be designed to comply with the restrictive discharge rate. Please provide a stormwater management plan that explains the surface hydrology of the area and addresses off -site flows into or around the proposed development property. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 410 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 13 Response: Please see the submitted conceptual water management plan. The project does not have any offsite flows that need to be considered for the proposed project. This is best demonstrated through the work developed through the Collier County Watershed Improvement Project (CWIP). EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT REVIEW - DAN SUMMERS Review comments will be provided as soon as they become available. Response: Response: Per an email received from Dan Summers, Director, Bureau of Emergency Services, the following commitment was added to the Developer Commitments: 7. EMERGENCY SERVICES A. Prior to the issuance of the IOt' residential certificate of occupancy, the property owner shall provide a one-time developer's contribution of one (1) 45 KW (or higher) towable, diesel, rental -grade generator to Collier County specification to the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services. B. Prior to the issuance of the 4001h residential certificate of occupancy, the property owner shall provide a one-time developer's contribution of five hundred thirty- nine (539) general population cots and one hundred (100) special needs cots to the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services. C. Prior to the issuance of the 8001 residential certificate of occupancy, the property owner shall provide a one-time developer's contribution of five hundred (500) general population cots and eighty-two (82) special needs cots to the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services. Please see Exhibit F of the revised RPUD Document included with this resubmittal for additional information. GENERAL COMMENTS — MICHELE MOSCA 1. Please be advised that pursuant to the LDC, a petition can be considered closed if there has been no activity on the petition for a period of six (6) months. In addition, a GMP Amendment application that is a companion item can likewise be considered closed. That six months period will be calculated from the date of this letter. 2. Additional comments or stipulations may be forthcoming once a sufficient petition has been submitted for review. This correspondence should not be construed as a position of 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 411 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 14 support or non-support for any issues within the petition. Staff will analyze the petition and the recommendation will be contained in the staff report prepared for the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) or Hearing Examiner (HEX). 3. Please ensure that all members of your team that may testify before the HEX or CCPC and the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) are registered as lobbyists with the County pursuant to the regulations regarding that issue. 4. When addressing review comments, please provide a cover letter outlining your response to each comment. Include a response to all comments. 5. Please put revised dates on all exhibits and in the title block of all Plans. The PUD document should include a footer that reflects the project name, petition number, date and page X of Y for the entire document. Documents without this information will be rejected. 6. A partial resubmittal cannot be accepted; please do not resubmit until you can respond to ALL review comments. 7. Public hearings cannot be held until the Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) criteria has been met. In some petition types a NIM must be held while other petition types only require the agent to send a letter. All letters and newspaper ads must be pre -approved by the county planner. For additional information about the process please contact me. Please note that the NIM must be held at least 15 days prior to the first hearing. As you prepare for that meeting, please be aware of the following items: a) Please provide the required NIM notice affidavit and its attachments prior to the meeting (in compliance with the LDC); and b) Please post signs to direct attendees to the exact meeting location; and c) Please ensure that there is sound amplification equipment available and working for this meeting. If there is no permanent equipment, please bring a tested/working portable microphone; and d) You must provide a written synopsis of the meeting that includes a list of all questions and answers as well as providing the audio/video tape; and e) Please prepare documents for hand out to all NIM attendees and the public hearing file, that show the differences in the uses that would be allowed in the existing and proposed zoning districts. This request is based upon recent CCPC direction. 8. Pursuant to F.S. 125.022, exhibits and application materials are subject to review upon each resubmittal until deemed sufficient and complete. Should the project receive a third request for additional information, staff requests that the applicant provide written acknowledgement with the resubmittal to waive the regulation that restricts the County from requesting additional information. Projects that do not include such written acknowledgement and that fail to address any outstanding review items with the 4th submittal will be denied/recommended for denial. 9. Note the adopted fee schedule requires payment of additional fees for petition review upon the 5th and subsequent submittals; please contact the appropriate staff and resolve issues to avoid this fee. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.docx Page 412 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 15 10. If you would like to discuss the review comments, require clarification and/or wish to identify agree -to -disagree issues, a post -review meeting can be arranged including all rejecting reviewers. To schedule a post -review meeting, please contact me, and Zoning Operations staff will proceed with scheduling. Response: Acknowledged. Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Documents Hosting a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) is required for this application type. To resolve this condition, please upload all supporting NIM documents from meeting to the GMD Public Portal. Contact Planner of this project for additional questions. If you experience issues uploading, please contact Client Services at 239-252-1036. Response: Acknowledged. We enclose the following documents: • One (1) copy of the cover letter (this is the cover letter); • One (1) copy of Exhibits II.B and II.D - Property Ownership Disclosure Fonn (revised); • One (1) copy of the Growth Management Plan Amendment application (revised); • One (1) copy of List of Folio Numbers (new); • One (1) copy of Legal Description (new); • One (1) copy of Exhibit IV.B.1 - Proposed GMPA Amendment Language (revised); • One (1) copy of Exhibit V.D.1 - Narrative and Justification (revised); • One (1) copy of Exhibit V.E.1 - Public Facilities Report (revised); • One (1) copy of Exhibit V.E.3 - TIS — Section 1 (revised); • One (1) copy of Exhibit V.E.3 - TIS — Section 2 (revised); and • One (1) copy of Exhibit V.E.3 - TIS, Exhibit A (revised). • One (1) copy of Exhibit V.G.4 - Affidavits of Authorization (revised); • One (1) copy of Black Bear Species Location Map (new); and • One (1) copy of Conceptual Water Management Plan (new). 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Letter.doex Page 413 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 March 26, 2024 Page 16 If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, HOLE MONTES, a BOWMAN COMPANY Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Senior Vice President RJM/sek Enclosures as noted. cc: David Torres w/enclosures Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. w/enclosures 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 holemontes.com I bowman.com H:\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\MM 240326 Response Utter.doex Page 414 of 708 November 21, 2024 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 Dear Ms. Mosca: We are in receipt of the County comment letter dated May 3, 2024, and offer the following responses: COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING REVIEW — MICHELE MOSCA 1. The Wildfire Prevention and Mitigation Plan is required for FLUE consistency. The Plan must be submitted with the proposed GMPA and the commitments to implement the conclusions of the Plan are required to be included within the PUD. Response: A Wildfire Prevention and Mitigation Plan has been included with this resubmittal. The respective commitment has been included within the PUD document. 2. Emergency Preparedness: It is assumed that the donation of cots and generator listed in the Developer Commitment Section of the PUD address sheltering, as required in the RFMUD. However, the RFMUD provisions require an evaluation of the project's impacts on evacuation routes, and CCME Policy 12.1.2 states, "Land use plan amendments in the Category 1 hurricane vulnerability zone shall only be considered if such increases in densities provide appropriate mitigation to reduce the impact of hurricane evacuation times." Therefore, please provide a narrative, including necessary mitigation, if any, to address the project's impacts on hurricane evacuation times and routes. Response: Dan Summers has determined the necessary mitigation to be the donation of cots and a generator. Over the course of reviews for previous projects, Emergency Services staff has determined that the applicant does not need to develop a site -specific Emergency Preparedness Plan dealing with shelters or evacuation. Emergency Services evaluate the best method to determine a projects impact on evacuation routes, as Emergency Services utilizes evacuation tinting software, census data, and evacuation routes prepared by State/Regional Planning Councils and USCOE to determine the necessary course of action on a per storm basis. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmitlal\MM 241121 Response Letter.docx Page 415 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 2 Usable Open Space: Provide a table with the calculation breakdown for the various usable open space categories for FLUE consistency evaluation. The residential acreage must exclude areas occupied by buildings, driveways, and walkways (yards — please provide typical yard, for each category, with useable open space calculation). Response: The final calculation of usable open space is determined at SDP andlor plat. We disagree that walkways should be excluded from usable open space calculations based on the following definition from LDC Sec. 1.08.02: Open space, usable: Active or passive recreation areas such as parks, playgrounds, tennis courts, golf courses, beach frontage, waterways, lakes, lagoons, floodplains, nature trails and other similar open spaces. Usable open space areas shall also include those portions of areas set aside for preservation of native vegetation, required yards (setbacks) and landscaped areas, which are accessible to and usable by residents of an individual lot, the development, or the general public. Open water area beyond the perimeter of the site, street rights -of -way, driveways, off-street parking and loading areas, shall not be counted towards required Usable Open Space. A separate, usable open space calculations table has been provided with this resubmittal. The table demonstrates compliance with the FLUE RFMUD requirement to provide a minimum of 50% of usable open space. 4. Address project compliance with FLUE Policies 7.3 and 7.4. below. 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. There are internal interconnection opportunities within the subject project boundary and with adjacent properties, including bicycle and pedestrian access points. Include interconnection points to internal parcels and potential future interconnections to adjacent properties on the Master Plan (Exhibit C) and provide a commitment for these interconnections under the Transportation Section of Exhibit F. 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. There are opportunities to interconnect walkways within the subject project boundaries and with adjacent properties. Include interconnecting walkways to internal parcels within 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\—?022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\MM 241121 Response Letter.docx Page 416 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 3 the boundaries of the project and to external parcels. Walkways should be no less than 5 ft. wide on double -loaded roadways and no less than 6 ft. wide on single -loaded roadways. Response: We don't agree with the vehicular interconnection request. Note that the policies above encourage, but do not require, interconnection. We have revised the master plan to accommodate potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnection between the tracts, and to property to the north and east. 5. Explain in detail how the proposed project employs clustering, consistent with the clustering provisions of the RFMUD, Receiving Lands of the FLUE and implementing LDRs. Response: The Comprehensive Plan RFMUD clustering provisions are as follows: 3. Clustering: Where the transfer of development rights or provision for housing that is affordable is employed to increase residential density within Receiving Lands, such residential development shall be clustered in accordance with the following provisions: a) Consistent with the provisions of the Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Sub -elements of this Plan, central water and sewer shall be extended the project. Where County sewer or water services may not be available concurrent with development in Receiving Lands, interim private water and sewer facilities may be approved. b) The maximum lot size allowable for a single-family detached dwelling unit is one acre. c) The clustered development shall be located on the site so as to provide to the greatest degree practicable: protection for listed species habitat; preservation of the highest quality native vegetation; connectivity to adjacent natural reservations or preservation areas on adjacent developments; and, creation, maintenance or enhancement of wildlife corridors. Regarding a), central water and sewer is available to serve the project and has the capacity to do so. Extension of the utilities to serve the proposed units will be done at the cost of the developer. Regarding b), the PUD document limits the maximum lot size allowable for a single- family detached dwelling to one acre. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\MM 241121 Response Letter.docx Page 417 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 4 Regarding c), the project is proposing to 13.59 acres of the wetlands consisting of higher quality native vegetation. The subject property is mostly surrounded by development (farm fields, right-of-way, and single-family lots). The location of the preserve is adjacent to the only heavily vegetated area off -site, creating a larger area to act as listed species habitat and creating a corridor for wildlife to travel between the properties. 6. Data and Analysis: The narrative provided for the requested GMPA to increase residential density from 45 units (1 du/5 ac.) on the subject site (or 227 units with the acquisition of TDRs) to 1,299 units (with 260 AH units at up to 80% AMI) is incomplete. Generally referencing infrastructure improvements, cost sharing arrangements, the County's draft Consolidated Housing Plan, and RFMUD provisions for affordable housing do not meet the statutory guidance provided in FS 163.3177 (f), which requires an amendment to the GMP be based on appropriate data and analysis. Staff recognizes that the infonnation provided is useful; however, the data should be supplemented to provide greater detail. Additionally, justification for the proposed GMPA should include, but should not be limited to, addressing issues such as proximity to employment centers, goods and services, transit, demographic data, and the demand for additional housing in the area. Response: The GMP allows for density bonuses of up to 12 units per acre in the RFMUD. The GMPA requested density is consistent with the GMP. The narrative has been revised to provide the additional analysis requested above. 7. The project proposal includes a 20% set -aside (260 DUs of the requested 1,299 Dus) for affordable units for individuals earning up to 80% of the AMI. In recent Board approvals the set -aside for affordable housing units has been 30% of the total project units. Please set -aside 30% of the project units as affordable or explain why the project can't include the requested set -aside as a public benefit. Additionally, please submit a current Income Limits and Rent Limits Table. Response: We recognize that other projects have set -aside 30% for affordable housing units, but this is typically only a portion for households earning up to 80% of the Collier County AMI and consists of rental units within a multi family development. This project is unique in that the affordable housing units will be owner occupied, fee simple units and will provide a benefit through providing an affordable means of home ownership. The requested density is consistent with the density bonus for owner occupied units within the current LDC matrix. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\MM 241121 Response Letter.docx Page 418 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 5 Additional Overlay text revisions may be requested during the petition review process. Response: Acknowledged. COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW — HEIDI ASHTON-CICKO Rev. 1: Both the Narrative and the application state that the property is within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan element. Please revise. Rev. 2: Update — Please correct the Narrative. Response: A revised narrative without reference to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan has been included with this resubmittal. 2. Rev. 1: Please revise the proposed GMP text regarding affordable housing to use staff s standard language for rentals and staffs standard language for owner -occupied units. Rev. 2: Update — Still outstanding. Response: The proposed GMP text regarding affordable housing has been revised as follows: To achieve the 1,299 dwelling units, the PUD shall commit to the following. Affordable units. Of the dwelling units constructed, the following requirements will apply: Twenty percent (20%) of the total units will be sold to households whose incomes do not exceed eighty percent (80Yo) of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). As part of Collier County's annual monitoring for the PUD, the owner will provide to Collier County Community and Human Services Division (CHS) an annual report at least forty-five (45) days prior to the anniversary of the adoption of the PUD that provides the progress and monitoring of occupancy of income units. The annual report will be provided in a format approved by CHS. The owner further agrees to annual on - site monitoring by the County. 3. Rev. 2: Are the affordable housing units owner occupied numbers are not locked rentals and how many are owner occupied. rentals or owner occupied? If the rental vs. in, how will it be determined how many are How will it be monitored? Response: All the affordable housing units proposed are owner occupied. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022030\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\MM 241121 Response Letter.docx Page 419 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 6 4. Rev. 2: The GMP text lacks clarity 1299 Single family units are very different from 1299 multifamily units. Response: The exact breakdown is unknown currently, but as noted in the PUD, trips are limited to 861 PM Peak Hour Trips based on a potential scenario including 560 multi family units. 5. Rev. 2: GMP text: End of first paragraph: Please change the cite to 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b). Response: Revised as requested. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING REVIEW — MICHAEL SAWYER Additional Items that need to be addressed for Transportation Operations Review: Rev. 2: See all PUDZ-PL2022-2061 Review 2 comments and VAC-PL2024-1248 Review I comments and reflect as needed for this GMP request. The following is provided consistent with the companion PUDZ petition for this request: Page 5, of the TIS, Last Sentence — This sentence indicates that some of the percentages needed for the analysis were replaced by multiplying the ones west of Greenway Road by the ratio 75.4/69 and the ones east by 14.6/12.7. Please use the project trip percentages estimated by the revised District One Regional Planning Model (D 1 RPM) that was created by Traf-O-Data for this specific project for all roadway segments. Response: Distribution pattern is now based on the revised DIRPM provided by the County. 2. Page 8, of the TIS, Table 2 (Project Traffic Distribution and PM Peak Hour impact) — The segment of US 41 from Collier Boulevard to Joseph Lane should be subdivided to account for the change in project traffic distribution that occurs at Manatee Road. The revised roadway segmentation should be US 41 from Collier Boulevard to Manatee Road and US 41 from Manatee Road to Joseph Lane. Response: Segmentation was revised. 3. Page 8, Table 2, of the TIS, (Project Traffic Distribution and PM Peak Hour impact) — The portion of Manatee Road from Collier Boulevard (CR 951) to US 41 needs to be included in the roadway segment analysis because the revised DIRPM indicates the average project trip distribution percentage for this roadway segment is approximately 13.2%. Similarly, the portion of Greenway Road from US 41 to Fritchey Road also needs 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittat\MM 241121 Response Lettec.docx Page 420 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 7 to be included in the roadway segment analysis because the revised D1RPM indicates the project trip distribution percentage for this roadway segment is approximately 99.8%. This will require that p.m. peak hour peak direction service volumes be derived for these roadway segments. It is recommended that the Applicant provide the service volumes they would like to use for these roadway segments to Collier County (for their review and approval) prior to updating the roadway segment analysis. Response: The report was revised using 800 vph for Manatee Rd. and 900 vph for Greenway Rd. The report contains justifications for both. 4. Page 9, of the TIS, 1 st Paragraph and Table 3 (Future Background Traffic) — The future background traffic volumes for the portion of US 41 from Collier Boulevard to 6L Farm Road were derived using a 4.0% per year growth rate for the five-year period from 2021 to 2026 and a 2.0% per year growth rate for the one-year period from 2026 to 2027. A growth trend analysis conducted using the FDOT's Traffic Trends software and AADT volumes for the years 2015 through 2021 recorded at FDOT Count Station No. 030194 (US 41 southeast of CR 951 at Milepost No. 20.45) indicates a historic growth rate of approximately 6.4% per year. A similar growth trend analysis conducted for US 41 using peak hour peak direction volumes for the years 2015 through 2021 documented in the County's 2021 AUIR database for US 41 from CR 951 to Joseph Lane indicates a historic growth rate of approximately 5.7% per year. Given the growth in land use that has occurred for the portion of US 41 southeast of CR 951 over the last five years, coupled with the construction that is currently ongoing and the future development that will likely be built in the next five years, the use of a 4.0% annual growth rate to derive the 2026 background traffic volumes and a 2.0% annual growth rate to derive the 2027 background traffic volumes is too low. We feel that a 5.5% annual growth rate should be used to derive 2027 background traffic volumes for the portion of US 41 from Collier Boulevard to 6L Farm Road. Response: A 4% maximum growth rate is utilized in the currently adopted AUIR — reference Appendix F ort Attachment G (2022 AUIR Update Programmed Improvements and Deficiencies Report). As required by the TIS Guidelines and Collier County LDC, the proposed TIS is consistent with the AUIR determinations. 5. The derivation of the 2027 p.m. peak hour background traffic volume for the segment of Greenway Road between Fritchey Road and US 41 should take into account any/all approved future development that is scheduled for construction in the next five years that is located north of Fritchey Road and will have direct access to Greenway Road. Although the primary access to and from the Naples Reserve development is via Naples Reserve Boulevard, there is a secondary access to this development via Greenway Road. Google Earth indicates that this development is not yet complete, and construction is ongoing (including portions of this development that would likely use Greenway Road 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\MM 241 121 Response Lettendocx Page 421 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 8 for entering/exiting). If the completion of this development is likely to occur within the next five years, then a portion of the peals hour trips associated with the remaining residential development should be assigned to Greenway Road. Response: The Naples Reserve Community is nearly built out and plans top use the Greenway RD access as a secondary emergency entrance, since using it daily would introduce traffic on some of the loaded residential streets that they do not have elsewhere in the community. As a result, it is our understanding that this section of roadway will be used exclusively for emergency access and not daily community traffic. To be conservative, a 2 % annual growth rate is utilized for Greenway Road. 6. Since US 41 is a state roadway, the maximum peak hour peals direction service volumes used for the US 41 roadway segment analysis needs to also include analysis accepted by FDOT District One (i.e., Kyle Purvis). Provide both County and FDOT accepted analysis for side -by -side comparison. Use the most conservative volume generation in the resulting analysis and TIS calculations. Response: Collier County establishes Levels of Service (LOS) standards to be used per the Collier County AUIR and the FDOT defers to the county established LOS Standards, which we rely on and believe is appropriate. 7. Since US 41 is a state roadway, the extent of the roadway segment analysis (Collier County 2%/2%/3% criteria) that will need to be conducted on US 41 needs to also include analysis accepted by FDOT District One (i.e., Kyle Purvis). Provide both County and FDOT accepted analysis for side -by -side comparison. Use the most conservative volume generation in the resulting analysis and TIS calculations. Response: Collier County establishes Level of Service (LOS) standards to be used per the Collier County AUIR and the FDOT defers to the county established LOS Standards, which we rely on and believe is appropriate. 8. Page 10, 1 st Paragraph — The text indicates the widening (four-laning) of US 41 from Greenway Road to 6L Farm Road is included in Period 2 (2026 — 2030) of the Collier MPO's 2045 Cost -Feasible Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). Since US 41 is a state roadway, please provide documentation that demonstrates the four-laning of this roadway segment (i.e., construction funding) is included in the FDOT's Five -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Five -Year State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). If construction funding for this roadway improvement is not included in the adopted TIP and STIP, the inclusion of this roadway improvement in the TIS roadway segment cannot be used in your analysis (see also Developer Commitment Comments below regarding this Issue). 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\MM 241 121 Response Letter.dou Page 422 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 9 Response: Revised as requested. Reference Deviation 8: Transportation Planning Staff does not support this deviation. Standard requirement for single loaded roadways is to provide a 6' wide sidewalk. The location of this deviation is not shown on your master plan. The location of your proposed alley deviation is also not shown and not supported by staff. Response: Due to revisions to the requested deviations, Deviation 8 (referenced above) is now Deviation 6. The deviation request has now been limited to within Tract R2 which will include the affordable housing component of the project and only for alleys in the locations depicted on the Master Plan. 10. Revise your Master Plan to provide potential interconnects from this development to surrounding parcels to the north and east. There are several locations where potential interconnections can be provided. Response: A revised Master Plan has been included with the PUD resubmittal. 11. The documents indicate this is a Habitat for Humanity development. Indicate the number of residential units to be constructed by -for Habitat for Humanity. Response: Habitat for Humanity will be constructing a minimum of 260 units but could exceed 500 units based on final site plans. 12. Provide a Developer Commitment to improve the Fritchey roadway to County Standards along the southern perimeter of the proposed development. Also include with the commitment that the Fritchey will remain open to the public in perpetuity and shall be maintained by owner or assigns. This commitment needs to be completed at time of first Site Development Plan (SDP) or Plat. Response: This has been addressed as part of the PUD petition. 13. Provide a Developer Commitment to pay Fair Share costs for the improvement of Greenway Road along the western perimeter of the proposed development to the intersection of US 41. This Fair Share payment shall be paid at time of first SDP or Plat. Response: Greenway Road is not considered a failing road including the project and as such requires no fair share payment. 14. Provide a Developer Commitment to pay Fair Share costs for intersection improvements at Greenway Road and US 41 as determined by Collier County and FDOT. This Fair Share payment shall be paid at time of first SDP or Plat. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\MM 241121 Response Letter.docx Page 423 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 10 Response: Please see TIS Section 2. The Developer proposes the addition of a southbound left turn lane into Greenway Road as a project related cost. 15. Provide a Developer Commitment to pay Fair Share costs for the widening (four-laning) of US 41 from the intersection of Greenway Road to 6L Farm Road. This Fair Share payment shall be paid at time of first SDP or Plat. Response: US 41 is a state road whose improvement and required fair share shall be done if required and in accordance with Florida Statutes. GENERAL COMMENTS — MICHELE MOSCA 1. Please be advised that pursuant to the LDC, a petition can be considered closed if there has been no activity on the petition for a period of six (6) months. In addition, a GMP Amendment application that is a companion item can likewise be considered closed. That six months period will be calculated from the date of this letter. 2. Additional comments or stipulations may be forthcoming once a sufficient petition has been submitted for review. This correspondence should not be construed as a position of support or non-support for any issues within the petition. Staff will analyze the petition and the recommendation will be contained in the staff report prepared for the Collier County Planning Cominission (CCPC) or Hearing Examiner (HEX). 3. Please ensure that all members of your team that may testify before the HEX or CCPC and the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) are registered as lobbyists with the County pursuant to the regulations regarding that issue. 4. When addressing review comments, please provide a cover letter outlining your response to each comment. Include a response to all comments. 5. Please put revised dates on all exhibits and in the title block of all Plans. The PUD document should include a footer that reflects the project name, petition number, date and page X of Y for the entire document. Documents without this information will be rejected. 6. A partial resubmittal cannot be accepted; please do not resubmit until you can respond to ALL review comments. 7. Public hearings cannot be held until the Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) criteria has been met. In some petition types a NIM must be held while other petition types only require the agent to send a letter. All letters and newspaper ads must be pre - approved by the county planner. For additional information about the process please contact me. Please note that the NIM must be held at least 15 days prior to the first hearing. As you prepare for that meeting, please be aware of the following items: a) Please provide the required NIM notice affidavit and its attachments prior to the meeting (in compliance with the LDC); and b) Please post signs to direct attendees to the exact meeting location; and 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\MM 241121 Response Lettendocx Page 424 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 11 c) Please ensure that there is sound amplification equipment available and working for this meeting. If there is no permanent equipment, please bring a tested/working portable microphone; and d) You must provide a written synopsis of the meeting that includes a list of all questions and answers as well as providing the audio/video tape; and e) Please prepare documents for hand out to all NIM attendees and the public hearing file, that show the differences in the uses that would be allowed in the existing and proposed zoning districts. This request is based upon recent CCPC direction. 8. Pursuant to F.S. 125.022, exhibits and application materials are subject to review upon each resubmittal until deemed sufficient and complete. Should the project receive a third request for additional information, staff requests that the applicant provide written acknowledgement with the resubmittal to waive the regulation that restricts the County from requesting additional information. Projects that do not include such written acknowledgement and that fail to address any outstanding review items with the 4th submittal will be denied/recommended for denial. 9. Note the adopted fee schedule requires payment of additional fees for petition review upon the 5th and subsequent submittals; please contact the appropriate staff and resolve issues to avoid this fee. 10. If you would like to discuss the review comments, require clarification and/or wish to identify agree -to -disagree issues, a post -review meeting can be arranged including all rejecting reviewers. To schedule a post -review meeting, please contact me, and Zoning Operations staff will proceed with scheduling. Response: Acknowledged. Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Documents Hosting a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) is required for this application type. To resolve this condition, please upload all supporting NIM documents from meeting to the GMD Public Portal. Contact Planner of this project for additional questions. If you experience issues uploading, please contact Client Services at 239-252-1036. Response: Acknowledged. 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd ResubmittahMM 241121 Response Letter.docx Page 425 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 November 21, 2024 Page 12 We enclose the following documents: • One (1) copy of Cover Letter (this is the Cover Letter); • One (1) copy of Exhibit IV.B.1 - Proposed GMPA Amendment Language (revised); • One (1) copy of Exhibit V.D.1 - Narrative, Justification and Supplemental Information (revised); • One (1) copy of Open Space Calculations Table (new); • One (1) copy of Wildfire Prevention and Mitigation plan (new); • One (1) copy of Exhibit V.E.3 - Traffic Impact Statement (Section 1 - Road Segment Analysis) (revised); and • One (1) copy of Exhibit V.E.3 - Traffic Impact Statement (Section 2 - Intersection Operational Analysis) (revised). If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, BOWMAN Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Senior Vice President RJM/sek Enclosures as noted. cc: David Torres w/enclosures Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. w/enclosures 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\2nd Resubmittal\MM 241121 Response Letter.docx Page 426 of 708 I el'o'l ITA i i 17 • February 10, 2025 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) HM File No.: 2022.036 Dear Ms. Mosca: We are in receipt of the County comment letter dated January 14, 2025, and offer the following responses: COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING REVIEW — MICHELE MOSCA Rev. 3: FLUE Policies 7.3 and 7.4 —Applicant is not proposing vehicular inter -connections between residential developments, as requested by staff. Further, the applicant is proposing Deviation #6, which would allow a single sidewalk, five feet in width, on only one side of the street. The minimum LDC requirement provides that walkways should be no less than 5 ft. wide on double -loaded roadways and no less than 6 ft. wide on single -loaded roadways. Additionally, projects such as the Tree Farm PUD provide for a vehicular interconnection for the market rate and affordable housing tracts. [Informational comment] Response: Deviation #6 has been revised to require a single sidewalk, six feet in width, on one side of the street within Tract R2. There is no benefit to providing vehicular interconnection between the tracts, as both tracts have separate accesses to Fritchey Road (which ultimately connects to Greenway Road); and there will be separate amenities serving each tract. We provided for a potential pedestrian interconnection. It should be noted that the GMP does not require interconnection, only suggests/encourages. The potential interconnections shown further the intent of FLUE Policies 7.3 and 7.4. Rev. 3: Wildfire Prevention and Mitigation Plan — Revise 6.A.3. (pg. 20) to include requirement for double -paned glass or tempered glass. Response: 6.A.3 has been revised to include the requirement for double paned glass or tempered glass. Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\3rd Resubmittal\MM 250210 Response Letter.doex Page 427 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 February 10, 2025 Page 2 2. Rev. 3: Open Space requirement. The property appears to be divided into 2 separate and distinct residential tracts, except for the preserve acreage. Please provide the following: 1) Identify in the PUD the maximum number of units proposed on each of the two tracts. (PUDs, such as San Marino, The Haven, etc., identify the total maximum units for each tract within their respective PUDs) Response: Pursuant to discussion with Mike Bosi, Division Director — Planning & Zoning, on Tuesday, January 21, 2025, the PUD has not been revised to propose a maximum number of units per tract. 2) Provide open space at 70% for what appears to be the market rate tract and 50% for the AH/Habitat tract. (Note: The proposed development does not comply with certain requirements of LDC Section 2.06.00, e.g., the integration of AH units, so the project is not eligible to reduce open the space requirements. Staff can't support 50% open space overall but can support the reduction for the separate AH/Habitat tract. Response: Pursuant to discussion with Mike Bosi, Division Director — Planning & Zoning, on Tuesday, January 21, 2025, the 50% open space requirement applies to the entirety of the proposed PUD. Rev. 3: Please see the attached revisions to the proposed FLUE Overlay text and revise accordingly. Response: Most of the revisions provided were made, except for the proposed affordable housing density bonus text. The affordable housing density bonus text was revised to reflect the most recent version sent by Cormac Giblin and the CAO. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT REVIEW - DAN SUMMERS 1. Per Dan Summers, Division Director of Emergency Management, The Greenway PUD with the proposed 1,408 single-family residences will have the following impact on evacuation: 1) With 1408 Homes proposed at 2 occupants per home, the total residency for evacuation planning is: 2,816. 2) Our customary impact on evacuation shelters is 40%. 3) 40% of 2,816 generates 1,126 evacuees that typically need an evacuation shelter. Q:TL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\3rd Resubmittal\MM 250210 Response Letter.doex Page 428 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 February 10, 2025 Page 3 4) This evacuation impact may exceed the capacity of one evacuation shelter, which is generally capped at 600. 5) The EM Division is making an ask of the developer to provide (2) towable 45kw generators to support shelter operations. This will be a one-time developer contribution. Emergency Management will provide minimum specifications and a list of vendors for the developer's purchase consideration. 6) The first of two towable generators shall be due at the time of the first certificate of occupancy and the second generator shall be due at the 250th. certificate of occupancy. Response: The Emergency Services developer commitments have been revised to provide one towable generator at the time of the first certificate of occupancy and a second towable generator at the time of the 25011' certificate of occupancy. COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW — HEIDI ASHTON-CICKO Rev. 3: Please revise the proposed GMP text regarding affordable housing to use staff's standard language for rentals and staff's standard language for owner -occupied units. Update: The proposed text is insufficient. Response: The affordable housing density bonus text has been revised to reflect the most recent version sent by Cormac Giblin and the CAO. 2. Rev. 3: The GMP text lacks clarity, 1,299 Single family units are very different from 1,299 multifamily units. Update: The proposal lacks clarity. Response: Pursuant to discussion with Mike Bosi, Division Director — Planning & Zoning, on Tuesday, January 21, 2025, it is not necessary to identify a maximum of single- or multi family units as the proposed development will be subject to a trip cap which is the ultimate limit on the types of dwelling units that can be developed. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING REVIEW — MICHAEL SAWYER Stipulation 1 Stipulated Condition of Approval (1): The road capacity for Greenway Road remains a agree to disagree status. As discussed at the 1-6-2025 meeting this Greenway Road will be removed from the TIS. Greenway is not a tracked roadway in the AUIR, it is a dead-end road, and GMP required road impacts will start at US-4 1. This is a condition of Transportation Planning Approval. Response: Acknowledged. The TIS has been revised as requested. Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\3rd Resubmittal\MM 250210 Response Letter.docx Page 429 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 February 10, 2025 Page 4 Stipulation 2 Stipulated Condition of Approval (2): As discussed at the 1-6-2025 meeting a DCA will be prepared to address all outstanding impact related concerns. The DCA will be a companion item with this PUDZ and GMPA for the Board of County Commissioner hearing. This is a condition of Transportation Planning Approval. Response: Acknowledged. A draft of the DCA bullet points has been provided by our counsel, Rich Yovanovich, to the Transportation Planning Department. GENERAL COMMENTS — MICHELE MOSCA 1. Please be advised that pursuant to the LDC, a petition can be considered closed if there has been no activity on the petition for a period of six (6) months. In addition, a GMP Amendment application that is a companion item can likewise be considered closed. That six months period will be calculated from the date of this letter. 2. Additional comments or stipulations may be forthcoming once a sufficient petition has been submitted for review. This correspondence should not be construed as a position of support or non-support for any issues within the petition. Staff will analyze the petition and the recommendation will be contained in the staff report prepared for the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) or Hearing Examiner (HEX). 3. Please ensure that all members of your team that may testify before the HEX or CCPC and the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) are registered as lobbyists with the County pursuant to the regulations regarding that issue. 4. When addressing review comments, please provide a cover letter outlining your response to each comment. Include a response to all comments. 5. Please put revised dates on all exhibits and in the title block of all Plans. The PUD document should include a footer that reflects the project name, petition number, date and page X of Y for the entire document. Documents without this information will be rejected. 6. A partial resubmittal cannot be accepted; please do not resubmit until you can respond to ALL review comments. 7. Public hearings cannot be held until the Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) criteria has been met. In some petition types a NIM must be held while other petition types only require the agent to send a letter. All letters and newspaper ads must be pre -approved by the county planner. For additional information about the process please contact me. Please note that the NIM must be held at least 15 days prior to the first hearing. As you prepare for that meeting, please be aware of the following items: a) Please provide the required NIM notice affidavit and its attachments prior to the meeting (in compliance with the LDC); and b) Please post signs to direct attendees to the exact meeting location; and c) Please ensure that there is sound amplification equipment available and working for this meeting. If there is no permanent equipment, please bring a tested/working portable microphone; and Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\3rd Resubtnittal\MM 250210 Response Lettendocx Page 430 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 February 10, 2025 Page 5 d) You must provide a written synopsis of the meeting that includes a list of all questions and answers as well as providing the audio/video tape; and e) Please prepare documents for hand out to all NIM attendees and the public hearing file, that show the differences in the uses that would be allowed in the existing and proposed zoning districts. This request is based upon recent CCPC direction. Pursuant to F.S. 125.022, exhibits and application materials are subject to review upon each resubmittal until deemed sufficient and complete. Should the project receive a third request for additional information, staff requests that the applicant provide written acknowledgement with the resubmittal to waive the regulation that restricts the County from requesting additional information. Projects that do not include such written acknowledgement and that fail to address any outstanding review items with the 4th submittal will be denied/recommended for denial. Note the adopted fee schedule requires payment of additional fees for petition review upon the 5th and subsequent submittals; please contact the appropriate staff and resolve issues to avoid this fee. If you would like to discuss the review comments, require clarification and/or wish to identify agree -to -disagree issues, a post -review meeting can be arranged including all rejecting reviewers. To schedule a post -review meeting, please contact me, and Zoning Operations staff will proceed with scheduling. LIV 6 10. Response: Acknowledged. Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) and Required Documents A second Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) is required for this application because the petition activity has extended beyond one year from the date of the first NIM on December 5, 2022. Response: Acknowledged. We enclose the following: • One (1) copy of the Response Letter (this is the Response Letter); • One (1) copy of Proposed GMPA Amendment Language (revised); and • One (1) copy of Traffic Impact Statement —Section 1 Road Segment Analysis (revised). Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\3rd Resubmittal\MM 250210 Response Letter.doex Page 431 of 708 Michele Mosca AICP, Principal Planner Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 February 10, 2025 Page 6 If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, BOWMAN Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Senior Vice President RJM/sek Enclosures as noted. cc: David Torres w/enclosures Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. w/enclosures Taylor Whitcomb w/enclosures Norman Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, PE w/enclosures Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\3rd ResubmittahMM 2502I0 Response Lettecdoex Page 432 of 708 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) (PL-20220002063) NIM #1 DOCUMENTS Page 433 of 708 NIM SUMMARY Greenway Fritchey RPUD (PL-20220002061) Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay (PL-20220002063) Monday, December 5 at 5:30 p.m. Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, The Auditorium 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL 34113 The NIM was held for the above referenced petitions. The petitions are described as follows: Greenway Fritchey RPUD (PL20220002061) The property is zoned A — Agricultural. This is a request to rezone the property to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to allow for a mix of up to 1,408 single and multi -family dwelling units and the project, as submitted, includes up to 282 units (either rental or fee simple ownership) to be offered to households whose incomes are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County; and 2. Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay (PL-20220002063) The land use designation is currently Agricultural/Rural, Receiving Lands. This is a request for a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) to create the Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay to allow for a mix of up to 1,408 single and multi -family dwelling units and the project, as submitted, includes up to 282 units (either rental or fee simple ownership) to be offered to households whose incomes are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. Note: This is a summary of the NIM. An audio recording is also provided. Attendees On behalf of Applicants: David Torres, Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC (Applicant) Lisa Lefkow, Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. (Applicant) Mara Foley, Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. Taylor Whitcomb, FL Star Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., Coleman Yovanovich Koester, PA Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, President/CEO, Hole Montes, Inc. Norman Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, PE, Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Emilio Robau, PE, Robau and Associates Bethany Brosious, Passarella & Associates, Inc. County Staff: Raymond Bellows, Zoning Manager, Zoning Services James Sabo, AICP, Comprehensive Planning Manager Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Timothy Finn, Planner III, Zoning Services Seventeen members of the public attended. Pagel of 3 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\NIM\NIM SUmmary RJM 12-27-22.doex Page 434 of 708 Mr. Mulhere started the presentation by introducing himself, the property owner, the other consultants, and county staff. He explained the NIM process, the process for approval, and provided a brief history and overview of the project. The following comments/questions were raised by the members of the public in attendance: Traffic Concerns were raised regarding traffic and its effect on the surrounding roadway network. Mr. Torres explained that the applicant will likely be responsible for improvements to Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, however it is too early in the process to know the specific details. Mr. Trebilcock went on to discuss future improvements to US 41, specifically the signalization of the intersection of US 41 and Greenway Road. He also explained that the County has a set of rules to follow and provides the data to calculate traffic generation, and the developer will be responsible for paying impact fees that will go towards the cost of capital improvements. Densi Concerns were raised regarding the requested density. The property is designated Receiving Lands on the County Future Land Use map. Receiving lands are areas that have been designated as suitable for growth and development. The proposed density is ±6.2 dwelling units per acre, which is comparable to similar communities throughout Collier County. Additionally, the County, via the Affordable Housing Density Bonus, provides an opportunity request an increased density of up to 12 dwelling units per acre. Although the proposed density bonus in the RFMUD affordable housing is not yet approved, the site specific GMPA was submitted toa address this. Affordable Housing Units Questions were asked regarding the proposed affordable housing units. Of the 1,408 dwelling units proposed, 282 will be affordable to households making up to 80% of the Collier County AMI. This is a joint project with Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, who will be developing the affordable housing portion of the project using property they own within the project. Ms. Lefkow went on to explain that Habitat for Humanity will develop dwelling units that will be sold at the appraised value and are meant to provide an entry to home ownership. There is a competitive selection process for applicants, which includes interviews and comprehensive standards that must be met. Misc. Questions were asked about the notification for the NIM and public hearing process. As part of the rezoning application, the County provided the applicant with mailing labels to provide the necessary mailed notices. Additionally, the County requires a printed notification in the newspaper. Mr. Mulhere explained the process going forward: the applicant will take the public comments into consideration during the County review process. Once staff finds the application sufficient, public hearings will be scheduled before the CCPC, who will provide feedback based on public input and will make a recommendation if approval, approval with conditions, or denial; Page 2 of 3 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\NIM\NIM SUmmary RJM 12-27-22.docx Page 435 of 708 and the BCC who will ultimately approve or deny the project. The County is responsible for public hearing notifications. Questions were asked about the native species on the site, specifically the Florida Panther. Ms. Brosious explained that the entire area is designated as panther territory. During the permitting process, the developer will be required to work federal, state, and local agencies regarding wildlife species that may be present on site. The permitting process will require the collection of extensive environmental data. Questions were asked about the design and price and size range of the proposed market rate units. Mr. Torres explained that it is too early at this time to provide details, as the market is always changing, and the product will adjust accordingly. There could be a combination of market rate rentals and for -sale product. The price range for the for -sale project will be similar to housing found in the area, which can range in price from $500,000 to $800,000. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:45 PM. Page 3 of 3 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\NIM\NIM SUmmary RJM 12-27-22.docx Page 436 of 708 AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that pursuant to Ordinance 2004-41, of the Collier County Land Development. Code, I did cause the attached newspaper advertisement to appear and I did give notice by mail to the following property owners and/or condominium and civic associations whose members may be affected by the proposed land use changes of an application request for a rezoning, PUD amendment, or conditional use, at least.15 days prior to the scheduled Neighborhood Information Meeting. For the purposes of this requirement, the names and addresses of property owners shall be deemed those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the county to be notified The said notice contained the laymen's description of the site property of proposed change and the date, time, and place of a Neighborhood Information Meeting. Per the attached letters, property owner's list, and copy of newspaper advertisement which are hereby made a part of this Affidavit of Compliance; (Signature ,of Applicant) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing Affidavit of Compliance was acknowledged before me this ` ) to 2022 by means of ; physical presence or online notarization, by Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, President/CEO of Hole Montes, Inc., wh�m o .is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. .— Signature f Notary Public (Notary Seal) Awl Printed Name of Notary 1Y ►u''•. STEPHANIE KAAOL Notary Public • State of Florida Commlu{an M GG 965839 or r� ,.• My Comm, Expires Mar 4, 2024 bonded through National Notary Assn, Page 437 of 708 19M HOLE MONTES ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS 950 Encore Way • Naples, Florida 34110 • Phone 239.254.2000 • Fax: 239.254.2099 November 18, 2022 Re: Greenway Fritchey RPUD (PL-20220002061) & Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay (PL-20220002063) HM File No. 2022.036 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, President/CEO of Hole Montes, Inc., and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire, of Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A. have made two (2) formal companion applications to Collier County Growth Management: 1. Greenway Fritchey RPUD (PL20220002061) The property is zoned A — Agricultural. This is a request to rezone the property to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to allow for a mix of up to 1,408 single and multi -family dwelling units and the project, as submitted, includes up to 282 units (either rental or fee simple ownership) to be offered to households whose incomes are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County; and 2. Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay (PL-20220002063) The land use designation is currently Agricultural/Rural, Receiving Lands. This is a request for a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) to create the Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay to allow for a mix of up to 1,408 single and multi -family dwelling units and the project, as submitted, includes up to 282 units (either rental or fee simple ownership) to be offered to households whose incomes are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. The subject property is ±227.09 acres and located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, in Section 7, Township 51, Range 27, Collier County, Florida. 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 petition and ask questions. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Monday, December 5, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. at the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, The Auditorium, 300 Tower Road, Naples FL, 34113. Zoom is being provided as an option to those electing not to attend the meeting in person. However, if technical difficulties arise with Zoom, these technical difficulties will not be grounds to invalidate the meeting. If you would like to participate via Zoom or view a video of the meeting, please email us at Nei ghborhoodMeetingga,hmeng com and we will send a link of the video. You may also email any comments or questions to Neig_hborhoodMeeting_@hmeng.com. Please reference Greenway Fritchey RPUD & GMPA in subject line. Very truly yours, HOLE MONTES, INC. Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP President/CEO RJM/sek Naples • Fort Myers Page 438 of 708 fa a Fritchey Rd a� L Subject Site F ■ Location Map IHmGreenway - Fritchey Residential Overlay y Greenway Fritchey RPUD HOLEMONTES NNW IUJIO WIARCHITHIS I PLAIMIUMW Page 439 of 708 NUJItts 4:Dattil Nt'w 1 0 PARYOFTHE USA TODAY NE f W09K-'. Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 HOLE MONTES ASSOCIATES INC 950 ENCORE WAY #200 NAPLES, FL 34110 ATTN STEPHANIE KAROL 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. Afflant 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. 11118/2022 Subscribed and sworn to before on NOVEMBER 18TH, 2022 Notary, StaTe of W-0c f n My commission e PUBLICATION COST: $1,008.00 AD No: GC10975502 CUSTOMER NO: 530712 PO#: PUBLIC NOTICE AD SIZE: DISPLAY AD W/ MAP 3X10 NANCY HEYRMAN Notary Public State of Wisconsin Page 440 of 708 The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting held by Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, President/CEO of Hole Montes, Inc. and Richard Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, PA, on behalf of the applicants at the following time and location: December 5, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, The Auditorium 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL 34113 The following formal companion applications have been made to Collier County: 1. Greenway Fritchey RPUD (PL20220002061) The property is zoned A - Agricultural. This is a request to rezone the property to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to allow for a mix of up to 1,408 single and multi -family dwelling units and the project, as submitted, includes up to 282 units (either rental or fee simple ownership) to be offered to households whose incomes are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County; and 2. Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay (PL-20220002063) The land use designation is currently Agricultural/Rural, Receiving Lands. This is a request for a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) to create the Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay to allow for a mix of up to 1,408 single and multi -family dwelling units and the project, as submitted, includes up to 282 units (either rental or fee simple ownership) to be offered to households whose incomes are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. The subject property is ±227.09 acres and located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, in Section 7, Township 51, Range 27, Collier County, Florida, B Location Map a, Greenway - Fritchey Resldentlal Overlay RtlLEPdPNTES Greenway Fritchey RPUD Business and property owners, residents and visitors are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss the project with the applicants and Collier County staff. Zoom is being provided as an option to those electing not to attend the meeting in person. However, if technical difficulties arise with Zoom, these technical difficulties will not be grounds to invalidate the meeting. If you would like to participate via Zoom or view a video of the meeting, please email us at NeighborhoodMeeting@hmeng.com and we will send a link of the video. You may also email any comments or questions to NeighborhoodMeeting@hmeng.com. Please reference Greenway Fritchey RPUD & GMPA in subject line. Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, President/CEO Hole Montes, Inc., 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-254-2000, email: bobmulhere@hmeng.com Page 441 of 708 O N O O O N �1 � a O � N O 0 o o P4 N W � O z O F c N O t9 O ai d VI c � � L ,Q N U E a) t _ a .Y v ru 0 E 1 O c vj L v O OLn d 0 `o c c _ c o ' E o 0 0 cus v CL v02 aj @ L o m o +j 'v) v E m � 3 LA 0 N w +.. Y (o 3 c -O .otw , O U c O O .Y 3 -0 " al CL 3 a0 U v C 3 U -0 I 3 � 01 U 7 U N .' u N O C O EL E C. L" c o w L Y W 4- i- ' O c to 'm 4%-v t4 Q m O 3 c O U y of O c c a o 0 O c O '^ , 3 '~ -0 H O h O -0 L 41 U 3 N t u i (n : U N 4L fl 3 c L aj m O O m O O N O C 6 a L L N C 3 O V a �w N � a � �1 a W may. h CL �� y F4 M M U hl 1� �M N �qq Q � M o 0 � p FJ M C w, cW zlt'%. FS, C N p O 4@� U N _ � T (9 y L O m H U E DJ N L cu m o °1 3 a c c Ln t Y O o aai v E o E o o � � c c c o E o 0 0 �s a Ln ,° cu LL ,� y civ E +' °' 3 � o O �+ c _+�43U E3c� 0 O OA U c 1 p O Y 7 0 E U a o '� U u Ln3 ov -u N -r U p C O ai L L E a. c o m S L C C c bz c0 O ru L�:cu L w L M aj C TS U T O U f0 U i fl � of O C U O o c a +� U O p O *' h O O L O 3 v i N > � U L h U N . � CL fl 41 p UJ M O ® m O Ln � 'ai 41 E a, L L O •� � c v E O Fes— L U N W V Q N Aq J N a� r� tU Z � C� V N OD 0 ti 0 cM N ^(0 LL co 4E o L } µ u � N 41 �CUr L 3 E ti0.. s M is 0 au °c E 3 fl. O c Ln L Y o o v v E v E o L o � :3 c c c o 0 0 0 ms v;+= fl 41 -O > 4° o m o +� v E 4' � y i c � c°� 41 ccn p m T3�4 �obp U r N c O 'Y 3 'd E u O o 4- U T S 4� 3 U �1 y ai a tw 3 oon a U 3 U aJ 'N U N O N c O Q E E a c o L L d,a > tj :, UQ O r- O C GO Fa a r F 'anj N >' IJ v y t" ,, cu •a 3 O 3 C > O U u > �; 41 m Oc U O O o o O cOi O C y E! N U 6 L 41 N O U 0 T N U 3 a � ° 3 c o o m O v > uL L L y.. (9 N al C aj E 3 O OC U bp u L a W � Q N M � c� U N N L `V Z r' IE� S" 5 0) c (0 +L+ L u n C CU T �vr L O M N Cl c v 0 a, 3 Q. o c c vi L Y O o U a, m v u E vM"- `o .a E o c o E 0 0 0 ai s ai }_ CL -a L v a c 4 o m o :!� IL } In vE c cu 3 Ln 41 o o (n W O i fa 0 al E3 c o s w O E Y 7 W a) o 4- U a)C 'n v U N 3 4, bn U @ 2 U (v 4'U 41 O C .� O a Q- c e a' L 4- +a ba O .� C M O fa 'O M YL- UJ m >�';' bZ ns a c v ? U 3 O aJ 3 C O U (a ++ U L •N .Q C U O O O C d U O C o 41 '8 � O O L U N O U 4) > 7 U y 3 N CL 3 C a) m O ca O C H aj N > m U E a a) L a L w E O O V v � L a W a � � O� N c cc � v CU L a � 0 coo •ter 1 Z CZ ` d 01 OD 0 ti 0 m LL IUan oane a I 09 L8/0915® d Iq.iedwoo ww Lg x ww gZ fawJof ap at;an�l33 , 0918/09190 kuAV ql!m algltsdwoo „8/g Z x j azls lapel I ALCIME, MARIO i • ALVARADO, JAMEE S & ANTONIA I i ALVARDO, ELOINA 10316 MAJESTIC CIR I 2561 JAMES RD i 1741 22ND AVE NE NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3126 i i i NAPLES, FL 34120--- 5429 ANTOINE, JN DAVID I i ARCAS, DOHANNYS L & ALINA i i AUGUSTIN, JIMMY ELIZANNE ANTOINEJN CHARLES 1055.2 MAJESTIC CIR 10537 MAJESTIC CIR 10541 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 AZOR, FLORENCE BARKER, TRENT ANTHONY i BEAUPLAN, ELIPHEN , 10509 MAJESTIC CIR i 10501 MAJESTIC CIRCLE CHARITABLE BELIZAIRE NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i 10504 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 BRUNO JR, RALPH G i BUCHHEIT, DIANA LEE I CAMIL, BETTY BARBARA J BRUNO 10328 MAJESTIC CIRCLE i 10308 MAJESTIC CIR 10671 GREENWAY RD i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i i NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3131 NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3100 i i CASTANEDA, CARLOS R MONTANEZ CASTELLAN, JUAN CARLOS CAZARES, DANIEL 1 RAFAEL LOPEZ MONTANEZ i 10513 MAJESTIC CIRCLE i f ELMER A CASARES 209 PORTER ST i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i 10541 GREENWAY RD NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 0 i i i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 CESAR, DIEUSEUL & ISMELA i CHRIST, WILLIAM E & ROSEANNE R i CIBRIAN, NOHEMI DE JESUS 10545 MAJESTIC CIR i 1401 N COLLIER BLVD i 10505 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145 --- 0 i i i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 I CODIO, LUC �l � CORDEIRO, ASHLEY M i I DELISCA, MYRTIL 10549 MAJESTIC CIR I i 10548 MAJESTIC CIR i CHRISTINE DELISCA DUPUY NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i 10280 EMPEROR LANE i NAPLES, FL 34114---0 DIAZ, AGNIESKA MAYOL i DIAZ, ALEJANDRA i DIMAS, ADRIAN ASCENCIO 10517 MAJESTIC CIR i 10304 MAJESTIC CIRCLE I i OFELIATELLEZ BAUTISTA NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i 10533 MAJESTIC CIR ' NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 DORIA, REY & MARY i i DDRAN, HELIODORO & MARTA D i EPPARD, KARIN , PO BOX 8539 I i 6080 W 8TH AVE i RICHARD C DOMINICKS NAPLES, FL 34101 --- 8539 i HIAL.EAH, FL 33012--- 6536 10350 GREENWAY RD NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 (l FORTUNA, MAMSENA 1 i ( GALDAMEZ, ZONIA P JANDRES l ( GARCIA, SERGIO & DIANA 10276 EMPEROR LN i I 10560 MAJESTIC CIR i I 2700 SANDFIELD LN NAPLES, FL. 34114--- 3102 I i i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i �� fl ,I NAPLES, FL 34114 --0 label size 1" x 2 5/8" compatible with Avery 65160/81'60 Page 446 of 708 Etigpette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery ® 0160/8160 09t8/09150 AJaAV DOAe elgif> dwoo ww L9 x ww gZ tewlol ap 911anb113 09L8/0919® AnAV q}im algltedwoa „9/g Z x „t azis lapel GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 7742 ALICO RD i ; 7742 ALICO RD i l FORT MYERS, FL 33912 --- 0 i FORT MYERS, FL 33912 --- 0 (il li GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC i I GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 7742 ALICO RD 7742 ALICO RD l FORT MYERS, FL 33912 --- 0 FORT MYERS, FL 33912 --- 0 GUZMAN, JESUS G FIGUEROA i t l HABITAT FOR HUMANITY VALERIA E ZAMBRANO PACHECO i OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 10585 MAJESTIC CIR 11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 0 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY i HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC OF COLLIER COUNTY INC i 11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST i 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34113--- 7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY i l i HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC I i OF COLLIER COUNTY INC i 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E i 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113--- 7753 i NAPLES, FL 34113--- 7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E i 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113--- 7753 i NAPLES, FL 34113--- 7753 HARTNETT, MARTHA LEE i HERNANDEZ, ARTURO PINA i 14600 FRITCHEY RD i JUANA REYES BAUTISTA NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3130 10556 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 HERNANDEZ, ZYNNIA E (} HERRERA-RODRIGUEZ, MARIA C i 10508,MAJESTIC CIR Ii 10333 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 I i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 1ASMIN, BRASELYE i JOAN A BRYANT REV LIV TRUST JACQUELINE JASMIN I i 10381 GREENWAY RD 10588 MAJESTIC CIR i NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3103 NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 JOSEPH, MIREILLE LAITIL, GUERDA 10568 MAJESTIC CIR ! 10581 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 label size 1" x 2 5/8" compatible with Avery 05160/811160 Etigpette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery O�160/8160 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 7742 ALICO RD FORT MYERS, FL 33912 --- 0 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 7742 ALICO RD FORT MYERS, FL 33912 --- 0 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 0 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113--- 7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113--- 7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TR E NAPLES, FL 34113---0 HERNANDEZ, MIGUEL & LAURA 2471JAMES RD NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3126 HILL, ROSE M 10544 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 JONES, ANDREA 10493 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 LEMY, KATINA R 10631 GREENWAY RD NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3100 Page 447 of 708 09L8/09L ® AJaAV oaAe alq!}edwoo ww L9 x ww 9Z LewJof ap 9119n6g3 09 f 8/09 L9® AJaAV qj!m alq!Ledwoo „g/9 Z x „L az!s lapel I I LOPEZ, VICKY ROSANNA i j LOUIMA, MANESE 10296 MAJESTIC CIR i! 10553 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3129 i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 I I Ili �I'I, III III II I MARFER INVESTMENTS LLC j MARTINEZ, YARITA LOYOLA 16932 NE 19TH AVE I 10281 EMPEROR LN NORTH MIAMI BEAC, FL 33162--- 3110 i NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3105 MEDIA, FRED CASTILLO EVELIA LARA ALVAREZ 10512 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34.114 --- 0 MORALES, FRANCISCO & JULIA 7595 W 5TH CT HIALEAH, FI: 33014--- 4922_ MORALES, JULIANA 2541 JAMES RD NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3126 MORGAN, TONICIA DENISE 10284. EMPEROR LN NAPLES, FL 34114-•--3102 i NEPTUNE, TIMOTHY L & KAREN 10551 GREENWAY ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---3108 PADIN, ESLANDI & MERCEDES 2465 JAMES RD NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3126 PEARCE, ZOILA ALEJANDRA 10572 MAJESTIC CIRCLE NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 PERRIER, ROSE LAURE 10576 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 STAPLES t I I I �I I jl I i II I I MEJIAS, RAUL A SUAREZ LILEIDA PINERO 10496 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 j I I I I I I I I MORALES' GENARO & OPHELIA I I I 14830 FRITCHEY RD I NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3183 I I I I I I I (I I I ,I 1 I _ I I MORALES, NEIL I MAHARAI DACOSTA 14830 FRITCHEY RD NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 I I I I I I I I MYRTHIL, HENAL 10411 GREENWAY RD NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 I I I I I I I I I I I i OJISMA, EDAIN MIRLANDE SAGESSE 10329 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 I I I I I I I I I PADRON, DENIS 10584 MAJESTIC CIR j NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I' PERALTA, DELMIRA A VIDAL 10557 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114-""-0 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I PIERRE, RONALD CHARLES FREDLINE PIERRE SAINTIL 10312 MAJESTIC CIRCLE NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 I ii i) � I I I I , I I label size 1" x 2 5/8" compatible with Avery 05160/8160 Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery ®g160/8160 LOUIS, LUCRECE PIERRE 10337 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 MATOS, RICARDO GAMEZ MARIA E GAMEZ PELEGRIN 10521 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 METELUS, MICHELOT ISLANDE RENETTE METELUS 10580 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 MORALES, GENARO & OPHELIA . 14830 FRITCHEY RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3133 MORALES, PEDRO E 420 23RD ST NW NAPLES, FL 34120 --- 0 NAZIEN, QUEENIE WORTH 10577 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES; FL 34114 --- 0 OLVERA, MELINA 10277 EMPEROR LN NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3105 PALACIOS, ARACELI INDRA MULYANA 2425 JAMES RD NAPLES, FL. 34114--- 3126 PEREZ, DANIEL MARGARET DORGAN 2555 BECCA AVENUE NAPLES, FL 34112 --- 0 PING, MARIO B J CORP 6860 NW 75TH ST MEDLEY, FL 33166--- 2549 Page 448 of 708 0918/091 ® I�JaAV oane alq!ledwoo ww L9 x ww 9Z lewJof op allarib!13 09118/09 G5o AjoAV yl!m alq!ledwoo „8/c Z x „L az!s !agel PLANTIN, MAXO ) i PRICE, GARY W PRUDHOMME, EASLANDE ROSE M MANOLY 10571 GREENWAY RD 10569 MAJESTICC] R 10272 EMPEROR LN ! ! NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3108 : ! ! NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3102 i I ! REGAL ACRES HOMEOWNERS i I REGAL ACRES HOMEOWNERS REGAL'ACRES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC I i ; ASSOCIATION INC ASSOCIATION INC ' 11145 TAMIAMI'TRL E 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E I NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 0 i � lid NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 0 REGAL ACRES HOMEOWNERS i I REGAL ACRES HOMEOWNERS i REGAL ACRES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC ASSOCIATION INC I ! ASSOCIATION INC ! 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E i ! 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E i 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E ! NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34113--- 7753 i NAPLES, FL 34113--- 7753 I ! � RICO, MARTIN AVILA i ROBLES, IVAN A MEDINA i ROGNRUD, JAMEST ALICIA ANAYA DE AVILA ! DILMA BATISTA RODRIGUEZ i 180 TRINIDAD STREET 10324 MAJESTIC CIRCLE i 10561 MAJESTIC CIR i NAPLES, FL 34117 --- 0 NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 ! i ROJO, VIRGINIA LOPEZ DE ! ROLLE, JANET ! ' SANCHEZ, GEILIS 10529 MAJESTI CIR i 10292 MAJESTIC CIR i OROSNELVIS RASPADO MORENO NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3129 i 10285 EMPEROR LN ! ! t NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3105 SARDUY, JUAN E ! Il ! SENDEJAS, JAVIER & MARTA M i SEVA, JUDITH CARMEN E CABRERA i 10564 MAJESTIC CIR i 10497 MAJESTIC CIR 10565 MAJESTIC CIR i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 NAPLES, Fl. 34114 --- 0 ! SEVILA, WILLIAN OCHOA ! i SOLIS, FLORIBERTO I ST VIL, MIRLAINE YADIRA MEDINA PENA i MARTA ELENA DURAN PATINO 10573 MAJESTIC CIR 10500 MAJESTIC CIR i 10300 MAJESTIC CIR i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 STUTE,FRANK t ! ! SYNEGENTA SEEDS INC ! SYNGENTASEEDSINC 10651 GREENWAY RD i VEGETABLES —NAFTA i VEGETABLES NAFTA NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 i 3411 SILVERSIDE RD #i100 i 3411 SILVERSIDE RD #100 CONCORD PLAZA, SHIPLEY BLDG i CONCORD PLAZA, SHIPLEY BLDG WILMINGTON, DE 19810---0 i ! j! WILMINGTON, DE 19810 — 0 TGL ENTERPRISES INC ! TREVINO, RAUL VALLADARES, ARIAIS P C/O FARM OP i JESSICA GARCIA i 2521 JAMES RD 315 NEW MARKET RD E i 10525 MAJESTIC CIR NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 IMMOKALEE, FL 34142--- 3509 i NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 VIZCAYA, CECILIAAVILA i ( VIZCAYA, ERASMO AVILA l i WFA LAND CO INC 10273 EMPEROR LN l ! MIRTHA D ZAMARRIPA i , 315 NEW MARKET RD E NAPLES, FL 34114--- 3105 10589 MAJESTIC CIR i IMMOKALEE, FL 34142--- 3509 I NAPLES, FL 34114 --- 0 !I I label size 1" x 2 5/8" compatible with Avery 05160/81'60 tiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery O§160/8160 Page 449 of 708 09 [9/0916® AJany oane alglledwoo ww L9 x ww 9Z lewaol ap a119nb113 0919/09190 r(Jany q m alci edwoo „9/9 Z x „G azls label WFA LAND CO INC i WFA LAND CO INC i I 315 NEW MARKET RD E i 315 NEW MARKET RD E IMMOKALEE, FL 34142--- 3509 i IMMOKALEE, FL 34142--- 3509 it li± ii, East Naples Civic and Commerce, Inc. 8595 Collier Blvd, Suite 107-49 Naples FL 34114-3556 ISTAPCES � ICI - i . I Ji I� label size 1" x 2 5/8" compatible with Avery 05160/8100 blgpette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery ®g160/8160 s � WILLIAMCEAU, ELVITA 10320 MAJESTIC CIRCLE NAPLES, FL 34114--- 7753 Page 450 of 708 5/15/2025 Item # 9.13 ID# 2025-1330 PL20250000524 - Publication of Legal Notices for Neighborhood Information Meetings (LDCA) - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the Comprehensive Land Regulations for the Unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, to allow Legal Notice for Neighborhood Information Meetings by publication on the County Clerk's website or a printed newspaper, by providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments To The Land Development Code, more specifically amending the following: Chapter Ten — Application, Review, And Decision -Making Procedures, including Section 10.03.05 Required Methods Of Providing Public Notice; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; Section Six, Effective Date. [Angela Galiano, Planner II] ATTACHMENTS: 1. LDCA (04-17-2025) Page 451 of 708 ..,)Collier County LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT PETITION PL20250000524 ORIGIN Growth Management Community Department (GMCD) HEARING DATES Board TBD CCPC 05/15/2025 DSAC 04/02/2025 DSAC-LDR 03/18/2025 SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT To amend the Land Development Code (LDC) to allow applicants of land use petitions, which require a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), the option of advertising the NIM on the County Clerk website instead of in a newspaper or other qualifying printed publication. LDC amendments are reviewed by the Board of County Commissioners (Board), Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC), and the Land Development Review Subcommittee of the DSAC (DSAC-LDR). LDC SECTION TO BE AMENDED 10.03.05 Required Methods of Providing Public Notice ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS DSAC-LDR Approval with recommendations DSAC CCPC Approval TBD BACKGROUND In Florida, the requirement for legal notices and advertisements be provided in newspapers dates to the mid - nineteenth century. The Florida Constitution currently requires that all meetings of a collegial public body, at which official acts are to be taken or public business of such body is to be transacted or discussed, be open to the public and properly noticed. Historically, the method of advertising legal notices has been done using printed versions only. However, Florida law changed in 2012, when Section 50.0211 of the Florida Statutes was created, in part, to also require that legal notices be placed on a newspaper's website on the same day the notice appears in the printed edition, contingent upon a newspaper having and maintaining a website. In 2022, the Florida Statutes were further amended to allow governmental agencies the option of publishing legal notices on a publicly accessible website of a county instead of in a printed newspaper or on a newspaper's website. The publicly accessible website was defined by House of Florida Representatives Bill 7049 as "a county's official website or other private website designated by the county for the publication of legal notices and advertisements that is accessible via the Internet." A governmental agency may use the county's website if the cost of publishing advertisements on the website is less than the cost of publishing in the newspaper. The current cost of advertising an ordinance in the Naples Daily News is approximately $1,008.00, which is markedly higher than advertising on the County Clerk's website— approximately $50.00. Furthermore, some types of Land Development Code amendments (ordinances) require two separate public hearings, which means that two separate printed advertisements are often done. Because the cost of advertising on the County's website is significantly less than the cost of advertising in the newspaper, GMCD staff has begun to systematically advertise ordinances on the County Clerk's website instead of in the newspaper —as a means of reducing the burden to the taxpayers. In 2023, the Board desired to amend the Code of Laws and Ordinances to allow advertisements, publications, and notices to be published on a publicly accessible website, as allowed by Chapter 50 of the Florida Statutes. The Board adopted Ordinance 2023-37, which defined "Publicly accessible website" as "the county's official website or other private website designated by the county for the publication of legal notices and advertisements that is accessible via the Internet." The adopted ordinance also included supporting provisions related to the publication of legal advertisements and public notices. On January 10, 2023, the Board designated the Clerk of the Circuit G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 452 of 708 ..,)Collier County Court's public notice website as the County's official website for the publication of legal advertisements and public notices. In Collier County, there are many types of land use applications that require public hearings, and many of these require the petitioner to conduct a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM). The NIM requirement was first established in Collier County in 2001, and the purpose and intent of a NIM is to provide the public with notice of an impending zoning application and to foster communication between the petitioner and the public. The petitioner is required to conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the first public hearing. Each time a petitioner conducts a qualifying NIM, they are compelled to publicly notice it by advertising in a newspaper. However, because the County requires the petitioner to conduct a NIM as part of its application process, staff feels it is a reasonable courtesy to allow the petitioner the option of advertising the NIM on the County's website in lieu of advertising in the newspaper, similar to the method used by the County when advertising proposed ordinances, both County -initiated and privately initiated. Advertising on the County's website for an upcoming NIM may provide petitioners a cost savings and added convenience. The County's NIM process and its required advertising are not addressed by the Florida Statutes, and if the Board decides to extend this courtesy to the petitioners, it will be necessary to amend the LDC. DSAC-LDR Subcommittee Recommendation: On March 18, 2025, the DSAC-LDR Subcommittee recommended approval of the LDC amendment, contingent upon 1) removing "on the website" from the proposed administrative code amendment as it relates to when the public notice is first published; and 2) staff verifying that the cited Florida Statutes are correct. DSAC Recommendation: On April 2, 2025, the DSAC recommended approval of the LDC amendment including the changes presented by staff. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS GMP CONSISTENCY There will be no additional fiscal impacts to The proposed LDC amendment has been reviewed by County. To advertise a NIM on the County's Comprehensive Planning staff and may be deemed website, the County Clerk will accept a fee from consistent with the GMP. the petitioner commensurate with the service EXHIBITS: A) Changes to Adminstrative Code; B) County Clerk website; C) F.S. Chapter 50 — Legal and Official Advertisements 2 G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 453 of 708 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is G61rr9At text to be deleted Amend the LDC as follows: 10.03.05 — Required Methods of Providing Public Notice This section shall establish the required methods of providing public notice. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code shall establish the public notice procedures for land use petitions. A. Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM). Neighborhood Information Meetings, when required, shall be held prior to the first public hearing, noticed as follows, and subject to the Rules of Decorum: Mailed Notice shall be sent prior to the NIM and shall be pursuant to LDC section 10.03.05 B. 2. Publication of Legal Advertisement prior to the NIM. Advertisements for NIMs may be published on the official website of Collier County or in a newspaper in the manner described in F.S. section 50.011. 3. Rules of Decorum. The purpose and intent of a NIM is to provide the public with notice of an impending land use petition and to foster communication between the petitioner and the public. To promote increased participation and convenience to the interested members of the public, all NIMs shall be conducted at a physical location, to allow for in -person attendance, and virtually, utilizing videoconferencing technology. The expectation is that all NIM attendees will conduct themselves in such a manner that their presence will not interfere with the orderly progress of the meeting. The petitioner is encouraged to provide a licensed and qualified security detail for in -person meetings, which will be at the petitioner's expense. If the petitioner or staff determines the NIM cannot be completed due to the disorderly conduct of the members of the public, the petitioner shall have the right to adjourn the NIM but be required to conduct another duly advertised NIM, either in person or via videoconferencing technology, or both, at the petitioner's discretion. B. Mailed Notice. Where required, Mailed Notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area as follows: a. For areas in the urban designated area of the future land use element of the Growth Management Plan notices shall be sent to all property owners within 500 feet of the property lines of the subject property. b. For all other areas, except areas designated in the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub -Element or Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub -Elements of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, notices shall be sent to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the property lines of the subject property. C. For areas designated within the Rural and Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub -Elements of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, notices shall be sent to all property owners within one mile of the subject property lines, except 3 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 454 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is GUrr9At text to be deleted for Estates (E) zoned variance applications, which shall be 1,000 feet of the subject property lines. d. Notices shall also be sent to property owners and condominium and civic associations whose members may be impacted by the proposed land use changes and who have formally requested the county to be notified. A list of such organizations must be provided and maintained by the County, but the applicant must bear the responsibility of ensuring that all parties are notified. 2. 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. Unless required by F.S. § 125.66(4), the mailed notice is a courtesy only and is not jurisdictional. Accordingly, provided a good faith attempt for mailed notice is made, failure to mail or to timely mail the notice or failure of an affected property owner to receive mailed notice will not constitute a defect in notice or bar the public hearing as scheduled. C. Lice al Advertisement. 1. 15 days prior to the public hearing in +a accordance with F.S. § 125.66. D. Posting of Signage. Where required, signs shall be posted 15 days prior to the first advertised public hearing pursuant to the Administrative Code. E. Agent Letter. Where required, an informational letter shall be sent by the owner or Agent to property owners within 150 feet of the area covered by the petition following the initial staff review comments for the petition and prior to the resubmittal of the petition to the County. # # # # # # # # # # # # # 2 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 455 of 708 Exhibit A — Changes to Administrative Code Collier County Land Development Code I Administrative Procedures Manual Chapter S/ Public Notice B. Neighborhood Information Meeting Purpose and Intent The purpose and intent of a Neighborhood Information Meeting ("NIM") is to provide the public with notice of an impending zoning application and to foster communication between the petitioner and the public. Applicability 1. A NIM shall be conducted when: a. The initial staff review and comment period on the application have been completed; and b. At least 15 days before the first public hearing is held, whether it is the Planning Commission, Hearing Examiner, the BCC, or the BZA. 2. In addition to the above, the following shall also apply for small-scale amendments and other site -specific comprehensive plan amendments: a. The NIM is required before the Planning Commission transmittal hearing. b. A second NIM is required if the County Manager or designee determines that a substantial change has occurred to a proposed site - specific comprehensive plan amendment following the BCC's transmittal hearing. The applicant must hold the second NIM before the Planning Commission adoption hearing. 3. If the applicant's petition activity extends beyond 1 year from the date of the first NIM, a second NIM will be required and shall be noticed in accordance with this chapter. Notice The NIM shall be noticed as follows: Requirements 1. Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in notification area at least 15 days before the NIM meeting. a. The applicant shall also provide written notice of the NIM to property owners, condominium, and civic associations whose members may be affected by the proposed land use change and who have formally requested the County to be notified. Each mailed notice shall contain the following: "The purpose and intent of this Neighborhood Information Meeting is to provide the public with notice of an impending zoning application and to foster communication between the applicant and the public. The expectation is that all attendees will conduct themselves in such a manner that their presence will not interfere with the orderly progress of the meeting." 5 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 456 of 708 Exhibit A — Changes to Administrative Code 2. Legal Advertisement: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the NIM meeting. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: a. Date, time, and location of the NIM meeting; b. Petition name, number and applicant contact info; c. Purpose of the NIM meeting; d. Description of the proposed land uses; and e. 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. f. Date on which the advertisement or public notice was first published. Location The applicant must arrange the location of the meeting. To promote increased participation and convenience to the interested members of the public, all NIMs shall be conducted at a physical location, to allow for in -person attendance, and virtually, utilizing videoconferencing technology. The in -person location must be reasonably convenient to the property owners who receive the required notice. The facilities must be of sufficient size to accommodate the expected attendance. Conduct of 1. Conduct of Meeting: ACollier County staff planner ordesigneeshall attend the NIM Meeting and and record all commitments made by the applicant during the meeting while Decorum remaining neutral and providing clarification regarding the next steps the petition must follow in the review process, including the anticipated future public hearings that are associated with the petition. The applicant shall make a presentation of how they intend to develop the subject property. The applicant is required to record the NIM proceedings and provide an audible audio/video copy to the Zoning Division, including a written summary. When video conferencing is used, it must have the capability to capture the written comments from the attendees. These written comments will be included in the written summary of the NIM. The applicant must provide the following at the NIM for review and comment, including but not limited to: a. The proposed uses and density/intensity of the project; b. The proposed Master Plan, when applicable; and C. The current LDC zoning district uses and development regulations. 2. Decorum: The expectation is that all NIM attendees will conduct themselves in such manner that their presence will not interfere with the orderly progress of the meeting. For in -person meetings, the applicant is encouraged to provide a licensed and qualified security detail, which will be at the applicant's expense. If the applicant or staff planner determines the NIM cannot be completed due to the disorderly conduct of the members of the public, the applicant shall have the right to adjourn the NIM but be required to conduct another duly advertised NIM, either in -person or via videoconferencing technology, or both, at the applicant's discretion. 6 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 457 of 708 Exhibit A — Changes to Administrative Code Meeting Follow -Up 1. After a NIM is completed, the applicant will submit a written summary of the NIM and any commitments that have been made to the assigned planner. These commitments will: a. Become part of the record of the proceedings; b. Be included in the staff report for any subsequent review and approval bodies; and c. Be considered for inclusion in the conditions of approval of any applicable development order. 2. The County staff planner or designee shall promptly postthe written summary and audio/video recording of the NIM to the County's website for public inspection. Updated Resolution 2023-211 D. Legal Advertisement Applicability For applicable land use petitions, the legal advertisement shall be as follows. A copy of the legal advertisement shall be kept available for public inspection during regular business hours of the Office of Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners. The notice of proposed enactment shall include where the proposed ordinance or resolution may be inspected by the public. The notice shall also advise that interested parties may appear at the meeting and be heard with respect to the proposed ordinance or resolution. Placement and The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before each advertised public Content hearing or on the official website of Collier County, as prescribed in F.S. section 50.011. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: a. Date, time, and location of the hearing; b. Petition name, number and applicant contact info; c. Description of the proposed land uses; and d. 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location, as applicable. e. Date on which the advertisement or public notice was first published. Updated 2025-### 7 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 458 of 708 Exhibit B — County Clerk's Website COLLIER LEGAL NOTICES COLLIER LEGAL NOTICES COLLIER LEGAL NOTICES Shur Source for Public Intonnatlon in Collier {aunty Legal Notre search: Search Results: 5ear-I mot aw ilt Stard wlim • arma 0t 1ER $11+ta1se ugh E= Er1 - Your Source for Public Information in Collier County Hone Wit its Search Notices - (Ktatt Ua FkQ9 $01:5 k login � EN^ Mo611e Food Truck 5396 Myrtle Ln (Small 11760 Tamlaml Trail Emit 3010 Tamiaml Trl E Parks-Mo611e Food le GMPA7 & (P110R) ISnnall S_le GMPA) & (MU P) (PL20220006931) ❑Ispensing Vehicles (PL2023o01G211& IRZ)(PL2022o0058223 I0111412025) Hewer IE[1CA)... PL2023001621_ &(PL .. enr�rrr e�,•edc«.ae«.�E�wz e°.mdeou•ncom.,rrro, w,.vdm.�aea,.rtE�w..rs rr.mdeourvee,�,rarae 6mrddCoun1yCommiasionen. WbrnimC +2r2&2ui� PJ1'rsno, 0e�e �Ll6fl0N WhEcncn Ceor+tr2&20t� PitlkNim0xe �2r16110N ruhWwd Date nvm. E--• Ni, WQW25 .. EmmmGte 0�M. N25 .. .. ..-. Exv•eten M, pAM25 ... ... .... . F�mon Orr Ot 'S r...... .i. -... Sw Date Procurement Ordinance VAC-PL20240002006 VAC-PL20240005670 (01J1412025) 5380-540o hail Alvd Myrtle Cove Acres Lots End E1a1e (BCC-lanuary 14.2025) 24-2&51k A{ACC Ianua ry 114. 2025) SWuv. EovedcwycaM1..0 m "wa-M—¢n , kaEdreary [crtrtivk.eis �Hve kbrreim bx+2r� v,yereo, 0eie 02&2M WbErei'anCw+2r] N - E—.- 1— 0116IM25 E., —C. a 06+E &• N• •ei.r 141, 0116IM25 COLLIER LEGAL NOTICES 8 Your Source for Public Information in Collier County G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 459 of 708 Exhibit C — F.S. Chapter 50 — Legal and Official Advertisements The 2024 Florida Statutes Title VI Chapter 50 View Entire Chapter CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE LEGAL AND OFFICIAL ADVERTISEMENTS CHAPTER 50 LEGAL AND OFFICIAL ADVERTISEMENTS 50.011 Publication of legal notices. 50.021 Publication when no newspaper in county. 50.0211 Internet website publication. 50.031 Newspapers in which legal notices and process may be published. 50.0311 Publication of advertisements and public notices on a publicly accessible website and governmental access channels. 50.041 Proof of publication; uniform affidavits required. 50.051 Proof of publication; form of uniform affidavit. 50.061 Amounts chargeable. 50.0711 Court docket fund; service charges; publications. 50.011 Publication of legal notices. —Whenever by statute an official or legal advertisement or a publication or notice in a newspaper or on a governmental agency website has been or is directed or permitted in the nature of or in lieu of process, or for constructive service, or in initiating, assuming, reviewing, exercising, or enforcing jurisdiction or power, or for any purpose, including all legal notices and advertisements of sheriffs and tax collectors, such legislation, whether existing or repealed, means either of the following: (1) A publication in a newspaper printed and published periodically at least once a week, containing at least 25 percent of its words in the English language, available to the public generally for the publication of official or other notices and customarily containing information of a public character or of interest or of value to the residents or owners of property in the county where published, or of interest or of value to the general public, which: (a) Has an audience consisting of at least 10 percent of the households in the county or municipality, as determined by the most recent decennial census, where the legal or public notice is being published or posted, by calculating the combination of the total of the number of print copies reflecting the day of highest print circulation, of which at least 25 percent of such print copies must be delivered to individuals' home or business addresses, as certified biennially by a certified independent third -party auditor, and the total number of online unique monthly visitors to the newspaper's website from within the state, as measured by industry -accepted website analytics software. The newspaper must also be sold, or otherwise available to the public, at no less than 10 publicly accessible outlets. For legal and public notices published by nongovernmental entities, the newspaper's audience in the county or municipality where the project, property, or other primary subject of the notice is located must meet the 10 percent threshold; or (b) Is entered or qualified to be admitted and entered as periodical class mail at a post office in the county where published. (2) A publication on a publicly accessible website under s. 50.0311. History.—s. 2, ch. 3022, 1877; RS 1296; GS 1727; s. 1, ch. 5610, 1907; RGS 2942; s. 1, ch. 12104, 1927; CGL 4666, 4901; s. 1, ch. 63-387; s. 6, ch. 67-254; s. 21, ch. 99-2; s. 1, ch. 2021-17; s. 1, ch. 2022-103. Note. — Former s. 49.01, www.leg.state.E.uslstatuteslindex.cfm?App mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-00991005010050.html 9 115 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 460 of 708 Exhibit C — F.S. Chapter 50 — Legal and Official Advertisements 1131I25, 9:43AM Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes Online Sunshine 50.021 Publication when no newspaper in county. —When any law, or order or decree of court, directs advertisements to be made in a county and there is no newspaper published in the county, the advertisement may be published on a publicly accessible website as provided in s. 50.0311 or made by posting three copies thereof in three different places in the county, one of which shall be at the front door of the courthouse, and by publication in the nearest county in which a newspaper qualified Lander this chapter is published. History.—RS 1297; GS 1728; RGS 2943; CGL 4667; s. 6, ch. 67-254; s. 2, ch. 2021-17; S. 2, ch. 2022-103. Note. —Formers. 49.02. 50.0211 Internet website publication.— (1) This section applies to legal notices that must be published in accordance with this chapter unless otherwise specified. (2) If a governmental agency publishes a legal notice in the print edition of a newspaper, each legal notice must be published on the newspaper's website on the same day that the printed notice appears in the newspaper, at no additional charge, in a separate web page titled "Legal Notices," "Legal Advertising," or comparable identifying language. A link to the legal notices web page shall be provided on the front page of the newspaper's website that provides access to the legal notices. If there is a specified size and placement required for a printed legal notice, the size and placement of the notice on the newspaper's website must optimize its online visibility in keeping with the print requirements. The newspaper's web pages that contain legal notices must present the legal notices as the dominant and leading subject matter of those pages. The newspaper's website must contain a search function to facilitate searching the legal notices. A fee may not be charged, and registration may not be required, for viewing or searching legal notices on a newspaper's website if the legal notice is published in a newspaper. (3) (a) If a legal notice is published in the print edition of a newspaper, the newspaper publishing the notice shall place the notice on the statewide website established and maintained as an initiative of the Florida Press Association as a repository for such notices located at the following address: www.ftoridapubticnotices.com. (b) A legal notice placed on the statewide website created under this subsection must be: 1. Accessible and searchable by party name and case number. 2. Published for a period of at least 90 consecutive days after the first day of publication. (c) The statewide website created under this subsection shall maintain a searchable archive of all legal notices published on the publicly accessible website for 18 months after the first day of publication. Such searchable archive shall be provided and accessible to the general public without charge. l istory.—s. 1, ch. 2012-212; s. 1, ch. 2014-210; s. 3, ch. 2021-17; s. 3, ch. 2022-4; s. 3, ch. 2022-103. 50.031 Newspapers in which legal notices and process may be published. —If a governmental agency publishes a legal notice in a newspaper, no notice or publication required to be published in the nature of or in lieu of process of any kind, nature, character, or description provided for under any law of the state, whether heretofore or hereafter enacted, and whether pertaining to constructive service, or the initiating, assuming, reviewing, exercising, or enforcing jurisdiction or power, by any court in this state, or any notice of sale of property, real or personal, for taxes, state, county, or municipal, or sheriff's, guardian's, or administrator's or any sale made pursuant to any judicial order, decree, or statute or any other publication or notice pertaining to any affairs of the state, or any county, municipality, or other political subdivision thereof, shall be deemed to have been published in accordance with the statutes providing for such publication, unless the same shall have been published for the prescribed period of time required for such publication, in a newspaper which at the time of such publication shall have been in existence for 2 years and meets the requirements set forth in s. 50.011, or in a newspaper which is a direct successor of a newspaper which has been so published; provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall apply where in any county there shall be no newspaper in existence which shall have been published for the length of time above prescribed. No legal publication of any kind, nature, or description, as herein defined, shall be valid or binding or held to be in compliance with the statutes providing for such publication unless the same shall have been published in accordance with this section or s. 50.0311. Proof of such publication shall be made by uniform affidavit. www.leg.state.fl. us)statutes/index.cfm?App_mod e= Display_Statute& U R L 4000-0099/C050/0050. htm I IV 2!5 GALDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 461 of 708 Exhibit C — F.S. Chapter 50 — Legal and Official Advertisements 1131l25, 9:43AM Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes Online Sunshine History.—ss. 1-3, ch. 14830, 1931; CGL 1936 Supp. 4274(1); s. 7, ch. 22858, 1945; s. 6, ch. 67-254; s. 1, ch. 74-221; s. 22, ch. 99-2; s. 4, ch. 2021-17; s. 4, ch. 2022-103. Note. — Formers. 49.03, 50.0311 Publication of advertisements and public notices on a publicly accessible website and governmental access channels.— (1) For purposes of this chapter, the term "governmental agency" means a county, municipality, school board, or other unit of local government or political subdivision in this state. (2) For purposes of notices and advertisements required under s. 50.011, the term "publicly accessible website" means a county's official website or other private website designated by the county for the publication of legal notices and advertisements that is accessible via the Internet. All advertisements and public notices published on a website as provided in this chapter must be in searchable form and indicate the date on which the advertisement or public notice was first published on the website. (3) Agovernmental agency may use the publicly accessible website of the county in which it lies to publish legally required advertisements and public notices if the cost of publishing advertisements and public notices on such website is less than the cost of publishing advertisements and public notices in a newspaper. (4) A governmental agency with at least 75 percent of its population located within a county with a population of fewer than 160,000 may use a publicly accessible website to publish legally required advertisements and public notices only if the governing body of the governmental agency, at a public hearing that has been noticed in a newspaper as provided in this chapter, determines that the residents of the governmental agency have sufficient access to the Internet by broadband service, as defined in s. 364.02, or by any other means, such that publishing advertisements and public notices on a publicly accessible website will not unreasonably restrict public access. (5) A special district spanning the geographic boundaries of more than one county that satisfies the criteria for publishing and chooses to publish legally required advertisements and public notices on a publicly accessible website must publish such advertisements and public notices on the publicly accessible website of each county it spans. For purposes of this subsection, the term "special district" has the same meaning as in s. 189.017. (6) A governmental agency that uses a publicly accessible website to publish legally required advertisements and public notices shall provide notice at least once per year in a newspaper of general circulation or another publication that is mailed or delivered to all residents and property owners throughout the government's jurisdiction, indicating that property owners and residents may receive legally required advertisements and public notices from the governmental agency by first-class mail or e-mail upon registering their name and address or e- mail address with the governmental agency. The governmental agency shall maintain a registry of names, addresses, and e-mail addresses of property owners and residents who have requested in writing that they receive legally required advertisements and public notices from the governmental agency by first-class mail or e-mail. (7) A link to advertisements and public notices published on a publicly accessible website shall be conspicuously placed: (a) On the website's homepage or on a page accessible through a direct link from the homepage. (b) On the homepage of the website of each governmental agency publishing notices on the publicly accessible website or on a page accessible through a direct link from the homepage. (8) A governmental agency that has a governmental access channel authorized under s. 610.109 may also include on its governmental access channel a summary of all advertisements and public notices that are published on a publicly accessible website. (9) A public bid advertisement made by a governmental agency on a publicly accessible website must include a method to accept electronic bids. History.—s. 5, ch. 2022-103. 50.041 Proof of publication; uniform affidavits required.— (1) All affidavits made for the purpose of establishing proof of publication of public notices or legal advertisements shall be uniform throughout the state. www.leg.state.fl. us/statuteslindex.ofm?App_mod e= Display_Statute& U R L=0000-00991005010050. htm I 11 3/5 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 462 of 708 Exhibit C — F.S. Chapter 50 — Legal and Official Advertisements 1131l25, 9:43AM Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes Online Sunshine (2) Each such affidavit shall be printed upon white paper and shall be 81/2 inches in width and of convenient length, not less than 51/2 inches. A white margin of not less than 21/2 inches shall be left at the right side of each affidavit form and upon or in this space shall be substantially pasted a clipping which shall be a true copy of the public notice or legal advertisement for which proof is executed. Alternatively, the affidavit may be provided in electronic rather than paper form, provided the notarization of the affidavit complies with the requirements of s. 117.021. (3) There may be a charge not to exceed $2 levied for the preparation and execution of each such proof of publication or affidavit. history.—s. 1, ch. 19290, 1939; CGL 1940 Supp. 4668(1); s. 1, ch. 63-49; s. 26, ch. 67-254; s. 1, ch. 76-58; s. 2, ch. 2012-212; s. 5, ch. 2021-17. Note. —Formers. 49, 04. 50.051 Proof of publication; form of uniform affidavit. —The printed form upon which all such affidavits establishing proof of publication are to be executed shall be substantially as follows: NAME OF COUNTY STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF : Before the undersigned authority personally appeared , who on oath says that he or she is of County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a in the matter of in the Court, was published on the publicly accessible website of County, Florida, or in a newspaper by print in the issues of on �dtL. Affiant further says that the website or newspaper complies with all legal requirements for publication in chapter 50, Florida Statutes. Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of ear , by , who is personally known to me or who has produced type of identification) as identification. Signature of Notary Public)_ _Print Types or Stamp Commissioned Name of Notary Public)_ (Notary Public) History--s. 2, ch. 19290, 1939; CGL 1940 Supp. 4668{2); s. 6, ch. 67-254; s. 1, ch. 93-62; s. 291, ch. 95-147; s. 23, ch. 99-2; s. 3, ch. 99- 6; s. 6, ch. 2021-17; s. 6, ch. 2022-103. Note. —Formers. 49.05. 50.061 Amounts chargeable.— (1) The publisher of any newspaper publishing any and all official public notices or legal advertisements shalt charge therefor the rates specified in this section without rebate, commission or refund. (2) The charge for publishing each such official public notice or legal advertisement shall be 70 cents per square inch for the first insertion and 40 cents per square inch for each subsequent insertion, except that government notices required to be published more than once, the cost of which is paid for by the government and not paid in advance by or allowed to be recouped from private parties, may not be charged for the second and successive insertions at a rate greater than 85 percent of the original rate. (3) where the regular established minimum commercial rate per square inch of the newspaper publishing such official public notices or legal advertisements is in excess of the rate herein stipulated, said minimum commercial rate per square inch may be charged for all such legal advertisements or official public notices for each insertion, except that government notices required to be published more than once, the cost of which is paid for by the government and not paid in advance by or allowed to be recouped from private parties, may not be charged for the second and successive insertions at a rate greater than 85 percent of the original rate. www.leg.sta te.fl. uslsta tuteslindex.cfm?App_mod e= Display_Statute& U R L=0000-00991005010050. htm I 415 GALDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 463 of 708 Exhibit C — F.S. Chapter 50 — Legal and Official Advertisements 1131125, 9:43 AM Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes Online Sunshine (4) A governmental agency publishing an official public notice or legal advertisement may procure publication by soliciting and accepting written bids from newspapers published in the county, in which case the specified charges in this section do not apply. (5) If the public notice is published in the print edition of a newspaper, the publishing of the notice on the newspaper's website pursuant to s. 50.0211(2) must be done at no additional charge. (6) All official public notices and legal advertisements shall be charged and paid for on the basis of 6-point type on 6-point body, unless otherwise specified by statute. (7) Any person violating this section, either by allowing or accepting any rebate, commission, or refund, commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or S. 775.083. (8) Failure to charge the rates prescribed by this section shall in no way affect the validity of any official public notice or legal advertisement and shall not subject same to legal attack upon such grounds. History.—s. 3, ch. 3022, 1877; R51298; GS 1729; RGS 2944; s. 1, ch. 12215, 1927; CGL 4668; ss. 1, 2, 2A, 28, ch. 20264, 1941; s. 1, ch. 23663, 1947; s. 1, ch. 57-160; s. 1, ch. 63-5C; s. 1, ch. 65-569; s. 6, ch. 67-254; s. 15, ch. 71-136; s. 35, ch. 73-332; s. 1, ch. 90-279; S. 3, ch. 2012-212; s. 2, ch. 2014-210; s. 7, ch. 2C21-17; s. 7, ch. 2022-103. Note. —Formers. 49.06. 50.0711 Court docket fund; service charges; publications.— (1) The clerk of the court in each county may establish a court docket fund for the purpose of paying the cost of publication of the fact of the filing of any civil case in the circuit court of the county by the style and of the calendar relating to such cases. This court docket fund shall be funded by $1 mandatory court cost for all civil actions, suits, or proceedings filed in the circuit court of the county. The clerk shall maintain such funds separate and apart, and the proceeds from this court cost shall not be diverted to any other fund or for any purpose other than that established in this section. The clerk of the court shall dispense the fund to the designated publicly accessible website publisher or record newspaper in the county on a quarterly basis. (2) If a judicial circuit publishes legal notices in a newspaper, a newspaper qualified under the terms of s. 50.011 shall be designated as the record newspaper for such publication by an order of the majority of the judges in the judicial circuit in which such county is located, and such order shall be filed and recorded with the clerk of the circuit court for such county. The designated record newspaper may be changed at the end of any fiscal year of the county by a majority vote of the judges of the judicial circuit of the county ordering such change 30 days prior to the end of the fiscal year, notice of which order shall be given to the previously designated record newspaper. (3) The publicly accessible website publisher or publishers of any designated record newspapers receiving payment from this court docket fund shall publish, without additional charge, the fact of the filing of any civil case, suit, or action filed in such county in the circuit. Such publication shall be in accordance with a schedule agreed upon between the website publisher or record newspaper and the clerk of the court in such county. (4) The publicly accessible website publisher or publishers of any designated record newspapers receiving revenues from the court docket fund established in subsection (1) shall, without charge, accept legal advertisements for the purpose of service of process by publication under s. 49.011(4), (10), and (11) when such publication is required of persons authorized to proceed as indigent persons under s. 57.081. History.—s. 46, ch. 2004-265; s. 8, ch. 2022-103. Copyright © 1995-2025 The Florida Legislature • Privacy Statement • Contact Us 13 GALDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Notices NIMs - LDCA (04-17-2025).docx Page 464 of 708 5/15/2025 Item # 9.0 ID# 2025-1362 ** THIS ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD BEFORE 5:05 P.M. **PL20220003445 - Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Updates (LDCA) - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the Comprehensive Land Regulations for the Unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, to implement Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay provisions of the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan by providing for Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to the Land Development Code, specifically amending the following: Chapter Four — Site Design and Development Standards, including Section 4.08.01 specific definitions applicable to the RLSA district, Section 4.08.04 Implementation of Stewardship Credits, Section 4.08.05 Baseline Standards, Section 4.08.06 SSA Designation, and Section 4.08.07 SRA Designation; Section Four, Conflict and severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Six, Effective Date. [Eric Johnson, AICP, CFM, Planning Manager] ATTACHMENTS: LDCA (04-22-2025) Exhibit A - Summary of Changes Exhibit B - Ordinance 2021-28 Exhibit C - Conservancy and Fish & Wildlife Letters Exhibit D - Utter Email Exhibit E - League of Women Voters (10-31-2022) Page 465 of 708 ..,)Collier County LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT PETITION SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT PL20220003445 ORIGIN Growth Management Plan (GMP) HEARING DATES Board TBD CCPC 05/15/2025 DSAC 11/02/2022 This Land Development Code (LDC) amendment shall update the Rural Land Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSA District) Standards and Procedures to ensure consistency with the recently adopted changes that were made to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP, pursuant to Ordinance 2021-28. LDC amendments are reviewed by the Board of County Commissioners (Board), Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC), and the Land Development Review Subcommittee of the DSAC (DSAC-LDR). LDC SECTIONS TO BE AMENDED 4.08.01 Specific Definitions Applicable to the RLSA District 4.08.04 Implementation of Stewardship Credits 4.08.05 Baseline Standards DSAC-LDR 09/21/2022 4.08.06 SSA Designation 4.08.07 SRA Designation ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS DSAC-LDR DSAC CCPC Approval with recommendations Approval TBD BACKGROUND In 1999, the State of Florida imposed a Final Order (Case No. ACC-99-002 and DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM) on Collier County, directing the County to perform a three-year Rural and Agricultural Assessment of the GMP to identify measures to protect agricultural areas, direct incompatible land uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, and to assess the growth potential of the County's rural areas. The was to occur while discouraging urban sprawl, directing incompatible land uses away from critical habitat, and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques. In 2002, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) established the Rural Lands Stewardship Area program under the FLUE of the GMP, pursuant to Ord. 2002-54. The objective was to create an incentive -based land use overlay system founded upon the principles of rural land stewardship as defined in Chapter 163.3177(11), F.S., now in Chapter 163.3248, F.S. The Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSA District) regulations were initially adopted into the LDC on June 16, 2003, pursuant to Ord. 2003-27. Subsequent amendments to the RLSA District in the LDC occurred in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2010. The RLSA District includes important environmental and agricultural assets, most of which are on privately held land. On February 10, 2015, the Board directed staff to initiate "restudies" of four GMP master plans, one of which being the RLSA. The RLSA restudy began in January 2018, culminating in the creation of an RLSA White Paper, which was presented to the Board in October 2019. At this meeting, the Board directed staff to (1) bring forward GMP amendments for the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay in the FLUE, (2) develop a regional water partnership to address regional water matters, and (3) draft LDC amendments to address the characteristics of the Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA). A GMP amendment (PL20190002292) involving the RLSA Overlay in the FLUE was approved by the Board on July 13, 2021, pursuant to Ord. 2021-28. The changes to the administrative code are shown in Exhibit A and will require a separate resolution. This LDC amendment shall implement the updates that were made to the GMP last summer. The noteworthy LDC amendment changes are identified and summarized in Exhibit B. The pertinent GMP Policies are summarized in Exhibit C. G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22- 2025).docx Page 466 of 708 ..,)Collier County DSAC-LDR Subcommittee Recommendation: The DSAC-LDR Subcommittee recommended approval of this LDC amendment on September 21, 2022, subject to the following: 1. Wherever it states dark sky compliant lighting principles, the Subcommittee is not in favor of that terminology and to instead use the language from Policy 5.7 of the GMP, and that a future LDC amendment should be considered for lighting guidance in general. 2. Clarify the sentence on lines 16-18 on page 33 (LDC section 4.08.06 B.6.£), which currently reads: "Only one type of restoration shall be rewarded with these Credits for each acre designated for restoration and in no case shall more than ten (10) Credits be awarded per acre," and that staff would consider inserting a chart to makes it easier to follow. 3. Clarify the verbs on page 31 (i.e., received, awarded, assigned, rewarded) under restoration stewardship credits, to be made consistent to the extent necessary to understand the intent. 4. Include the walk-on changes to the LDC amendment, as presented by staff at the meeting. 5. Include the administrative code changes, provided the changes are consistent with what we just discussed. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS GMP CONSISTENCY There are no fiscal or operational impacts to The proposed LDC amendment has been reviewed by the County. Developers will be required to Comprehensive Planning staff and may be deemed submit an SRA Mobility Plan. consistent with the GMP. EXHIBITS: A) Summary of Proposed Changes; B) Ordinance 2021-28; C) Conservancy Letter and Backup; D) Utter Email; and E) League of Women Voters 2 G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22- 2025).docx Page 467 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 Amend the LDC as follows: 4.08.00 - RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT 4.08.01 - Specific Definitions Applicable to the RLSA District As used in the RLSA District Regulations, the terms below shall have the following meanings, set forth below, to the exclusion of any meanings ascribed to such terms in section 1.08.00: A. Accessory dwelling unit. A dwelling unit that is supplemental and subordinate to a primary dwelling on the same premises, limited to 900 square feet. B. Baseline Standards. Baseline Standards are the allowable uses, density, intensity and other land development regulations assigned to land within the RLSA District by the GMP, Collier County Land development Regulations and Collier County Zoning Regulations in effect prior to July 25, 2000, and subject to the further provisions of section 4.08.05. C. Building Height. Refers to the vertical extent of a building. Building height is measured in Stories. D. Building Height to Street Width Ratio. The maximum height of the tallest building divided by the width of the street. The street width is the distance between two building fagades. E. Civic and Institutional Uses. Structures developed for and/or used by established organizations or foundations dedicated to public service or cultural activities including the arts, education, government and religion. F. Compact Rural Ddevelopment (CRD). Compact Rural Development is a form of SRA that is intended to suDDort and further Collier Countv's valued attributes of aariculture. natural resources, and economic diversity. A CRD shall include uses associated with and needed to support research, education, convenience retail, tourism, or recreation. A CRD may include but is not required to have permanent residential housing and the services and facilities to support permanent residents. Compact Rural developments are a form of SRA that pFevide flexibility with Fespeet te the mix ef uses and design standalFels, bult shall otherwise oomply with the standards of a Hamlet or Village. A CRD may include, but is not FequiiFed te have pelcmanent residential housing and the seFViees and faeolities that sup - ' permanent residents. An example of a CRD without permanent residential housing is an eeetewism village that weuld have a unique set ef uses and suppeFt serviees diffe from a traditional residential village. it would oontain transient ledging fadlitles nooessary to support permanent residents. G. Context Zones. Areas that establish the use, intensity and diversity within a town, or village o,-haFn;ot. Context zones specify permitted land uses, FARs, building height, setbacks, and other regulating elements to guide the establishment of the urban to rural continuum. H. Designation. Application of the SSA or SRA concepts through a formal application, review, and approval process as described in the RLSA District Regulations. 3 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 468 of 708 Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 FSA - Flow way Stewardship Area. Privately owned lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map, which primarily include privately owned wetlands that are located within the Camp Keais Strand and Okaloacoochee Slough. FSAs form the primary wetland flow way systems in the RLSA District. JK. HSA - Habitat Stewardship Area. Privately owned lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map, which include both areas with natural characteristics that make them suitable habitat for listed species and areas without these characteristics. These latter areas are included because they are located contiguous to habitat with natural characteristics, thus forming a continuum of landscape that can augment habitat values. KL-. Incidental Clearing. Clearing of no more than 1 % of the area of an SSA, which is conducted to accommodate the ability to convert from one Ag 1 use to another Ag 1 use and which connects existing Ag 1 acres, squares up existing Ag 1 farm fields, or provides access to or from Ag 1 areas. LM. Landmark building. A prominent civic or institutional building that creates a significant community feature, focal point, or terminating vista. MN. Land Use - Land Cover Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon land use and land cover characteristics as mapped using the Florida Land Use, Cover, and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) (FDOT 1999). For purposes of assigning values, land use and land cover codes are grouped as follows: Group 1 (Codes 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, 630, 641, 643); Group 2 (Codes 321, 411, 4119, 425, 434, 439, 428); Group 3 (211, 212, 213, 214, 221, 222, 241, 242, 243, 250, 260, 261, 310, 329, 330, 422, 510, 521, 523, 533, 534); and Group 4 (all others). NO. Land Use Layer (Layer). Permitted and conditional land uses within the Baseline Standards that are of a similar type or intensity and that are grouped together in the same column on the Land Use Matrix. O-P. Land Use Matrix (Matrix). The tabulation of the permitted and conditional land uses within the Baseline Standards set forth in Section 4.08.06 BA., with each Land Use Layer displayed as a single column. PQ. Listed Species Habitat Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as preferred or tolerated habitat for that species. Land mapped, using FLUCFCS, as 310, 321, 411, 425, 428, 434, 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, and 630 is deemed to be preferred or tolerated habitat for panthers for the purpose of assigning a value for these indices. An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence 4 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 469 of 708 Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of preferred or tolerated habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. Q. Micromobility. Any small, low -speed, human- or electric -powered transportation device, including bicycles, scooters, electric -assist bicycles, electric scooters (a.k.a. e-scooters), and other small, lightweight, wheeled conveyances. R. Natural Resource Index (Index). A measurement system that establishes the relative natural resource value of each acre of land by objectively measuring six different characteristics of land and assigning an index factor based on each characteristic. The sum of these six factors is the Index value for the land. The six characteristics measured are: Stewardship Overlay Delineation, Proximity, Listed Species Habitat, Soils/Surface Water, Restoration Potential, and Land Use/Land Cover. S. Natural Resource Index Map Series (Index Maps). The Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Map Series adopted as part of the GMP. T. Natural Resource Index Value (Index Value). The sum of the values assigned to each acre, derived through the calculation of the values assigned to each of the six (6) characteristics included in the Index. U. Neighborhood Edge. A defining Context Zone that includes the least intensity and diversity within the town, or village—ham;et. The zone is predominantly single-family residential and recreational uses. The Neighborhood Edge may be used to provide a transition to adjoining rural land uses. V. Neighborhood General. A defining Context Zone that creates community diversity with the inclusion of a mix of single and multi -family housing, neighborhood scale goods and services, schools, parks and other recreational uses, and open space. W. Neighborhood Goods and Services Zone. Zone located within the Neighborhood General Context Zone. These zones are intended to provide convenient neighborhood scale retail and office use within proximity to the residential uses in order to support community walkability. X. Open space. Open space includes active and passive recreational areas such as parks, playgrounds, ball fields, golf courses, lakes, waterways, lagoons, flood plains, nature trails, native vegetation preserves, landscape areas, public and private conservation lands, agricultural areas (not including structures), and water retention and management areas. Buildings shall not be counted as part of any open space calculation. Vehicular use surface areas of streets, alleys, driveways, and off-street parking and loading areas shall not be counted as part of any open space calculation. Y. Park -and -Ride site. Means a Darkina lot. aaraae. Darkina structure. or other off-street parking area that constitutes either a principal or accessory use of the property and serves a bus station/depot or a bus stop on a transit route whereby a user leaves their automobile/vehicle and travels via bus, carpool, vanpool, or bicycle. A park and ride may be a tvoe of automobile Darkina establishment (SIC 7521). 5 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 470 of 708 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added ZY. Pathway. A defined corridor for the primary use of non -motorized travel. AAZ. Post Secondary Institution Ancillary Uses. Any use or facility owned by a public or private post secondary institution that is of a type commonly found on public or private post secondary institution campuses. BBAA. Proximity Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon the proximity of the land to areas designated on the RLSA Overlay Map as FSA, HSA, or WRA and to either public or private preserve lands. No additional value shall be added under the Proximity Indices for land that is within an FSA, HSA, WRA, or public or private preserve. CCBB. Restoration Potential Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based both upon the potential for restoration and the historic use or character of the land as a large mammal corridor, connector wetlands and flow way, wading bird habitat, or other listed species habitat. DDGG. Restoration Area Zene. Privately owned lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map that are located within 500 feet of an FSA, but are not otherwise included in an HSA or WRA. EEDD. RLSA District, also called Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District. The area geneFall„ depi ted „n the Future Land Use Map and s Gifi..-,4y depicted on the Official Zoning Atlas Map as the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, including lands within the Immokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment referred to in the State of Florida Administration Commission Final Order No. AC-99-002. The RLSA District generally includes rural lands in northeast Collier County lying north and east of Golden Gate Estates, north of the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and Big Cypress National Preserve, south of the Lee County Line, and south and west of the Hendry County Line. FF€€. RLSA Overlay Map. The map entitled "Collier County Rural & Agricultural Area Assessment Stewardship Overlay Map," which identifies those areas delineated as FSA, HSA, WRA, Restoration Zone, and Open in the GMP. GG€F. RLSA District Regulations. LDC Section 4.08.00. HHGG.Soils/Surface Water Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon soil types classified using the following Natural Soils Landscape Positions (NSLP) categories: Open Water and Muck Depression Soils (NSLP Categories 1 and 5); Sand Depression Soils (NSLP Category 6); Flats Soils (NSLP Category 7); and Non-Hydric Soils (NSLP Categories 8, 9, and 11). IIHN. Special Districts. An area dedicated for certain uses that cannot be incorporated into one of the Context Zones. Special Districts provide for the inclusion of unique uses and development standards not otherwise defined in a context zone. JJf4. SRA - Stewardship Receiving Area. A designated area within the RLSA District that has been approved for the development of a Hamlet, Vol!Town, Village, or CRD and that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits. 6 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 471 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 KKJJ. SSA - Stewardship Sending Area. A designated area within the RLSA District that has been approved for the generation of Stewardship Credits in exchange for the elimination of one or more Land Use Layers. LLKK. Stewardship Sending Area Credit (SSA Credit). A transferable unit of measure generated by an SSA and consumed by an SRA. Where SSA Credits were created from an SSA approved prior to July 13, 2021, eight €4g#t credits are transferred to an SRA in exchange for the development of one acre of land as provided in LDC Ssection 4.08.06 B. Where such SSA Credits were created from an SSA approved after July 13, 2021, 10 credits are transferred to an SRA in exchange for the development of one acre of land as provided in LDC section 4.08.06 B. MMLL. Stewardship Credit Database. A database maintained by the County that keeps track of all of the credit transactions (generation of Credits through SSA designation and the consumption of credits through SRA designation) approved by the County. NNMM.Stewardship Credit System. A system that creates incentives to protect and preserve natural resources and agricultural areas in exchange for the generating and use of credits to entitle compact forms of rural development. The greater the value of the natural resources being preserved and the higher the degree of preservation, the greater the number of credits that can be generated. Credits are generated through the designation of SSAs and consumed through the designation of SRAs. OON-N.Stewardship Credit Worksheet. An analytical tool that manually describes the Stewardship Credit calculation process including the Natural Resource Index and Land Use Layer components. The worksheet can be used to document proposed changes to the Index component during the SSA and SRA designation processes. PPGQ. Stewardship Overlay Designation. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon the designation of the land on the RLSA Overlay Map as FSA, HSA, WRA, er ACSC, or, Restoration Area where Land Use Layers 1 through 4- are eliminated removed Restoration Zone. Land that is designated as ACSC, as well as FSA, HSA, or WRA shall receive value for the designation with the higher value but shall not receive value for both designations. QQP-P. Story. That portion of a building included between a floor which is calculated as part of the building's habitable floor area and the floor or roof next above it. RRQQ.Story, half. The designation of a space on the upper level of a building in which the walls at the eaves are zero to four feet. SSRR. Town. Towns are a form of SRA and are the largest and most diverse form of SRA, with a full range of housing types and mix of uses. Towns have urban level services and infrastructure which support development that is compact, mixed use, human scale, and provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile trips and increase livability. Towns are comprised of several Villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and character. TTSS. Town Center. A defining Context Zone that is intended to provide a wide range of uses, including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, and residential uses within 7 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 472 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 L11T-1121 Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough s Gurrent text to he deleted a Town. The Town Center is an extension of the Town Core, however the intensity is less as the Town Center serves as a transition to surrounding neighborhoods. UUTT. Town Core. A defining Context Zone within a Town. The Town Core is the most dense and diverse Context Zone with a full range of uses. The Town Core is the most active area within the Town with uses mixed vertically and horizontally. VVU-U. Village. Villages are a form of SRA and are primarily residential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed -use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. WW-VV.Village center. A defining Context Zone within a Village that is intended to provide a wide range of uses including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, and residential uses. XX. Walkability. The suitabilitv for Dedestrians to walk safelv and comfortablv within a community or distinct neighborhood to a destination, generally within a quarter -mile radius. Walkable communities are typically characterized by sidewalks and curbs and/or roadways designed to protect pedestrians from moving traffic, including the use of street trees seDaratina the street from the sidewalk. YYVVVV.WRA - Water Retention Area. Privately owned lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map, that have been permitted by the SFWMD to function as agricultural water retention areas and that provide surface water quality and other natural resource value. # # # # # # # # # # # 4.08.04 - Implementation of Stewardship Credits A. Establishment of a Stewardship Credit Database. As part of the initial implementation of the RLSA Overlay, the County Manager or designee shall cause to be developed a Stewardship Credit Database to track the generation (by SSAs) and consumption (by SRAs) of Stewardship Credits within the RLSA District. The database shall be in an electronic form that can be linked to the RLSA Overlay Map and can readily produce reports that will afford convenient access to the data by the public. The database shall be updated upon approval of an SSA or SRA Designation Application and Credit Agreement. B. Authorization to Establish a Stewardship Credit Trust. As part of the implementation of the RLSA Overlay, the County may elect to acquire Credits through a publicly funded program. Should the County pursue this option, the County shall establish a Stewardship Credit Trust to receive and hold Credits until such time as they are sold, transferred or otherwise used to implement uses within SRAs. Nothing herein shall preclude the County from permanently "retiring" those credits received or held. C. Density. Except as provided in herein, there shall be no change to the underlying density and intensity of permitted uses of land within the RLSA District, as set forth in the Baseline Standards, until a property owner elects to utilize the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System pursuant to the provisions of Section 4.08.04. No part of the Stewardship Credit 8 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 473 of 708 L11T-1121 Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 System shall be imposed upon a property owner without that owner's written consent. It is the intent of the RLSA District Regulations that a property owner will be compensated consistent with Policy 3.8 of the RLSA Overlay for the voluntary stewardship and protection of important agricultural and natural resources. The Baseline Standards will remain in effect for all land not subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits. D. Creation of Stewardship Credits/General. Stewardship Sending Area Credits (Credits) may be created from any lands within the RLSA District from which one or more Land Use Layers are eliminated tea. These lands will be identified as SSAs. All privately owned lands within the RLSA District are candidates for designation as an SSA. Land becomes designated as an SSA upon petition by the property owner seeking such designation as outlined herein. A Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement shall be developed that identifies those land uses, which have been eliminated tea. Once land is designated as an SSA and Credits or other compensation is granted to the owner, no increase in density or additional uses that are not expressly identified in the Stewardship Sending Area Agreement shall be allowed on such property. E. Transfer of Stewardship Credits/General. Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSA District that meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth in Section 4.08.07 A.1. and that have been designated as SRAs. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Stewardship Credits will be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis. SRA density and intensity will thereafter differ from the Baseline Standards. F. Allocation of Stewardship Credits/General. Stewardship Credits generated from one SSA may be allocated to one or more SRAs, and an SRA may utilize reeeive Stewardship Credits generated from one or more SSAs. G. Seveni-ve Year Comprehensive Review. Many of the tools, techniques, and strategies of the RLSA Overlay are new, innovative, and incentive -based. and have yet to be tested on aGtual „0mplemeatato„--Ge„sequea y, by In� nhsubsequent r tomes as deemed appropriate by the BGG, The County shall prepare and submit to DCA for review a comprehensive analysis of the RLSA Overlay every seven years, beginning on July 13, 2021, to assess the participation and effectiveness of the RLSA Overlay implementation in meeting the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the RLSA Overlay by utilizing the measures of review delineated in Policy 1.21 of the FLUE. The County shall encourage public participation in the review process through publicly noticed workshops and meetings and through the solicitation of public input. 2. Subsequent to the seven-year june 2008 review, the RLSA Overlay and RLSA District Regulations may be amended in response to the County's assessment and evaluation of the participation in and effectiveness of the Stewardship Credit System. 3. The value, exchange rate, and use of Stewardship Credits shall be governed by the RLSA Overlay and RLSA District Regulations in effect at the time the SSA from 9 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 474 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough s Gurrent text to he deleted which those credits are generated is approved. The Restoration Stewardship Credits shall be governed by the RLSA Overlay and RLSA District Regulations in effect at the time that such Restoration Stewardship Credits are authorized by the BCC. H. Stewardship Credit Cap. The total number of Stewardship Credits shall be capped at 404,000 to entitle no more than 45,000 acres of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Generating Stewardship Credits does not presume approval of Stewardship Receiving Areas. 4.08.05 - Baseline Standards All lands within the RLSA District have been delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map. Unless and until designated as an SSA or SRA, lands within the RLSA District shall remain subject to the Baseline Standards. A. Purpose and intent. These Baseline Standards will remain in effect for all land within the RLSA District unless or until such land becomes subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits, except as to those agricultural uses subject to sections §§163.3162M463�47 and 823.14(6), Florida Statutes. The Baseline Standards are intended to protect water quality and quantity, maintain the natural water regime, and protect listed animal and plant species or species of special concern as defined by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and their habitats on land that has not been designated as an SSA or SRA. The opportunity to voluntarily participate in the Stewardship Credit Program, as well as the right to sell conservation easements or a fee or lesser interest in the land, shall constitute compensation for the loss of any development rights related to these standards. B. Applicability of code. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section 4.05.00, those provisions of this Code in effect as of July 25, 2000, shall apply to all land within the RLSA District unless or until such lands become subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits. C. Private lands delineated FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs, and Restoration Areas. Lands delineated FSA, HSA, er WRA, or Restoration Areas on the RLSA Overlay Map eveFlay n4ap have been identified through data and analysis as having a higher quality natural resource value than those lands not delineated. Although any land within the RLSA District can be designated as an SSA, generally those lands delineated FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs are the most likely candidates for designation because of the higher credit values applied to lands with those delineations. D. Private lands delineated as open. Lands not otherwise classified as FSA, HSA, er WRAI or Restoration Areas are delineated as 'open" on the RLSA Overlay Map ex—riniz mnp and are generally of a lower natural resource quality. Open lands may be designated as either SSAs or SRAs. E. Area of critical state concern (ACSC). The RLSA District includes lands that are within the ACSC. Those ACSC lands are depicted on the RLSA Overlay Map overlayand are eligible for designation as SRAs, subject to additional standards set forth in subsection 4.08.07 A.2. All ACSC regulations continue to apply to ACSC lands within the RLSA District regardless of designation. 10 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 475 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 F. Public or private conservation lands. Those lands within the RLSA District that are held in public ownership or in private ownership as conservation lands may be delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map everlay rnap as FSA, HSA, or WRA but are not eligible for designation as either an SSA or SRA. G. No increase in density or intensity within the RLSA District is permitted beyond the Baseline Standards except in areas designated as SRAs. Within SRAs, density and intensity may be increased through the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System and, where applicable, through the affordable housing density Bonus as referenced in the density Rating System of the FLUE, and the density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. H. Allowable uses. The permitted, accessory, and conditional uses allowed shall be those set forth in LDC section 2.03.00 in effect as of July 25, 2000, with the following exceptions: 1. Residential Uses, General conditional uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1-4) as listed in the Matrix at in LDC section 4.08.00 shall be eliminated in all FSAs and designated Restoration Areas, as provided in LDC section 4.08.00. 2. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, except those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety as described in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2, shall not be allowed in FSAs with an Index value of 1.2 or less, as provided in section 4.08.00. 3. Directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development and production activities in FSAs and HSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapters 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in section 377.42, F.S. Rule 62C 30.001(2F.A.G. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapters 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62-30.005(2)(a) 1 through 12, F.A.C. 4. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants shall be prohibited in areas mapped as HSAs. 11 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 476 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Standards applicable inside the ACSC. RLSA District lands within the ACSC shall be subject to all ACSC regulatory standards, including those that strictly limit non-agricultural clearing. Standards applicable outside the ACSC. Except to the extent superseded sue-. by L. or M. below, the following standards shall apply to all development within those areas of the RLSA District that are outside of the ACSC, other than agricultural operations that fall within the scope of sections §§163.3162(163.3162 (` and 823.14-(6), F.S., and single family residential dwellings, unless or until such lands are subject to transmittal or receipt of Stewardship Credits: A wildlife survey, as set forth in Chapter 10, shall be required for all parcels when listed species are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site or where listed species are directly observed on the site. 2. If listed species are utilizing a site or indicated by evidence, such as dennin foraging, or other indications, the first priority shall be given to are directly observed en the site of the nroient�- r are indiGated by evidenGe, SUGh as denninn fnrnninn or other O„dmeationsfirst priority shall he given to preserving the habitat of such listed species. A a minimum of 40% of native vegetation on site shall be retained, with the exception of clearing for agricultural in^,,taf purposes. 3. If the wildlife survey indicates that listed species are utilizing the site, or the site is capable of supporting and is likely to support listed species, a wildlife habitat management plan shall be prepared and submitted to the County. a. The wildlife habitat management plan within the RLSA District shall include the following techniques to protect listed species from the negative impacts of development: Fencing, walls, other obstructions, or other provisions shall be used to minimize development impacts to the listed species and to encourage wildlife to use wildlife corridors. N. Roadways crossings, underpasses, and signage shall be used where roads must cross wildlife corridors as determined by the authorities governing crossing locations. The wildlife habitat management plan shall also incorporate the following: A description of the techniques used to direct incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats and to comply with the criteria identified in 1 and 2 above, as applicable.; Identification of appropriate lighting controls for permitted uses including, outdoor lighting that is designed to protect the nighttime 12 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 477 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security, and a consideration of the opportunity to utilize prescribed burning to maintain fire -adapted preserved vegetation communities and provide browse for white-tailed deer, consistent with the USFWS South Florida Multi -Species Recovery Plan, May 1999, except as recommended otherwise by the USFWS or FFWCC_; and fly If the development will be large than 10 acres, ai-rvririn_g ito—�� � � � `J- iii. A description of provisions to minimize human and wildlife interactions based on the most current FFWCC guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human -wildlife contact, consistent with the baseline standards provided in LDC section 4.08.05 J.3.a. Low intensity land uses, such as lakes, parks, or passive recreation areas, vegetation preserves, and agriculture shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat and areas dominated by human activities. iv. The methods to be used for disseminating information to local residents, visitors, and businesses about the presence of wildlife and practices that enable coexistence and minimized interaction such as appropriate waste disposal practices. V. Mitigation for impacting listed species habitat shall be considered in the management plan, as appropriate. vi. A monitorina Droaram if the develoDment will be areater than 10 ftrel C. The most current and comDleted data and local. state. and federal guidelines and regulations shall be utilized to prepare the required management plans. Management guidelines contained in publications used by the FFWCC and USFWS for technical assistance shall be used for developing required management plans, and the County shall consider any other techniques recommended by the FFWCC and the USFWS, consistent with LDC section 4.08.05 J.4. The following referenGes shall be used, as e te pFepare the wildlife habitat management plan: 13 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 478 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added I V. Ecology and development Related Habitat Requirements of the 3 8, F'OF'da Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission-, 1991.v.EGelegy and Habitat PreteGtien Needs of the Southeastern 5 Amermean Kestrel (Falco Sparverius Paulus) on Large scale 9 r+ The followong species speenfinPFE)VOS'GRSshall be included within the 10 oldiife habitat management plan if the wildlife SHFvey indiGates that the - 11 identified species Lifilizes the site or the site OS Gapable Of SUPPOFt'Rg and 12 likely te suppeFt sueh speeies, . 13 14 Gephel: teFtemse. F„r ^^reels eent ,ining phor +cr cvri^viees (GepheFUS 15 pol yphemu s) prierity shall be given to .,roteo+ing the largest, most r,+ig e s gopher +nrtemse habitat with +oo+ R �mhor of 16 EA,,zga���op,-r �iG�Q�ea�-r,-a,,,,��,--oT 17 er)+ive burrows, and for providing a eo nection to off site adjacent 18 gepher +nr+r,ioo nroc or"oc 19 1 ReFida sGFub jay. Habitat•_ , .. • 27 preserve and the need te maintain the scrub vegetation sh : develeped. These requirements eonsistent wit - • USFWS South Florida Multi Species Recovery Plan, May 1... 1 31 Bald eagle. For the bald eagle (Hainaeetus leuceee 32 equi. ed habitat management plans shall establish prot 33 around the eagle nest reStF!Gfing Ger-tain aGtivities. The plans sh nnynr Dion May ... 37 (1pneoides borealis), the required habitat protection plan shall •1 41 minimize impacts to foraging habitat. Where adverse effe6ts e 42 be avemded, measures shall be taken te .. These requirements shall be eonsistent with the USFWS Seut 45 Florida Multi Species Reeovery Plan, May ... .6 be present,the management .; .• central IOGatmens. The management plan shall also identify rn 1 . ,........ 14 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 479 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough ;G Gurrent text to be deleted between bla& bears and hu mans.Mitigation for impaetino habitat suitable for hlasL hoar shall be s sodered in the management plan 4. On property where the wildlife survey establishes that listed species are utilizing the site or where the site is capable of supporting listed species and such listed species can be anticipated to potentially occupy the site, the County shall, consistent with the RLSA Overlay of the GMP, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the FFWCC State of and recommendations from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development orders. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case -by -case basis may strengthen Ghange the requirements contained herein and any such change shall be deemed consistent with this Code. However, no reduction of the wildlife protection standards herein will be considered as these constitute minimum standards for wildlife protection. K. Golf course standards. Except as otherwise required by L. or M. below, all golf courses within the RLSA District that are not within an SRA shall be subject to the following requirements: Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program (ACSP) for Golf Courses. The project shall demonstrate that the ACSP's Environment Management Practices for Golf Courses have been incorporated into the golf course design or operational procedure. Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program (ACSP) for Golf Courses Audubon International's Gold Signature Program The project shall demonstrate that the ACSP's Environment Management Practices for Golf grip lei- for oesouree Management h„ Signature Courses ,Tn-rc�prc��vr�-cc�var required by the ararc Drearam (Cite SpAssessment, Hahi+a+ C sitiyity, Native d Alaturalize ce�a aka-rv�arurrcccr ��J and Natural La ds piny Water Conservation, Waste Management. Tyra-JC-ep.,��vwrcr��erprsno-r"v'a ri--cv-�a�-ct, Energy J Genserva+i renewable Energy Coy �reeS Transportation Greenssppa�cc wand idsAgrioulturldin Energy have been incorporated into the golf course's design and operational procedures. In addition to addressing these requirements, golf courses shall meet the following specific criteria: a. In order to prevent the contamination of soil, surface water and ground water by the materials stored and handled by golf course maintenance operations, golf courses shall comply with the Best Management Practices for Enhancement of Environmental Qualitv on Florida Golf Courses 15 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 480 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Maintenance Departmts, prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, September 2012, as amended M 1995. To protect ground and surface water quality from fertilizer and pesticide usage, golf courses shall demonstrate the following management practices: The use of slow release nitrogen sources; The use of soil and plant tissue analysis to adjust timing and amount of fertilization applications; iii. The use of an integrated pest management program using both biological and chemical agents to control various pests; iv. The coordination of pesticide applications with the timing and application of irrigation water; and V. The use of the procedure contained ;n IFAS Gir,., T Managing Gides feF Gelf GeuFse MaintenanGe ancr-cvcrr2F Quality roteGfion, May 1991 (revised 1995) seteEt pesticides that will have a minimum adverse impact on water quality, in compliance with Best Management Practices for the Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses, FDEP, September 2012, as amended. 2. To ensure water conservation, golf courses shall incorporate the following in their design and operation: a. Irrigation systems shall be designed to use weather station information and moisture -sensing systems to determine the optimum amount of irrigation water needed considering soil moisture and evapotranspiration rates. As available, golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Public Facilities Element of the Growth Management Plan GMP SanitaFy Sewer Sub Element Objective 4-4 and its policies.; C. Native plants shall be used exclusively except for special purpose areas such as golf greens, fairways, and building sites. Within these excepted areas, landscaping plans shall require that at least 75% of the trees and 50% of the shrubs be freeze -tolerant native Floridian species. At least 75% of the required native trees and shrubs shall also be drought tolerant species. 3. Stormwater management ponds shall be designed to mimic the functions of natural systems: by establishing shorelines that are sinuous in configuration in order to provide increased length and diversity of the littoral zone. A Littoral shelf shall be established to provide a feeding area for water dependent avian species. The combined length of vertical and rip -rapped walls shall be limited to 25% of the shoreline. Credits to the site preservation area requirements, on an acre -to -acre 16 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 481 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added basis, shall be given for littoral shelves that exceed these littoral shelf area requirements. L. Standards applicable in FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs that are outside of the ACSC. The provisions of Chapters 3, 4, and 10 in effect as of July 25, 2000, shall apply to FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs outside of the ACSC, with the following exceptions: Site clearing and alteration shall be limited to 20% of the property and nonpermeable surfaces shall not exceed 50% of any such area. 2. Except for roads and lakes, any nonpermeable surface greater than one acre shall provide for release of surface water run off, collected or uncollected, in a manner approximating the natural surface water flow regime of the surrounding area. 3. Roads shall be designed to allow the passage of surface water flows through the use of equalizer pipes, interceptor spreader systems or performance equivalent structures. 4. Revegetation and landscaping of cleared areas shall be accomplished with predominantly native species and planting of undesirable exotic species shall be prohibited. M. Standards applicable to wetlands outside of FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and the ACSC. Wetlands located outside of FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and the ACSC shall be preserved in accord with the following criteria: The vegetative preservation requirement set forth in J.2. above shall first be met through preservation of wetlands having a functionality assessment score of 0.65 or greater. Applicants shall establish the wetland functionality score of wetlands using the South Florida Water Management District's Unified Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method, F.A.C. 62-345. Upland vegetative communities may be utilized to meet the vegetative, open space, and site preservation requirements when the wetland functional assessment score of on -site wetlands is less than 0.65. 2. Wetlands and contiguous upland buffers that are utilized by listed species or serving as corridors for the movement of listed species shall be preserved on site. 3. Wetland flow —way functions through the project shall be maintained. 4. Ground water table drawdowns or diversions shall not adversely change the hydroperiod of preserved wetlands on or off -site and detention and control elevations shall be set to protect surrounding wetlands and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. In order to meet these requirements, projects shall be designed in accordance with the current CA 2 2 A G 1 and G 12 of CC\NMD's Basis of FW Basis o e Review Q�t+e;,�-- . � Review, january 2004. 5. All direct impacts shall be mitigated for as required by applicable federal or state agencies and in the same manner as set forth in section 4.06.04 of this Code. 17 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 482 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 6. Single family residences shall follow the requirements contained within Policy 6.2.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP. 7. Appropriate buffering shall be provided to separate preserved wetlands from other land uses. A minimum 50-foot vegetated upland buffer is required adjacent to a natural water body and for other wetlands a minimum 25-foot vegetated upland buffer adjacent to the wetland. A structural buffer, consisting of a stem -wall, a berm, or a vegetative hedge with suitable fencing, may be used in conjunction with a vegetative buffer that would reduce the vegetative buffer width by 50%. A structural buffer shall be required adjacent to wetlands where direct impacts are allowed. Wetland buffers shall conform to the following standards: a. The buffer shall be measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line. b. The buffer zone shall consist of preserved native vegetation. Where native vegetation does not exist, native vegetation compatible with the existing soils and expected hydrologic conditions shall be planted. C. The buffer shall be maintained free of Category I Exotics. d. The following land uses are considered to be compatible with wetland functions and are allowed within the buffer: Passive recreational areas, boardwalks and recreational shelters; ii. Pervious nature trails; iii. Water management structures; iv. Mitigation areas; V. Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses. 8. Mitigation rRequirements. Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to wetlands, such that the wetland functional score of the mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland functional score of the impacted wetlands. a. Priority shall be given to mitigation within FSAs and HSAs. b. Loss of storage or conveyance volume resulting from direct impacts to wetlands shall be compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity on site and within or adjacent to the impacted wetland. C. Protection shall be provided for preserved or created wetland or upland vegetative communities offered as mitigation by placing a conservation easement over the land in perpetuity, providing for initial exotic plant 18 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 483 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added removal (Class I invasive exotic plants defined by the Florida Exotic Plant Council) and continuing exotic plant maintenance, or by appropriate ownership transfer to a state or federal agency along with sufficient funding for perpetual management activities. 9. Prior to issuance of any final development order that authorizes site alteration, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with paragraphs LDC section 4.08.05 M.8.a. through LDC section 4.08.05 M.8.de. above, as applicable, and SFWMD standards. If state or federal agency permits have not provided mitigation consistent with paFagFaphs LDC section 4.08.05 M.8 above, the County shall require mitigation exceeding that of the jurisdictional agencies. 10. Wetland preservation, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be identified or platted as separate tracts. In the case of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), these areas shall also be depicted on the PUD Master Plan. These areas shall be maintained free from trash and debris and from Category I Exotics. Land uses allowed in these areas shall be limited to those identified in LDC section 4.08.05 M.7.d. above. N. Outdoor lighting. Any development proposed in the RLSA District shall be compatible with surrounding land uses and implement appropriate lighting controls for permitted uses, including outdoor lighting that is designed to protect and preserve the nighttime environment by minimizing light pollution and glare while reducing energy consumption and upholding safety and security. Except for when the County Manager or designee determines otherwise to protect the health, safety, and welfare, permanent outdoor lighting shall comply with the following_ All outdoor freestandina liahtina facilities shall be limited to a maximum of 25 feet in height. This height limitation shall also be applicable to streetlights located within private and public rights -of -way. However, any lighting from a non- residential use, excluding rights -of -way, and located within 50 feet of a residential property line shall be limited to 15 feet in height. 2. All off-street parking, loading, and other vehicular use areas shall utilize lighting fixtures that are fully shielded and directs lighting downward. This includes the top-level/roof areas of parking garages. 3. All lighting fixtures shall be fully shielded when affixed to walls of non-residential uses, multi -family buildings, and related accessory structures. Any mounted to soffits for these uses shall be recessed into the soffit or otherwise fullv shielded. 4. Lighting shall not be aimed onto adjacent properties without consent, except in cases of shared parking, shared pedestrian pathways, coordinated development sites spanning multiple parcels, or to otherwise comply with LDC section 6.06.03. 5. Lighting used for outdoor athletic fields, courts, or tracks shall be shielded to the maximum extent possible to reduce glare, safety hazards, light trespass, and light pollution. These lights shall be extinguished within one hour at the end of active use. 19 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 484 of 708 I�.f_1*I Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 6. For pedestrian pathway lighting, if bollard -type lighting facilities are used, they shall be fully shielded and painted dark colors, such as black, dark gray, dark brown, or dark earth tones. 7. Pedestrian walkway lighting shall use shatterproof lamp coverings. 4.08.06 - SSA Designation Lands within the {RLSA District may be designated as SSAs subject to the following regulations: A. Lands Within the RLSA _District that can be Designated as SSAs. Any privately held land within the RLSA District delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map as FSA, HSA, WRA, Restoration Area, or Open, may be designated as an SSA, including lands within the ACSC. 1. May be within an SRA Boundary. A WRA, whether designated as an SSA or not, may be contiguous to or surrounded by an SRA. Should a WRA be used to provide water retention for an SRA, the provisions of LDC section 4.08.06 AA.b. shall apply. 2. FSA Delineated Lands. a. In the case where lands delineated as FSA are designated as an SSA, at a minimum, Residential uses, General conditional uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1-4) as listed in the Land Use Matrix shall be eliminated as permitted land uses. c Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety as described in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2., shall only be allowed in FSAs with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. Directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development, and production activities in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit requiring compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on June 16, 2005, regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Swamp as defined in section 377.42, F.S. Rule 62C 30 001(2) F. . All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, FAC. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with the Florida Statues and Florida Administrative Code GhapteF 62G 25 thFe gh 62C 30 F . even 20 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 485 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 3 if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protect from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)1 through 12, FAC. Nothing contained herein alters the requirement to obtain conditional use permits for oil and gas field development and production activities. Directional - drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development and production activities in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit requiring compliance with the criteria established in the Florida Statutes and Florida Administrative Code Gh.,. teF 62C 25 through 62C 30 F. ., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005, regardless of whether the FSA in which oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development and production activities is within the Big Cypress Swamp as defined in section 377.42, F.S. Rule 62C 30 001(2) F.A.G. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with the Florida Statutes and Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62C 25 through 62C 30 F.A.C. even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. Nothing contained herein alters the requirement to obtain conditional use permits for oil and gas field development and production activities. d. The elimination of the Earth Mining layer (Layer 3) shall not preclude the excavation of lakes or other water bodies if such use is an integral part of a restoration or mitigation program within an FSA. e. Once land in an FSA is designated as an SSA, no expansion of Agriculture Group 1 (Layer 5) or Agriculture Group 2 (Layer 7) and no conversion of Agriculture Group 2 to Agriculture Group 1 shall be allowed beyond those land uses in existence or allowed by applicable permits as of the date that the SSA designation is approved other than incidental clearing as set forth in f. below. Incidental clearing is permitted, provided that the Ag 1 Land Use Layer has been retained on the areas to be incidentally cleared and the Natural Resource Index Value score has been adjusted to reflect the proposed change in land cover. In the event said incidental clearing impacts lands having a Natural Resource Index Value in excess of 1.2, appropriate mitigation shall be provided. HSA Delineated Lands. a. In the case where lands delineated as HSA are designated as an SSA, at a minimum, Residential Land Uses (Layer 1), as listed in the Matrix, shall be eliminated. General conditional uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses shall be allowed only on HSA lands with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. 21 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 486 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 C. In addition to the requirements imposed in the LDC for approval of a conditional use, uses listed in b. above will only be approved upon submittal of Environmental Data an EIS which demonstrates that clearing of native vegetation has been minimized, the use will not significantly and adversely impact listed species and their habitats and the use will not significantly and adversely impact aquifers. This demonstration shall be made by establishing the following: i. M Clearing of native vegetation shall not exceed 15% of the native vegetation on the parcel. ii. {2) Priority shall be given to utilizing contiguous areas of previously cleared land before native vegetated areas. Buffering to Conservation Land shall comply with LDC section Section 4.08.07 1.5.d.iid-6.10. iv. (4) Stormwater Management design shall base water control elevations on seasonal high water elevations of adjacent wetlands to protect wetland hydroperiods in accord with the SFWMD Basis of Review. V. {} The area has a Listed Species Habitat Indices Value of 0.4 or less and no state or federal direct impact take permit is required for the use. vi. {64 Activities that are the subject of an approved SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit or Consumptive Use Permit and that utilize best management practices designed to protect groundwater from contamination from allowable land uses are deemed not to significantly and adversely impact aquifers. d. As an alternative to the submittal of the Environmental Data required in LDC section 4.08.06 A.3.c. an EIS, the applicant may demonstrate that such use is an integral part of a State or Federally approved restoration plan or mitigation program. e. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public as described in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2.shall only be allowed in HSAs with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. f. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants are prohibited in all HSAs. g. Directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development, and production activities in HSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit 22 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 487 of 708 Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 4 requiring compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on June 16, 2005, regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Swamp as defined in section 377.42, F.S. Rule a' C 30 001(2) F. n r-. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, FAC. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C- 30.005(2)(a)1 through 12, FAC. Nothing contained herein alters the requirement to obtain conditional use permits for oil and gas field development and production activities. Golf Course design, construction, and operation in any HSA shall comply with the best management practices of Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary intern ,+,nabs Geld Program for Golf and the Florida DEP, which standards shall be adopted by December 13 2003 Once land in an HSA is designated as an SSA, no expansion of Agriculture Group 1 (Layer 5) or Agriculture Group 2 (Layer 7) and no conversion of Agriculture Group 2 to Agriculture Group 1 shall be allowed beyond those land uses in existence or allowed by applicable permits as of the date that the SSA designation is approved other than incidental clearing as set forth in j. below. Incidental clearing is permitted, provided that the Ag 1 Land Use Layer has been retained on the areas to be incidentally cleared and the Natural Resource Index Value score change in land cover. In the having a Natural Resource mitigation shall be provided. WRA Delineated Lands. has been adjusted to reflect the proposed event said incidental clearing impacts lands Index Value in excess of 1.2, appropriate a. In the case where lands delineated as WRA are designated as an SSA, at a minimum, Residential Land Uses (Layer 1), as listed in the Matrix, shall be eliminated as permitted land uses. During permitting to serve new uses within an SRA, additions and modifications to WRAs may be required, including but not limited to changes to control elevations, discharge rates, storm water pre-treatment, grading, excavation or fill. Such additions and modifications shall be allowed subject to review and approval by the SFWMD in accordance with best management practices. Such additions and modifications to WRAs 23 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 488 of 708 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strikethrough is Gurrent text to he deleted shall be designed to ensure that there is no net loss of habitat function within the WRAs unless there is compensating mitigation or restoration in other areas of the RLSA District that will provide comparable habitat function. Compensating mitigation or restoration for an impact to a WRA contiguous to the Camp Keais Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough shall be provided within or contiguous to that Strand or Slough. 5. Restoration Zone Delineated Lands. To further direct other uses away from and to provide additional incentive for the protection, enhancement, and restoration of the Okaloacoochee Slough and Camp Keais Strand, when lands within a Restoration Zone are designated as an SSA and at least Land Use Layers 1 through 4 are eliminated as permitted uses, such Restoration Zone shall receive a Stewardship Overlay Designation value of 0.6. B. SSA Credit Generation - Stewardship Credit System. Stewardship Credits (Credits) are created from any lands within the RLSA District from which one or more Land Use Layers are eliminated removed and that are designated as SSAs. Once land is designated as an SSA and Credits or other compensation consistent with Policy 3.8 of the RLSA Overlay is granted to the owner, no increase in density or additional uses not expressly identified in the Stewardship Agreement shall be allowed on such property. A methodology has been adopted in the GMP for the calculation of credits based upon: 1) the Natural Resource Index Value of the land being designated as an SSA, and 2) the number of land use layers being eliminated. Early Entry bonus credits. Early Entry bonus credits were are hereby established to encourage the voluntary designation of SSAs within the RLSA District. The bonus shall be was in the form of an additional one Stewardship Credit per acre of land designated as an SSA that is within an HSA located outside of the ACSC and one-half Stewardship Credit per acre of land designated as an SSA that is within an HSA located inside the ACSC. a. The early entry bonus was shall be available until January 30, 2009. be. Credits generated under the early entry bonus may be used after the termination of the bonus period. ce. Early Entry bonus credits shall not be transferred into or otherwise used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC. 2. Agricultural Stewardship Area (ASA). Open Lands are eligible for designation as Agricultural Stewardship Areas. To qualify as an ASA, all non -agriculture uses shall be eliminated from the property and the remaining uses shall be limited to aaricultural Land Use Lavers 5. 6 and 7 on the Land Use Matrix. In lieu of aoolvina 24 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 489 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 I�.f_1*I the Natural Resource Index, lands d Stewardship Credits per acre. Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough s Gurrept text to he deleted nated as ASAs shall be awarded two (2.0 32-. The Stewardship Credit Worksheet, adopted as Attachment "A" of the GMP RLSA Goals, Objectives, and Policies, sets out the mathematical formula that shall be used to determine the number of credits available for each acre of land being considered for an SSA. 4-. Natural Resource Indices and Values. A set of Natural Resource Indices has been established as part of the Stewardship Credit Worksheet. a. Natural Resource Indices. Stewardship Overlay Designation Proximity Indices Listed Species Habitat Indices Soils/Surface Water Indices Restoration Potential Indices Land Use - Land Cover Indices Index Values. During the RLSA Study, based upon data and analysis, each acre within the RLSA District was assigned a value for each Index except for the Restoration Potential Index. The Restoration Potential Index is assigned during the SSA designation process if appropriate, and credit adjustments are made at that time. C. Restoration Areas Index Score Upgrade. An index score upgrade is hereby established as an incentive for the protection, enhancement and restoration of the Okaloacoochee Slough and Camp Keais Strand. All lands within 500 feet of the delineated FSAs as shown on the RLSA Overlay Map that comprise the Slough or Strand that are not otherwise included in an HSA or WRA shall receive the same natural index score (0.6) that an HSA receives, if such property is designated as an SSA and retains only agricultural, recreational and/or conservation, restoration, and natural resource layers of land use (Layers 5-8 on the Land Use Matrix). d. Index Map. A Natural Resource Index Map adopted as a part of the RLSA Overlay, indicates the Natural Resource Stewardship Index Value for all land within the RLSA District. Credits from any lands designated as SSAs, shall be based upon the Natural Resource Index values in effect at the time of designation. At the time of designation, the Natural Resource Index Assessment required in Section 4.08.06 C.3. shall document any necessary adjustments to the index values reflected on the Index Map. Any change in the characteristics of land due to alteration of the land prior to 25 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 490 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added the designation of an SSA that either increases or decreases any Index Value shall result in a corresponding adjustment in the credit value. e. Restoration Potential Index Value. If the applicant asserts that the land being designated as an SSA has a Restoration Potential Index Value of greater than zero (0), an evaluation of the restoration potential of the land being designated shall be prepared by a qualified environmental consultant (per Chapter 34-0 of the LDC) on behalf of the applicant and submitted as part of the SSA Designation Application Package. In the event that restoration potential is identified, the appropriate Restoration Potential Index Value shall be determined in accord with the Credit Worksheet. The credit value of each acre to which the Restoration Potential Index Value is applied shall be recalculated by adding the Restoration Potential Index Value to that acre's total Index Value. 5. f-. Restoration Stewardship Credits. Restoration Stewardship Credits are hereby established in addition to the Restoration Potential Index Value. In certain locations there may be the opportunity for flow way or habitat restoration such as locations where flow ways have been constricted or otherwise impeded by past activities or where additional land is needed to enhance wildlife corridors. Restoration Stewardship Credits shall be applied to an SSA subject to the following regulations_: Credits shall only be approved for one type of restoration per acre and in no case shall more than 10 Credits be awarded per acre. a. Panther corridor credits. As generally illustrated in the RLSA Overlay Map, there may be opportunities to create, restore, and enhance a northern panther corridor connection and a southern panther corridor connection. Should a property owner in a federally approved corridor designate the required property for such corridor, then two Stewardship Credits shall be awarded for each acre of land so designated. Should an owner also effectively complete the corridor restoration, this shall be awarded with eight additional Credits per acre of restored land upon demonstration that the restoration met applicable success criteria as determined by the federal permit agency authorizing said restoration. The awarding of the eight (8) restoration implementation credits may be phased to coincide with a phased implementation process in accordance with the federal permit. Wetland Wadina Bird Habitat Restoration Credits. Desianation of anv area for seasonal wetland restoration inside an FSA, HSA, or WRA shall be awarded two (2) additional Credits per acre. The dedication shall be by conveyance or restrictive covenant. Should the landowner successfully comDlete the restoration, an additional eiaht (8) Credits Der acre shall be awarded. C. Other restoration credits. i. Should a property owner designate land for restoration activities within an FSA or HSA, one (1) additional Stewardship Credit shall be awarded for each acre of land so dedicated and identified as Restoration I (R 1) within each individuallv submitted SSA. 26 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 491 of 708 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is Gurrent text to be deleted ii. Completion of restoration. Upon completion of the restoration improvements, the owner shall be awarded additional stewardship credits identified as R2 Restoration within each individually submitted SSA, as follows: a) Caracara restoration credits at two (2) credits per acre. b) Exotic controlled burning at five (5) credits per acre. c) Flow wav restoration credits at five (5) credits Der acre. d) Native habitat restoration credits at seven (7) credits acre. (3-) The actual implementation of restoration improvements is not required for the owner to receive such credits referenced in LDC 4.08.06 B.5.c.i. (1) and (2) above. iv. (4) On lands Lands designated 'Restoration;' Land Use Layers 1 through 6 must be eliminated and allowable uses shall be limited restrieted to Agriculture - Group 2 and conservation uses and all natural areas shall be maintained in their existing natural condition until such time as restoration activities occur. Upon completion of restoration, the land shall be managed in accordance with the applicable restoration permit conditions, which may impose further restriction on the allowed use of the property. 27 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 492 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 V. One or more of the following eligibility criteria shall be used in evaluating an applicant's request for these additional Restoration Stewardship Credits: (a) FSA and/or HSA lands where restoration would increase the width of flow way and/or habitat corridors along the Camp Keais Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough so that, in the opinion of the applicant's environmental consultant and County environmental or natural resources staff, there will be functional enhancement of the flow way or wildlife corridor; (b) FSA and/or HSA lands where restoration would increase the width of flow way and/or habitat corridors within two miles of existing public lands so that, in the opinion of the applicant's environmental consultant and County environmental or natural resources staff, there will be a functional enhancement of the flow way or wildlife corridor; (c) Documentation of state or federal listed species utilizing the land or a contiguous parcel; (d) Lands that could be restored and managed to provide habitats for specific listed species (e.g., gopher tortoise, Big Cypress fox squirrel, red -cockaded woodpecker, etc.), or; (e) Occurrence of a land parcel within foraging distance from a wading bird rookery or other listed bird species colony, where restoration and proper management could increase foraging opportunities (e.g., wood storks). 64. Land Use Layers to be Elimin" A set of Land Use Layers has been established as part of the Stewardship Credit Worksheet and adopted as the Land Use Matrix set forth below. Each Layer incorporates a number of the permitted or conditional uses allowed under the Baseline Standards. Each Layer listed below has an established credit value (percentage of a base credit) developed during the RLSA Study. At the time of designation application, a landowner wishing to have hisiheF land designated as an SSA determines how many of the Land Use Layers are to be eliminated Femeyed from the designated lands. A Land Use Layer can only be eliminated removed in its entirety (all associated activities/land use are eliminated rernevea), and Layers shall be eliminated remeved sequentially and cumulatively in the order listed below. a. Land Use Layers. 1 - Residential Land Uses 2 - General conditional uses 28 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 493 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Layer 1 Residential Land Uses Single-family dwelling, incl. Mobile Home (P) Mobile homes [(P) in MH Overlay; (A) as temporary use] Private boathouses and docks on lake, canal or waterway lots (A) 3 - Earth Mining and Processing Uses 4 - Recreational Uses 5 - Agriculture - Group 1 6 - Agriculture - Support Uses 7 - Agriculture - Group 2 8 - Conservation, Restoration and Natural Resources b. Land Use Matrix Layer 2 General Conditional Uses Family care facilities (P) Collection and transfer sites for resource recovery (CU) Veterinary clinic (CU) Layer 3 Earth Mining and Processing Uses Excavation, extraction or earthmining and related processing and production (CU) Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants (CU) see next page for Matrix Layer 4 Recreational Uses Golf courses and/or golf driving ranges (CU) Sports instructional schools and camps (CU) Sporting and recreational camps (CU) 29 Layer 5 Agriculture Group 1 Crop raising; horticulture; fruit and nut production; groves; nurseries; improved pasture (P) Animal breeding (other than livestock), raising, training, stabling or kenneling (P) Dairying, beekeeping poultry and egg production; milk production Layer 6 Agriculture Support Uses Farm labor housing (A) Retail sale of fresh, unprocess ed agricultura I products; grown primarily on the property (A) Retail plant nurseries (CU) Layer 7 Agriculture Group 2 Unimproved pasture and grazing, forestry (P) Ranching; livestock raising (P) Hunting cabins (CU) Layer 8 Conservation, Restoration and Natural Resources Wildlife management, plant and wildlife conservancies, refuges and sanctuaries (P) Water management, groundwater recharge (P) Restoration, mitigation (P) G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 494 of 708 Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 Recreational facilities integral to residential development, e.g., golf course, clubhouse, community center building and tennis facilities, parks, playgrounds and playfields (A) Guesthouses (A) Child care centers and adult day care centers Zoo, aquarium, aviary, botanical garden, or other similar uses (CU) Churches and other places of worship (CU) Communicat ions towers (P)(CU) Social and fraternal organization s (CU) Private landing strips for general aviation (CU) Cemeteries (CU) Schools (CU) Group care facilities, ALF (CU) The commercial production, raising or breeding or exotic animals (CU) Wholesale reptile breeding and raising - non- venomous (P) and venomous (CU) Uses as listed in LDC- Rural Agricultural District 30 Packingho use or similar agricultura I processin g of farm products produced on the property (A) Sawmills (CU) Cultural, educational, or recreational facilities and their related modes of transporting participants, viewers or patrons; tour operations, such as, but not limited to airboats, swamp buggies, horses and similar modes of transportation (CU) Excavation and related processing incidental to Ag(A) Water supply, wellfields (P); oil and gas exploration (P) Boardwalks, nature trails (P) Natural resources not otherwise listed (P) Essential services (P and CU) Oil and gas field development and production (CU) G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 495 of 708 1111DA-1121 Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 (P) principal use, (a) accessory use, (CU) conditional use C. Any development proposed in the RLSA District shall be compatible with surrounding land uses and implement appropriate lighting controls for permitted uses, including outdoor lighting that is designed to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Except for when the County Manager or designee determines otherwise to protect the health, safety, and welfare, permanent outdoor lighting shall comDly with the criteria listed in LDC section 4.08.05 N. 75. Matrix Calculation. The maximum number of credits generated through designation as an SSA is established in a matrix calculation that multiplies each Natural Resource Index Value by the value of each Land Use Layer, thereby establishing a credit value for each acre in the RLSA Overlay, weighted by the quality of its natural resources. As Land Use Layers are eliminated Fernevea, the sum of the percentages of those Layers eliminated removed is multiplied by the Natural Resource Index Values to determine the Stewardship Credits to be generated by each acre being designated as an SSA. C. SSA Designation Application Package. A request to designate lands(s) within the RLSA District as an SSA shall be made pursuant to the regulations of this Section. An SSA Application Package shall include the following: SSA Designation Application. A landowner or his/her agent, hereafter "applicant," shall submit a request for the designation of SSA for lands within the RLS District to the County Manager or his designee, on an approved application form. The application shall be accompanied by the documentation as required by this Section. 2. Application Fee. An application fee shall accompany the application. 3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. The applicant shall prepare and submit as part of the SSA Designation Application a report entitled Natural Resource Index Assessment that documents the Natural Resource Index Value scores. The Assessment shall include a summary analysis that quantifies the number of acres by Index Values, the level of conservation being proposed, and the resulting number of Credits being generated. The Assessment shall: a. Verify that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are still valid through recent aerial photography or satellite imagery, agency - approved mapping, or other documentation, as verified by field inspections. If if this Assessment establishes that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are no longer valid, document the Index Value of the land as of the date of the SSA Designation Application. 31 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 496 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added C. Establish the suggested 'Restoration Potential" Index Value for any acres as appropriate and provide evidence/documentation supporting the suggested Index Value; d. Quantify the acreage of agricultural lands, by type, being preserved; e. Quantify the acreage of non-agricultural acreage, by type, being preserved; f. Quantify the acreage of all lands by type within the proposed SSA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2; and g. Quantify all lands, by type, being designated as SSA within the ACSC, if any. 4. Support Documentation. In addition, the following support documentation shall be provided for each SSA being designated: a. Legal description, including sketch or survey; b. Acreage calculations, e.g., acres of FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs, etc., being put into the SSA; C. RLSA Overlay Map delineating the area of the RLSA District being designated as an SSA; d. Aerial photograph(s) having a scale of one (1) inch equal to at least 200 feet when available from the County, otherwise, a scale of at least one (1) inch equal to 400 feet is acceptable, delineating the area being designated as an SSA; e. Natural Resource Index Map of area being designated as an SSA; f. FDOT Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SSA on an aerial photograph having a scale of one (1) inch equal to at least 200 feet when available from the County, otherwise, a scale of at least one (1) inch equal to 400 feet is acceptable; g. Listed species occurrence map(s) from United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) Florida Fish Wildlife Conservation Commission, and Florida Natural Areas Inventory, delineating the area being designated as an SSA; h. United States Department of Agriculture -Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) Soils map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SSA; Documentation to support a change in the related Natural Resource Index Value(s), if appropriate; and 32 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 497 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 j. Calculations that quantify the number of acres by Index Values, the level of conservation being offered, and the resulting number of credits being generated. 5. SSA Credit Agreement. Any landowner petitioning to have all or a portion of land owned within the RLSA District designated as an SSA and who is to obtain SSA credits for the land so designated shall enter into a SSA Credit Agreement with the County. SSA Credit Agreements entered into by and between a landowner and the County shall contain the following: a. The number of acres, and a legal description of all lands subject to the SSA Credit Agreement; b. A map or plan (drawn at a scale of 1 "= 500') of the land subject to the agreement which depicts any lands designated FSAs, HSAs, or WRAs and the acreage of lands so designated; C. A narrative description of all land uses, including conditional uses, if any, that shall be eliminated removed from the land upon approval of the SSA Credit Agreement; d. Calculations that support the total number of SSA credits that result from the Natural Resource Index Assessment; e. A copy of the Stewardship easement, (or deed if a fee simple transfer is proposed) applicable to the land, which shall be granted in perpetuity and shall be recorded by the County upon approval of the SSA Credit Agreement; f. Land management measures; g. Provisions requiring that, upon designation of land as an SSA, the owner shall not seek or request, and the County shall not grant or approve, any increase in density or any additional uses beyond those specified in the SSA Credit Agreement on the land; h. Provisions requiring that, upon designation of land within either an FSA or an HSA as an SSA, the owner shall not thereafter seek or request, and the County shall not thereafter grant or approve any expansion or conversion of agricultural land uses in violation of sections 4.08.06 A.2 and A.3.; Provisions regarding and ensuring the enforceability of the SSA Credit Agreement; and If applicable, the number of credits to be granted for restoration (Restoration Credits), together with the following information: i. M A legal description of lands to be designated for restoration; 33 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 498 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 ii. (2) A map depicting the land being designated as SSA, with the lands to be dedicated for restoration, but which the applicant makes no commitment to undertake restoration, identified as Restoration I ("R I"); and the lands dedicated for restoration and for which the applicant has committed to carry out the restoration identified as Restoration 11 ("R 11"); iii. (3) The number of Restoration Credits to be granted for the lands designated R I and R 11; iv. (4) A Restoration Analysis and Report, which shall include a written evaluation of the restoration area's existing ecological/habitat value and the necessary restoration efforts required to reestablish original conditions; enhance the functionality of wetlands or wildlife habitat; or remove exotics so as to enhance the continued viability of native vegetation and wetlands; and V. (-5-) When the restoration is to be undertaken by the applicant, a Restoration Plan that addresses, at a minimum, the following elements: (a) Restoration goals or species potentially affected; (b) Description of the work to be performed; (c) Identification of the entity responsible for performing the work; (d) Work Schedule; (e) Success Criteria; and (f) Annual management, maintenance and monitoring. 6. Public Hearing for Credit Agreement. The SSA Credit Agreement shall be approved by a resolution of the BCC at an advertised public meeting by majority vote. 7. Recording of SSA Memorandum. Following approval by the County, an SSA Memorandum shall be prepared and recorded in the public records, together with the following portions or exhibits of the SSA Credit Agreement as attachments: a. The legal description of the lands subject to the SSA Credit Agreement and the number of SSA Credits assigned to the land designated as SSA, including lands designated for restoration, if any, and the Restoration Credits assigned to such land; b. The Stewardship Easement easernenn Agreement on the SSA lands, describing the land uses remaining on the land; 34 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 499 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 C. A summary of the Restoration Plan, if restoration is to be undertaken by the applicant, to include the elements set forth in Section 4.08.06 C.5. 8. Conditional Stewardship Easement easerien Agreement er Deed. The applican- :,,-ra.,prepare and submit a Stewardship Easement reavc�neFlAgreement On ak c;ases exeept when the PFOper-ty is being deeded in fee simple te a a. The applicant shall prepare and submit a Conditional Stewardship Easement Agreement with the SSA application in all cases except when the property is being deeded in fee simple to a conservation land trust accredited by the Land Trust Accreditation Commission. b. UDon the initial aDDroval of an SSA, a Conditional Stewardship Easement shall be established for a term of five years (hereinafter referred to as "Conditional Period"). All conditions and restrictions related to maintaining the existing property conditions, including all management obligations of the owner of the SSA lands shall be full force durina the Conditional Period. c.a-. The Conditional Stewardship Easement Agreement shall impose a restrictive covenant or grant a perpetual restrictive easement that shall be recorded for each SSA. The Conditional Stewardship Easement shall run with the land and s4a44 be in favor of Collier County and FFWCC and include one or more of the following: Florida DEP, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, SFWMD, or a wed land trust accredited by the Land Trust Accreditation Commission. d.b-. The Conditional Stewardship Easement easement Agreement shall identify the specific land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures. e.E In the event that the land being designated as an SSA is being transferred to a conservation entity by fee simple title, a deed shall be submitted in lieu of the Conditional Stewardship Easement ern Agreement. W, Termination of the Conditional Stewardship Easement shall be done in compliance with LDC section 4.08.06 F. D. SSA Application Review Process. Pre -application Conference with County Staff. Prior to the submission of a formal application for SSA designation, the applicant shall attend a pre -application conference with the County Manager or his designee and other county staff, agencies, and officials involved in the review and processing of such applications and related materials. If an SRA designation application is to be filed concurrent with an SSA application, only one pre -application conference shall be required. This pre -application conference should address, but not be limited to, such matters as: 35 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 500 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added a. Conformity of the proposed SSA with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP; Review of the Stewardship Credit Worksheet and Natural Resource Index Assessment for the property; C. Identification of the recognized entity to be named in the covenant or perpetual restrictive easement, and; d. Identification of the proposed land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures. 2. Application Package Submittal and Processing Fees. The required number of copies of each SSA Application and the associated processing fee shall be submitted to the County Manager or his designee. The contents of said application package shall be in accordance with Section 4.08.06 C. 3. Application Deemed Sufficient for Review. Within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of the SSA Application, the County Manager or his designee shall advise the applicant in writing that the application is complete and sufficient for agency review or advise what additional information is needed to find the application sufficient. If required, the applicant shall submit additional information. Within ten (10) working days of receipt of the additional information, the County Manager or his designee shall advise the applicant in writing that the application is complete, or, if additional or revised information is required, the County manager shall again inform the applicant what information is needed, and the timeframe outlined herein shall occur until the application is found sufficient for review. 4. Review by County Reviewing Agencies: Once the SSA application is deemed sufficient, the County Manager or his designee will distribute it to specific County staff for their review. 5. Designation Review. Within sixty (60) days of receipt of a sufficient application, county staff shall review the submittal documents and provide written comments, questions, and clarification items to the applicant. If deemed necessary by county staff or the applicant, a meeting shall be held to resolve outstanding issues and confirm public hearing dates. 6. Designation Report. Within ninety (90) days from the receipt of a sufficient application, county staff shall prepare a written report containing their review findings and a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions or denial. This timeframe may be extended upon written agreement by the applicant. E. SSA Application Approval Process. Public Hearing. The BCC shall hold an advertised public hearing on the proposed resolution approving an SSA Application and SSA Credit Agreement. Notice of the Board's intention to consider the Application and proposed SSA Credit Agreement shall be given at least fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the County. A copy of such notice shall be kept 36 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 501 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 available for public inspection during regular business hours of the Office of Clerk to the BCC. The notice of proposed hearing shall state the date, time and place of the meeting, the title of the proposed resolution, and the place or places within the County where the proposed resolution and agreement may be inspected by the public. The notice shall provide a general description and a map or sketch of the affected land and shall advise that interested parties may appear at the meeting and be heard with respect to the proposed resolution. The BCC shall review the staff report and recommendations and, if it finds that all requirements for designation have been met, shall, by resolution, approve the application. If it finds that one or more of the requirements for designation have not been met, it shall either deny the application or approve it with conditions mandating compliance with all unmet requirements. Approval of such resolution shall require a majority vote by the BCC. 2. Legal Description. Following the BCC's approval of the SSA Application and SSA Credit Agreement, a legal description of the land designated SSA, the SSA credits granted, and the Stewardship easement applicable to such lands, shall be provided to the Collier County Property Appraiser and the applicant, and shall be recorded within thirty (30) days by the applicant in the public records. 3. Update the RLSA Overlay Map and Official Zoning Atlas. The Official Zoning Atlas shall be updated to reflect the designation of the SSA. Sufficient information shall be included on the updated zoning maps so as to direct interested parties to the appropriate public records associated with the designation, including but not limited to Resolution number and SSA Designation Application number. The RLSA Overlay Map shall be updated to reflect the SSA designation during a regular growth management cycle no later that twelve months from the effective date of the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement SSA Agreement. F. Permanent Stewardship Easement and extensions and terminations of Conditional Stewardship Easement Agreements. 1. Permanent Stewardship Easement. The Conditional Stewardship Easement shall become permanent and be recorded in the Public Land Records if any of the following occurs: a. The Stewardship Credits from the SSA have been assianed to entitle an approved SRA and such SRA has received all necessary, final, and non - appealable development orders, permits, or other discretionary approvals, which are necessary to commence construction, including Final Subdivision Plat and/or Site Development Plan approval but excluding building permits. If Stewardship Credits from the SSA have been assigned to more than one SRA, then the receipt of all necessary governmental final and non -appealable development orders, permits, or other discretionary approvals necessary to commence construction of any SRA shall automatically cause the Stewardship Easement to become permanent. The owner of the SSA lands sells or transfers Stewardship Credits to another person, entity, or Stewardship Credit Trust, and such owner receives the StewardshiD Credits from the sale or transfer of the credits 37 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 502 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 with or without consideration due from the sale or transfer of Conditional Stewardship Credits. However, this expressly excludes the following: i. A sale or transfer of the Stewardship Credits ancillary to the sale or transfer of the underlying fee title to the SSA lands. ii. An instance when a landowner establishes an SSA for a specific SRA, whether the SRA is owned or developed by a separate or related entity, and the Stewardship Credits are transferred to entitle the SRA as required by GMP, LDC, or SRA approval. C. The owner of the SSA lands receives other compensation from local, state, federal, or private revenues, in exchange for the preservation of the SSA lands. d. The owner does not record a Notice of Termination in accordance with LDC section 4.08.06 F.3. within 180 days of the expiration date as extended in the Conditional Easement Aareement. 2. Extension of Conditional Period. a. The owner may extend the Conditional Period for one additional year, by providing written notice to the County Manager or designee prior to the expiration of the Conditional Period and before the Conditional Easement becomes permanent in accordance with LDC section 4.08.06 F.1. b. If a challenae and/ or aaaeal of a necessary develoDment order. Dermit. or other discretionary approval is filed, and the challenge or appeal is not resolved such that the construction may commence under terms acceptable to the owner of the SSA lands, the owner of the SSA lands may record a Notice of Termination within 180 days of the final disposition of the challenge or appeal. 3. Termination of Conditional Stewardship Easement Agreements. a. The owner of SSA lands may terminate the Stewardship Easement by recording a Notice of Termination within 180 days before the last day of the Conditional Period and before the Conditional Stewardship Easement becomes a Permanent Stewardship Easement in accordance with LDC section 4.08.06 F. b. In the event that the Stewardship Credits from an SSA have been used to obtain one or more SRA approvals, but none of the events in LDC section 4.08.06 F.1. has occurred during the Conditional Period, then the Notice of Termination shall also provide for termination of any SRAs that have been assigned credits from the SSA, unless the SRA owner has obtained sufficient Stewardship Credits from another source and such Stewardship Credits have been applied to the SRA. In the event that a Notice of Termination does terminate an SRA, the owner of the SRA lands shall join in the Notice of Termination. 38 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 503 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 C. Upon the recording of such Notice of Termination, the Stewardship Easement and corresponding Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement shall expire and terminate, the Stewardship Credits generated by the SSA shall cease to exist, the rights and obligations set forth in the Stewardship Easement shall no longer constitute an encumbrance on the property, and the SSA Memorandum shall be revised accordingly. The owner of the SSA lands shall provide a copy of the Notice of Termination to the County. d. Once a Stewardship Easement is terminated. all benefits. riahts. privileaes restrictions, and obligations associated with the SSA shall be null and void, and the land shall be governed by it underlying classification, free and clear of any encumbrance from the Stewardship Easement and SSA Credit Agreement. e. If requested by the owner of the SSA lands, Collier County and the other grantees under the Stewardship Easement shall provide a written release and termination of easement and credit agreements for recording in the public records within 15 days of request from the owner of the SSA lands. Collier County shall update the Official Zoning Atlas Map to reflect the termination of any SSA or SRA. G1=. SSA Amendments. Collier County shall consider an amendment to an approved SSA in the same manner described in this Section for the designation of an SSA. Amendment(s) to approved SSAs shall only be considered if the application eliminates removes one or more additional Land Use Layers from the existing SSA. Under no circumstances shall Land Use Layers, once eliminated removed as part of an SSA designation, be added back to the SSA. The application to amend the SSA may be submitted as part of an application to designate a new SSA provided such lands are contiguous to the previously approved SSA and are under the same ownership. 4.08.07 - SRA Designation SRA designation is intended to encourage and facilitate uses that enable economic prosperity and diversification of the economic base of the RLSA District, and encourage development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques and facilitates a compact form of development to accommodate population growth by the establishment of SRAs. Stewardship Credits generated from SSAs are exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis as set forth herein. Density and intensity within the RLSA District shall not be increased beyond the Baseline Standards except through the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System, the affordable housing density Bonus as referenced in the density Rating System of the FLUE, and the density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSA District that meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth herein. Land becomes designated as an SRA on the date that the SRA Credit Agreement becomes effective pursuant to Section 4.08.07 D.124. Any change in the residential density or non-residential intensity of land 39 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 504 of 708 1111DA-1121 Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 use on a parcel of land located within an SRA shall be specified in the resolution, which shall reflect the total number of transferable Credits assigned to the parcel of land. A. Lands Within the RLSA District that can be Designated as SRAs. All privately owned lands within the RLSA District that meet the suitability criteria contained herein may be designated as SRA, except lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map as FSA, HSA, or WRA, or lands already designated as an SSA. WRAs may be located within the boundaries of an SRA and may be incorporated into an SRA Master Plan to provide water management functions for properties within such SRA, subject to all necessary permitting requirements. If all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the pro rata acreage of the WRA shall be required to consume SRA credits but shall not be included within the SRA acreage. Suitability Criteria. The following suitability criteria are established to ensure consistency with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the RLSA Overlay. a. An SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the planned development. Any development proposed in the RLSA District shall be compatible with surrounding land uses and implement appropriate lighting controls for permitted uses, including outdoor lighting that is designed to protect and preserve the nighttime environment by minimizing light pollution and glare while reducing energy consumption and upholding safety and security. Except for when the County Manager or designee determines otherwise to protect the health, safety, and welfare, permanent outdoor lighting shall comply with the criteria listed in LDC section 4.08.05 N. Residential, commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, and transient housing, institutional, civic and community service uses within an SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. C. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, with the exception of those necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety, as described in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2.,shall not be sited on land that receives a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2, regardless of the size of the land or parcel. d. Lands or parcels that are greater than one acre and have an Index Value greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space and maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated state. e. Open space shall also comprise a minimum of thirty-five percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town or; Village, or those Conte Gross acreage includes only that area of development within the SRA that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits. 40 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 505 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added pereent retained non spa shall not be required to nonce me Stewardship fg. An SRA may be contiguous to an FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in Section 4.08.07 1_5J-6. An SRA may be contiguous to, or encompass a WRA. However, if all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the prorata acreage of the WRA that is used to meet the water quality treatment water volume shall be required to consume SRA credits and shall be included within the SRA acreage. g#. The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation planning standards. h. An SRA shall provide direct vehicular and pedestrian connections to the County's arterial/collector roadway network as shown on the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Long Range Transportation Needs Plan. The SRA shall include a Mobilitv Plan in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 D.10. that includes vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas of outside development and land uses. Strategies shall encourage the use of mass transit services such as bus subsidies, route sponsorship, or other incentives. Anv mitigation measures reauired to offset an SRA's traffic imaacts including but not limited to provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossings, environmental mitigation credits, right-of-way dedication(s), water management and/or fill materials that may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network, public utilities, or parks, shall be memorialized in a developer contribution agreement. Mitigation measures shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or proposed roadways. 2. SRAs Within the ACSC. SRAs are permitted within the ACSC subject to limitations on the number, size, location, and form of SRA described herein. Nothing within this Section shall be construed as an exemption of an SRA from any and all limitations and regulations applicable to lands within the ACSC. Lands within the ACSC that meet all SRA suitability criteria shall also be restricted such that credits used to entitle an SRA in the ACSC must be generated exclusively from SSAs within the ACSC. No early entry bonus credits generated prior to the termination of the bonus period can be used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC. a. The only forme of SRAs allowed in the ACSC east of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Hamlets a CRDs of 100 acres or less, and the only forms - of SRAs allowed in the ACSC west of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be CRDs and Villages and-CRDs of not more than 300 acres and Hamlets -' Not more than 1.000 total acres of SRA development is allowed in the 41 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 506 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 ACSC, Provided, however, two —SRA s, consisting of any oomh;nation of Villages er ! RDs of not more than 500 aeres ^^h exclusive of any lakes created prior to June 30, 2002, the effective date of this amendment as a result of mining operations, shall be allowed in areas that have a frontage on State Road 29 and which that, as of the effeGtmve date of the RLSA Overlay, had been predominantly cleared as a result of Ag Group I (Layer 5) or Earth Mining or Processing Uses (Layer 3). The Town form of an SRA shall not be located within the ACSC. B. Establishment and Transfer of Stewardship Credits. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Stewardship Credits will be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis, as described in Section 4.08.07 B.2. Stewardship density and intensity will thereafter differ from the Baseline Standards. Transfer of Credits. The transfer or use of Stewardship Credits shall only be in a manner as provided for herein. a. Stewardship Credits generated from any SSA may be transferred to entitle any SRA, except where the SRA is within the ACSC, in which case only Stewardship Credits that have been generated from an SSA within the ACSC can be used to entitle such SRA. No early entry bonus credits generated prior to the termination of the bonus period can be used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC. Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSA District that meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth herein. C. Stewardship Credits may be transferred between different parcels or within a single parcel, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of these policies. Residential clustering shall only occur within the RLSA District through the use of the Stewardship Credit System, and other forms of residential clustering shall not be permitted. d. Stewardship Credits may be acquired from any credit holder and transferred to an SRA subject to the limitations contained in this Section. e. Stewardship Credits may be acquired from a Stewardship Credit Trust established pursuant to Section 4.08.04 B., and transferred to an SRA subject to the limitations contained in this Section. 2. Stewardship Credit Exchange. Stewardship Credits shall be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis at a rate of eight (8) Stewardship Credits per gross acre where credits were created for an SSA submitted for review or aDDroved Drior to July 13. 2021. and a rate of ten (10) Stewardship Credits per gross acre for SSA/Credits where such Credits were created from any other SSA. Lands within an SRA greater than one acre, with Index Values of greater than 1.2, shall be retained as open space and maintained in a predominantly natural, vegetated state. Any sueh lands within aR 42 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 507 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added SR I + d outside f the /� G exeeedi the thirty five (35) percent drer-r-rvcarcd-li�r�� �dti^—^vrzh� d � c�ccccai� g�rre-ri�'ti�ttGt��h-Frc�-rry shell net he required +e censurne Stewardship Credits 3. Public Benefit Uses. The acreage within an SRA devoted to a public benefit use shall not be required to consume Stewardship Credits and but shall not count toward the maximum acreage limits of an SRA unless such public benefit uses were approved as part of an SRA approved prior to July 13, 2021, in which case such public benefit uses shall continue to be excluded from the maximum acreage limitation pursuant to the policy in effect at the time of approval. For the purpose of this Section, public benefit uses are limited to the following: affordable housing public schools (preK-12)1 and public or private post -secondary institutions and ancillary uses, Rest Q--endaFy Institutien AneillaFy Uses, community parks exceeding the minimum requirement, of feet per dwelling init municipal golf courses, regional parks, and other governmental facilities,exeluding essential serv'Gess .Defined in the I DG 4. Mixed Land Use Entitlements. In order to promote compact, mixed use development and provide the necessary support facilities and services to residents of rural areas, the SRA designation and the transfer of the Stewardship Credits allows for a full range of uses, accessory uses and associated uses that provide a mix of services to and are supportive to the residential population of an SRA and the RLSA District. SRAs are intended to be mixed use and shall be allowed the full range of uses permitted by the Urban Designation of the FLUE, as modified by Policies 4.7, 4.7.1, 4.7.2, 4.7.3, 4.7.4 and RLSA Overlay Attachment C. Depending on the size, scale, and character of an SRA, it shall be designed to include an appropriate mix of retail, office, recreational, civic, governmental, and institutional uses, in addition to residential uses. 5. Towns and Villaaes shall be the Dreferred locations for business and indust including environmental research, agricultural research, aviation and aerospace, health and life sciences, corporate headquarters, computer hardware, software and services, information technology, manufacturing, research and development, wholesale trade and distribution and similar uses, including Florida Qualified Target Industries. 6. Affordable Housing. To address the accommodation of Affordable Housing in a Town or Village, the SRA applicant shall utilize one of the following options: a. Affordable Housina Land Reservation. Reservation of one or more site(s) within the SRA or within a proximal SRA in the RLSA District with densities and development standards that accommodate Affordable Housing residential uses at a minimum density of 10 units per acre, for acquisition by Collier County, a community land trust, a private developer, or any other affordable housing provider. ii. The aggregate acreage of such site(s) shall be equal to or greater than two and one-half Dercent (2.5%) of the aross area of the SRA. 43 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 508 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added iii. The acreage of land reserved for Affordable Housing will be considered as a Public Benefit Use. iv. The County shall verify the site() is/are appropriate and approve the site(s) at time of SRA approval. V. Affordable Housing units shall be excluded from the Traffic Impact Statement or trip cap for the SRA in which they are located. b. Alternatives proposed by the SRA Applicant. Other options may be proposed by the SRA applicant and approved by the BCC to address housina affordabilitv in the subiect SRA. C. Forms of SRA developments. SRA developments are a compact form of development, which accommodate and promote uses that utilize creative land use planning techniques. SRAs shall be used to facilitate the implementation of innovative planning and flexible development strategies described in section 163.3248§463.34" ", F.S. and Rule 9i- F 006(5)(1) F.A.G. These planning strategies and techniques are intended to minimize the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while discouraging urban sprawl, protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and, providing for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Only the following four specific forms of rural development in SRAs are permitted within the RLSA District. Towns. Towns are the largest and most diverse form of SRA, with a full range of housing types and mix of uses. Towns have urban level services and infrastructure which support development that is compact, mixed use, human scale, and provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile trips and increase livability. The mixture of land uses shall accommodate services that would increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long-distance travel. Towns shall be greater than 1,500 acres but not more than 5,000 acres not less than 1,000 acres or more than 4,000 acres and are comprised of several villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and character. Towns shall have a mixed -use town center that will serve as a focal point for community facilities and support services. Towns shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. The Town transportation network shall be based upon a Mobility Plan in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 D.10. and shall include a transfer station or park and ride area that is appropriately located within the Town to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. Towns shall have at least one community park with a minimum size of 200 square feet per dwelling unit in the Town, subiect to Level of Service Requirements. Towns shall also have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Towns shall include both community and neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.07 14.1. Towns may also include those compatible corporate office, research and development companies, and light industrial uses, such as those included in Policy 4.7.4 perm#ted-iR-the-Bus4iessoa a Researeh and Teehnelegy Dark Subdistriet of the FLUE. Towns shall be the preferred location for the full range of schools, and to the extent possible, schools 44 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 509 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. Towns shall not be located within the ACSC. 2. Villages. Villages are PlFiFnaFily Fesidential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be greater than 300 acres but not more than 1,500 acres, except that if any portion is designated ACSC, the maximum size shall be no more than 1,000 acres not less than 100 „ thaR 1,000 . Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed -use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.07 1-J.1. Villages may contain appropriately scaled uses that are permitted in CRDs. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. The Village form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.07 A.2. Villages greater than 500 acres shall require a Mobility Plan in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 D.10., to include either a transfer station or park -and -ride area that is appropriately located within the village to serve as the connection point for internal and external public transportation. 34. Compact Rural developments (CRDs). Compact Rural development (CRD) is a form of SRA that is a maximum of 300 acres and intended to support and further Collier Countv's valued attributes of aariculture. natural resources. and economic diversity. Primary CRD uses shall be those associated with and needed to support research, education, convenience retail, tourism or recreation will "' E)Yide fleXibi'ity with F8SP86t to the Fnix of uses and design standaFds, but shall etheFwise GemplyL with the st.,.,,taFds of a H. rnl t r Village. A CRD may include- but is not required to have permanent residential housing and the services and facilities that support permanent residents. The number of residential units shall be equivalent with the demand generated by the primary CRD use but shall not exceed two units per gross acre. Except as described above, a CRD shall w+44 conform to the characteristics of a ","a^o or Harnlet as set forth in Section 4.08.07 1-J.1. based on 45 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 510 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted nolude permanent residential housing, the proper-tionate support servioes listed- feFm of SRA as described on SeGtlon A 08 07 C 7 r 3 WAIMUSYMMIM a. CRDs within the ACSC. The CRD form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.07 A.2. 45. Proportion of Hamlets and- CRDs to Villages and Towns. In order to maintain the correct proportion of Hamlets and CRDs of 300 4-A8 acres or less to the number of Villages and Towns approved as SRAs, not more than five (5) of any combination ef a+ets—and CRDs of 300 4-A8 acres or less may be approved prior to the approval of a Village or Town. In order to maintain that same proportion thereafter, not more than five { } additional of any r bination of Hamlets is and CRDs of 300 4-00 acres or less may be approved prior to for each subsequent Village or Town appreved. D. SRA Designation Application Package. A Designation Application Package to support a request to designate land(s) within the RLSA District as an SRA shall be made pursuant to the regulations of the RLSA District Regulations. The SRA Application Package shall include the following: 46 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 511 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 1. SRA Designation Application. An application shall be submitted by a landowner or his/her agent, hereafter "applicant," to request the designation of an SRA within the RLSA District. The Application shall be submitted to the County manager or his designee, on a form provided. The application shall be accompanied by the documentation as required by this Section. 2. Application Fee. An application fee shall accompany the application. 3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. An assessment that documents the Natural Resource Index Value scores shall be prepared and submitted as part of the SRA Application. The Assessment shall include an analysis that quantifies the number of acres by Index Values. The Assessment shall: a. Identify all lands within the proposed SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2; b. Verify that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are still valid through recent aerial photography or satellite imagery or agency - approved mapping, or other documentation, as verified by field inspections; C. If the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are no longer valid, document the current Index Value of the land. d. Quantify the acreage of agricultural lands, by type, being converted; e. Quantify the acreage of non-agricultural acreage, by type, being converted; f. Quantify the acreage of all lands by type within the proposed SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2; g. Quantify the acreage of all lands, by type, being designated as SRA within the ACSC, if any; and h. Demonstrate compliance with the Suitability Criteria contained in Section 4.08.07 A.1. 4. Natural Resource Index Assessment Support Documentation. Documentation to support the Natural Resource Index Assessment shall be provided for each SRA being designated to include: a. Legal Description, including sketch or survey; b. Acreage calculations of lands being put into the SRA, including acreage calculations of WRAs (if any) within SRA boundary but not included in SRA designation, C. RLSA Overlay Map delineating the area of the RLSA District being designated as an SRA; d. Aerial photograph delineating the area being designated as an SRA; 47 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 512 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 e. Natural Resource Index Map of area being designated as an SRA; f. FLUCFCS map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA; g. Listed species map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA; h. Soils map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA, and; Documentation to support a change in the related Natural Resource Index Value(s), if appropriate. 5. SRA Master Plan. A Master Plan shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of an SRA. The SRA Master Plan shall be consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07 G. 6. SRA Development Document. A Development Document shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of an SRA. The SRA Development Document shall be consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07 H. 7. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report. An Impact Assessment Report shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of a SRA. The SRA Impact Assessment Report shall address the requirements of Section 4.08.07 JK. 8. SRA Economic Assessment Report. An Economic Assessment Report shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of an SRA. The SRA Economic Assessment Report shall address the requirements of Section 4.08.07 K-L. 9. Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Application. A Credit Use and Reconciliation Application shall be submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application in order to track the transfer of credits from SSA(s) to SRA(s). The Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Application shall be in a form provided by the County Manager, or his designee. The application package shall contain the following: a. The legal description of, or descriptive reference to, the SRA to which the Stewardship Credits are being transferred; b. Total number of acres within the proposed SRA and the total number of acres of the proposed SRA within the ACSC (if any); C. Number of acres within the SRA designated "public use" that do not require the redemption of Stewardship Credits in order to be entitled (does not consume credits); d. Number of acres of "excess" open spaces within the SRA that do not require the consumption of credits; 48 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 513 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 e. Number of acres of WRAs inside the SRA boundary but not included in the SRA designation; f. Number of acres within the SRA that consume Credits; g. The number of Stewardship Credits being transferred (consumed by) to the SRA and documentation that the applicant has acquired or has a contractual right to acquire those Stewardship Credits; h. Number of acres to which credits are to be transferred (consumed) multiplied by eight (8) Credits / acre equals the number of Credits to be transferred (consumed) or 10 credits per acre, as applicable; A descriptive reference to one (1) or more approved or pending SSA Designation Applications from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. Copies of the reference documents, e.g., SSA Stewardship Credit Agreement, etc., shall be provided, including: i. M SSA application number; ii. R4 Pending companion SRA application number; iii. (3) SSA Designation Resolution (or Resolution Number); iv. (4) SSA Credit Agreement (Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement); V. (-5-) Stewardship Credits Database Report. A descriptive reference to any previously approved Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Applications that pertain to the referenced SSA(s) from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained; and k. A summary table in a form provided by Collier County that identifies the exchange of all Stewardship Credits that involve the SRA and all of the associated SSAs from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. 10. SRA Mobilitv Plan. a. An SRA mobility plan shall be submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA designation. b. Applicability. Regardless of development size, each mobility plan shall be required to address the strategies found in the mobility plan checklist. C. Mobility plan checklist. The mobility plan checklist provides a framework for which mobility strategies are identified and detailed. Along with the writeup on each mobility element, the checklist shall be included in the text portion of the required mobility plan. 49 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 514 of 708 DRAFT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Mobility Strategies Pedestrian Micromobility Bicycle Public Transit Vehicular School Connectivity Internal Circulators and Connectivity External Connectivity LRTP Roadway and Pathway Needs LRTP Transit Needs Text underlined is new text to be added Table 1. Mobility Plan Checklist Accommodated? I Described Strategy Details d. Mobility map strategies. i. Pedestrian. Each SRA shall be designed to accommodate pedestrians to encourage mobility and promote internal and external circulation. Each SRA shall provide an interconnected continuous sidewalk and multi -use pathway network. This sidewalk and pathway network shall provide a high-level of connectivity between land uses, which include, but are not limited to neighborhoods/residential areas, town cores, village centers, employment centers, public uses, green/open spaces, and commercial areas. The SRA shall utilize traffic calming strategies and recommendations as identified by the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) to improve safety and comfort for the pedestrian in turn increasing the overall walkability, as applicable. All constructed sidewalks and multi -use pathways shall be built in accordance with LDC section 6.06.02. ii. Micromobility. SRAs shall encourage the use of micromobility infrastructure such as but not limited to charging stations or mobility corrals or hubs within the development, as applicable. If charging stations, shared bike, or mobility corrals/hubs are incorporated into the project, a reduction in three required parking spaces per charging station or corral/hub from the total required parking space requirement may be utilized. It is encouraged that all multi -use 50 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 515 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added pathways, roadways, and sidewalks be constructed to accommodate micromobility. iii. Bicycle. a) Each SRA shall ensure that a comfortable and safe environment for bicycling is provided. b) Each SRA shall provide protected, buffered, or separated bicycling lanes on roadways with travel speeds that exceed 30 m.p.h. Bicycle lanes may utilize various separation types, includina but not limited to bollards. delineator Dosts. solid barriers, raised medians or lanes, parked vehicles, other types of infrastructure, or a combination thereof, as determined by the County Manager or designee. c) Local roadways and urban centers within the SRA max utilize shared travel lanes. iv. Public Transit. Public transit shall be considered an integral part of the transportation system and fully integrated into the road network. All transit plans and enhancements shall be planned for and designed in accordance with the MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and coordinated with Collier Area Transit (CAT), to ensure proposed transit system enhancements are appropriate and needed. All transit stations and stops, as well as park -and -ride facilities, shall follow all county design standards and regulations, as applicable. All Towns or Villages shall have a Transit Station or a Park -and -Ride Facilitv. V. Vehicular. All development shall comply with LDC section 4.04.00 and street system design standards in LDC section 4.08.07 and LDC section 6.06.00. It is encouraged to integrate innovative intersections within the development which allow for effective multimodal use with a high emphasis on safety. vi. School connectivity. SRAs that are required to include a school site, shall in coordination with Collier County Public School planning staff. connect the site to the multi -modal internal and external transportation system. All sidewalks and multiuse pathways shall ultimately connect to the school site, allowing students from residential and mixed -use areas to access the school. The school site shall be a main destination and fullv intearated into the sidewalk and multiuse pathway network. vii. Internal circulators. Each SRA street system shall be designed in such a manner to allow for optimum internal vehicular circulation. Gated and non -gated neighborhoods shall have multiple internal access connections if the neighborhood has direct access to a collector and arterial street. Direct connection between 51 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 516 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 neighborhoods is encouraged to reduce traffic congestion at neighborhood entrances and enhance internal circulation. The use of cul-de-sacs shall be minimized to greatest extent possible when designing neighborhood street systems as to encourage walkability and circulation. viii. External connectivity. External connections between adjacent towns, villages, and CRD's shall be identified on the mobility plan. These shall include sidewalks, multiuse pathways, transit, and vehicular access. The applicant shall work with County transportation planning staff and identify needs within the LRTP to establish connections that further the Countv's transportation needs, future plans, and increase connectivity. ix. LRTP roadwav and Dathwav needs. SRAs shall work with the MPO and County transportation planning staff to identify roadway and pathway needs as presented within the LRTP. Each SRA shall address how their proposal enhances the County roadway and pathway network. X. LRTP transit needs. SRAs shall work with the MPO and Collier Area Transit (CAT) staff to identitv transit system needs. Each SRA shall address how their proposal enhances the overall transit system. e. Additional information. Each mobility plan shall include a mobility plan graphic as part of the SRA Master Plan. 11. Wildlife Dlan. A wildlife manaaement Dlan shall include Drovisions for minimizin human and wildlife interactions. Low intensity land uses (e.g., parks, passive recreation areas, golf courses) and vegetation preservation requirements, including agriculture, shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas dominated by human activities. Consideration shall be given to the most current Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human wildlife conflict. The management plans shall also require the dissemination of information to local residents, businesses, and governmental services about the presence of wildlife and practices, such as appropriate waste disposal methods, that enable responsible coexistence with wildlife, while minimizing opportunities for negative interaction. such as aDDroDriate waste disposal Dractices. Wildlife manaaement plans shall contain a monitoring program for developments greater than 10 acres. 124-0. Conditional SRA Designation. If at the time of the approval of the SRA Designation Application, the applicant has not acquired the number of credits needed to entitle the SRA, then the SRA Designation approval shall be conditional. The applicant shall have sixty (60) days from the date of the conditional approval to provide documentation of the acquisition of the required number of Stewardship Credits. If the applicant does not provide such documentation within sixty (60) days, the conditional SRA Designation approval shall be null and void. The Stewardship 52 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 517 of 708 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Credit Use and Reconciliation Application shall be amended to accurately reflect the transfer of credits that occurred following the conditional approval of the SRA. 1344. SRA Credit Agreement. a. Any applicant for designation of an SRA shall enter into an SRA Credit Agreement with the County. b. The SRA Credit Agreement shall contain the following information: i. M The number of SSA credits the applicant for an SRA designation is utilizing and which shall be applied to the SRA land in order to carry out the plan of development on the acreage proposed in the SRA development Documents; ii. R) A legal description of the SRA land and the number of acres; R The SRA master plan depicting the land uses and identifying the number of residential dwelling units, gross leasable area of retail and office square footage and other land uses depicted on the master plan; iv. (4) A description of the SSA credits that are needed to entitle the SRA land and the anticipated source of said credits; V. {} The applicant's acknowledgement that development of SRA land may not commence until the applicant has recorded an SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum with the Collier County Clerk of Courts; and vi. (6) The applicant's commitments, if any, regarding conservation, or any other restriction on development on any lands, including wetlands, within the SRA, as may be depicted on the SRA Master Plan for special treatment. C. The SRA Credit Agreement shall be effective on the latest of the following dates: i. M The date that the County approves the SRA Application; ii. (2) The date that documentation of the applicant's acquisition of the Stewardship Credits to be utilized for the SRA is found by the County to be sufficient; or (3-) Five (5) working days after the date on which the applicant submits documentation of the acquisition of the Stewardship Credits to be utilized, if the County fails to make a sufficiency determination prior to that date. 53 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 518 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added d. Following approval of the SRA Application, the applicant shall record a SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum, which shall include the following: i_ M A cross reference to the recorded SSA Credit Agreement Memorandum or Memoranda for the SSA lands from which the credits being utilized are generated and identification of the number of credits derived from each SSA; and ii. {2) A a legal description of the SRA lands. e. If the development provided for within an SRA constitutes, or will constitute, a development of regional impact ("DRI") pursuant to sections § 380.06 and 380.0651, F.S., and if the applicant has obtained a preliminary development agreement ("PDA") from the Florida Department of Community Affairs for a portion of the SRA land, the applicant may request the County to enter into a Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement for those Stewardship Credits needed in order to develop the PDA authorized development. Commencement of the PDA authorized development may not proceed until the applicant has recorded a Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum. The Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement and Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement shall include the same information and documentation as is required for an SRA Credit Agreement and an SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum. E. SRA Application Review Process. Pre -Application Conference with County Staff: Prior to the submission of a formal application for SRA designation, the applicant shall attend a pre -application conference with the County Manager or his designee and other county staff, agencies, and officials involved in the review and processing of such applications and related materials. If an SRA designation application will be filed concurrent with an SSA application, only one pre -application conference shall be required. This pre -application conference should address, but not be limited to, such matters as: a. Conformity of the proposed SRA with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP; Consideration of suitability criteria described in LDC section 4.08.07 A.1. and other standards of this Section; C. SRA master plan compliance with all applicable policies of the RLSA District Regulations, and demonstration that incompatible land uses are directed away from FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and Conservation Lands; d. Assurance that applicant has acquired or will acquire sufficient Stewardship Credits to implement the SRA uses, and; e. Consideration of impacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts. 54 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 519 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 2. Application Package Submittal, Processing Fees, and Review. The required number of SRA Applications and the associated processing fee shall be submitted to the County Manager or his designee. The contents of said application package shall be in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 D. The review and approval of the application shall be in accordance with section 125.022, Florida Statutes. 3. Public notice and required hearings shall be as established in LDC section 10.03.06 M. F. SRA Application Approval Process. Public Hearings Required. The BCC shall review the staff report and recommendations and the recommendations of the EAC and CCPC, and the BCC shall, by resolution, approve, deny, or approve with conditions the SRA Application only after advertised public notices have been provided and public hearings held in accordance with LDC section 10.03.06 M. 2. Update Stewardship Credits Database. Following the effective date of the approval of the SRA, the County shall update the Stewardship Credits Database used to track both SSA credits generated and SRA credits consumed. 3. Update the Official Zoning Atlas and the RLSA Overlay Map. Following the effective date of the approval of the SRA, the County shall update the Official Zoning Atlas to reflect the designation of the SRA. Sufficient information shall be included on the updated maps so as to direct interested parties to the appropriate public records associated with the designation, e.g., Resolution number, SRA Designation Application number, etc. The RLSA Overlay Map shall be updated to reflect the SRA designation during a regular GMP amendment cycle, no later than twelve months from the effective date of the SRA Credit Agreement. 4. SRA Amendments. Amendments to the SRA shall be considered in the same manner as described in this Section for the establishment of an SRA, except as follows: a. Waiver of Required SRA Application Package Component(s). A waiver may be granted by the County Manager or his designee, if at the time of the pre -application conference, in the determination of the County Manager or designee, the original SRA Designation Application component(s) is (are) not materially altered by the amendment or an updated component is not needed to evaluate the amendment. The County Manager or designee shall determine what application components and associated documentation are required in order to adequately evaluate the amendment request. Substantial changes. Any substantial change(s) to an SRA Master Plan or Development Document shall require the review and recommendation of the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of County Commissioners as an SRA amendment prior to implementation. Applicants shall be required to submit and process a new application complete with 55 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 520 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added pertinent supporting data, as set forth in the Administrative Code. For the purpose of this section, a substantial change shall be deemed to exist where: i. (4-) A proposed change in the boundary of the SRA; ii. R4 A proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development; (-3,) A proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation or open space areas within the development not to exceed 5 percent of the total acreage previously designated as such, or 5 acres in area; iv. (4) A proposed increase in the size of areas used for nonresidential uses, to include institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, conservation nor open spaces), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses; V. (-5) A substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are not limited to, increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts on other public facilities; vi. (6) A change that will result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers; vii. M A change that will result stormwater retention, or will discharges; in a requirement for increased otherwise increase stormwater viii. (&) A change that will bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use; ix. (�) Any modification to the SRA master plan or SRA document which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other element of the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase the density or intensity of the permitted land uses; X. Any modification in the SRA master plan or SRA document which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification as described under this LDC section 4.08.07. C. Insubstantial change determination. An insubstantial change includes any change that is not considered a substantial or minor change. An insubstantial change to an approved SRA Development Document or master plan shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 4.08.07 FA.b., above and shall require the review and approval of the Hearing Examiner or Planning Commission. The approval shall be based on the G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 521 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added findings and criteria used for the original application and be an action taken at a regularly scheduled meeting. i_ M The applicant shall provide the Planning and Zoning Department Director documentation which adequately describes the proposed changes as described in the Administrative Code. d. Approval of Minor Changes by County Manager or Designee. County Manager shall be authorized to approve minor changes and refinements to an SRA Master Plan or Development Document upon written request of the applicant. Minor changes and refinements shall be reviewed by appropriate County staff to ensure that said changes and refinements are otherwise in compliance with all applicable County ordinances and regulations prior to the County Manager or designee's consideration for approval. The following limitations shall apply to such requests: i. (4-) The minor change or refinement shall be consistent with the RLSA Overlay, the RLSA District Regulations, and the SRA development Document's amendment provisions. ii. {2) The minor change or refinement shall be compatible with GeRtOEJUOUS land uses and sha# not create detrimental impacts to abutting land uses, water management facilities, and conservation areas within or external to the SRA. iii. (-3,) Minor changes or refinements, include but are not limited to: (a) Reconfiguration of lakes, ponds, canals, or other water management facilities where such changes are consistent with the criteria of the SFWMD and Collier County; (b) Internal realignment of rights -of -way, other than a relocation of access points to the SRA itself, where water management facilities, preservation areas, or required easements are not adversely affected; and (c) Reconfiguration of parcels when there is no encroachment into the conservation areas or lands with an Index Value of 1.2 or higher. e. Relationship to Subdivision or site Development Approval. Approval by the County Manager or designee of a minor change or refinement may occur independently from, and prior to, any application for subdivision or Site Development Document approval. However, such approval shall not constitute an authorization for development or implementation of the minor change or refinement without first obtaining all other necessary County permits and approvals. G. Master Plan. To address the specifics of each SRA, a master plan of each SRA will be prepared and submitted to Collier County as a part of the petition for designation as an 57 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 522 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 SRA. The master plan will demonstrate that the SRA complies with all applicable GMP policies and the RLSA District and is designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from lands identified as FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and Conservation Lands on the RLSA Overlay Map. Master Plan Requirements. A master plan shall accompany an SRA Designation Application to address the specifics of each SRA. The master plan shall demonstrate that the SRA is designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from lands identified as FSAs, HSAs, WRAs and Conservation Lands on the RSLA Overlay Map. The plan shall be designed by an urban planner who possesses an AICP certification, together with at least one of the following: a. A professional engineer (P.E.) with expertise in the area of civil engineering licensed by the State of Florida; b. A qualified environmental consultant per Chapter 10 of the LDC; orc.A practicing architect licensed by the State of Florida. 2. Master Plan Content. At a minimum, the master plan shall be consistent with the County's then -adopted Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and Access Management procedures and include the following elements: a. The title of the project and name of the developer; b. Scale, date, north arrow; C. Location map that identifies the relationship of the SRA to the entire RLSA District, including other designated SRAs; d. Boundaries of the subject property, all existing roadways within and adjacent to the site, watercourses, easements, section lines, and other important physical features within and adjoining the proposed development; e. Identification of all proposed tracts or increments within the SRA such as, but not limited to: residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, conservation/ preservation, lakes and/or other water management facilities, the location and function of all areas proposed for dedication or to be reserved for community and/or public use, and areas proposed for recreational uses including golf courses and related facilities; f. Identification, location and quantification of all wetland preservation, buffer areas, and open space areas; g. The location and size (as appropriate) of all proposed drainage, water, sewer, and other utility provisions; h. The location of all proposed major internal rights of way and pedestrian access ways; 58 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 523 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added i. Typical cross sections for all arterial, collector, and local streets, public or private, within the proposed SRA; Identification of any WRAs that are contiguous to or incorporated within the boundaries of the SRA, and any part of a WRA that provides stormwater quality treatment for ati the SRA,; and k. A Wildlife Management Plan for minimizing human and wildlife interactions, including the baseline standards techniques provided in LDC section 4.08.05 J.3.a: and lk. Documentation or attestation of professional credentials of individuals preparing the master plan. M. A mobility plan graphic. H. Development Document. Data supporting the SRA Master Plan, and describing the SRA application, shall be in the form of a Development Document that shall consist of the information listed below, unless determined at the required pre -application conference to be unnecessary to describe the development strategy. The document shall be prepared by an urban planner who possesses an AICP certification, together with at least one of the following: a. A professional engineer (P.E.) with expertise in the area of civil engineering licensed by the State of Florida; b. A qualified environmental consultant per Chapter 10 of the LDC orc.A practicing landscape architect licensed by the State of Florida. 2. The document shall identify, locate, and quantify the full range of uses, including accessory uses that provide the mix of services to, and are supportive of, the residential population of an SRA or the RSLA District, and shall include, as applicable, the following: a. Title page to include name of project; b. Index/table of contents; C. List of exhibits; d. Statement of compliance with the RSLA Overlay and the RLSA—District Regulations; e. General location map showing the location of the site within the boundaries of the RLSA Overlay Map and in relation to other designated SRAs and such external facilities as highways; f. Property ownership and general description of site (including statement of unified ownership); 59 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 524 of 708 Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 g. Description of project development; h. Legal description of the SRA boundary, and for any WRAs encompassed by the SRA; The overall acreage of the SRA that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits and proposed gross density for the SRA; Identification of all proposed land uses within each tract or increment describing: acreage; proposed number of dwelling units; proposed density and percentage of the total development represented by each type of use; or in the case of commercial, industrial, institutional or office, the acreage and maximum gross leasable floor area within the individual tracts or increments; k. Design standards for each type of land use proposed within the SRA. Design standards shall be consistent with the Design Criteria contained in Section 4.08.07 IJ.; The Development Document, including any amendments, may request deviations from the LDC. The Development Document application shall identify all proposed deviations and include justification and any proposed alternatives. See LDC section 4.08.07 1.7." for the deviation requirements and criteria. M. The proposed schedule of development, and the sequence of phasing or incremental development within the SRA, if applicable; n. A Natural Resource Index Assessment as required in Section 4.08.04 C.3.; o. The location and nature of all existing or proposed public facilities (or sites), such as schools, parks, fire stations and the like; p. A plan for the provision of all needed utilities to and within the SRA; including (as appropriate) water supply, sanitary sewer collection and treatment system, stormwater collection and management system, pursuant to related county regulations and ordinances; q. Typical cross sections for all arterial, collector, and local streets, public or private, within the proposed SRA; r. Agreements, provisions, or covenants, which govern the use, maintenance, and continued protection of the SRA and any of its common areas or facilities; S. Development commitments for all infrastructure; t. When determined necessary to adequately assess the compatibility of proposed uses within the SRA to existing land uses, their relationship to 60 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 525 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added agriculture uses, open space, recreation facilities, or to assess requests for deviations from the Design Criteria standards, the County Manager or designee may request schematic architectural drawings (floor plans, elevations, perspectives) for all proposed structures and improvements, as appropriate; Development Document amendment provisions; an-d-, V. An inventory of historic or cultural resources identified within the RLSA District, and in conjunction with the Florida Division of Historic Resources, an assessment of their historic or cultural significance in accordance with LDC section 2.03.07 E.. and DroDosed strateaies to Dromote educational and public awareness regarding those significant resources; and wv. Documentation or attestation of professional credentials of individuals preparing the development document. IJ. Design Criteria. Criteria are hereby established to guide the design and development of SRAs to include innovative planning and development strategies as set forth in §§ section 163.3248;63.31'�;-7, F.S. and apt 06(5) "` F.A.G. The size and base density of each form of SRA shall be consistent with the standards set forth below. The maximum base residential density as specified herein for each form of SRA may only be exceeded through the density blending process as set forth in density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan or through the affordable housing density bonus as referenced in the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element. The base residential density is calculated by dividing the total number of residential units in an SRA by the acreage therein that is entitled through Stewardship Credits. The base residential density does not restrict net residential density of parcels within an SRA. The location, size and density of each SRA will be determined on an individual basis, subject to the regulations below, during the SRA designation review and approval process. SRA Characteristics. Characteristics for SRAs designated within the RLSA District have been established in the Goals, Objectives, and Policies, of the RLSA Overlay. All SRAs designated pursuant to this Section shall be consistent with the characteristics identified on the Collier County RLSA Overlay SRA Characteristics Chart and the design criteria set forth in 2. through 56. below. a. SRA Characteristics Chart consists of the following Tables: A - Town, B - Village, C Hamlet, ^ ICompact Rural Development: 1100 GFOss AGres or Lessand n 2 G,,.n.,.,,.+ RuFal Development: ('_.-,,. ter than 100 Gres AGFes. Table A — Town 61 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 526 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Thxt strikethrough is Gurrent text to be deleted F Typical Town haracteristics (Towns are prohibited within the ACSC, per LDC section 4.08.07 A.2.b.) Size (Gross Acres) 1,000 4,0Greater than 1,500 but no more than 5,000 acres 1-4 DUs per gross acre Residential Units (Density can be increased beyond the base density through the affordable (DUs) per gross acre base density workforce housing density bonus or through the density blending provision, per RLSA policy 4.7 in of the FLUE of the-GMR.) I _ Required Uses 'Residential Full range of single family and multi -family Housing Styles housing types, styles, lot sizes Retail & Office - .5 Maximum Floor Area Ratio or Intensity per use Civic/Governmental/Institution - .6 Town Center with Community and Neighborhood Goods and Services in Town Goods and and Village Centers: Minimum 6-5-170 SF gross Services building area per DU; Corporate Office, Manufacturing and Light Industrial and research companies. Water and Centralized or decentralized community Wastewater treatment system Community Parks (200 SF/DU), subject to level of service requirements Uses Allowed But Not Required Manufacturing/Light Industrial and Research and Development Companies - .45 Group Housing - .45 Transient Lodging - 26 upa net Corporate Office, Manufacturing and Light Industrial and Research and Development Companies Interim Well and Septic Recreation and Active Recreation/Golf Open Space Parks &Public Green Spaces w/n Courses Neighborhoods F Lakes 62 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 527 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Thxt strikethrough is current text to be deleted F Typical Town characteristics (Towns are prohibited within the ACSC, per LDC section 4.08.07 A.2.b.) Open Space Minimum 35% of SRA Civic, Governmental Wide Range of Services - minimum 15 SF of and Full Range of Schools Institutional gross land area /DU Services Auto - interconnected system of collector and local roads; required connection to collector or arterial Transportation Interconnected sidewalk and pathway system County Transit AE)eess-area station or a park and ride facility 1 2 Table B — Village 3 Typical Characteristics Village Greater than 300 acres but not more than 1,500 acres, except that if any portion is designated ACSC, the maximum size shall be no more than Size (Gross Acres) 1,000 acres (Villages within the ACSC are subject to location and size limitations per LDC section 4.08.07.A.2. and are subject to Chapter 28-25, FAC.) 1-4 DUs per gross acre Residential Units (Density can be increased beyond the base density through the (DUs) per gross affordable workforce housing density bonus or through the density acre base density blending provision, per RLSA Policy y 4.7 of iR the FLUE of the GMP.) Required Uses Uses Allowed But Not Required Residential Diversity of single family and multi -family Housing Styles housing types, styles, lot sizes _T Retail & Office - .5 _T Group Housing - .45 63 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 528 of 708 1 2 3 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Thxt strikethrough is Gurrent text to be deleted Typical Characteristics Village Maximum Floor Transient Lodging - 26 upa Area Ratio or Civic/Governmental/Institution - .6 net Intensity per use Corporate Office, Manufacturing and Light Goods and Village Center with Neighborhood Goods Industrial and Research and Services and Services in Village Centers: Minimum Development Companies: 25 53 SF gross building area per DU appropriately scaled Water and Centralized or decentralized community Interim Well and Septic Wastewater treatment system Parks & Public Green Spaces w/n Neighborhoods (minimum 1 % of gross Recreation and acres) Active Recreation/Golf Open Space F Lakes Courses Open Space Minimum 35% of SRA [Civic, Governmental and Moderate Range of Services - minimum Full Range of Schools Institutional 10 SF/DU Services Auto - interconnected system of collector and local roads; required connection to Equestrian Trails collector or arterial Transportation Interconnected sidewalk and pathway County Transit Aeoess system County Transit station or a park and ride facility 64 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 529 of 708 1 2 3 A.f_121 Resadentmal Housing Sye-s n axomum Cleer Area ref Intensity Du b"G Green Cnane fer Neighborhoods (minimum 1 O/ of gFess aGFe-&) aF14 Ins+ifi u+ienal Qenneen Text underlined is new text to be added Thxt strikethrough is current text to be deleted Table C D4. - Compact Rural Development-3004 0 Gross Acres or Less in Size 65 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 530 of 708 DRAFT Typical Characteristics Text underlined is new text to be added Thxt strikethrough is Gurrent text to be deleted Compact Rural Development-300 400-Gross Acres or Less (Compact Rural developments within the ACSC are subject to location and size limitations, LDC section 4.08.07.A.2. of this Code, and are subject to Chapter 28-25, FAC.) r If residential, '/2-2 DUs per gross acre Residential Units (Density .. ., h., i .,.J h.,.,(,Y,.J the base density +hr.�� �.,,h +h.,-,ff,,,-,�-,hl„ (DUs) per gross eFkf. FGe he ng .Density bon r +hlFeugh the .Density blending acre base density ,�,�n „�F RLS^^.7 in theTL FLUthe E Required Uses Uses Allowed But Not Required Single Family and limited multi -family Residential (Those CRDs that include single or multi - Housing Styles family residential uses shall include proportionate support services.) —� Retail & Office* - .5 Business, industry and uses associated with and needed Maximum Floor to support research, Civic/Governmental/Institution - .6 Area Ratio or education, tourism or Intensity per use recreation - .5 F T_ Group Housing - .45 F_F Transient Lodging - 26 upa net Goods and Services Convenience Goods and Services: Minimum 10 SF gross building area per DU Business. industry and uses associated with and needed to support research, education, convenience retail, tourism, or recreation, appropriately scaled Water and Individual Well and Septic Wastewater System 66 Convenience Goods and Services*: Minimum 10 SF gross building area DU Centralized or decentralized community treatment system G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 531 of 708 1 2 3 4 AkDE121 Typical Characteristic [Recreation and Open Space ITS Civic, Governmental and Institutional Services Transportation Text underlined is new text to be added Thxt strikethrough is Gurrent text to be deleted Compact Rural Development-300 4) -Gross Acres or Less Public Green Space for Public Green Space for Neighborhoods Neighborhoods (minimum 1 % (minimum 1 % of gross acres)* of gross acres) Open Space Minimum 35% of SRA* Limited Services Pre-K through Elementary Schools Equestrian Trails Auto - interconnected system of local roads Pedestrian Pathways County Transit station or a park and ride facility * In conjunction with residential units proposed within the CRD. (Compact Rural developments eats wig the AGSC a uhieet to loeacatinv,T and size imm+tafleRs, LDC meet+^^ 4.08.07.A.2. e+his Cede and are subJ 6t to Chapter 28-25CA(` \ l Is r, gross anro^� ) Residential Units 1 A n /nl Is\ per gross lDeRSity s n be i d e beyond the base density through the aere base density affordable workforce housing density bonus or through the density blending r,ra.iisinr r RLSA peke+ 4.7 On the FLUE E ref the GMP \ Requimd 1 T Uses Mewed But Net RequiFed Single Family and limited multi family Res'dential r'c�.�r�rcni ra-r (These GRDs that inelude single or multi He SORB Qfidas family residential uses shall i slu.dn pry ate suppert s s \ 67 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 532 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 «.f_l21 ReGreatiOR aR d Open Space Parks 9_ Du blue !''_r.,e Spaces w/n Neighborhoods of gross acres) fakes M G ✓YC-1 Governmental and instotutwvrrcar Services vc r�v�rc� Text underlined is new text to be added Thxt strikethrough is Gurrent text to be deleted b. Streets within SRAs shall be designed in accord with the cross -sections set forth in Figures 1-18 below, as more specifically provided in J.2 through J.5. Alternatively, Collier County Transportation Services may approve additional cross -sections as needed to meet the design objectives. Deviations from the cross sections set forth in Figures 1-18 may be 68 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 533 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 requested in the SRA Development Document or an amendment to the 2 SRA Development Document. Please see LDC section 4.08.07 1.7.E for 3 the deviation requirements and criteria. 4 5 i. Figure 1: Town Core/Center- 6 7 8 9 ii. {2) Figure 2: Town Core/Center- 10 12 13 iii. (3-) Figure 3: alley: Town Core/Center- 14 15 16 17 iv. (4) Figure 4: Town Core/Center 18 19 20 21 V. (-5-) Figure 5: Neighborhood General 22 23 24 25 vi. (6) Figure 6: Neighborhood General 26 27 28 29 vii. Figure 7: Neighborhood General, 30 31 32 33 viii. {8} Figure 8: Neighborhood General, 34 35 36 37 ix. {9} Figure 9: Neighborhood Edge, 38 39 40 41 X. Figure 10: Neighborhood General.- 42 43 44 45 A. 4 -) Figure 11: Neighborhood Edge, 46 47 48 49 xii. (4� Figure 12: Neighborhood Edge 50 69 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 534 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 xiii. {a 3} Figure 13: Collector street: Neighborhood Edge.. 4 5 6 7 xiv. 44) Figure 14: Neighborhood Edge.. 8 9 10 11 xv. { } Figure 15: Neighborhood Edge.. 12 13 14 15 xvi. 46-) Figure 16: Neighborhood Edge.. 16 17 18 19 xvii. 47-) Figure 17: Neighborhood Edge.. 20 21 22 23 xviii. Figure 18: Neighborhood Edge.. 24 25 26 27 2. Town Design Criteria. 28 29 a. General design criteria. 30 31 i. Shall be compact, pedestrian -friendly and mixed -use; 32 33 ii. Shall create an interconnected street system designed to disperse 34 and reduce the length of automobile trips; 35 36 iii. Shall offer a range of housing types and price levels to 37 accommodate diverse ages and incomes; Accessory dwelling unit 38 shall not count towards the total approved number of units, provided 39 that the total number of units does not exceed the maximum density 40 allowed by the GMP. 41 42 iv. Shall include school sites that are sized and located to enable 43 children to walk or bicycle to them; 44 45 V. Shall provide a range of open spaces including neighborhood and 46 community parks, squares and playgrounds distributed throughout 47 the community; 48 49 vi. Shall include both community and neighborhood scaled retail and 50 office uses; 70 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 535 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 vii. Shall have urban level services and infrastructure which supports development that is compact, including water management facilities and related structures, lakes, community and neighborhood parks, trails, temporary construction, sales and administrative offices for authorized contractors and consultants, landscape and hardscape features, fill storage, and site filling and grading, which are allowed uses throughout the community. viii. Shall be designed in a progressive rural to urban continuum with the greatest density, intensity and diversity occurring within the Town Core, to the least density, intensity and diversity occurring within the Neighborhood Edge; ix. Shall provide sufficient transition to the adjoining use, such as active agriculture, pasture, rural roadway, etc., and compatibility through the use of buffering, open space, land use, or other means; X. Shall include a minimum of three Gcontext Zzones: Town Core, Town Center and Neighborhood General, each of which shall blend into the other without the requirements of buffers; A. May include the Gcontext Zzone of Neighborhood Edge; and xii. Shall allow signs typically permitted in support of residential uses including for sale, for rent, model home, and temporary construction signs. Specific design and development standards shall be set forth in the SRA document for such signs permitted in residential areas or in conjunction with residential uses. xiii. To the extent that section 5.05.08 is applicable within the Urban designated area, SRA Architectural Design Standards shall comply with the provisions of section 5.05.08, unless additional or different design standards that deviate from section 5.05.08, in whole or part, are submitted to the County as part of the SRA Development Document or any amendment to the SRA Development Document. See LDC section 4.08.07 1.7.E for the deviation requirements and criteria. xiv. To the extent that section 4.06.00 is applicable within the Urban designated area, SRA Landscape Design and Installation Standards shall comply with the provisions of section 4.06.00, unless additional or different design and installation standards that deviate from section 4.06.00, in whole or in part, are submitted to the County as part of the SRA Development Document or any amendment to the SRA Development Document. Please see LDC section 4.08.07 1.7.E for the deviation requirements and criteria. Transportation Network. 71 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 536 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added i. The transportation network shall provide for a high level of mobility for all travelers gents through a design that respeGtS tho pedestrian ana accommodates a variety of travel modes—t ie auterneb+le. The transportation network shall be designed in an interconnected system of streets, sidewalks, and pathways. iii. A transfer station or park and ride area shall be appropriately located within the Town to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. iv. The SRA shall include vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas outside development and land uses. V. Any mitigation measures required to offset an SRA's traffic impacts, such as provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossinas. environmental mitiaation credits. riaht of wav dedication(s), water management and/or fill materials which may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network, shall be memorialized in a developer contribution agreement. Actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or proposed roadways. C. Open space and Parks. Towns shall have a minimum of 35 percent % open space. Towns shall have community parks that include sports fields and facilities with a minimum level of services of 200 square feet per dwelling unit in the Town, subject to level of service requirements. iii. Towns shall have passive or active parks, playgrounds, public plazas or courtyards as appropriate within each Scontext Zzone. d. Context Zzones. Context Zzones are intended to guide the location of uses and their intensity and diversity within a Town, and provide for the establishment of the urban to rural continuum. Town Core. The Town Core shall be the civic center of a Town. It is the most dense and diverse zone, with a full range of uses within walking distance. The Core shall be a primary pedestrian zone with buildings positioned near the right-of-way, wide sidewalks shall be shaded through streetscape planting, awnings and other architectural elements. Parking shall be provided on street and off street in the rear of buildings within lots or parking structures. Signage shall be pedestrian scale and designed to complement the building architecture. The following design criteria shall apply within the Town Core, with the exception of civic or institutional buildings, 72 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 537 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 which shall not be subject to the building height, building placement, building use, parking, and signage criteria below, but, instead, shall be subject to specific design standards set forth in the SRA development Document and approved by the BCC that address the perspective of these buildings' creating focal points, terminating vistas and significant community landmarks. a) Uses - commercial, retail, office, civic, institutional, light industrial and manufacturing, essential services, residential, parks and accessory uses. Such uses may occur in shared use buildings or single use buildings. b) The total building area within each block shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 3. c) Retail and offices uses per block shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 0.5. d) Civic uses per block shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 0.6. e) Light industrial and manufacturing uses per block shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 0.45. f) The density of transient lodging uses shall not exceed 26 dwelling units per Town Core gross acre. g) The maximum building height shall be 6 stories, excluding roofs and architectural features. h) There shall be no minimum lot size. i) The maximum block perimeter shall be 2,500 feet. j) Minimum setbacks from all property boundaries shall be 0 feet and the maximum setback from the front boundary shall be 10 feet. The maximum setback from the front boundary may be increased in order to create public spaces such as plazas and courtyards. k) Overhead encroachments such as awnings, balconies, arcades and the like, shall maintain a clear distance of 9 feet above the sidewalk and 15 feet above the street. 1) Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to encroach into the public sidewalks and shall leave a minimum 6-foot clear pedestrian way between the outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area. 73 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 538 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added m) Buildings within the Town Core shall be made compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage, scale and architectural features. n) The majority of parking spaces shall be provided off-street in the rear of buildings, or along the side (secondary streets), organized into a series of small bays delineated by landscape islands of varied sized. A maximum spacing between landscape islands shall be ten (10) spaces. Landscape islands and tree diamonds shall have a minimum of one tree. Parking is prohibited in front of buildings, except within the right-of-way. Parking structures fronting on a primary street shall either include ground floor retail or have a minimum ten (10) foot wide landscaped area at grade, including one tree per five (5) square feet of landscaped area. Parking structures fronting on a secondary street shall have a minimum ten (10) foot wide, densely landscaped area at grade, including one tree per 250 square feet of landscaped area or 25 linear feet on center. The amount of required parking shall be demonstrated through a shared parking analysis submitted with an SRA designation application. Parking shall be determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies. The analysis shall demonstrate the number of parking spaces available to more than one use or function, recognizing the required parking will vary depending on the multiple functions or uses in close proximity which are unlikely to require the spaces at the same time. The shared parking analysis methodology will be determined and agreed upon by the County Transportation staff and the applicant during the pre -application meeting. The shared parking analysis shall use the maximum square footage of uses proposed by the SRA development document. o) Streets shall adhere to LDC section 4.08.07 IJ.1.b. and Figures 1, 2, 3, or 4. At a minimum all proposed streets shall include sidewalks on both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way, and a five (5) foot streetscape area between the back of curb and the sidewalk. In these areas, sidewalk protection such as root barriers, a continuous tree pit, and/or structural soils shall be provided. streets shall maintain a minimum average building height to street width ratio of 1:1, excluding landmark buildings. p) Landscaping minimums within the Town Core shall be met by providing landscaping within parking lots as described, and by providing a streetscape area between the sidewalk and curb at a minimum of five (5) feet in width, with trees planted forty (40) feet on -center. The five-foot minimum 74 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 539 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added wide of planting area may be reduced to three (3) feet if sidewalk protection such as root barriers, continuous tree pits, and/or structural soils are provided. The street tree pattern may be interrupted by architectural elements such as arcades and columns. q) General signage standards. Signage requirements shall be as provided for in section 5.06.00, the "Collier County Sign Code." ii. Town Center. The Town Center shall provide a wide range of uses including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, within walking distance. Like the Town Core, the Town Center is the primary pedestrian zone, designed at human scale to support the walking environment. It is the Main street area of the Town. buildings shall be positioned near the right-of-way line, wide sidewalks shall be shaded by street trees and architectural elements. The following design criteria shall apply within the Town Center, with the exception of civic or institutional buildings, which shall not be subject to the height, building placement, building use, parking, and signage criteria below, but, instead, shall be subject to specific design standards that address these buildings' creating focal points, terminating vistas, and significant community landmarks and that are set forth in the SRA development Document and approved by the BCC. a) Commercial, retail, office, civic, institutional, light industrial and manufacturing, essential services, parks, residential and schools and accessory uses shall be permitted. These uses may occur in shared use buildings or single use buildings. b) The floor area ratio for the total building area within each block shall not exceed 2. c) The floor area ratio for retail and office uses per block shall not exceed 0.5. d) The floor area ratio for civic uses per block shall not exceed 0.6. e) The floor area ratio for light industrial and manufacturing uses per block shall not exceed 0.45. f) The maximum density for transient lodging shall be 26 dwelling units per Town Center gross acre. g) The maximum building height shall be 5 stories, excluding roofs and architectural features. 75 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 540 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added h) The minimum lot area shall be 1,000 square feet. i) The maximum block perimeter shall be 2,500 feet. j) The minimum setbacks shall be 0 from all property boundaries and the maximum setback shall be 10 feet from the front right of way line. k) Overhead encroachments such as awnings, balconies, arcades and the like, must maintain a clear distance of 9 feet above the sidewalk and 15 feet above the street. 1) Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to encroach the public sidewalks and shall leave a minimum 6-foot clear pedestrian way between the outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area. m) Buildings within the Town Center shall be made compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage, scale and architectural features. n) Streets shall adhere to LDC section 4.08.07 1J.1.b. and Figures 1, 2, 3, or 4. At a minimum all proposed streets must include sidewalks on both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way, and a 5 Ft. streetscape area between the back of curb and the sidewalk. streets shall maintain a minimum average building height to street width ratio of 1:1, excluding landmark buildings. o) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core. p) Landscape minimums are the same as in the Town Core. q) Signage requirements are the same as in the Town Core. iii. Neighborhood General. Neighborhood General is predominately residential with a mix of single and multi -family housing. Neighborhood scale goods and services, schools, parks and open space diversify the neighborhoods. The interconnected street pattern is maintained through the Neighborhood General to disperse traffic. Sidewalks and streetscape support the pedestrian environment. The following design criteria shall apply within Neighborhood General: a) Residential, neighborhood scale goods and services, civic, institutional, parks, schools and accessory uses shall be permitted. b) The maximum allowable building height shall be 3.5 stories. 76 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 541 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 c) The maximum block perimeter shall be 3500 feet, except that a larger block perimeter shall be allowed where an alley or pathway provides through access, or the block includes water bodies or public facilities. d) The SRA Development Document shall set forth the development standards for all allowable types of single- family development, which shall, at a minimum, adhere to the following: i) The minimum lot area shall be 1,000 square feet. ii) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core, inclusive of garage spaces, with an additional parking space required if an accessory dwelling unit is built. iii) Landscaping shall include a minimum of sixty (60) square feet of shrub planting per lot, on lots that are 3,000 square feet or less in area; eighty (80) square feet on lots that are greater than 3,000 square feet but less than 5,000 square feet in area; and 100 square feet for lots 5,000 square feet or larger in area. Plantings shall be in identified planting areas, raised planters, or planter boxes in the front of the dwelling, with, at a minimum, turf grass for the remainder of the property. e) Multi -family residential uses shall adhere to the following: i) Lots shall be a maximum of 4 acres. ii) Front and side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet and rear yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 20 feet for the primary structure and 5 feet for any accessory structures. iii) Porches, stoops, chimneys, bays canopies, balconies and overhangs may encroach into the front yard a maximum of 3 ft. 6 in and a maximum of 3 Ft. into side yards, but no element may encroach into a side yard such that the distance to the property line from the encroaching element is less than 3 Ft. 2 In., except that overhangs may encroach no more than 2 Ft. into any yard. iv) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core. 77 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 542 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added v) A minimum of 100 Sq. Ft. of shrub planting shall be required for each 2,000 Sq. Ft. of building footprint, and one tree shall be required for each 4,000 Sq. Ft. of lot area, inclusive of street trees, with such plantings in planting areas, raised planters, or planter boxes in the front of the building and a minimum of turf grass for the remainder of the property. f) Non-residential uses shall adhere to the following: i) All such uses shall be located at intersection corners or street bends and shall not be permitted at mid - block locations; ii) If the non-residential use is a restaurant, grocery store, or convenience store, it shall be located on an alley loaded site; iii) The minimum distance between non-residential uses shall be 1,000 feet, as measured along the street frontage at the right-of-way line; iv) The maximum square footage per use shall be 3,000 square feet and per location shall be 15,000 square feet; v) The use shall have a minimum lot area of not less than the size of the smallest adjacent lot. vi) The minimum setbacks shall be as follows: 0 feet from the front property boundary, a distance from the side property boundary that is equal to the setback of the adjacent property, and a minimum of 20 feet from the rear property boundary for the principal structure and 5 feet from the rear property boundary for any accessory structures. vii) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core, with on -street parking provided only along the lot street frontage. No off- street parking shall be permitted between the front fagade and the front property line. No off-street parking shall be permitted between the side fagade and the street side property line for corner lots. All off-street parking shall be screened from the street and adjacent property by wall, fence and/or landscaping. 78 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 543 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added viii) Landscaping shall include a minimum of 100 Sq. Ft. of shrub planting per 2,000 Sq. Ft. of building footprint, and one tree per 4,000 Sq. Ft. of lot area, inclusive of street trees. Plantings shall be in planting areas, raised planters, or planter boxes in the front of the building. Minimum of turf grass for the remainder of the property. g) General signage requirements shall be as provided for in LDC section 5.06.00. h) Signage within Neighborhood Goods and Service Zones shall be as provided for in section 5.06.00. i) Streets shall adhere to LDC section 4.08.07 IJ.1.b and Figures 5, 6, 7, 8, or 10. At a minimum all proposed streets must include sidewalks on both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way, and a 5 Ft. streetscape area between the back of curb and the sidewalk. iv. Neighborhood Edge (optional). Neighborhood Edge is predominately a single-family residential neighborhood. This zone has the least intensity and diversity within the Town. The mix of uses is limited. Residential lots are larger and more open space is evident. The Neighborhood Edge may be used to provide a transition to adjoining rural land uses. The following standards shall apply with the Neighborhood Edge: a) The permitted uses within the Neighborhood Edge are residential, parks, open space, golf courses, schools, essential services, and accessory uses. b) Building heights shall not exceed 2 stories. c) Lots shall have a minimum area of 5,000 square feet with lot dimensions and setbacks to be further defined with the SRA development Document. d) The perimeter of each block may not exceed 5,000 feet, unless an alley or pathway provides through access, or the block includes water bodies or public facilities. e) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core, inclusive of garage spaces, with provision for an additional parking space if an accessory dwelling unit is built. f) Landscaping shall include a minimum of 100 Sq. Ft. of shrub planting per lot, with plantings in planting areas, raised 79 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 544 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added planters, or planter boxed in the front of the dwelling and a minimum of turf grass for the remainder of the property. g) Streets shall adhere to LDC section 4.08.07 Id.1.b. and to Figures 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, or 18. At a minimum all proposed streets must include a 10-foot pathway on one side of the street with an 8-foot streetscape area between the edge of curb and the pathway. V. Special District (optional). The Special District is intended to provide for uses and development standards not otherwise provided for within the Gcontext Zzones. Special Districts would be primarily single use districts, such as universities, business parks, medical parks and resorts that require unique development standards to ensure compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. The location of Special Districts shall be illustrated on the SRA Master Plan, and uses and development standards shall be defined in detail within the SRA development application for review by Collier County staff. Special Districts could be for uses such as Universities, business or industrial parks, retirement communities, resorts, etc. 3. Village Design Criteria. a. General criteria. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed -use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed in a compact, pedestrian -friendly form. iii. Create an interconnected street system designed to disperse and reduce the length of automobile trips. iv. Offer a range of housing types and price levels to accommodate diverse ages and incomes. Accessory dwelling units shall not count towards the maximum allowed density. V. Be developed in a progressive rural to urban continuum with the greatest density, intensity and diversity occurring within the village center, to the least density, intensity and diversity occurring within the Neighborhood Edge. vi. The SRA document shall demonstrate the urban to rural transition occurring at the Villages limits boundary provides sufficient transition to the adjoining use, such as active agriculture, pasture, rural roadway, etc., and compatibility through the use of buffering, open space, land use, or other means. 80 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 545 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added vii. Shall allow signs typically permitted in support of residential uses including for sale, for rent, model home and temporary constructions signs. Specific design and development standards shall be set forth in the SRA document for such signs permitted in residential areas or in conjunction with residential uses. viii. To the extent that LDC section 5.05.08 is applicable within the Urban designated area, SRA Architectural Design Standards shall comply with the provisions of section 5.05.08, unless additional or different design standards that deviate from section 5.05.08, in whole or part, are submitted to the County no later than when the first SRA Site Development Document is submitted for approval. ix. To the extent that LDC section 4.06.00 is applicable within the Urban designated area, SRA Landscape Design and Installation Standards shall comply with the provisions of section 4.06.00, unless additional or different design and installation standards that deviate from LDC section 4.06.00, in whole or in part, are submitted to the County no later than when the first SRA Site Development Document is submitted for approval. b. Transportation Network. The transportation network for a Village shall adhere to the same standards provided for within a Town in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 1.2.b. C. Parks. A Village shall provide a range of active and passive parks, squares and playgrounds as appropriate to be located within each Scontext Zzone and Special District. d. Context Zzones. General. a) Villages shall be designed to include a minimum of two Context Zones: Village Center and Neighborhood General. b) Each Zone shall blend into the other without the requirements of buffers. c) Villages may include the Context Zone of Neighborhood Edge. d) Villages may include Special Districts to accommodate uses that require use specific design standards not otherwise provided for within the Scontext Zzones. e) The SRA Master Plan shall designate the location of each Scontext Zzone and each Special District. The village center shall be designated in one location. Neighborhood General, 81 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 546 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough s Gurrent text to he deleted Neighborhood Edge and Special District may be designated in multiple locations. f) Context Zzones are intended to guide the location of uses and their intensity and diversity within a Village, and provide for the establishment of the urban to rural continuum. ii. Village center. a) The allowable uses within a village center are commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, research and development businesses, retail, office, civic, institutional, essential services, parks, residential and schools and accessory uses. b) Uses may occur in shared use buildings or single use buildings. c) The floor area ratio of any use shall not exceed 2 for the total building area within each block, shall not exceed 0.5 for retail and office uses per block shall not exceed 0.6 for civic uses per block, manufacturing/light industrial, and research and development businesses shall not exceed 0.45 Der block. d) Transient Lodging - 26 dwelling units per village center gross acre e) Maximum building height - 5 Stories, excluding roofs and architectural features. f) Minimum lot area: 1,000 SF g) Block Perimeter: 2,500 Ft. max h) Front setbacks - 0 to 10 feet from the right-of-way line i) Side setbacks - 0 feet j) Rear setbacks - 0 feet k) Overhead encroachments such as awnings, balconies, arcades and the like, must maintain a clear distance of 9 feet above the sidewalk and 15 feet above the street. 1) Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to encroach the public sidewalks and shall leave a minimum 6-foot clear pedestrian way between the outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area. 82 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 547 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added m) The design of civic or institutional buildings shall not be subject to the specific standards of this subsection which regulate building height, building placement, building use, parking, and signage but, instead, shall be subject so specific design standards that address the perspective of these buildings' creating focal points, terminating vistas, and significant community landmarks and that are set forth in the SRA Development development Document and approved by the BCC. n) Buildings within the village center shall be made compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage, scale and architectural features. o) Streets shall adhere to Id.1.b. and Figures 1, 2, 3, or 4. At a minimum all proposed streets shall include sidewalks on both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way, and a 5 Ft. streetscape area between the back of curb and the sidewalk. Streets streets shall maintain a minimum average building height to street width ratio of 1:1, excluding landmark buildings. p) General parking criteria i) On -street parking spaces within the limits of the front property line, as projected into the right-of-way, shall count towards the required number of parking spaces. ii) The majority of parking spaces shall be provided off- street in the rear of buildings, or along the side (secondary streets). Parking is prohibited in front of buildings. iii) Parking areas shall be organized into a series of small bays delineated by landscape islands of varied sized. A maximum spacing between landscape islands shall be 10 spaces. Landscape islands shall have a minimum of one canopy tree. iv) Parking lots shall be accessed from alleys, service lanes or secondary streets. q) The majority of parking spaces shall be provided off-street in the rear of buildings, or along the side (secondary streets), organized into a series of small bays delineated by landscape islands of varied sized. A maximum spacing between landscape islands shall be 10 spaces. Landscape islands and tree diamonds shall have a minimum of one tree. Parking is prohibited in front of buildings, except within 83 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 548 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 the right-of-way. Parking lots shall be accessed from alleys, service lanes or secondary streets. Parking structures fronting on a primary street shall include ground floor retail. Parking structures fronting on a secondary street shall have a minimum 10 Ft. wide, densely landscaped area at grade, including one tree per 250 square feet of landscaped area or twenty-five (25) lineal feet on -center. The amount of required parking shall be demonstrated through a shared parking analysis submitted with an SRA designation application. Parking shall be determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies. The analysis shall demonstrate the number of parking spaces available to more than one use or function, recognizing the required parking will vary depending on the multiple functions or uses in close proximity which are unlikely to require the spaces at the same time. r) Landscaping minimums within the village center shall be met by providing landscaping within parking lots as described, and by providing a streetscape area between the sidewalk and curb at a minimum of 5 Ft. in width. In these areas, sidewalk protection such as root barriers, continuous three pits, and/or structural soils shall be provided. Trees shall be planted forty (40) feet on -center. The street tree pattern may be interrupted by architectural elements such as arcades and columns. s) Signage standards within the village center shall comply with those provided in the Town Center. iii. Neighborhood General. Design standards for the Neighborhood General within a Village shall be the same as defined within a Town. iv. Neighborhood Edge (optional). Design standards for the Neighborhood Edge within a Village shall be the same as defined within a Town. V. Special District (optional). The Special District is intended to provide for uses and development standards not otherwise provided for within the Scontext Zzones. Uses and development standards shall be defined in detail within the SRA development application for review by Collier County staff. 84 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 549 of 708 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Thxt strikethrough is current text to be deleted 85 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 550 of 708 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 86 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 551 of 708 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 87 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 552 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added additional arLine cnFreiif anraceessory dwelling unit is- buitt-. 45. Compact Rural Development development Criteria. a. General criteria. Compact Rural Development development (CRD) is a form of SRA that is a maximum of 300 acres and intended to support and further Collier County's valued attributes of agriculture, natural resources, and economic diversity will n „irle flexibility with r eat to the m ix of uses and development standards but shall otherwiseco* with the design standards of a Hamlet er Village ii. Primary CRD uses shall be those associated with and needed to support agriculture, natural resources, research, education, convenience retail, tourism, or recreation. iiiii. A CRD may include, but is not required to have permanent residential housing and the services and facilities that support permanent residents. IV##F. ECEept-aSreae,rirheFabeye "GIRD .ill eenfeFrn to the deag standards of a Village er Hamlet as set forth herein based en the size of the GIRD As residential units are not a required use, those goods and services that support residents such as retail, office, civic, governmental and institutional uses shall also not be required, however for any CRD that does include permanent residential housing, the proportionate support services shall be provided in accordance with LDC section 04.08.07 1.1. Example. An example of a CRD is an ecotourism village that would have a unique set of uses and support services different from a traditional residential village. It would contain transient lodging facilities and services appropriate to eco-tourists, but may not provide for the range of services that necessary to support permanent residents. 88 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 553 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added i. The transportation network shall provide for a high level of mobility for all travelers through a design that accommodates a variety of travel modes. ii. The transportation network shall be designed in an interconnected system of local roads and pathways. C. Parking. i. Parking for non-residential uses may be provided on -street, off- street, and within parking structures. ii. Parking shall be determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies. The analysis shall demonstrate the number of parking spaces available to more than one use or function, recognizing the required parking will vary depending on the multiple functions or uses in close proximity which are unlikely to require the spaces at the same time. d. Landscaping and buffering. Landscaping and buffering shall be provided in accordance with LDC section 4.06.00, except a Type B Buffer shall also be required around the perimeter of the CRD in accordance with LDC section 4.06.02, unless additional or different design standards that deviate from LDC section 4.06.02, in whole or part, approved by the County as part of the SRA Development Document or any amendment to the SRA Development Document. e. General signage standards. Signage requirements shall be as provided for in LDC section 5.06.00. f. Open space. i. For CRDs that include residential: a) A minimum of 35 percent of the CRD must be provided as open space within the CRD; and b) A minimum of one percent of the CRD shall be provided as public green within neighborhoods. ii. For CRDs with only non-residential uses, a minimum of 30 percent of the CRD must be provided as open space within the CRD. q. Primary non-residential CRD uses shall adhere to the following_ i, Non-residential uses are limited to business, industry, and uses associated with and needed to support agriculture, natural resources. research. education. convenience retail. tourism. or recrPatinn_ 89 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 554 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 ii, Civic, institutional, and governmental uses are permitted. iii. Uses may occur in shared use buildings or single use buildings. iv. See LDC section 4.08.07.1, Table C. for maximum floor area ratios. V. The maximum building height shall be 4 stories, excluding roofs and architectural features. vi. Setbacks and allowable encroachments shall be further defined within the SRA Development Document. h. Residential and supporting non-residential uses shall adhere to the following: i, If permanent residential housing is included in the CRD, the number of residential units shall be limited to be equivalent with the demand aenerated by a maximum of two (2) units Der acre. Retail and office uses may be permitted in conjunction with residential uses in the CRD but shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 0.5. iii. Convenience goods and services may be permitted in conjunction with residential uses in the CRD but shall be built at a minimum of 10 square feet of gross building area per residential dwelling unit within the CRD. Such uses shall be located at intersection corners or street bends and shall not be Dermitted at mid -block locations. iv. The maximum building height shall be 3 stories, but no greater than 35 fPPt_ V. Residential uses in the CRD shall be located abutting residentially zoned land where feasible. vi. Setbacks and allowable encroachments shall be based upon the most similar residential zoning district to the proposed residential use found in LDC section 04.02.01. For non-residential suaaort services, the minimum setbacks shall be consistent with the least restrictive setbacks of the adjoining property_ 56. Design Criteria Common to SRAs. a. Parcels of one (1) acre or more, with a Natural Resource Index rating greater than 1.2, must be preserved as open space and maintained in a predominantly naturally vegetated state, except the infrastructure necessary to serve the Dermitted uses may be exemDt from this restriction if such infrastructure is designed to minimize the impacts to any such areas. 90 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 555 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added b. A minimum of thirty-five (35) percent of the SRA land designated as Town or Village shall be kept in open space. C. SRA design shall demonstrate that ground water table draw down or diversion will not adversely impact the hydroperiods of adjacent FSA, HSA, WRA or Conservation Land and will not adversely affect the water use rights of either adjacent developments or adjacent agricultural operations and will comply with the SFWMD Basis of Review. Detention and control elevations shall be established to protect natural areas and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. d. Where an SRA adjoins an FSA, HSA, WRA or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map, best management and planning practices shall be applied to minimize adverse impacts to such lands. Best management practices shall include the following: The perimeter of each SRA shall be designed to provide a transition from higher density and intensity uses within the SRA to lower density and intensity uses on adjoining property. The edges of SRAs shall be well defined and designed to be compatible with the character of adjoining property. Techniques such as, but not limited to setbacks, landscape buffers, and recreation/open space placement may be used for this purpose. Open space within or contiguous to an SRA shall be used to provide a buffer between the SRA and any adjoining FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map. Open epen space contiguous to or within 300 feet of the boundary of an FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land may include: natural preserves, lakes, golf courses provided no fairways or other turf areas are allowed within the first 200 feet, passive recreational areas and parks, required yard and set -back areas, and other natural or man-made open space. Along the west boundary of the FSAs and HSAs that comprise Camp Keais Strand, i.e., the area south of Immokalee Road, this open space buffer shall be 500 feet wide and shall preclude golf course fairways and other turf areas within the first 300 feet. e. Where a WRA is incorporated into the stormwater system of an SRA, the provisions of LDC section 4.08.06 AA.b. Seetien n 08 nn Ah apply. Where existing agricultural activity adjoins an SRA, the design of the SRA must take this activity into account to allow for the continuation of the agricultural activity and to minimize any conflict between agriculture and SRA uses. q. An SRA proposed to adjoin lands designated as Open Lands shall provide the opportunity for direct vehicular and pedestrian connections from said areas to the County's arterial/collector roadway network as shown on MPO's Long Range Transportation Needs Plan. 91 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 556 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 h. Public and private roads within an SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. Signalized intersections within or adjacent to an SRA that serves the SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. i. To the extent required to mitigate an SRA's traffic impacts, actions may be taken to include, but shall not be limited to, provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossing, environmental mitigation credits, right of way dedication(s), water management and/or fill material which may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network. Any such actions to offset traffic impacts shall be memorialized in a developer's contribution agreement. These actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or proposed roadways that are anticipated to be expanded or constructed. 67. Infrastructure Required. An SRA shall have adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed development, or such infrastructure must be provided concurrently with the demand as identified in Chapter 6 of the LDC. The level of infrastructure required will depend on the type of development, accepted civil engineering practices, and the requirements of this Section. a. The capacity of infrastructure serving the SRA must be demonstrated during the SRA designation process in accordance with the provisions in Chapter 6 of the LDC in effect at the time of SRA designation. Infrastructure to be analyzed will include facilities for transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, and solid waste. C. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities are required in Towns and; Villages, and those Cons „ eding innacres i sire. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities shall be constructed, owned, operated and maintained by a private utility service, the developer, a Community development District, other special districts the Immokalee Water Sewer Service District, Collier County Water and Sewer District, or other governmental entity. This Section shall not prohibit innovative alternative water and wastewater treatment systems such as decentralized community treatment systems provided that they meet all applicable regulatory criteria. d. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems, limited to a maximum of 100 acres of any Town or; Village erB are permitted on an interim basis until services from a centralized/decentralized community system are available. e. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems are peFmitte Hamletsand may be permitted in CRDs of 100 aores r loss ; size. 92 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 557 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough s GLArrent text to he deleted 78. Requests for Deviations from the LDC. The SRA Development Document or any amendments to the SRA Development Document may provide for nonprocedural deviations from the LDC, provided that all of the following are satisfied: a. The deviations are consistent with the RLSA District Overlay; and It can be demonstrated that the proposed deviation(s) further enhance the tools, techniques and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in section 163.32481.3177 ", F.S. JK. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessments. Impact assessments are intended to identify methods to be utilized to meet the SRA generated impacts on public facilities and to evaluate the self-sufficiency of the proposed SRA with respect to these public facilities. Information provided within these assessments may also indicate the degree to which the SRA is consistent with the fiscal neutrality requirements of Section 4.08.07 KL Impact assessments shall be prepared in the following infrastructure areas: Transportation. A transportation impact assessment meeting the requirements of Chapter 10 of the LDC or its successor regulation or procedure, shall be prepared by the applicant as component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. a. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the transportation impact assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the following issues related to the highway network: i_ M Impacts to the level of service of impacted roadways and intersections, comparing the proposed SRA to the impacts of conventional Baseline Standard development; ii. (2) Effect(s) of new roadway facilities planned as part of the SRA Master Plan on the surrounding transportation system; and iii. (3) Impacts to agri-transport issues, especially the farm -to - market movement of agricultural products. The transportation impact assessment, in addition to considering the impacts on the highway system, shall also consider vehicular, bicvcle/Dedestrian. Dublic transit, internal circulators. and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas outside development and land uses p bliG transp matte, (transit) and hiGYGle and pedestrian issues to the extent a pineable C. No SRA shall be approved unless the transportation impact assessment required by this Section has demonstrated through data and analysis that the capacity of County/State collector or arterial road(s) serving the SRA to be adequate to serve the intended SRA uses in accordance with Chapter 6 of the LDC in effect at the time of SRA designation. 93 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 558 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 2. Potable Water. A potable water assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either Florida Administrative Code for private and limited use water systems, or for Public Water Systems. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the potable water assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products, if any, generated by the proposed treatment process. The applicant shall identify the sources of water proposed for potable water supply. 3. Irrigation Water. An irrigation water assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall quantify the anticipated irrigation water usage expected at the buildout of the SRA. The assessment shall identify the sources of water proposed for irrigation use and shall identify proposed methods of water conservation. 4. Wastewater. A wastewater assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either Standards for Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems, contained in Florida Administrative Code for systems having a capacity not exceeding 10,000 gallons per day or for wastewater treatment systems having a capacity greater than 10,000 gallons per day. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the wastewater assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products generated by the proposed treatment process. 5. Solid waste. A solid waste assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall identify the means and methods for handling, transporting and disposal of all solid waste generated including but not limited to the collection, handling and disposal of recyclables and horticultural waste products. The applicant shall identify the location and remaining disposal capacity available at the disposal site. 6. Stormwater Management. A stormwater management impact assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as a part of an SRA Designation Application Package. The stormwater management impact assessment shall, at a minimum, provide the following information: a. An exhibit showing the boundary of the proposed SRA including the following information: i. M The location of any WRA delineated within the SRA;_ ii. R� A generalized representation of the existing stormwater flow patterns across the site including the location(s) of discharge from the site to the downstream receiving waters; 94 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 559 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 (-3,) The land uses of adjoining properties and, if applicable, the locations of stormwater discharge into the site of the proposed SRA from the adjoining properties. A narrative component to the report including the following information: i. M The name of the receiving water or, if applicable, FSA or WRA to which the stormwater discharge from the site will ultimately outfall; The peak allowable discharge rate (in cfs/acre) allowed for the SRA per Collier County Ordinance No. 90-10 or its successor regulation; (-3-) If applicable, a description of the provisions to be made to accept stormwater flows from surrounding properties into, around, or through the constructed surface water management system of the proposed development; iv. (4) The types of stormwater detention areas to be constructed as part of the surface water management system of the proposed development and water quality treatment to be provided prior to discharge of the runoff from the site; and V. {} If a WRA has been incorporated into the stormwater management system of an SRA, the report shall demonstrate compliance with provisions of Section 4.08.04 AA.b. 7. Public Schools. The applicant shall coordinate with the Collier County School Board to provide information and coordinate planning to accommodate any impacts that the SRA has on public schools. As part of the SRA application, the following information shall be provided: a. School Impact Analysis (SIA) for a determination of school capacity only (refer to section 10.04.09 for SIA requirements); and The potential for locating a public educational facility or facilities within the SRA, and the location(s) of any site(s) that may be dedicated or otherwise made available for a public educational facility. KL SRA Economic Assessment. An Economic Assessment meeting the requirements of this Section shall be prepared and submitted as part of the SRA Designation Application Package. At a minimum, the analysis shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire, and schools. Development phasing and funding mechanisms shall address any adverse impacts to adopted minimum levels of service pursuant to Chapter 6 of the LDC. 95 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 560 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1. Demonstration of Fiscal Neutrality. Each SRA must demonstrate that its development, as a whole, will be fiscally neutral or positive to the Collier County tax base. This demonstration will be made for each unit of government responsible for the services listed above, using one of the following methodologies: a. Collier County Fiscal Impact Model. The fiscal impact model officially adopted and maintained by Collier County. Alternative Fiscal Impact Model. If Collier County has not adopted a fiscal impact model as indicated above, the applicant may develop an alternative fiscal impact model using a methodology approved by Collier County. The BCC may grant exceptions to this policy of fiscal neutrality to accommodate affordable or workforce housing. 2. Imposition of Special Assessments. If the Report identifies a negative fiscal impact of the project to a unit of local government referenced above, the landowner will accede to a special assessment on his property to offset such a shortfall or in the alternative make a lump sum payment to the unit of local government equal to the present value of the estimated shortfall. The BCC may grant a waiver to accommodate affordable housing. 3. Special Districts Encouraged in SRAs. The use of community development districts (CDDs), Municipal Service Benefit Units (MSBUs), Municipal Service Taxing Units (MSTUs), or other special districts shall be encouraged in SRAs. When formed, the special districts shall encompass all of the land designated for development in the SRA. Subsequent to formation, the special district will enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the County to assure fiscal neutrality. As outlined above, if the monitoring reveals a shortfall of net revenue, the special district will impose the necessary remedial assessment on lands in the SRA. LM. The BCC may, as a condition of approval and adoption of an SRA development, require that suitable areas for parks, schools, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use. When the BCC requires such a set aside for one or more public facilities, the set aside shall be subject to section 2.03.06, in the same manner as are public facility dedications required as a condition of PUD rezonings. # # # # # # # # # # # 96 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates - LDCA (04-22-2025).docx Page 561 of 708 Exhibit B — GMP Policy Direction Chart General Changes Multiple Sections • Updating obsolete code references of the Florida Statutes and Florida Administrative Code and properly referencing the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) throughout the RLSA provisions. • Creating new outdoor lighting standards to protect and preserve the nighttime environment by minimizing light pollution and glare while reducing energy consumption and upholding safety and security to conform with GMP Policies 3.15, 4.23, and 5.7. • Removing Hamlets as an allowable form of SRA development, to conform with GMP Policy 4.7. • Updating wildlife habitat management plan requirements to include provisions to minimize human and wildlife interactions and strategies for disseminating information to residents and visitors to encourage the responsible coexistence with such wildlife, to conform with GMP Policies 4.5 and 5.5. LDC section 4.08.01 Amending the definitions that are specific to the RLSA, by redefining Compact Rural Development (CRD), deleting Hamlet, and amending Stewardship Credit. • Defining Micromobility, Park -and -Ride, and Walkability, LDC section 4.08.04 • Changing the required comprehensive review of stewardship credits from 5 years to 7 years, as well as establishing a Stewardship Credit Cap at 404,000 to entitle no more than 45,000 acres of Stewardship Receiving Areas (in LDC section 4.08.04), to conform with GMP Policies 1.21 and 1.22. LDC section 4.08.05 • Including Restoration Areas so they have the same restrictions as FSAs, to conform to GMP Policy 5.1. • Exempting "agricultural purposes" from the 40% native vegetation preserve requirement in the RLSA for sites having evidence of species of special concern and changing the method for determining if such species are present by deleting the "directly observed" requirement and relying solely upon evidence, such as denning, foraging, or other indications, to conform with GMP Policy 5.5. • Deleting open space and vegetation preservation requirements as a means for establishing buffer areas between human and wildlife habitats, to conform with GMP Policy 5.5. • Updated wildlife habitat management plan requirements to include determination within each SRA by the authority having jurisdiction over wildlife crossing locations to conform with GMP Policy 5.4. • Expanding the provision for lighting controls so that outdoor lighting is designed to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security, to conform with GMP Policies 3.15, 4.23, and 5.7. • Deleting references and species (i.e., gopher tortoise, Florida scrub jay, bald eagle, red -cockaded woodpecker, and panther) that were removed from GMP Policy 5.5. • Updating the wildlife protection standards to further stipulate that the County will not consider any recommendations from the FFWCC or USFWS that reduces the minimum standards for wildlife protection, to conform with GMP Policy 5.5.3. • Updating the golf course standards by requiring that golf courses be designed in accordance with the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for Golf and requiring the use of pesticides follow Best Page 562 of 708 Exhibit B — GMP Policy Direction Chart Management Practices for the Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses, FDEP, to conform to GMP Policy 3.7. • Including upland buffers that are contiguous to wetlands to be considered for preservation, to conform with GMP Policy 5.6. LDC section 4.08.06 • Changing EIS to "Environmental Data," in HSA Delineated Lands, to conform to GMP Policy 3.7. • Updating SSA Credit Generation to accurately reference SSA Credit Agreement in GMP Policy 1.6. • Deleting language that refers to earning early entry bonus credits since the availability period to award bonus credits has ended. • Adding provisions for Agricultural Stewardship Area in Open Lands to include two Stewardship Credits per acre in lieu of using the NRI, to conform to GMP Policy 2.2. • Adding provisions for Panther Corridor Credits, to conform to GMP Policy 3.11.2. • Adding provisions for Wetland Wading Bird Habitat Restoration Credits, to conform to GMP Policy 3.11.3. • Updating Restoration Areas Index Score Upgrade to reference Layers 5-8 on the Land use Matrix, to conform to GMP Policy 3.12. • Restricting only one type of restoration shall be rewarded toward Restoration Stewardship and allowing up to 10 credits per acre, to conform to GMP Policies 3.11 and 3.11.4. • Adding 1 additional Stewardship Credit per acre for lands identified as Restoration I and 2 additional credits per acre for the dedication of lands inside an FSA, HAS, or WRA. A landowner who successfully completes restoration shall be awarded up to eight additional credits, to conform to GMP Policies 3.11.1 through 3.11.3. • Removing the priority of awarding four restoration credits within the Camp Keais Strand FSA, contiguous HSAs, or those portions of the Restoration Zone depicted on the RLSA Overlay Map that are contiguous to the Camp Keais Strand, to conform with GMP Policy 3.11. • At the completion of restoration, adding additional stewardship credits opportunities as R2 Restoration for caracara restoration, exotic controlled burning, flow way restoration, and native habitat restoration, to conform to GMP Policy 3.11. • Removing "Aquaculture for native species and non-native species" from the Land Use Matrix under the SSA, because it was stricken from the Land Use Matrix in the GMPA approved in July 2021. • Updated SSA Easement Agreement by capitalizing "Easement" and specifying easement shall be in favor of Collier County and the FFWCC, to conform to GMP Policies GMP 1.6 and 1.7. • Creating a conditional period of 5 years when a stewardship easement is established in the SSA, to conform to GMP Policy 1.6.1. • Creating permanent stewardship easement provisions, including extensions and terminations of conditional stewardship easement agreements, to conform to GMP Policy 1.6.1. LDC section 4.08.07 • Adding a provision that if all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the pro rata acreage of the WRA shall be required to consume SRA credits but shall not be included within the SRA acreage, to conform to GMP Policies 3.13, 4.2, and 4.9. This will be reflected in the requirements for Master Plan Content. Page 563 of 708 Exhibit B — GMP Policy Direction Chart • Deleting the 35% minimum open space requirement for "those CRDs exceeding 100 acres," to conform with GMP Policy 4.10. • Requiring direct pedestrian/vehicular connections from an SRA to a County arterial or collector roadway (when lands adjoin), to conform to GMP Policy 4.14. • Requiring a Mobility Plan in an SRA, including strategies to encourage mass transit, to conform to GMP Policy 4.6. • Adding mitigation provisions to offset the traffic impacts of an SRA, to conform to GMP Policy 4.14. • Adding stipulation and not more than 1,000 total acres of SRA development is allowed in the Area of Critical State Concern. • Modifying Stewardship Credit Exchange provisions by allowing a total of 10 stewardship credits per gross acre that may be used where such credits were created from other SSAs and to exempt infrastructure deemed necessary for public safety and minimize impacts to natural resources on lands having a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2, to conform with GMP Policies 4.9 and 4.19. Deleting "Any such lands within an SRA located outside of the ACSC exceeding the required thirty- five (35) percent shall not be required to consume Stewardship Credits," to conform to GMP Policy 4.10. • Updating Public Benefit Uses provisions to require them to count toward the maximum acreage limits of an SRA (except those approved prior to July 13, 2021) but not counting against the consumption of Stewardship Credits in an SRA, to conform to GMP Policy 4.20. In addition, affordable housing will now be considered as a public benefit use. • Updating Mixed Land Use Entitlement provisions to indicate Towns and Villages shall be "the preferred locations for business and industry, including environmental research, agricultural research, aviation and aerospace, health and life sciences, corporate headquarters, computer hardware, software and services, information technology, manufacturing, research and development, wholesale trade and distribution and similaruses, including Florida Qualified Target Industries," to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.4. • Adding affordable housing provisions to an SRA, to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.5. • Increasing the minimum size of a Town from 1,000 acres 1,500 acres and the maximum size from 4,000 acres to 5,000 acres, requiring the Town transportation networkbe based on an internal mobility plan, requiring a transfer station or park -and -ride area, and including research and development companies as allowable uses, to conform to GMP Policies 4.6 and 4.7.1. • Increasing the minimum size of a Village from 100 acres to 300 acres and the maximum size shall be 1,000 acres (in the ACSC) and 1,500 acres (outside the ACSC), requiring an internal mobility plan when Villages are greater than 500 acres, which includes a transfer station or park -and -ride, to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.2 • Increasing the maximum allowable size of Compact Rural Development from 100 acres to 300 acres, updating the purpose and intent of a CRD, and limiting the number of dwelling units to be equivalent to the demand generated by the primary CRD use (and no greater than 2 d/u per acre), and stipulating that no more than five CRDs may be approved prior to the approval of a Village or Town, to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.3. • Updating SRA Designation Application Package to include "SRA Mobility Plan," which includes vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas of outside development and land uses. The Mobility Plan shall Page 564 of 708 Exhibit B — GMP Policy Direction Chart provide mobility strategies such as bus subsidies, route sponsorship, or other incentives to encourage the use of mass transit services. The Mobility Plan shall also consider the needs identified in the MPO Long Range Transportation Needs Plan, and plan land uses to accommodate services that would increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long-distance travel. Such development strategies are recognized as methods of discouraging urban sprawl, encouraging alternative modes of transportation, increasing internal capture, and reducing vehicle miles traveled. This was done to address GMP Policy 4.6. The proposed provisions will require a checklist to address multiple mobility strategies, including pedestrian, micromobility, bicycle, public transit, vehicular, school connectivity, internal circulators and connectivity, LRTP roadway and pathway needs, and LRTP transit needs. • Updating Master Plan content to include consistency with Long Range Transportation Plan and Access Management procedures and to require a Wildlife Management Plan, to conform to GMP Policy 4.5. • Updating Development Document to include an inventory of historic or cultural resources, to conform to GMP Policy 4.22. • Deleting the provision for SRAs as an allowable part of a Development of Regional Impact. • Updating Town Characteristic Chart to (1) indicate a proposed minimum and maximum acreages, (2) indicate the maximum FAR is based on a "per use" basis and that research companies be assigned a maximum FAR of 0.45, (3) increase the minimum Goods and Services from 65 square feet to 170 square feet of gross building area per dwelling unit and include "Research and Development companies" as an allowable use under this category [to conform to GMP Policies 4.7.1 and 4.7.4], (4) amend community parks under Recreation and Open Space by indicating "subject to level of service requirements" [to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.1], (5) update Civic, Governmental and Institutional Uses to specify a minimum of 15 square feet of gross land area is required per each dwelling unit, and (6) include a transfer station or park -and -ride as a required use under Transportation [to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.1]. • Updating Village Characteristic Chart to (1) indicate the minimum acreage be 300 acres and a maximum of 1,000 acres inside the ACSC and 1,500 acres outside the ACSC [to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.2], (2) indicate the maximum FAR is based on a "per use" basis, (3) increase the minimum Goods and Services from 25 square feet to 53 square feet of gross building area per dwelling unit and include "Corporate Office, Manufacturing and Light Industrial, and Research and Development companies: appropriately scaled" as an allowed use under Goods and Services [to conform to GMP Policies 4.7.2 and 4.7.4], and (4) include a transfer station or park -and -ride as a required use and delete "county transit access" as an allowable use under Transportation. • Updating CRD Chart to (1) change the maximum acreage from 100 acres to 300 acres, (2) delete the note regarding density, (3) indicate the maximum FAR is based on a "per use" basis and that "Business, industry and uses associated with and needed to support research, education, tourism or recreation be a required use with a maximum FAR of 0.5," (4) stipulate that retail and office uses are allowed "in conjunction with residential units proposed within the CRD," (5) include "Business, industry and uses associated with and needed to support research, education, convenience retail, tourism or recreation, appropriately scaled" as a required use under Goods and Services [to conform to GMP Policies 4.7.2 and 4.7.3] and that "Convenience Goods and Services*: Minimum 10 SF gross building area per DU" in conjunction with residential units proposed within the CRD be an allowable use under the same category, (6) include "Public Green Space for Neighborhoods* (minimum 1% of gross acres)" and "Open Space Minimum 35% of SRA*" "in conjunction with residential units proposed within the CRA" as an allowable use under Recreation and Open Space, and (8) allowing "County Transit station Page 565 of 708 Exhibit B — GMP Policy Direction Chart or a park and ride facility" as an allowing use under the Transportation category. • Adding "manufacturing/light industrial" and "research and development businesses" to village center and stipulating the maximum FAR does not exceed 0.45 per block. • Adding new standards to CRDs relative to parking, landscaping, signage, open space, and uses. The new parking standard, which indicates, "Parking for non-residential uses may be provided on -street, off-street, and within parking structures" was modeled after the Babcock Mixed Use Residential Commercial (MURC) Subdistrict in Charlotte County, Florida. In addition, new standards, which are duplicated in the Village Center criteria, include parking requirements based on modal splits and demands from reputable industry leaders, such as the ITE, ULI, or other source or study. The new sign standards were modeled after the Town Core criteria. The standards relative the uses were modeled upon Table C. and the Babcock MURC. The new maximum building height of 4 stories was developed as a comprise between the old Hamlet limitation (3.5 stories) and the Village Center limitation (5 stories). The new setbacks standards were developed using the old Hamlet Neighborhood Edge criteria. The new standards relative to residential and supporting non-residential uses were developed by using Table C. and the old Town Neighborhood General criteria from Hamlets. The maximum building height of 3 stories was derived as a compromise between old Hamlet criteria (3.5 stories) and RSF-1 and RSF-2 standards (35 feet). The "Residential uses in the CRD shall be located abutting residentially zoned lands where feasible" reflects strategic opportunity signs subdistricts standards in a newly proposed and independent GMP amendment. Page 566 of 708 ORDINANCE NO.2021- 28 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY RESTUDY SPECIFICALLY TO AMEND THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, TO CHANGE ACREAGES, STEWARDSHIP CREDITS, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20190002292] 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 Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Future Land Use Element 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 December 11, 2020, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Economic Opportunity 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 [19-ENS-00625/1631679/1]223 1 of 3 RLSA Restudy / PL20190002292 5/11/21 Page 567 of 708 WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of these 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 May 6, 2021, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on July 13, 2021; 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 RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendment to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Future Land Use Element, 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 Economic Opportunity. 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. [19-ENS-00625/1631679/11223 2 of 3 RLSA Restudy / PL20190002292 5/11/21 Page 568 of 708 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this 13t" day of _, 2021. ATTEST:. ;� 1')' R,IA. ". CRYSTACK. KINZLL.. CLERK 17 By: Awry, . '`' Clerk Signat � fitly: Approved as to form and legality: r✓ Heidi Ashton-Cic o Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIE O TY, FLORIDA By: Penny Ta or, Chairma Attachment: Exhibit A — Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Future Land Use Element This. ordlnonce biFet� witi, ory of tote's Office12-m>; day of�_�0 �.. and acknowledge en tho7 ofeivecl„th__r��l. �QY of � [I 9-ENS-00625/1631679/ 11223 RLSA Restudy / PL20190002292 5/11/21 3 of 3 Page 569 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Prepared by Collier County Planning and Zoning Department Comprehensive Planning Section Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Adopted October, 1997 Text underlined is added; text stFike##i=eugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 1 of 38 Page 570 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft II. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** D. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Goal: To address the long-term needs of residents and property owners within the Immokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment by pFeteGtiRg retaining agricultural activities, directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, enabling the conversion of rural land to other uses in appropriate locations, discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that its employs creative land use planning techniques through the use of established incentives. Objective: Create an incentive based land use overlay system, herein referred to as the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, based on the principles of rural land stewardship as defined in Chapter 163.3248, F.S. The Policies that implement this Goal and Objective are set forth below in groups relating to each aspect of the Goal. Group 1 policies describe the structure and organization of the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Group 2 policies relate to agriculture, Group 3 policies relate to natural resource protection, and Group 4 policies relate to conversion of land to other uses and economic diversification. Group 5 are regulatory policies that ensure that land that is not voluntarily included in the Overlay by its owners shall nonetheless meet the minimum requirements of the Final Order pertaining to natural resource protection. Group 1 — General purpose and structure of the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Policy 1.1: To promote a dynamic balance of land uses in the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) that collectively contributes to a viable agricultural industry, protects natural resources, and enhances economic prosperity and diversification, Collier County hereby establishes the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (Overlay). The Overlay was created through a collaborative community -based planning process involving county residents, area property owners, and representatives of community and governmental organizations under the direction of a citizen oversight committee. Policy 1.2: The Overlay protects natural resources and retains viable agriculture by promoting compact rural mixed -use development as an alternative to low -density single use development, and provides a system of compensation to private property owners for the elimination of certain land uses in order Text underlined is added; text stFike thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 2 of 38 Page 571 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft to protect natural resources and viable agriculture in exchange for transferable credits that can be used to entitle such compact development. The strategies herein are based in part on the principles of Florida's Rural Lands Stewardship Act, Section 163.3248, Florida Statutes. The Overlay includes innovative and incentive based tools, techniques and strategies that are not dependent on a regulatory approach, but will complement existing local, regional, state and federal regulatory programs. Policy 1.3: This Overlay to the Future Land Use Map is depicted on the Stewardship Overlay Map (Overlay Map) and applies to rural designated lands located within the Immokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment referred to in the State of Florida Administration Commission Final Order No. AC-99-002. The RLSA generally includes rural lands in northeast Collier County lying north and east of Golden Gate Estates, north of the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and Big Cypress National Preserve, south of the Lee County Line, and south and west of the Hendry County Line, and includes a total of approximately 496,846-185,935 acres, . The Overlay Map is an adopted overlay to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Policy 1.4: Except as provided in Group 5 Policies, there shall be no change to the underlying density and intensity of permitted uses of land within the RLSA, as set forth in the Baseline Standards, as defined in Policy 1.5, unless and until a property owner elects to utilize the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System. It is the intent of the Overlay that a property owner will be compensated for the voluntary stewardship and protection of important agricultural and natural resources. Compensation to the property owner shall occur through one of the following mechanisms: creation and transfer of Stewardship Credits, acquisition of conservation easements, acquisition of less than fee interest in the land, or through other acquisition of land or interest in land through a willing seller program. Policy 1.5: As referred to in these Overlay policies, Baseline Standards are the permitted uses, density, intensity and other land development regulations assigned to land in the RLSA by the GIVI Growth Management Plan (GMP), Collier County Land Development Regulations L( DRs) and Collier County Zoning Regulations in effect prior to the adoption of Interim Amendments and Interim Development Provisions referenced in Final Order AC-99-002. The Baseline Standards will remain in effect for all land not subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits, except as provided for in Group 5 Policies. No part of the Stewardship Credit System shall be imposed upon a property owner without that owveem owner's consent. Policy 1.6: Stewardship Credits (Credits) are created from any lands within the RLSA that are to be kept in permanent agriculture, open space or conservation uses. These lands will be identified as Stewardship Sending Areas or SSAs. All privately owned lands within the RLSA are a candidate for designation as a SSA. Land becomes designated as a SSA upon petition by the property owner seeking such designation and the adoption of a resolution by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC), which acknowledges the property owner's request for such designation and assigns Stewardship Credits or other compensation to the owner for such designation. Collier County will update the Overlay Map to delineate the boundaries of each approved SSA. Designation as an SSA shall be administrative and shall not require an Text underlined is added; text stFike thMuggh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 3 of 38 Page 572 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft amendment to the Growth Management Plan, but shall be retroactively incorporated into the adopted Overlay amendment as may be periodically initiated by the County, or sooner at the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners. A Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement shall be developed that identifies those allowable residential densities and other land uses which remain. Once land is designated as a SSA and Credits or other compensation is granted to the owner, no increase in density or additional uses unspecified in the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement shall be allowed on such property unless the SSA is terminated as provided in Policy 1.6.1. Policy 1.6.1 Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, upon initial approval of a Stewardship Sending Area ("SSA") the Stewardship Easement shall be established for a term of five years ("Conditional Period") and shall be deemed a Conditional Stewardship Easement. The Conditional Period may be extended for one additional year at the option of the owner by providing written notice to the County prior to the expiration of the initial five-year period. All conditions and restrictions of the Stewardship Easement related to maintaining the existing property conditions, including all management obligations of the owner of the SSA lands shall be in full force throughout the Conditional Period. If at any time during the Conditional Period any of the following events occur, then the Conditional Stewardship Easement shall become a Permanent Stewardship Easement which shall be final perpetual and non -revocable in accordance with the terms set forth therein: 1. Stewardship Credits from the SSA have been assigned to entitle an approved Stewardship Receiving Area ("SRA") and the SRA has received all necessary final and non -appealable development orders, permits, or other discretionary approvals necessary to commence construction including subdivision plat and site development plan approval but not building permits. If Stewardship Credits from the SSA have been assigned to more than one SRA then the receipt of all necessary governmental final and non -appealable development orders permits or other discretionary approvals necessary to commence construction of any SRA shall automatically cause the Conditional Stewardship Easement to become a Permanent Stewardship Easement; 2. The owner of the SSA lands has sold or transferred any Stewardship Credits to another person or entity, including a Stewardship Credit Trust as described in Policy 1.20, the closing has occurred and the owner has received the consideration due from such sale or transfer, but not expressly excluding: a) a sale or transfer of the Stewardship Credits ancillary to the sale or transfer of the underlying fee title to the land, or (b) instances where a landowner establishes an SSA for a specific SRA, whether the SRA is owned or developed by a separate or related entity, and the Stewardship Credits are transferred as required by the Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code for SRA approval; or 3 The owner of the SSA lands has received in exchange for the creation of the Stewardship Easement Agreement other compensation from local state federal or private revenues (collectively, the "Events"). Text underlined is added; text stFike thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 4 of 38 Page 573 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A I PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft The LDC shall specify how, assuming a Notice of Termination (as hereafter described) has not been recorded, the Conditional Stewardship Easement shall automatically convert to a Permanent Stewardship Easement upon the earliest to occur of (a) any of the foregoing Events during the Conditional Period, or (b) 180 days after the last day of the Conditional Period, as and to the extent extended hereunder. In the event that none of the foreaoing events has occurred during the Conditional Period, then the owner of the SSA lands may within 180 days after the last day of the Conditional Period terminate the Conditional Stewardship Easement by recording a Notice of Termination. In addition, if a challenge and/or appeal of a necessary development order, permit or other discretionary approval is filed, the owner of the SSA lands may elect to extend the Conditional Period until the challenge or appeal is finally resolved. If the challenge or appeal is not resolved such that the construction may commence under terms acceptable to the owner of the SSA lands, the owner of the SSA lands may within 180 days of the final disposition of the challenge or appeal record a Notice of Termination. Upon the recording of such Notice of Termination, the Stewardship Easement Agreement and corresponding Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement shall expire and terminate, the Stewardship Credits generated by the SSA shall cease to exist, the rights and obligations set forth in the Stewardship Easement shall no longer constitute an encumbrance on the property, and the SSA Memorandum shall be revised accordingly. The owner of the SSA lands shall provide a copy of the Notice of Termination to the County. In the event that the Stewardship Credits from an SSA have been used to obtain one or more SRA approvals, but none of the foregoing events has occurred during the Conditional Period, then the Notice of Termination shan also provide for termination of any SRAs that have been assigned credits from the SSA, unless the SRA owner has obtained sufficient Stewardship Credits from another source and such Stewardship Credits have been applied to the SRA. In the event that a Notice of Termination does terminate an SRA, the owner of the SRA lands shall loin in the Notice of Termination. In the event that a Conditional Stewardship Easement is terminated, all benefits, rights, privileges, restrictions and obligations associated with the SSA shall be null and void, and the land shall revert to its underlying zoning classification, free and clear of any encumbrance from the Conditional Stewardship Easement and SSA Credit Agreement. If requested by the owner of the SSA lands, Collier County and the other grantees under the Stewardship Easement Agreement shall provide a written release and termination of easement and credit agreements for recording in the public records within 15 days of request from the owner of the SSA lands. Collier County shall update the overlay map to reflect the termination of any SSA or SRA. This policy shall be implemented in the LDC within 12 months after adoption hereof. For SSAs approved prior to this Policy 1.6.1 being adopted but have not changed ownership in whole or part since the creation of the SSA and have not transferred, sold or utilized Credits generated from the SSA, the property owner may withdraw the SSA designation provided an application for such withdrawal is implemented within 6 months of the adoption of this Policy 1.6.1. Text underlined is added; text stfike-thFoudh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 5 of 38 Page 574 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 1.7: The range of Stewardship Credit Values is hereby established using the specific methodology set forth on the Stewardship Credit Worksheet (Worksheet), incorporated herein as Attachment A. This methodology and related procedures for SSA designation will also be adopted as part of the Stewardship Overlay District in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). Such procedures shall include but not be limited to the following: (1) All Credit transfers shall be recorded with the Collier County Clerk of Courts; (2) a covenant or perpetual restrictive easement shall also be recorded for each SSA, shall run with the land and shall be in favor of Collier County, and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and one of the following: Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, South Florida Water Management District, or a recognized statewide land trust; and (3) for each SSA, the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement will identify the specific land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures. Policy 1.8: The natural resource value of land within the RLSA is measured by the Stewardship Natural Resource Index (Index) set forth on the Worksheet. The Index established the relative natural resource value by objectively measuring six different characteristics of land and assigning an index factor based on each characteristic. The sum of these six factors is the index value for the land. Both the characteristics used and the factors assigned thereto were established after review and analysis of detailed information about the natural resource attributes of land within the RLSA so that development could be directed away from important natural resources. The six characteristics measured are: Stewardship Overlay Designation, Sending Area Proximity, Listed Species Habitat, Soils/Surface Water, Restoration Potential, and Land Use/Land Cover. Policy 1.9: A Natural Resource Index Map Series (Index Map Series) indicates the Natural Resource Stewardship Index value for all land within the RLSA. Credits from any lands designated as SSAs, will be based upon the Natural Resource Index values in effect at the time of designation. Any change in the Characteristics of land due to alteration of the land prior to the establishment of a SSA that either increases or decreases any Index Factor will result in an adjustment of the factor values and a corresponding adjustment in the credit value. The Index and the Index Map Series are adopted as a part of the RLSA Overlay. Policy 1.10: In SSAs, the greater the number of uses eliminated from the property, and the higher the natural resource value of the land, the higher the priority for protection, the greater the level of Credits that are generated from such lands, and therefore the greater the incentive to participate in the Stewardship Credit System and protect the natural resources of the land. Policy 1.11: The Land Use Matrix, Attachment B, lists uses and activities allowed under the A, Rural Agricultural Zoning District within the Overlay. These uses are grouped together in one of eight separate layers in the Matrix. Each layer is discrete and shall be removed sequentially and cumulatively in the order presented in the Matrix, starting with the residential layer (layer one) and ending with the conservation layer (layer eight). If a layer is removed, all uses and activities in that layer are eliminated and are no longer available. Each layer is assigned a percentage of a base credit in the Worksheet. The assigned percentage for each layer to be removed is added Text underlined is added; text stFike thmugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 6 of 38 Page 575 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft together and then multiplied by the Index value on a per acre basis to arrive at a total Stewardship Credit Value of the land being designated as a SSA. Policy 1.12: Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSA that meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth in Group 4 Policies. Such lands shall be known as Stewardship Receiving Areas or SRAs. Policy 1.13: The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein and are part of athe Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District in the LDC (District) Policy 1.14: Stewardship Credits will be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in a SRA on a per acre basis, as described in Policy-18 4.19. Stewardship density and intensity will thereafter differ from the Baseline Standards. The assignment or use of Stewardship Credits shall not require a GMP Amendment. Policy 1.16: Land becomes designated as an SRA upon the adoption of `a resolution by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approving the petition by the property owner seeking such designation. Any change in the residential density or non-residential intensity of land use on a parcel of land located within a SRA shall be specified in the resolution reflecting the total number of transferable Credits assigned to the parcel of land. Density and intensity within the RLSA or within an SRA shall not be increased beyond the Baseline Standards except through the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System, the Affordable Housing Density Bonus as referenced in the Density Rating System of the FLUE, and the density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. Policy 1.16: Stewardship Receiving Areas will accommodate uses that utilize creative land use planning techniques and Credits shall be used to facilitate the implementation of innovative and flexible development strategies described in Section 163.31 )163.3248, Florida Statutes. Policy 1.17: Stewardship Credits may be transferred between different parcels or within a single parcel, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of these policies. Residential clustering shall only occur within the RLSA through the use of the Stewardship Credit System, and other forms of residential clustering shall not be permitted. Policy 1.18: A blend of Local, State, Federal and private revenues, such as but not limited to Florida Forever, Federal and State conservation and stewardship programs, foundation grants, private conservation organizations, local option taxes, general county revenues, and other monies can augment the Stewardship program through the acquisition of conservation easements, Credits, or land that is identified as the highest priority for natural resource protection, including, but is not limited to, areas identified on the Overlay Map as Flow way Stewardship Areas (FSAs), Habitat Text underlined is added; text s#ik9 thFOUgh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 7 of 38 Page 576 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments - BCC Adoption Draft Stewardship Areas (HSAs), Water Retention Areas (WRAs) and land within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC). Policy 1.19: All local land or easement acquisition programs that are intended to work within the RLSA Overlay shall be based upon a willing participant/seller approach. It is not the intent of Collier County to use eminent domain acquisition within this system. Policy 1.20: The County may elect to acquire Credits through a publicly funded program, using sources identified in Policy 1.18. Should the County pursue this option, it shall establish a Stewardship Credit Trust to receive and hold Credits until such time as they are sold, transferred or otherwise used to implement uses within Stewardship Receiving Areas. 0^10^11 4 114. —I.-I uv...N —1 ­1 —Y-.. 1 ... L.— -... —. ......--- .Y ...,,...y.......,.. ... -...., -..._. - r•-----._.. Policy 1.221.21: The RLSA Overlay was designed to be a long-term strategic plan_ with a plan""'^ h9F*Zen YeaF e 2025: Many of the tools, techniques and strategies of the Overlay are new, Innovative, and incentive based_, and have yet to be tested in tual A Comprehensive review of the Overlay shall be prepared for and reviewed by Collier County every seven (7) years beginninq [date of adoption of this Ordinancel. Stewardship nib+.aGt iR the L r,G The purpose of the review shall be to assess the participation in and effectiveness of the Overlay implementation in meeting the Goal, Objective and Policies set forth herein. The specific measures of review shall be as follows: 1. The amount and location of land designated as FSAs, HSAs, WRAs and other SSAs. 2. The amount and location of land designated as SRAs. 3. The number of Stewardship Credits generated, assigned or held for future use. 4. A comparison of the amount, location and type of Agriculture that existed at the time of a Study and time of review. 5. The amount, location and type of land converted to non-agricultural use with and without participation in the Stewardship Credit System since its adoption. Text underlined is added; text stFike thFeUg# is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 8 of 38 Page 577 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft 6. The extent and use of funding provided by Collier County and other sources Local, State, Federal and private revenues described in Policy 1.18. 7. The amount, location and type of restoration through participation in the Stewardship Credit System since its adoption. 8. . At the direction of the Board of County Commissioners, additional review measures may be considered. Policy 1.22 The total number of Stewardship Credit shall be capped at 404,000 to entitle no more than 45,000 acres of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Generating Stewardship Credits does not presume approval of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Group 2 — Policies to ate -retain land for agricultural activities through the use of established incentives in order to continue the viability of agricultural production througo the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Policy 2.1: Agriculturale landowners will be provided with te 9theF uses by incentives that encourage the voluntary elimination of the property owner's right to convert agriculture land to non-agricultural uses in exchange for compensation as described in Policiesy 1.4 and 2.2 and by the establishment of SRAs_ as the fOFFR of eempaG tzrw Policy 2.2: Agriculture lands protected through the use of Stewardship Credits shall be designated as Stewardship Sending Areas (SSAs) as described in Policy 1.6. The protection measures for SSAs are set forth in Policies 1.6, 1.7, 1.10 and 1.17. In addition to protecting agriculture activities in SSAs within FSA, HSA, and WRA, as further described in Policies 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3, additional incentives are desired to retain agriculture within Open Lands as an alternative to conversion of such lands to other uses, using Baseline Standards as described in Policy 1.5. Open Lands are those lands not designated SSA, SRA, WRA, HSA, FSA, or public lands on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map. Open Lands are those lands described in Policy 4.2. Therefore, in lieu of using the Natural Resource Index on land designated Open Lands, these lands shall be assigned two (2.0) Stewardship Credits per acre. All non -agriculture uses shall be removed from Open Lands and the remaining uses are limited to agriculture Land Use Levels 5, 6 and 7 on the Land Use Matrix. Each laver is discrete and shall be removed sequentially and cumulatively in the order presented in the Matrix. If a laver is removed, all uses and activities in that laver are eliminated and no longer available. SSA's created under this Policy will be known as an Agricultural SSA Following approval of an Agricultural SSA Collier County shall periodically update the RLSA Zoning Overlay District Map to delineate the boundaries of the Agricultural SSA. Text underlined is added; text stfike thFOUgh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 9 of 38 Page 578 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 2.3: , Within ene (1) ..ear from the e#en+ive date of these emeRdmen+_; Collier County YY&Tay establish an Agriculture Advisory Council comprised of not less than five nor more than nine appointed representatives of the agriculture industry, to advise the BCC on matters relating to Agriculture. The Agriculture Advisory Council (AAC) will work to identify opportunities and prepare strategies to enhance and promote the continuance, expansion and diversification of agriculture in Collier County. The AAC will also identify barriers to the continuance, expansion and diversification of the agricultural industry and will prepare recommendations to eliminate or minimize such barriers in Collier County. FeG9Fnmemd_.;#iA_mr_, to the BGG. Policy 2.4: The BCC will consider the recommendations of the AAC and facilitate the implementation of strategies and recommendations identified by the ACC that are determined to be appropriate. The BCC may adopt amendments to the LDC that implement policies that support agriculture activities. Policy 2.6: Agriculture is an important aspect of Collier County's quality of life and economic well-being. Agricultural activities shall be protected from duplicative regulation as provided by the Florida Right -to -Farm Act. Policy 2.6: Notwithstanding the special provisions of Policies 3.9 and 3.10, nothing herein or in the implementing LDRs, shall restrict lawful agricultural activities on lands within the RLSA that have not been placed into the Stewardship program. Group 3 — Policies to protect water quality and quantity and maintain the natural water regime, as well as listed animal and plant species and their habitats by directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat through the establishment of Flow way Stewardship Areas, Habitat Stewardship Areas, and Water Retention Areas, where lands are voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area program. Policy 3.1: Protection of water quality and quantity, and the maintenance of the natural water regime shall occur through the establishment of Flowway Stewardship Areas (FSAs), as SSAs within the RLSA Overlay. FSAs are delineated on the Overlay Map and contain approximately 31,109 30,869 acres. FSAs are primarily privately owned wetlands that are located within the Camp Keais Strand and Okaloacoochee Slough. These lands form the primary wetland Fowway systems in the RLSA. The Overlay provides an incentive to permanently protect FSAs by the creation and transfer of Credits, elimination of incompatible uses, and establishment of protection measures described in Group 1 Policies. Not all lands within the delineated FSAs are comparable in terms of their natural resource value; therefore the index shall be used to differentiate higher value from lower value lands for the purpose of Overlay implementation. Analysis of the Index Map Series shows that FSA lands score within a range of 0.7 to 2.4; approximately 96% score greater than 1.2 while 4% score 1.2 or less. The average Index score of FSA land is 1.8. Text underlined is added; text sag# is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 10 of 38 Page 579 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments - BCC Adoption Draft Policy 3.2: Listed animal and plant species and their habitats shall be protected through the establishment of Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSAs), as SSAs within the RLSA Overlay. HSAs are delineated on the Overlay Map and contain approximately 48,00�39.991 acres. HSAs are privately owned agricultural areas, which include both areas with natural characteristics that make them suitable habitat for listed species and areas without these characteristics. These latter areas are included because they are located contiguous to habitat to help form a continuum of landscape that can augment habitat values. The Overlay provides an incentive to permanently protect HSAs by the creation and transfer of Credits, resulting in the elimination of incompatible uses and the establishment of protection measures described in Group 1 Policies. Not all lands within the delineated HSAs are comparable in terms of their habitat value; therefore, the index shall be used to differentiate higher value from lower value lands for the purpose of Overlay implementation. Analysis of the Index Map Series shows that HSA lands score'within a range of 0.6 to 2.2. There are approximately 13,808-15.156 acres of cleared agricultural fields located in HSAs. The average Index score of HAS HSA designated lands is 1.3, however, the average index score of the naturally vegetated areas within HSAs is 1.5. Policy 3.3: Further protection for surface water quality and quantity shall be through the establishment of Water Retention Areas (WRAs), as SSAs within the RLSA Overlay. WRAs are delineated on the Overlay Map and contain approximately 19,200-18.428 acres. WRAs are privately owned lands that have been permitted by the South Florida Water Management District to function as agricultural water retention areas. In many instances, these WRAs consist of native wetland or upland vegetation; in other cases they are excavated water bodies or may contain exotic vegetation. The Overlay provides an incentive to permanently protect WRAs by the creation and transfer of Credits, elimination of incompatible uses, and establishment of protection measures described in Group 1 Policies. Not all lands within the delineated WRAs are comparable in terms of their natural resource value; therefore the index shall be used to differentiate higher value from lower value lands for the purpose of Overlay implementation. Analysis of the Index Map Series shows that WRA lands score within a range of 0.6 to 2.4; approximately 74% score greater than 1.2 while 26% score 1.2 or less. The average Index score of WRA land is 1.5. Policy 3.4: Public and private conservation areas exist in the RLSA and serve to protect natural resources. Corkscrew Marsh and Okaloacoochee Slough State Forest include approximately 13,500 acres. Analysis shows that they score within an Index range of 0.0 to 2.2; with an average Index score of 1.5. Because these existing public areas, and any private conservation areas, are already protected, they are not delineated as SSAs and are not eligible to generate Credits, but do serve an important role in meeting the Goal of the RLSA. Policy 3.5: Residential uses, General Conditional uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1-4) as listed in the Matrix shall be eliminated in FSAs in exchange for compensation to the property owner as described in Policy 3.8. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety, shall only be allowed in FSAs with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. Where practicable, directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed Text underlined is added; text stFike thmu6h is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 11 of 38 Page 580 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft areas shall be utilized for oil and gas extraction in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats. Other layers may also be eliminated at the election of the property owner in exchange for compensation. The elimination of the Earth Mining layer shall not preclude the excavation of lakes or other water bodies if such use is an integral part of a restoration or mitigation program within a FSA. Policy 3.6: Residential Land Uses listed in the Matrix shall be eliminated in Habitat Stewardship Sending Areas in exchange for compensation to the property owner as described in Policy 3.8. Other layers may also be eliminated at the election of the property owner in exchange for compensation. Policy 3.7: General Conditional Uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses shall be allowed only on HSA lands with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety, shall only be allowed in HSAs with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants are prohibited in all HSAs. Where practicable, directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas Extraction in HSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats. In addition to the requirements imposed in the LDC for approval of a Conditional Use, such uses will only be approved upon submittal of an EIS Environmental Data which demonstrates that clearing of native vegetation has been minimized, the use will not significantly and adversely impact listed species and their habitats and the use will not significantly and adversely impact aquifers. As an alternative to the foregoing, the applicant may demonstrate that such use is an integral part of an approved restoration or mitigation program. Golf Course design, construction, and operation in any HSA shall comply with the best management practices of Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program (ASCP) for Golf and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Compliance with the following standards shall be considered by Collier County as meeting the requirement for minimization of impact: • Clearing of native vegetation shall not exceed 15% of the native vegetation on the parcel. • Areas previously cleared shall be used preferentially to native vegetated areas. • Buffering to Conservation Land shall comply with Policy 4.13. Policy 3.8: Compensation to the property owner may occur through one or more of the following mechanisms: creation and transfer of Stewardship Credits, acquisition of conservation easements, acquisition of less than fee interest in the land, or through other acquisition of land or interest in land through a willing seller program. Policy 3.9: Agriculture will continue to be a permitted use and its supporting activities will continue to be permitted as conditional uses within FSAs and HSAs, pursuant to the Agriculture Group classifications described in the Matrix. The Ag 1 group includes row crops, citrus, specialty farms, horticulture, plant nurseries, improved pastures for grazing and ranching, aquaculture and similar activities, including related agricultural support uses. In existing Ag 1 areas within FSAs and HSAs, all such activities are permitted to continue, and may Text underlined is added; text stFike thmugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 12 of 38 Page 581 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft convert from one type of Agriculture to another and expand to the limits allowed by applicable permits. Once the Stewardship Credit System is utilized and an owner receives compensation as previously described, no further expansion of Ag 1 will be allowed in FSAs and HSAs beyond existing or permitted limits within property subject to a credit transfer, except for incidental clearing as set forth in Paragraph 2 below. 2. In order to encourage viable Ag 1 activities, and to accommodate the ability to convert from one Ag 1 use to another, incidental clearing is allowed to join existing Ag 1 areas, square up existing farm fields, or provide access to or from other Ag 1 areas, provided that the Ag 1 Land Use Layer has been retained on the areas to be incidentally cleared, and the Natural Resource Index Value score has been adjusted to reflect the proposed change in land cover. Incidental clearing is defined as clearing that meets the above criteria and is limited to 1 % of the area of the SSA. In the event said incidental clearing impacts lands having a Natural Resource Index Value in excess of 1.2, appropriate mitigation shall be provided. Policy 3.10: ' Ag 2 includes unimproved pastures for grazing and ranching, forestry and similar activities, including related agricultural support uses. In existing Ag 2 areas within FSAs and HSAs, such activities are permitted to continue, and may convert from one type of Agriculture to another and expand to the limits allowed by applicable permits. Once the Stewardship Credit System is utilized and an owner receives compensation as previously described, no further expansion of Ag 2 or conversion of Ag 2 to Ag 1 will be allowed in FSAs or HSAs beyond existing or permitted limits within property subject to a credit transfer. Policy 3.11: In certain locations there may be the opportunity for flow -way or habitat restoration. Examples include, but are not limited to, locations where flow -ways have been constricted or otherwise impeded by past activities, or where additional land is needed to enhance wildlife corridors. Drierity shall he given to restoration within Should a property owner be willing to dediGateesignate land for restoration activities within a FSA or HSA #die Camp Keai6 Strand FSA OF Gentiguous HSAs, one additional Stewardship Credits shall be as}s.,igned for each acre of land so dedicated. Stewardshipedit6--.srhalY� In be assigned f9F earshra'bre of land dedicated for restoration aoti.iitieg IN thin ether FSAs acid H The actual implementation of rc� rrrcrrn-rvcrtcr'r-vr-c�t�� ra�Tvr cv. restoration improvements is not required for the owner to receive such credits and the costs of restoration shall be borne by the governmental agency or private entity undertaking the restoration. Should an owner also complete restoration improvements, this shall be rewarded with #eu+r-additional Credits for each acre of restored land upon demonstration that the restoration met applicable success criteria, as defined in the Land Development Code as determined by the permit agency authorizing said restoration. The additional Credits shall be rewarded for either caracara restoration at 2 Credits per acre, or for exotic control/burning at 5 Credits per acres or for flow way restoration at 5 Credits per acre, or for native habitat restoration at 7 Credits per acre. Within the area proposed for restoration, Land Use Lavers 1-6 must Text underlined is added; text stFike thFOUgh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 13 of 38 Page 582 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft be removed The specific process for assignment of additional restoration Credits shall be included in the Stewardship District of the LDC. 2 In certain locations as generally illustrated in the RLSA Overlay Map, there may be opportunities to create restore and enhance a northern panther corridor connection and a southern panther corridor connection. Should a property owner in a federally approved corridor designate the reauired orooertv for such corridor, 2 Stewardship Credits shall be corridor restoration improvements this shall be rewarded with fe+F 8 additional Credits for each acre of restored land upon demonstration that the restoration met applicable success criteria as determined by the federal permit agency authorizing said restoration. Issuance of the 8 restoration implementation credits may be phased to coincide with a phased implementation process in accordance with the federal permit. The procedures shall be set forth in the LDC 3. In order to address a significant loss in Southwest Florida of seasonal, shallow wetland wading bird foraging habitat restoration of these unique habitats will be incentivized in the RLSAO Designation of any area inside an FSA HSA, or WRA for such seasonal wetland restoration shall be rewarded with 2 additional Credits per acre. Should the landowner successfully complete the restoration an additional 8 Credits per acre shall be awarded upon demonstration that the restoration met applicable success criteria as determined by the permit agency authorizing said restoration. 4. Only one type of restoration shall be rewarded with these Credits for each acre designated for restoration and in no case shall more than 10 Credits be awarded per acre. This Policy does not preclude other forms of compensation for restoration which may be addressed through public -private partnership agreement such as a developer contribution agreement or stewardship agreement between the parties involved. Also not precluded are various private and publicly funded restoration programs such as the federal Farm Bill conservation programs. The specific process for assignment of additional restoration credits shall be included in the Stewardship District of the LDC. Policy 3.12: Based on the data and analysis of the Study, FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and existing public/private conservation land include the land appropriate and necessary to accomplish the Goal pertaining to natural resource protection. To further direct other uses away from and to provide additional incentive for the protection, enhancement and restoration of the Okaloacoochee Slough and Camp Keais Strand, all land within 500 feet of the delineated FSAs that comprise the Slough or Strand that is not otherwise included in a HSA or WRA shall receive the same natural index score (0.6) that a HSA receives if such property is designated as a SSA and retains only agricultural, recreational and/or conservation layers within the matrix. Policy 3.13: Water Retention Areas (WRAs) as generally depicted on the Overlay Map have been permitted for this purpose and will continue to function for surface water retention, detention, treatment and/or conveyance, in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) permits applicable to each WRA. WRAs can also be permitted to provide such functions for new uses of land allowed within the Overlay. WRAs may be incorporated into a SRA master plan to Text underlined is added; text strife thmugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. i 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 14 of 38 Page 583 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments - BCC Adoption Draft provide water management functions for properties within such SRA, but are not required to be designated as a SRA in such instances. However, if all or part of a WRA provides stormwater aualitv treatment for a SRA, the prorata acreage of the WRA used to meet the water quality treatment volume required per Section 4.2 of the SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit Aoolicant's Handbook Volume II shall be included in the SRA credit calculation and the calculation of total SRA acreage. WRA boundaries are understood to be approximate and are subject to refinement in accordance with SFWMD permitting. Policy 3.14: ' During permitting to serve new uses, additions and modifications to WRAs may be required or desired, including but not limited to changes to control elevations, discharge rates, storm water pre-treatment, grading, excavation or fill. Such additions and modifications shall be allowed subject to review and approval by the SFWMD in accordance with best management practices. Such additions and modifications to WRAs shall be designed to ensure that there is no net loss of habitat function within the WRAs unless there is compensating mitigation or restoration in other areas of the Overlay that will provide comparable habitat function. Compensating mitigation or restoration for an impact to a WRA contiguous to the Camp Keais Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough shall be provided within or contiguous to that Strand or Slough. Policy 3.15 Any development on lands participating in the RLSA Overlay shall be compatible with surrounding land uses By 11 year of the date of adoption of the ordinance) LDC regulations shall be initiated for outdoor liahtina to protect the niqhttime environment conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Group 4 - Policies to enable conversion of rural lands to other uses in appropriate locations, while discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques by the establishment of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Policy 4.1: Collier County will encourage and facilitate uses that enable economic prosperity and diversification of the economic base of the RLSA. Collier County will also encourage development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques and facilitates a compact form of development to accommodate population growth by the establishment of Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRAs). Incentives to encourage and support the diversification and vitality of the rural economy such as flexible development regulations, expedited permitting review, and targeted capital improvements shall be incorporated into the LDC Stewardship District. Policy 4.2: All privately owned lands within the RLSA which meet the criteria set forth herein are eligible for designation as a SRA, except land delineated as a FSA, HSA, WRA or land that has been designated as a Stewardship Sending Area. The exception consistent with Policy 3.13, is when a WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA then the acreage of the WRA used for stormwater quality treatment for the SRA shall be included in the SRA. Land proposed for SRA designation shall meet the suitability criteria and other standards described in Group 4 Policies. Due to the long-term vision of the RLSA Overlay, e)den^'�to a-;onZGTr c' of 2025, and in accordance with the guidelines established in Section 463.3469(2)163.3248, Florida Statutes, the specific location, size and composition of each SRA cannot and need not be predetermined in the Text underlined is added; text sif+ke thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 15 of 38 Page 584 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft GMP. In the RLSA Overlay, lands that are eligible to be designated as SRAs generally have similar physical attributes as they consist predominately of agriculture lands which have been cleared or otherwise altered for this purpose. Lands shown on the Overlay Map as eligible for SRA designation include approximately 7-4,69)--72,0 00 acres outside of the ACSC and approximately 4B,15,000 acres within the ACSC. Total SRA designation shall be a maximum of 45,000 acres. ° • Because the Overlay requires SRAs to be compact, mixed -use and self sufficient in the provision of services, facilities and infrastructure, traditional locational standards normally applied to determine development suitability are not relevant or applicable to SRAs. Therefore the process for designating a SRA follows the fuFtheF procedures set forth herein and the adopted RLSA Zoning Overlay District. Policy 4.3: Land becomes designated as a SRA upon petition by a property owner to Collier County seeking such designation and the adoption of a resolution by the BCC granting the designation. The petition shall include a SRA master plan as described in Policy 4.5. The basis for approval shall be a finding of consistency with the policies of the Overlay, including required suitability criteria set forth herein, compliance with the LDC Stewardship District, and assurance that the applicant has acquired or will acquire sufficient Stewardship Credits to implement the SRA uses. The County has adopted LDC amendments to establish the procedures and submittal requirements for designation as a SRA, providing for consideration of impacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts, and for public notice of and the opportunity for public participation in any consideration by the BCC of such a designation. Policy 4.4: Collier County will update the Overlay Map to delineate the boundaries of each approved SRA. Such updates shall be incorporated into the adopted Overlay Map & Rg the EAR b med—�y amendment PF99e66 wheR4periodically initiated by the County essUFs, or sooner at the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners. Policy 4.5: To address the specifics of each SRA, a master plan of each SRA will be prepared and submitted to Collier County as a part of the petition for designation as a SRA. The master plan will demonstrate that the SRA complies with all applicable policies of the Overlay and the LDC Stewardship District and is designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from wetlands and critical habitat identified as FSAs and HSAs on the Overlay Map. The SRA Master Plan shall comply with the County's then -adopted MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), and Access Management procedures. Each SRA master plan shall include a Management Plan with provisions for minimizing human and wildlife interactions Low intensity land uses (e.g. passive recreation areas, golf courses) and vegetation preservation requirements including agriculture shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas dominated by human activities. Consideration shall be given to the most current Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human wildlife conflict. The management plans shall also require the dissemination of information to local residents businesses and governmental services about the presence of wildlife and practices that enable responsible coexistence with wildlife, while minimizing opportunities for negative interaction such as appropriate waste disposal practices. Text underlined is added; text strike through is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 16 of 38 Page 585 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 4.6: SRA characteristics shall be based upon innovative planning and development strategies referenced in Section 6(2)163.3248, Florida Statutes. These planning strategies and techniques include urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area -based allocations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed -use development that allow the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and providing for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. The SRA shall also include a mobility plan that includes vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas of outside development and land uses The mobility plan shall provide mobility strategies such as bus subsidies, route sponsorship or other incentives which encourage the use of mass transit services. The development of SRAs shall also consider the needs identified in the MPO Long Range Transportation Needs Plan and plan land uses to accommodate services that would increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long-distance travel. Such development strategies are recognized as methods of discouraging urban sprawl, encouraging alternative modes of transportation increasing internal capture and reducing vehicle miles traveled. Policy 4.7: There are #sup three specific forms of SRA permitted within the Overlay. These are Towns, Villages, Hamlets, and Compact Rural Development (CRD). The Characteristics of Towns, Villages, un -^SG, and CRD are set forth in Attachment C and are generally described in Policies 4.7.1, 4.7.2, and 4.7.3 and 4.7.4. Specific regulations, guidelines and standards within the LDC Stewardship District to guide the design and development of SRAs to include innovative planning and development strategies as set forth in Section a63.(2)163.3248, Florida Statutes. The size and base density of each form shall be consistent with the standards set forth on Attachment C. The maximum base residential density as set forth in Attachment C may only be exceeded through the density blending process as set forth in density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan or through the affordable housing density bonus as referenced in the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element. The base residential density is calculated by dividing the total number of residential units in a SRA by the overall area therein. The base residential density does not restrict net residential density of parcels within a SRA. The location, size and density of each SRA will be determined on an individual basis during the SRA designation review and approval process. Policy 4.7.1: Towns are the largest and most diverse form of SRA, with a full range of housing types and mix of uses. Towns have urban level services and infrastructure that support development that is compact, mixed use, human scale, and provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile trips and increase livability. Towns shall be not less than 1,000 greater than 1,500 acres and u to 5,000 acres and are comprised of several villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and character. Towns shall have a mixed -use town center that will serve as a focal point for community facilities and support services. Towns shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including, an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Towns shall include an internal mobility plan which shall include a transfer station or park and ride area that is appropriately located within the town to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. Towns shall Text underlined is added; text stFike thmugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 17 of 38 Page 586 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft have at least one community park with a minimum size of 200 square feet per dwelling unit in the Town, subject to Level of Service requirements. Towns shall also have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Towns shall include both community and neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, +e-a-Fa#i as wed -described in Policy4.15 4.15.1. Towns may also include those compatible corporate office, research, development companies, and light industrial uses such as those permitted in the Business Park and Research and Technology Park Subdistricts of the FLUE and those included in Policy 4.7.4. Towns shall be the preferred location for the full range of schools, and to the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located abutting each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities and as provided in Policies 4.15.2 and 4.15.3. Design criteria for Towns shall be included in the LDC Stewardship District. Towns shall not be located within the ACSC. Policy 4.7.2: Villages are pFimaFily Fesidential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be not less than 4-W 300 acres and up to GF MgFe than.1,000 acres inside the Area of Critical State Concern and up to 1,500 acres outside the Area of Critical State Concern. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed -use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Policy 4.15. Appropriately scaled uses described in Policy 4.7-3-4.7.3 shall also be permitted in Villages. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. Design criteria for Villages shall be included in the LDC Stewardship District. Villages greater than 500 acres shall include an internal mobility plan which shall include a transfer station or park and ride area that is appropriately located within the village to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. GUFFGRtly allowed in the baseliRe 6tandaFds. Hamlets shall have a publie, gFeeR rpaee fe Policy 4:7 4 4.7.3: Compact Rural Development (CRD) is a form of SRA that will pFevide xibility with Fe6peGt to the Village —shall support and further Collier County's valued attributes of agriculture, natural resources and economic diversity. CRDs shall demonstrate a unique set of uses and support services necessary to further these attributes within the RLSA. Primary CRD uses shall be those Text underlined is added; text stFike thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 18 of 38 Page 587 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft associated with and needed to support research education convenience retail, tourism or recreation. A CRD may include, but is not required to have permanent residential housing the —seFvises—and facilities that . and the services that support permanent residents The number of residential units shall be equivalent with the demand generated by the primary CRD use but shall not exceed the maximum of two units per gross acre. A CRD shall be a maximum size of 300 acres. -An example of a GIRD i6 an eGGtGWFi6M village that on AttaGhment G based 9R the size of the GIRD. As Fe6idential unitG aFe ROt a FequdFed use, there additional GRI)s 9f 100 aGFes GF less, in rembinatieR with Hamlets, may be appFeved f9F eaGh To maintain a proportion of CRDs of 300 acres or less to Villages and Towns not more than 5 CRDs of 300 acres or less may be approved as SRAs prior to the approval of a Village or Town and thereafter not more than 5 additional C_ RDs of 300 acres or less may be approved prior to each subsequent Village or Town. Policy 4.7.4 Existing urban areas Towns and Villages shall be the preferred location for business and industry within the RLSA to further promote economic sustainability and development, diversification and job creation The business and industry use allowed includes but is not limited to, those as defined as Florida Qualified Target Industries The appropriate scale and compatibility of these uses within a Town or Village will be addressed during SRA application process. Policy 4.7.5 To address the accommodation of Affordable Housing in a Town or Village the SRA applicant shall utilize one of the following options: 1) Affordable Housing Land Reservation a) Reservation of one or more site(s) within the SRA or within a proximal SRA in the RLSAO with densities and development standards that accommodate Affordable Housing residential uses at a minimum density of 10 units per acre for acquisition by either Collier County, a Community Land Trust a private developer or any other affordable housing provider. b) The aggregate acreage of such site(s) shall be equal to or greater than 2.5% of the gross area of the SRA. c) The acreage of land reserved for Affordable Housing will be considered as a Public Benefit Use and not require the consumption of Stewardship Credits but shall be included in the calculation of total SRA acreage. d) The County shall verify the site(s) is/are appropriate and approve the site(s) at time of SRA approval subject to standards to be established in the LDC. Text underlined is added; text s#ikethFeegh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing 4 Page 19 of 38 Page 588 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft e) Affordable Housing units shall be excluded from the Traffic Impact Statement or trip cap for the SRA in which they are located. 2) Alternatives proposed by the SRA Applicant a) While compliance with the Land Reservation described above shall be deemed to satisfy affordable housing requirements other options may be proposed by the SRA applicant and approved by the Board of County Commissioners to address housing affordability issues in the subject SRA. 3) The process and procedures to implement this policy, including a definition to be used to determine "proximal SRA" and specific guidelines and standards in those instances in which alternative options may be proposed shall be set forth in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District. Policy 4.8: An SRA may be contiguous to a FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in Policy 4.13. A SRA may be contiguous to and served by a WRA without requiring the VV A to he designated a6 a SRA in accordance with Policy 3.12 and 3.13. Policy 4.9: A SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the planned development in an environmentally acceptable manner. The primary means of directing development away from wetlands and critical habitat is the prohibition of locating SRAs in FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs unless the WRA is being used to provide water quality treatment volume as referenced in Policy 3.13, in which case the WRA shall retain its WRA Overlay classification and be included in the SRA acreage total. To further direct development away from wetlands and critical habitat, residential; commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, and transient housing, institutional, civic and community service uses within a SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. In addition, conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, with the exception of those necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety, shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. Infrastructure necessary to serve permitted uses may be exempt from this restriction, provided that designs seek to minimize the extent of impacts to any such areas. The Index value of greater than 1.2 represents those areas that have a high natural resource value as measured pursuant to Policy 1.8. Less than 2% of potential SRA land achieves an Index score of greater than 1.2. Policy 4.10: Within the RLSA Overlay, open space, which by definition shall include public and private conservation lands, underdeveloped areas of designated SSAs, agriculture, water retention and management areas and recreation uses, will continue to be the dominant land use. Therefore, open space adequate to serve the forecasted population and uses within the SRA is provided. To ensure that SRA residents have such areas proximate to their homes, open space shall also comprise a minimum of thirty-five percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town, or Village., ^r these GRI)6 eXGeeding 109 aGrer— Lands within a SRA greater than one acre with Index values of greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space except for the allowance of uses described in Policy 4.9. Text underlined is added; text stFike thmugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 20 of 38 Page 589 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 4.11: The perimeter of each SRA shall be designed to provide a transition from higher density and intensity uses within the SRAto lower density and intensity uses on adjoining property. The edges of SRAs shall be well defined and designed to be compatible with the character of adjoining property. Techniques such as, but not limited to setbacks, landscape buffers, and recreation/open space placement may be used for this purpose. Where existing agricultural activity adjoins a SRA, the design of the SRA must take this activity into account to allow for the continuation of the agricultural activity and to minimize any conflict between agriculture and SRA uses. Policy 4.12: Where a SRA adjoins a FSA, HSA, WRA or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the Overlay Map, best management and planning practices shall be applied to minimize adverse impacts to such lands. SRA design shall demonstrate that ground water table draw down or diversion will not adversely impact the adjacent FSA, HSA, WRA or conservation land. Detention and control elevations shall be established to protect such natural areas and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. Policy 4.13: Open space within or contiguous to a SRA shall be used to provide a buffer between the SRA and any adjoining FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the Overlay Map. Open space contiguous to or within 300 feet of the boundary of a FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land may include: natural preserves, lakes, golf courses provided no fairways or other turf areas are allowed within the first 200 feet, passive recreational areas and parks, required yard and set -back areas, and other natural or man-made open space. Along the west boundary of the FSAs and HSAs that comprise Camp Keais Strand, i.e., the area south of Immokalee Road, this open space buffer shall be 500 feet wide and shall preclude golf course fairways and other turf areas within the first 300 feet. Policy 4.14: The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation planning standards. At the time of SRA approval, an SRA proposed to adjoin land designated as an SRA or lands designated as Open Lands shall provide for the opportunity to provide direct vehicular and pedestrian connections from said areas to the County's arterial/collector roadway network as shown on the MPO's LRTP Needs Plan so as to reduce travel time and travel expenses, improve interconnectivity, increase internal capture and keep the use of county arterial roads to a minimum when traveling between developments in the RLSA. Public and private roads within an SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. Signalized intersections within or adjacent to an SRA that serves the SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. No SRA shall be approved unless the capacity of County collector or arterial road(s) serving the SRA is demonstrated to be adequate in accordance with the Collier County Concurrency Management System in effect at the time of SRA designation. A transportation impact assessment meeting the requirements of Section 2.7.3 of the LDC, or its successor regulation shall be prepared for each proposed SRA to provide the necessary data and analysis. To the extent required to mitigate an SRA's traffic impacts, actions may be taken to include, but shall not be limited to provisions for the construction and/or permittinq of wildlife crossings, environmental mitigation credits right of way dedication(s), water management and/or fill material Text underlined is added; text eta$ #FOUgh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 21 of 38 Page 590 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft which may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network. Any such actions to offset traffic impacts shall be memorialized in a developer contribution agreement. These actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or Proposed roadways. Policy 4.15.1: SRAs are intended to be mixed use and shall be allowed the full range of uses permitted by the Urban Designation of the FLUE, as modified by Policies 4.7, 4.7.1, 4.7.2, and 4.7.3, 4 7 4and Attachment C. An appropriate mix of retail, office, recreational, civic, governmental, and institutional uses will be available to serve the daily needs and community wide needs of residents of the RLSA. Depending on the size, scale, and character of a SRA, such uses may be provided either within the specific SRA, within other SRAs in the RLSA or within the Immokalee Urban Area provided the capacity of those adjoining area's facilities as described in Attachment C to be utilized by the newly created SRA can demonstrate sufficient capacity exists for their desired uses per the standards of Attachment C.. By example, each Village or Town shall provide for neighborhood retail/office uses to serve its population as well as appropriate civic and institutional uses, however, the combined population of several Villages may be required to support community scaled retail or office uses in a nearby Town. Standards for the minimum amount of non-residential uses in each category are set forth in Attachment C, and shall be also included in the Stewardship LDC District. Policy 4.15.2: The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) may, as a condition of approval and adoption of an SRA development, require that suitable areas for parks, schools, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use. When the BCC requires such a set aside for one or more public facilities, the set aside shall be subject to the same provisions of the LDC as are applicable to public facility dedications required as a condition for PUD rezoning. Policy 4.15.3: Applicants for SRA designation shall coordinate with Collier County School Board staff to allow planning to occur to accommodate any impacts to the public schools as a result of the SRA. As a part of the SRA application, the following information shall be provided: 1. Number of residential units by type; 2. An estimate of the number of school -aged children for each type of school impacted (elementary, middle, high school); and 3. The potential for locating a public educational facility or facilities within the SRA, and the size of any sites that may be dedicated, or otherwise made available for a public educational facility. Policy 4.16: A SRA shall have adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed development, or such infrastructure must be provided concurrently with the demand. The level of infrastructure provided will depend on the form of SRA development, accepted civil engineering practices, and LDC requirements. The capacity of essential services and infrastructure necessary to serve the SRA at build -out must be demonstrated during the SRA designation process. Infrastructure to be analyzed includes but not limited to, transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, and solid waste. Transportation infrastructure is discussed in Policy 4.14. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities are required in Text underlined is added; text is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 22 of 38 Page 591 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Towns; and Villages, and may be required in CRDs , depending upon the permitted uses approved within the CRD. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities shall be constructed, owned, operated and maintained by a private utility service, the developer, a Community Development District, the Immokalee Water Sewer Service District, Collier County, or other governmental entity. Innovative alternative water and wastewater treatment systems such as decentralized community treatment systems shall not be prohibited by this Policy provided that they meet all applicable regulatory criteria. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems, limited to a maximum of 100 acres of any Town, Village or CRD of 100 acres are permitted on an interim basis until services from a centralized/decentralized community system are available. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems a% peFFnitted in Hamlets may be permitted in CRDs of 100 acres or less in size. Policy 4.17: The BCC will review and approve SRA designation applications in accordance with the provisions of Policy 1.4-.2 of the Capital Improvement Element of the GMP and public facilities pursuant to Policy 1.1 of the Capital Improvement Element in addition to the following: fails, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire service, government buildings and libraries. mil+^ faGilities. Final local development orders will be approved within a SRA designated by the BCC in accordance with the Concurrency Management System of the GMP and LDC in effect at the time of final local development order approval. Policy 4.18: The SRA will be planned and designed to be fiscally neutral or positive to Collier County at the SRA horizon year based on a public facilities impact assessment, as identified in LDC 4.08.07.K. The BCC may grant exceptions to this Policy to accommodate affordable housing, as it deems appropriate. Techniques that may promote fiscal neutrality such as Community Development Districts, and other special districts, shall be encouraged. At a minimum, the assessment shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement, and schools. Development phasing, developer contributions and mitigation, and other public/private partnerships shall address any potential adverse impacts to adopted levels of service standards. In the event that an SRA development, generates surplus revenues to Collier County, Collier County may choose to allocate a portion of such surplus revenues to ensure that sufficient resources are available to allow Collier County to respond expeditiously to economic opportunities and to compete effectively for high -value research, development and commercialization, innovation, and alternative and renewable energy business projects. Policy 4.19: Eight (8) credits shall be required for each acre of land included in a SRA, where such Credits were created from a Stewardship Sendina Area submitted for review or -approved prior to (the adoption date of this Ordinance). Ten Credits per acre shall be required for each acre of land included in an SRA, where such Credits were created from any other Stewardship Sending Area. fw4l-and that is designated for a public benefit use described in Policy4 19 4.20 do not require the use of Credits. In order to promote compact, mixed use development and provide the necessary support facilities and services to residents of rural areas, the SRA designation entitles a full range of uses, accessory uses and associated uses that provide a mix of services to and Text underlined is added; text stFik thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 23 of 38 Page 592 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments - BCC Adoption Draft are supportive to the residential population of a SRA, as provided for in Policies 4.7, 446 4.15.1 and Attachment C. Such uses shall be identified, located and quantified in the SRA master plan. Policy 4.20: The acreage of a public benefit use shall count toward the maximum acreage limits of an SRA, unless such public benefit uses were approved as part of an SRA approved prior to [adoption date of this Ordinancel in which case such public benefit uses shall continue to be excluded from the maximum acreage limitation pursuant to the policy in effect at the time of approval. Public benefit uses shall not count toward the consumption of Stewardship Credits. For the purpose of this Policy, public benefit uses include: affordable housing as defined in the LDC, public schools (preK-12) and public or private post secondary institutions, including ancillary uses; community parks exceeding the minimum acreage requirements of Attachment C, municipal golf courses; regional parks; and governmental facilities G!ud*Rg e66eRtial 6ewiG^r, as defined in the LDC. The location of public schools shall be coordinated with the Collier County School Board, based on the interlocal agreement, Section 163,3248 77 F.S. and in a manner consistent with 235.193 F.S. Schools and related ancillary uses shall be encouraged to locate in or proximate to Towns; and Villages_, and Hamlets subject to applicable zoning and permitting requirements. Policy 4.21: Lands within the ACSC that meet all SRA criteria shall also be°restricted such that credits used to entitle a SRA in the ACSC must be generated exclusively from SSAs within the ACSC. Further, the only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC east of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Hamlets of -CRDs of 100 acres or less and the only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC west of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be CRDs and Villages and GRIDS -of not more than 300 acres -ate Hamlets. Provided, not more than 1,000 aces of SRA development in the form of Villages or CRDs howeveF, that twe Villages eF GRIDs ef Rot meFe thaR 500 aGFes eaGh, exclusive of any lakes created prior to the egeoti ,e date of thiG ame.,d, eRt June 30, 2002 as a result of mining operations, shall be allowed in areas that have a frontage on State Road 29 and that, as-ef the had been predominantly cleared as a result ofAg Group I or Earth Mining or Processing Uses. This Policy is intended to assure that the RLSA Overlay is not used to increase the development potential within the ACSC but instead is used to promote a more compact form of development as an alternative to the Baseline Standards already allowed within the ACSC. No policy of the RLSA Overlay shall take precedence over the Big Cypress ACSC regulations and all regulations therein shall apply. Policy 4.22 When historic or cultural resources are identified within the RLSA through the SRA designation process, the applicant in conjunction with the Florida Divisiori of Historic Resources will assess the historic or cultural significance and explore the educational and public awareness opportunities regarding significant resources. Policy 4.23 Any development on lands participating in the RLS Program shall be compatible with surrounding land uses. Within one year of the effective date of this Policy LDC regulations shall be implemented for outdoor lighting to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Text underlined is added; text strike thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 24 of 38 Page 593 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Group 5 — Policies that protect water quality and quantity and the maintaining of the natural water regime and protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats on land that is not voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area program. Policy 5.1: To protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime in areas mapped as FSAs and designated Restoration Areas as shown on the Overlay Map prior to the time that they are designated as SSAs under the Stewardship Credit Program. Residential Uses, General Conditional Uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1- 4) as listed in the Matrix shall be eliminated in FSAs. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, except those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety, shall e+4y not be allowed in FSAs. Infrastructure necessary to serve permitted uses may be exempt from this restriction, provided that designs seek to minimize the extent of impacts to any such areas. with a NatuFal ReGGUFee SteWaFdship index value of 1.2 OF less. Where practicable, directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil or gas extraction in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants shall be prohibited in areas mapped as HSAs. The opportunity to voluntarily participate in the Stewardship Credit Program, as well as the right to sell conservation easements or a free or lesser interest in the land, shall constitute compensation for the loss of these rights. Policy 5.2: To protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime and to protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats in areas mapped as FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs on the Overlay Map that are within the ACSC, all ACSC regulatory standards shall apply, including those that strictly limit non-agricultural clearing. Policy 5.3: To protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime and to protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats in areas mapped as FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs on the Overlay Map that are not within the ACSC, if a property owner proposes to utilize such land for a non-agricultural purpose under the Baseline Standards referenced in Policy 1.5 and does not elect to use the Overlay, these Group 5 policies aable—, shall be incorporated into the LDC, and shall supersede any comparable existing County regulations that would otherwise apply. These regulations shall only apply to non- agricultural use of land prior to its inclusion in the Overlay system: 1. Site clearing and alteration shall be limited to 20% of the property and nonpermeable surfaces shall not exceed 50% of any such area. 2. Except for roads and lakes, any nonpermeable surface greater than one acre shall provide for release of surface water runoff, collected or uncollected, in a manner approximating the natural surface water flow regime of the surrounding area. 3. Revegetation and landscaping of cleared areas shall be accomplished with predominantly native species and planting of undesirable exotic species shall be prohibited. 4. An Environmental Impact Statement shall be prepared by the applicant and reviewed by Collier County in accordance with County regulations. 5. Roads shall be designed to allow the passage of surface water flows through the use of equalizer pipes, interceptor spreader systems or performance equivalent structures. Text underlined is added; text strip is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 07/13/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 25 of 38 Page 594 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 5.4: Collier County will coordinate with appropriate State and Federal agencies concerning the provision of wildlife crossings at locations determined to be appropriate. A map of these potential crossina locations will be initiated by 112 months of the adoption of this Ordinancel, updated periodically, and shall be incorporated into community, cultural and historical, and transportation planning for the RLSA, including all SRAs described in Group 4 Policies. Policy 5.5: For those lands that are not voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship program, non- agricultural development, excluding individual single family residences, shall be directed away from the listed species and species of special local concern (SSLC), as defined by Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, and their habitats by complying with the following guidelines and standards_ 1. A wildlife survey shall be required for all parcels when listed species or SSLC are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site or where listed species or SSLC are utilizin the site. The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) guidelines. The County shall notify the FFWCC and USFWS of the existence of any listed species or SSLC that may be discovered. 2. Wildlife habitat management plans for listed species or SSLC and for those protected species identified below shall be submitted for County approval. A plan shall be required for all projects where the wildlife survey indicates listed species or SSLC or the protected species identified below are utilizing the site, or the site contains potential habitat for listed species. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species or SSLC and their habitats. Management plans for new preserves shall also outline a public awareness program to educate residents about the on -site preserve and the need to maintain habitat within the preserve for listed species and those protected species identified below. a. Management plans for new preserves shall incorporate proper techniques to protect listed species, or SSLC and those protected species identified below, and their habitats from the negative impacts of proposed development. The most current and completed data and local, state, and federal guidelines and regulations shall be utilized to prepare the required management plans. vegetati.en p 'e,e..ati.en ree„i.rem...e.n..t.A.. S..h...A..l.l. e used to e6tabl.i.shh-#BF aFeas Provisions such as fencing, walls, or other obstructions shall be provided to minimize development impacts to the wildlife and to facilitate and encourage wildlife to use wildlife corridors. Appropriate roadway crossings, underpasses and signage shall be used where roads must cross wildlife corridors. Mitigation for impacting listed species or SSLC habitat shall be considered in the management plans, as appropriate. i. Management guidelines contained in publications used by the FFWCC and USFWS for technical assistance shall be used for developing required management plans. Text underlined is added; text stFike Neagh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. NI -If lin BCC Adoption Hearing Page 26 of 38 Page 595 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments - BCC Adoption Draft (XIII) ii. The County shall consider any other techniques recommended by the USFWS and FFWCC, subject to the provision of paragraph 3 of this Policy. (XIII) iii. When listed species or SSLC are utilizing a diFeGtly 0199AWAGI GA site or indicated by evidence, such as denning, foraging, or other indications, a minimum of 40% of native vegetation on site shall be retained, with the exception of clearing for agricultural purposes. The County shall also consider the recommendation of other agencies, subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 of this Policy. b. Manaaement plans shall include provisions for minimizina human and wildlife interactions. Low intensity land uses (e.g. parks, passive recreation areas, golf courses) and vegetation preservation requirements, including agriculture, shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas dominated by human activities. Consideration shall be given to the most current Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human wildlife conflict. The management plans shall also require the dissemination of information to local residents, businesses and governmental services about the presence of wildlife and practices (such as appropriate waste disposal methods) that enable responsible coexistence with wildlife, while minimizing opportunities for negative interaction, such as appropriate waste disposal practices. c. The Management Plans shall contain a monitoring program for developments greater than ten acres. FeseFves: aye f lR Clnrirla -empe%ate hoar /I Irc„c amcrinan„n flnrirlan„O may be aFeaG wTefe-the -h'aGk Text underlined is added; text stfike thresh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 27 of 38 Page 596 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft WRIPM MIT lIN AN I all h. 3_The County shall, consistent with applicable policies of this Overlay, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and recommendations from the US Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development orders on property Wig -utilized by listed species or SSLC. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case by case basis, may Ghaege-strengthen the requirements contained within these wildlife protection policies and any such change shall be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan. However, no reduction of the wildlife protection policies of Policy 5.5 will be considered as these shall constitute minimum standards for wildlife protection. Policy 5.6: For those lands that are not voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship program, Collier County shall direct non-agricultural land uses away from high functioning wetlands by limiting direct impacts within wetlands. A direct impact is hereby defined as the dredging or filling of a wetland or adversely changing the hydroperiod of a wetland.' This Policy shall be implemented as follows: 1. There are two (2) major wetlands systems within the RLSA, Camp Keais Strand and the Okaloacoochee Slough. These two systems have been mapped and are designated as FSNs. Policy 5.1 prohibits certain uses within the FSA's, thus preserving and protecting the wetlands functions within those wetland systems. 2. The other significant wetlands within the RLSA are WRA's as described in Policy 3.3. These areas are protected by existing SFWMD wetlands —pens —Environmental Resource Permit for each area. 3. FSAs, HSAs and WRAs, as provided in Policy 5.3, and the ACSC have stringent site clearing and alteration limitations, nonpermeable surface limitations, and requirements addressing surface water flows which protect wetland functions within the wetlands in those areas. Other wetlands within the RLSA are isolated or seasonal wetlands. These wetlands will be protected based upon the wetland functionality assessment described below, and the final permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management District. Text underlined is added; text stFike thFOUgh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 28 of 38 Page 597 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft a. The County shall apply the vegetation retention, open space and site preservation requirements specified within this Overlay to preserve an appropriate amount of native vegetation on site. Wetlands shall be preserved as part of this vegetation requirement according to the following criteria: i. The acreage requirements specified within this Overlay shall be met by preserving wetlands with the highest wetland functionality scores. Wetland functionality assessment scores shall be those described in paragraph b of this Policy. The vegetative preservation requirements imposed by Policies 5.3 and 5.5 shall first be met through preservation of wetlands having a WRAP functionality assessment score of 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7, or greater. The County shall apply specific criteria in the LDC to be used to determine those instances in which wetlands with a WRAP functionality assessment score of 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7, or greater must be preserved in excess of the preservation required by Policy 5.3. ii. Wetlands and contiguous upland buffers that are used by listed species or SSLC, or serving as corridors for the movement of listed species or SSLC, shall be preserved on site. Wetland flowway functions through the project shall be maintained. iii. Proposed development shall demonstrate that ground water table drawdowns or diversions will not adversely change the hydoperiod of preserved wetlands on or offsite. Detention and control elevations shall be set to protect surrounding wetlands and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. In order to meet these requirements, projects shall be designed in accordance with Sections 10.2.2.4 of the Environmental Resource Permit Applicant's Handbook Volume I, and Sections 3.11 and 3.12 of the Environmental Resource Permit Applicant's Handbook Volume 11 for use within the Geographic Limits of the South Florida Water Management District (2014). Upland vegetative communities may be utilized to meet the vegetative, open space and site preservation requirements of this Overlay when the wetland functional assessment score is less than 0.65. b. In order to assess the values and functions of wetlands at the time of project review, applicants shall rate functionality of wetlands using the South Florida Water Management District's Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP), as described in Technical Publication Reg-001, dated August 1999 as amended, or the Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method, identified as F.A.C. Chapter 62-345. The applicant shall submit to County staff agency -accepted WRAP scores, or Uniform Wetlands Mitigation Assessment scores. County staff shall review this functionality assessment as part of the County's €Environmental Data provisions and shall use the results to direct incompatible land uses away from the highest functioning wetlands according to the requirements found in paragraph 3 above. c. All direct impacts shall be mitigated for pursuant to the requirements of paragraph (f) of this Policy. d. Single family residences shall follow the requirements contained within Policy 6.2.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Text underlined is added; text Neagh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 29 of 38 Page 598 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A J PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft e. The County shall separate preserved wetlands from other land uses with appropriate buffering requirements. The County shall require a minimum 50-foot vegetated upland buffer abutting a natural water body, and for other wetlands a minimum 25-foot vegetated upland buffer abutting to the wetland. A structural buffer may be used in conjunction with a vegetative buffer that would reduce the vegetative buffer width by 50%. A structural buffer shall be required abutting wetlands where direct impacts are alloweds. Wetland buffers shall conform to the following standards: The buffer shall be measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line. ii. The buffer zone shall consist of preserved native vegetation. Where native vegetation does not exist, native vegetation compatible with the existing soils and expected hydrologic conditions shall be planted. iii. The buffer shall be maintained free of Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. iv. The following land uses are considered to be compatible with wetland functions and are allowed within the buffer: (1) Passive recreational areas, boardwalks and recreational shelters; (2) Pervious nature trails; (3) Water management structures; (4) Mitigation areas; (5) Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses. v. A structural buffer may consist of a stem -wall, berm, or vegetative hedge with suitable fencing. f. Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to wetland in order to result in no net loss of wetland functions. Mitigation Requirements: i. "No net loss of wetland functions" shall mean that the wetland functional score of the proposed mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland functional score of the impacted wetlands. Priority shall be given to mitigation within FSA's and HSXs. ii. Loss of storage or conveyance volume resulting from direct impacts to wetlands shall be compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity on site and within or abutting the impacted wetland. iii. Protection shall be provided for preserved or created wetland or upland vegetative communities offered as mitigation by placing a conservation easement over the land in perpetuity, providing for initial exotic plant removal (Class I invasive exotic plants defined by the Florida Exotic Plan Council) and continuing exotic plant maintenance, or by appropriate ownership transfer to a state or federal agency along with sufficient funding for perpetual management activities. iv. Exotics removal or maintenance may be considered acceptable mitigation. Text underlined is added; text is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 30 of 38 Page 599 of 708 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCO Adoption Draft v_Jv.Prior to issuance of any final development order that authorizes site alteration, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with paragraphs (f} f. i, ii, and iii of this Policy and SFWMD standards. If agency permits have not provided mitigation consistent with this Policy, Collier County will require mitigation exceeding that of the jurisdictional agencies. g. Wetland preservation, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be identified or platted as separate tracts. In the case of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), these areas shall also be depicted on the PUD Master Plan. These areas shall be maintained free from trash and debris and from Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. Land uses allowed in these areas shall be limited to those listed above (3.e.iv.) and shall not include any other activities that are detrimental to drainage, flood, control, water conservation, erosion control or fish and wildlife habitat conservation and preservation. 4. All landowners shall be encouraaed to consider Darticipatina in anv proarams that provide incentives, funding or other assistance in facilitating wetland and habitat restoration on private lands including, but not limited to, federal farm bill agricultural conservation Droarams. private or public grants, tax incentives, easements, and fee or less than fee sale to conservation programs. Policy 5.7 Anv development not DarticiDatina in the RLS Proaram shall be compatible with surroundinq land uses. Within one year of the effective date of this Policy, LDC regulations shall be implemented for outdoor liahtina to protect the niahttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Text underlined is added; text stFike thr4gugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 31 of 38 Page 600 of 708 a OD 0 ti 0 0 cm m (0 11 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 32 of 38 41 O a N A w � m C o a d o C q O p y N m ` va_ 96. y 61 c� y m- c9 E d O0 E 3 iq= q a ° M 41 V t a q 3 c w cv m 9 E c A C q o R D A w N to E D _ ] A ip L y �i ? O u° 3a°� 3o`na �a 3da o m zo "uOvn O. _ d N w O S ol G 7 fn d v D D U C z E N N a o N O- a 3. L L d q C d d n P w s c cu d °[_°.� N o u o o 4 c21 m >_ u ] ee66E o C d o- gc a m G QC O y �e q o N g N p d— v oG0 s $O E m oo c c o'm£c c nE am m o m: E'n M NQ ayy d C c. m O: x u O n O. O C m m t� d N EwN N N 7 u Q g o O Q U O vA Q C p a d> ,� - u C z a G 6awc U A O G n Vm 6 C> a L C a Y > O m e[p E 00'o m > E u c c u v ° E m ° C m — = _ oue _ o"g my o p n] y w E v D u d q m N] a w m.E obo D m E ] m c o a o a _� C_ u app ey� uQ } u c pp d w 4 i'n O n C pp o D y a+ O awi t adi C C ° N w u L c C Q Q« .`.. Y w a Q �n c H O. D rCC d 3 a[y 6N1 m U y c a Ee c U c E c ° q w q v q u a q` y m a N C c m q C ? C q ~ m G y� W e u m c c C c d o D t� v � y pppC N [ a O N w d p0 �0 q C 10 c C O C cc y ii o f a o u E m E L L C N d v a� ma � d a 4 - HIS- 'N �> V. i^ m C aqi z•vDV 'a E Q u t O c ]F j c q q q v a v M q W O c Qp ro u p c dE O y n d j L L V w 8 0 L j V t q C O p• p on . y d u b V V > U q ni L O u G U �. o o E m u �n x t a r C Ccol c m °i- v,n g o N L 0 m, 4 o aCi Zu Y rCo a c E p a L z C m - V c O C d O y « qy a; N] d and E�__Vo 't- ee°°�'u o i m c Ib 0 0 N O V v � 7 00 m um a m a m a D CL c n` E 15 to 0 A 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 33 of 38 2 J~ Q m oAa m m pp E C d s m U O v u 3 n E m y E E A m S i 3 B is E y yypp �tx, z um�a�Kg�g1° w`5a 2" D n m G $ E m � 2Sfi s a w �� •r. ad gs F_F C E bEc�b m N y o L � 4 " E u w C�9 gq E c Wa Y O Ir. we w m b E c� }y - U j G. y ` F c n lS n 4 Q Li N + +g� �Ro u 1 u_ nS ain u N c _ m r w n aF V R$ Q-a e" _ m s i 13a E m i 9 m L� m a c I ::4L C Q 'Y Ep 5� m3 49 E� N of O 1 as 3 a c� waQ C�7 tea' P 0 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 34 of 38 N U N N SS E z a Ok i S j E a hi m O •� C JN 9 C 4 c c • E .e " ' X Y s s .. v E JI 72 a U G e E O x y y � � � ^ « e c ; •n� E Y i P ? E '. g i eY�� 0 3 E E E « Y ti Y ; r, Y G - �• Y V o. E 5 E i E E ; y E r a Y c E Y a E a o y E OO� m c 1 le C le �r ? r {S V u � g c 3 Er c 7 3 ui r� '• G so a _ EE Z E E o $ „ v E E Q E c 'j� 2 w z � E • � c o f S}k, a m$ a o ° l• M „ Y L O Y � x z ` a c T 7 S E 3 ° E ` 00 0 r` 0 0 CD U (6 d O LO M 41 m IG 4 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 35 of 38 J d e a 0 'm d G E _= m�, in c,-c E 8E a d o o U d `o m N V .2m rnN m y Z• « m a 0 rn a o m `? o h E aai o a m u E O c o 5 0 o m c �, m' am, o m5 aai m O �E c m E O > J a N O c E Y aWi Z ti tip � U D a J y O C O O m y d ; y m 2 U 11� p d m L d O O lmp m .2 E 'O O U y J m d C U m m c� C T ui d Q in« v o - nO m 9 r mma m a \ m= �� 0 �p 2 g me = i... y y o m = o m z a T r y p� y O) N U m] N Z tyC1 C C J E •-• O m li ( 'O O Y m 0 E L�f7 ~ m I rn "d O c �_ y oiU Oj v m y J E �o o_ d a m D' c ',c_. lL m o. c >,c8 .,. _ E c b o m ,>n v rn C y J C m N C E L C C o .. DL Q: o y U9 m E � 8 g d U a d d.E S C c o o c O' W C m V wy E -lnn U -E >o a d ¢c 8 8 8 J 0 O 0 m q 10 d c EO p cm EEJ E ay uJic c ; " U cn .- E o o mo ; $u m a o d E 'c a�i .S �- � JUG 8 .2 -� '� o o E O = cQ g o c o. c10 c o c Ev E O� nm in mEo Eyatc E $'c o N Toi a N m JO o y9 vrmo �yc Nm '=m LE Z N m d p y> N - AE����Uo�co�� O am � 'o Q >om a� ao aZ `8m o 808 6. j O W m- pC N U ~ Z �:IU U o a O Q m c o LL U 3 U y U N a d O y C C C O A O _ of m U m 'p_U 'C O O m C T ~ ¢ x _O m U 3 E o N l0 E O > C N N C N N 8 N p n A C5 m F 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 36 of 38 Page 606 of 708 Proposed Draft RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY MAP Note The official designated titles of SSAs can be found within SSA Credit Agreements- Page 607 of 708 w AO FLORIDA DEPARTMENT Of STATE RON DESANTIS Governor July 19, 2021 Ms. Martha Vergara, BMR & VAB Senior Deputy Clerk Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller of Collier County 3329 Tamiami Trail E, Suite #401 Naples, Florida 34112 Dear Ms. Vergara: LAUREL M.LEE Secretary of State Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes, this will acknowledge receipt of your electronic copy of Collier County Ordinance No. 2021-28, which was filed in this office on July 19, 2021. Sincerely, Anya Grosenbaugh Program Administrator AG/lb R. A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6270 Page 608 of 708 JohnsonEric From: BosiMichael Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2022 2:06 PM To: JohnsonEric Subject: FW: Conservancy Comments and Recommendations to Improve the RLSAs Land Development Code Section 4.08.00 Attachments: Attachment A - USFWS Fish and Wildlife Concerns re Longwater and Bellmar 3-1-21.pdf; Attachment B - Memo - 4-24-08 Hatcher-Roys to Greenwood.pdf; FW: Data & Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year; 3-4-2022 RLSA LDC Amendment recommendations Conservancy.pdf For the file From: FrenchJames <James.French @colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 6:32 PM To: ScottTrinity <Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: PattersonAmy <Amy. Patterson @colliercountyfl.gov>; GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; Lynch Diane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov>; BosiMichael <Michael.Bosi@colliercountyfl.gov>; CookJaime <Jaime.Cook@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Conservancy Comments and Recommendations to Improve the RLSAs Land Development Code Section 4.08.00 FYI Respectfully, Jamie James C. French Growth Management Department, Community Development 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Office (239) 252-5717 Colt cmnty Gmw1h Management Deparrya,t From: April Olson <AprilO@conservancy.org> Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 10:47 AM To: BosiMichael <Michael.Bosi@colliercountyfl.gov>; CookJaime <Jaime.Cook@colliercountyfl.gov>; FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: nicole johnson <nicolel@conservancy.org> Subject: Conservancy Comments and Recommendations to Improve the RLSAs Land Development Code Section 4.08.00 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. Dear Mr. Bosi, Ms. Cook, and Mr. French, We are pleased to provide you with the "Conservancy's Recommendations to improve RLSA's Land Development Code Section 4.08.00", dated 3-4-2022. Also, included with this email are three Attachments referenced in our comment letter. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions, or if you would like a follow up meeting, we are happy to schedule one with you. Best regards, April April Olson Senior Environmental Planning Specialist Conservancy of Southwest Florida 1495 Smith Preserve Way Naples, FL 34102 (239) 262-0304, Ext 250 Page 609 of 708 CONSERVANCY of Southwest Florida _ OUR WATER, LAND, WILDLIFE, FUTURE. Protecting Southwest Florida's unique natural environment and quality of life ... now and forever. 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. Page 610 of 708 CONSERVANCY of Southwest Moi�da OUR WATER, LAND, WILDLIFE, FUTURE. Protecting Southwest Florida's unique natural environment and quality of life ... now and forever. March 4, 2022 Michael Bosi, Planning Director Jamie Cook, Director Development Review Jamie French, Deputy Department Head Collier County Growth Management Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Conservancy's Recommendations to improve the RLSA's Land Development Code Section 4.08.00 Dear Mr. Bosi, Ms. Cook, and Mr. French: Although the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay is twenty years old, only recently has the program's effectiveness as a stewardship program truly been put to the test. Prior to the 5-Year Review (2007-2009), the RLSA had only one approved Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA), the Town of Ave Maria. However, as you know, during the second restudy (2018-2021), several more SRA applications were submitted to Collier County and were approved.' In addition, the County recently approved several Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) applications. These recent applications provide a wealth of information and reveal what is working and what improvements are necessary for the program to achieve its goals of wetland and habitat protection, retention of agricultural lands, and smart growth. Through our in-depth reviews of these recent SSA and SRA applications, we discovered flaws within the RLSA program that will result in ineffective restoration plans and impacts to listed species habitat, even within the preserves (SSAs). Although there are these serious issues, the applications still generated substantial stewardship credits toward development. Many of the issues boil down to loopholes and weak language within the Land Development Code (LDC). While, the Conservancy has solutions to improve the LDC, we understand that our recommendations may be outside of staff s scope of work, as the LDC amendments are only to implement the 2021 GMP RLSA Amendments. Unfortunately, because the adopted 2021 RLSA GMP Amendments are modeled after the outdated 2009 1 Rivergrass and Hyde Park Villages approved in 2020, followed Longwater and Bellmar Villages in 2021. Page 1140 Page 611 of 708 "5-Year Review Amendments," the 2021 RLSA GMP amendments failed to address many of the current issues we raise in this document. This document explains some of the ways in which recent SRA and SSA applications fail to align with the RLSA's goals and objectives for habitat protection and restoration. Following each issue we present, we provide our recommendations to improve policies within Collier County's LDC Section 4.08.00. If staff believes our recommendations to be outside of the scope this LDC Amendment process, we ask that staff consider our recommendations for the upcoming amendment cycle or the EAR. In this document, we present the following issues: • ISSUE #1: Restoration Plans that do not achieve stated outcomes. • ISSUE #2: SSA Applications may still generate large numbers of restoration credits while providing minimal restoration work. • ISSUE #3: The LDC should require measurable success criteria based on specific environmental outcomes instead of completed tasks. • ISSUE #4: SSA Agreements and Easements must include perpetual maintenance agreements to manage and control exotic species. • ISSUE #5: Although the Planning Commission acts as the County's Environmental Advisory Committee, they do not review or hold hearings for SSA applications. • ISSUE #6: SRAs may reduce habitat functionality in adjacent SSAs. • ISSUE #7: LDC 4.08.01Q fails to conform to the RLSA's goal. • ISSUE # 8: Scores for Listed Species Habitat Indices must be increased to protect the endangered Florida panther. • ISSUE #9: Issues with the proposed location of panther corridors. Conservancy provides recommendations for location of wildlife crossings. While these issues are not all encompassing, we believe these to be the most significant issues pertaining to restoration and protection of natural resources. Following the explanation of each issue, we provide our recommendation for LDC Section 4.08.00 in BLUE. ISSUE #1 - Restoration Plans that do not achieve stated outcomes: SSA15's Amended restoration plan, approved by the BCC in 2021, provides an example of a restoration plan that does not measure up to its stated goals. SSA15 lands are within an important regional wetland flowway that connects National Audubon Society's Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary to Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve. These lands are part of a large regional mammal corridor, called Camp Page 2140 Page 612 of 708 Keais Strand Corridor, for the endangered Florida panther and other mammals. Florida Forever targets Camp Keais Strand for protection and states in their five year plan "the large, interconnected swamps of Southwest Florida must be preserved if such wildlife as the Florida panther and black bear are to survive." z The applicant's goal for SSA15's Amended restoration plan is "to return the natural/historic functions to degraded and altered habitats, which will in turn provide regional benefits for surface water flow and wildlife."3 While the goal sounds promising, experts concluded that SSA15's restoration plan would not fully restore Camp Keais Strand to natural and historic conditions. This is because the applicant withdrew their commitment of significant work to restore two large farm fields that impede flows within Camp Keais Strand to wetlands, even though the work was included in a 2016 version of the SSA15 Amendment application for the Town of Rural West.4 Furthermore, the restoration plan failed to demonstrate significant hydrological benefits to SSA15 lands because the applicant did not provide an updated flowway restoration analysis after the applicant removed the significant farm field restoration work from the plan.' Kevin Godsea, Refuge Manager of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (FPNWR), explained in a letter to Collier County his concerns that SSA15's restoration plans would not achieve its stated goals of flowway restoration and landscape connectivity. Mr. Godsea stated: Secondly, the application does not address the need for hydrologic restoration of the adjacent Camp Keais Strand Foowway Stewardship Area. Hydrological restoration of the Camp Keais Strand was identified as a unique functional group within Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, which the County and Service both participated in. During this effort, members of local and state agencies, NG0s, and the Federal government made every effort to take a holistic approach to hydrological restoration. We implore the County and other regulatory authorities to require the applicants to include wetland restoration activities identified within the Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, especially those within the Camp Keais Strand functional group. 2 Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Division of State Lands (May 2020) 2020 Florida Forever Five -Year Plan. Summary of Recommendations and Status as of December 2019. Corkscrew Regional Ecological Watershed. P. 173 of 889. https:/Ifloridadep.gov/sites/default/files/FLDEP DSL OES FF CorkscrewRegionalEcosystemWatershed.pdf 3 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Collier County Restoration Plan, Revised Oct. 2019, Exhibit F to Easement Agreement p. 1 4 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Amendment Application dated January 2016. Exhibit 4-1: Aerial with Restoration Designation Areas p. 40/241 of pdf includes restoration work of two large farm fields. 5 The 2016 SSA15 Amendment application included the "Rural Lands West Camp Keais Strand Flow Way Restoration Analysis", which was never updated after restoration work for two large farm fields was removed. Page 52/241 of pdf Page 3140 Page 613 of 708 Hydrologic restoration of the Camp Keais Strand is clearly a component of the RLSA Stewardship Sending Areas, and is critically important for downstream conservation lands such as the FPNWR. Currently two farm fields restrict the flowway to a few culverts in a span of 100 yards, whereas restoring these farm fields back to wetlands would result in a nearly 1 mile wide flowway immediately adjacent to the proposed Longwater development. The applicant's original plans for the Town of Rural Lands West included restoring these approximately 935 acres of farmland in the middle of the Camp Keais Strand Stewardship flowway in SSA15, to benefit the hydrology of downstream conservation lands. This wetland restoration was not included in the plans for Rivergrass Village, Longwater Village or Belmar Village, and we believe that it should, as this type of wetland restoration was clearly the intent when the RLSA was established. If properly implemented, Camp Keais Strand hydrological restoration activities could ultimately benefit one of the most bio diverse forested wetlands in the state of Florida (i.e., Fakahatchee Strand), as well as the Picayune Strand. (Letter - Attachment A) In addition, the Conservancy hired Michael Frankenberger, Certified Professional Ecologist and President of Natural Resources Services, Inc., to review SSA15's 2016 and 2019 restoration plans. Mr. Frankenberger found similar concerns with SSA15's amended plan, as was stated by Mr. Godsea. At the January 28, 2020 Board of County Commission adoption hearing for SSA15 Mr. Frankenberger stated: They [applicant] don't provide any data, no hydrological data to support their assumption that this isgoing to provide great environmental benefit and hydrological improvements.... They [applicant] provide no data except in '16 they did do a hydrological monitoring plan, but that is irrelevant because they took out most of the restoration, and it doesn't identify all the additional development around the sloughs. The restoration work removed from the plan that Mr. Frankenberger referenced was the work to restore the two large farm fields. Mr. Frankenberger also stated the following in a report to the Conservancy6 upon his review of Amended SSA15 Amendment application: The application flow -way restoration plan includes an unsupported assumption that the two identified areas of flow -way work, totaling 4.5 acres will significantly improve Strand flow -way functions far beyond the proposed work site, including the >8 mile length of the strand within SSA15. However, there is no supporting documentation to support this extended reach of existing road impact or potential benefit. 6 Natural Resources Services, Inc. Outside Review and Comment on the SSA 15 Natural Resource Index Assessment and SSA 15 Proposed Restoration Plan. Page 4140 Page 614 of 708 Figure 1 provides a side -by -side comparison of SSA15's restoration areas from 2016 (left) and 2019 (right). Figure 1: 2016 and 2019 Restoration Areas within SSA15 The 2016 plan, on the left, includes restoration work for two large farm fields (Areas 8 and 9 depicted in light purple and pink). The 2019 plan, on the right, shows that restoration for the two farm fields has been removed. The 2016 Plan states: The restoration of Areas 8 and 9 will contribute significantly to the hydrologic improvement of Camp Keais Strand. The removal of the perimeter berms and ditches and re -grading of Areas 8 and 9 will aid in restoring historic sheet flow conditions within Camp Keais Strand.? Because restoration of the two farm fields was so important to the hydrologic restoration of Camp Keais Strand, the restoration work should not have been removed from the plan, unless the hydrologic modeling was updated after removal of the significant farm field 7 SSA 15 Amendment Application January 2016. Stewardship Sending Area 15 Restoration Analysis and Report p. 37/241 Page 5140 Page 615 of 708 restoration and the modeling supported the assumption that regional surface water flows and wildlife habitats would be restored to natural/historic function, as was promised by SSA15's goal. RECOMMENDATION 1: Language within LDC 4.08.06.C.5.j.(4) and (5) must be strengthened for flowway restoration plans. As part of the "Restoration Analysis and Report", require applicants to provide site -specific data and a hydrological study to identify how the restoration work will result in significant and measurable hydrological improvements. Applicants shall provide pre and post hydrological data as part of the success criteria to demonstrate improvements associated with each restoration activity. Furthermore, if prior to approval of an SSA application, or as part of an amendment to an approved SSA, the applicant modifies the amount and type of restoration work, the applicant shall provide the county with an updated Restoration Analysis and Report. The report must include an updated hydrological study demonstrating that the modified restoration plan still achieves the restoration goals provided in the plan, or the SSA agreement shall not be approved. RECOMMENDATION 2: If prior to approval of an SSA application, or as part of an amendment to an approved SSA, the applicant modifies the amount and type of restoration work to be provided for any type of restoration stated in Policy 3.11, (i.e. wading bird habitat restoration, panther corridor restoration, caracara habitat restoration, etc.) the applicant must provide an updated Restoration Analysis and Report that demonstrates how the modified plan would still achieve a functional enhancement of the restoration area. RECOMMENDATION 3: Camp Keais Strand and Okaloacoochee Slough are part of the Big Cypress Basin and a large interconnected natural system of wetlands and habitat corridors that connect with surrounding public lands. However, the letter from FPNWR manager suggests that some landowner -proposed restoration projects for SSAs are designed piecemeal, without considering whether the restoration project would benefit surrounding public lands. The LDC should be updated to require that applicants who apply for Restoration Credits (R-1 and R-2) must first consult with wildlife agencies and land managers of adjacent, downstream and/or connecting public lands to ensure that the proposed restoration activities are based on a holistic approach to benefit the entire watershed and habitat types. In addition, restoration plans within Camp Keais Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough must be consistent with Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan (SWFCWP). The SWFCWP was created through a large coordinated effort to "restore surface water hydrology (getting the right quantity of water to the right place, at the right time), Page 6 140 Page 616 of 708 improve water quality, restore landscape connectivity for wildlife, and restore the health of the estuaries." ISSUE #2 - SSA Applications may still generate a large number of restoration credits while providing minimal restoration work: Collier County Planning Staff clearly understood that restoration credits may not always be commensurate with restoration work provided, which is why they provided the following RLSA White Paper Recommendations. Structure restoration credits so that needed restoration is assured in return for the maximum credit and acreage footprint of SRA development (draft LDCAmendment) Restructure the timing of R-1 credits: only half of R-1 credits awarded at time of permit approval through the ERP process (or County permit if no ERP required): the remaining "R-1"credit(s) would be awarded only after the owner successfully complete all phases of R-2 restoration. (draft LDCAmendment) Restoration credits represent the lion's share of stewardship credits earned to date and are the primary type of credits that are expected to be earned in the future.$ We believe that the relationship between restoration credits and restoration work provided should always be proportional. In other words, the applicant should provide extensive environmental restoration work toward restoring habitats, flowways, and corridors, if the number of restoration credits is substantial. The SSA15 Amendment Application provides an example of how restoration work was not commensurate with the number of credits the applicant received. SSA15's Amended and Adopted restoration plan provided restoration work over only 116 acres, a mere 2% of the SSA's total 5,253 acres.9 Nonetheless, their application generated 21,428 restoration credits. At ten credits per acre, the restoration credits alone entitle them to 2,142 acres of SRA development, which may be applied toward any combination of SRAs.10 As example, 21,428 restoration credits may be applied toward two 1,000-acre villages or even a 2,142-acre town. A 2,142-acre SRA could easily add far more than 12,800 new residents to Collier County.11 These new residents will increase demands on traffic, water, sewer, 8 Collier County Stewardship Credit Analysis August 2020; Collier County May 2019 White Paper 9 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Collier County Restoration plan provide that there will be 104.23 acres of farm field restoration, 8.15 acres of exotics removal, 3.47 acres to remove trail south of Oil Well (5,400ft x 28ft), and .22 acre section road removal to alleviate pinch point (500ft x 20 ft.). The total lands where restoration work will occur is 116.07 acres. Resolution 2020-25, p. 2. 10 Policy 4.19 requires ten credits per acre, so 21,428 stewardship credits = 2,142 acres of SRAs. 11 SRAs can build up to 4 homes per acre. Even if we assume the 2,142 acres will be developed at a lower density of 3 homes per acre and at 2.5 persons per household, we get a population of 16,065. Assuming a vacancy rate of 20% _ 12,852 Page 7140 Page 617 of 708 fire, police, and impacts to water quality and wildlife in the area. Thus, the increase in development rights just from SSA15's restoration credits is very substantial. Ultimately, SSA15's applicant offered a faulty restoration plan, as we saw in the previous section, consisting of only 116 acres of restoration work, in exchange for substantial developer entitlements. We do not believe this ever was the intended purpose of restoration credits. Unfortunately, this seems to be a pattern with more recent SSA agreements, as we found a similar case with SSA14's restoration plan where there was little restoration work provided in exchange for considerable restoration credits. While the Board in 2021 did take a step in the right direction by reducing R-1 dedication credits, for some of the categories, to one credit per acre, we believe that applicants will continue to provide little restoration in exchange for an abundance of restoration credits. This is because there is little incentive to provide costly restoration work for two reasons: a. Lands restored through costly restoration activities generate the same credits as lands that may benefit indirectly from restoration. b. Less costly types of restoration, that provide fewer benefits to wildlife or wetlands, generate the same number of credits as costly restoration that provide much greater benefits. a. Lands restored through costly restoration activities generate the same credits as lands that may benefit indirectly from restoration: Environmental restoration work can be very costly, especially when the site includes large farm fields restored to wetlands or forested areas. However, the applicant of SSA15 discovered that, even if they removed major restoration work, they could still generate copious restoration credits. Before the SSA15 Amendment was adopted, the applicant removed 88%12 of the restoration work that was provided in the 2016 application, yet the total restoration credits were only reduced by 25% in the final adopted application.13 How could the applicant generate so many restoration credits while removing most of the restoration work? A review of SSA15's restoration plan shows that the bulk of restoration credits were generated for potential indirect benefits of the restoration work. Although the actual restoration work was planned for only 116 acres, the applicant claimed that 2,678 acres would benefit from the restoration work.14 12 The 2016 SSA15 Amended application provided 942 acres of restoration. While the adopted SSA15 Amendment provided only 116 acres. Thus, 826 acres of restoration was removed or 88% of the total restoration work. 13 The 2016 SSA15 Amended application proposed to generate 28,357 restoration credits (p. 18/241), while the adopted SSA15 Amended Application generated 21,428 restoration credits. Thus, a reduction of credits of about 25%. 14 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Collier County Restoration Plan, Revised Oct. 2019, Exhibit G, p. 1 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Restoration Analysis and Report. Revised October 2019. Exhibit G. Page 8140 Page 618 of 708 Figure 2 shows maps provided by the applicant's consultant. The map on the left shows, in blue and pink, the 2,678 acres where the applicant earned restoration credits. The map on the right shows, in orange and purple, the exact location where 116 acres of restoration work or restoration activities are planned. Figure 2: Map on left shows areas where R-1 and R-2 credits are generated. Map on right show locations of actual restoration activities. 2,678 acres of restoration areas 116 acres of restoration work T 11731 r!q^:53^x sTT3:J +n.nu �.l =7-. Am ,. - AMIC TXHIRIT O. RESTORATION AREAS SSA Is 1 It V a uu ue� PASSARELLA I—& AssocmTm I.fI While we agree that flowway restoration work, when done right, can benefit downstream lands, we also believe the framers intended to award Restoration credits only for restoration work or for "restoration activities" as stated in the LDC.15 Furthermore, the paltry restoration work of 116 acres, provided by the applicant, is likely why principal ecologist Michael Frankenberger and FPNWR Refuge Manager Kevin Godsea voiced is LDC policies 4.08.06.B.3f (1) (2), and (5) all state that Restoration Stewardship Credits shall be generated for "restoration activities." Page 9 140 Page 619 of 708 concerns that SSA15's restoration plan would provide little hydrological benefit to Camp Keais Strand flowway and downstream conservation lands. b. Less costly types of restoration, that provide fewer benefits to wildlife or wetlands, generate the same number of credits as costly restoration that provide much greater benefits: Besides removing extensive restoration work altogether, the applicant discovered that they could provide less expensive types of restoration with cheaper, less effective types of restoration, and not be penalized. As example, the 2016 SSA15 application provided planting of native wetland and upland species for each restoration area. However, the final adopted application removed all plantings in lieu of natural recruitment, even for the largest project, restoration of a 104-acre farm field. Michael Frankenberger stated concerns that natural recruitment may not work for large areas. He stated: It should be noted that the condition to let a large agricultural area restore vegetation naturally is very risky as long-term agricultural management has likely significantly reduced native seed bank and we would recommend that the applicant modify the plan to including seeding planting prior to first rainy season aftergrade restoration. Frankenberger also stated concerns that more costly restoration activities that provide greater benefits to wildlife and hydrology generate the same credits as activities that yield less environmental benefits: It appears that an error was made on the assignment of credits for flow -way work and farm field work. The amount of restoration work/expense for the restoration of farm fields and the potential wetland/flow-way/wildlife benefits for the farm field restoration is in order of magnitude greater than the cost/benefits associated with the road removal (flow -way restoration). The credits allotted should be more justifiably be assigned with the 70% to the farm fields and the ±25% for the road removal. If changes are not made to the newly adopted GMP Policy 3.11, the issue of awarding an extensive amount of restoration credits in exchange for minimal restoration could become even worse, as the new policy increases the ways in which restoration credits may be earned. RECOMMENDATION 4: The only way to incentivize significant restoration work is to award R-2 restoration credits only for the areas where the actual restoration work is to occur, not for the lands that have the potential to be indirectly restored. As example, R-2 credits may be generated on lands where there is a road removal, grading, removal of berms, planting of native species, seeding, exotics removal, etc. However, R-2 credits shall be awarded only after all specified environmental outcomes are achieved. R-1 10140 Page 620 of 708 credits may be awarded for lands that may benefit indirectly from restoration; however, Land Use Layers 1-6 shall first be removed. It should be noted that under the existing Stewardship Credit Matrix, base credits may be generated for lands having "Restoration Potential". This is yet another way landowners may generate credit for lands that may indirectly benefit from restoration, and another reason why R-2 credits should only be granted for the actual restoration work. Furthermore, the program should encourage planting of native vegetation and/or seeding, rather than natural recruitment to earn R-2 credits. If an application provides for natural recruitment, then restoration credits should be held until natural recruitment is successful, as determined by permitting agency. ISSUE #3 -The LDC should require measurable success criteria based on specific environmental outcomes instead of completed tasks: Principal Ecologist Michael Frankenberger, who reviewed SSA15's restoration plans, suggested that the plan lacked measurable success criteria for environmental outcomes. The success criteria provided within SSA15 Amendment was not based on whether the restoration work resulted in measurable environmental goals such as desired habitat types with dominant native species or achieved targeted hydroperiods, instead, the success criteria was whether the applicant completed restoration activities or tasks. As example, SSA15's Amended Restoration Plan provided the following success criteria for flow -way restoration: The following are the success criteria for flow -way restoration: (1) removal of the old road grade designated for removal as part of the SSA 14 restoration plan will be completed; (2) removal of road grade south of Oil Well Road will be completed; (3) removal of the pinch point farm road will be completed, (4) if two years after removal of the road grades natural recruitment of native vegetation within the footprint of the old road grades has not occurred, then planting/seeding will be completed, and (6) the restored areas will be free from exotic vegetation immediately following a maintenance activity and will consist of no more than five percent cover for exotic species. A total of 10,264.5 Stewardship Credits shall be available upon the achievement of these success criteria. The statement demonstrates that the plan's success is entirely measured upon whether the work is completed, not if or how the restoration work would benefit water quality or quantity within the strand or whether certain habitat types are enhanced for listed species or wildlife. The LDC should be updated to require that success criteria demonstrates 11 140 Page 621 of 708 significant and measurable enhancements of specific habitat types with specific tree or vegetative cover and/or targeted hydroperiods or water quality improvements. The 2021 adopted RLSA GMP amendments added several new ways in which applicants may earn restoration credits, so now is the time for the language to include specific success criteria based on environmental outcomes.16 As example, for crested caracara habitat restoration, the success criteria could be whether the restoration work results in the creation or enhancement of suitable caracara habitat, such as open dry or wet prairies consisting of scattered cabbage palms or lightly wooded areas with saw palmettos, cypress, and/or scrub oak.17 Mr. Frankenberger provided examples of measurable success criteria for SSA15, which we incorporated in the following recommendation to improve restoration plans. RECOMMENDATION 5: Add specificity to require that the Restoration Plan provide clearly defined and measurable expectations on what defines successful fulfillment of the restoration goals. Success criteria goals for habitat restoration should include desired dominant native species and minimum appropriate vegetative cover by habitats (i.e. deep marsh, marsh, wet prairie, hydric pine flatwoods, hardwood wetlands, cypress, pine uplands, palmetto uplands, etc.). For each of these systems, targeted habitats and hydroperiods (i.e. time period of saturation/inundation, average season high water depth, maximum seasonal high water) needs to be defined to allow post assessment and management adjustments. For forested and upland systems, in addition to identifying appropriate native tree composition (species and dominance), minimum trees per acre and minimum tree height/canopy closure should be provided to define level of success. The Conservancy is happy to provide language for success criteria, specific to each restoration type listed in Amended Policy 3.11, per the request of planning staff. 16 The 2021 amendments to Policy 3.11 provide landowners with additional opportunities to earn restoration credits for caracara habitat restoration, exotic control/burning, panther corridor enhancements, and restoration of shallow wetland wading bird foraging habitat. This is in addition to credits for flowway and native habitat restoration, which existed prior to the 2021 amendments. 17 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service South Florida Multi -Species Recovery Plan. Audubon's Crested Caracara. Polyborus plancus audubonii. https://www.fws.gov/verobeach/MSRPPDFs/AudubonsCrestedCaracara.pdf 12 140 Page 622 of 708 ISSUE #4 - SSA Agreements and Easements must include a perpetual maintenance agreement to manage and control exotic species: One of the benefits of the RLSA program often touted by RLSA landowners is that SSAs will be preserved and maintained in perpetuity at no cost to the taxpayers. ECPO's presentation at the March 28, 2019 RLSA Workshop stated: Total conservation land has grown to 50,000 acres (from 16,000 in 2002) that are permanently preserved, protected and managed at no cost to Collier County taxpayers - land that is valued at more than $500,000,000. (Emphasis added) However, a review of SSA15's Application documents, reveal ambiguous maintenance obligations that appear to end after only a few years. While there are annual inspections, the SSA Easement Agreement or Restoration plan does not state how long the inspections are to last and does not provide any maintenance requirements for the restoration areas. What happens if after ten years, much of the area becomes infested with exotics or nuisance species? There is nothing in the Stewardship Agreement to require the applicant to maintain the restoration areas. The LDC currently provides loose standards for maintenance and control of exotic species and for monitoring success of all restoration work. The LDC only requires the following: When the restoration is to be undertaken by the applicant, a Restoration Plan that addresses, at a minimum, the following elements: 0) annual management, maintenance and monitoring.18 Stewardship easement Agreement shall identify the specific land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures.19 Identification of the proposed land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures.20 Language within Stewardship Easement Agreements should require minimum standards for controlling exotic species and for prescribed burning and should state that annual management is perpetual. RECOMMENDATION 6: Write policy based on staffs White Paper recommendation: "Add specific exotic vegetation control measures to the SSA agreement and easement and require 18 4.080.06.C.5.j.(5) (SSA Designation Application) 19 4.080.06.C.8.b (SSA Designation Application Package) 20 4.080.06.D.1.d. (SSA Application Review Process) 13 140 Page 623 of 708 maintenance that assures no greater infestation than that existing at time of SSA designation." The plan should identify perpetual exotic control and other management measures as a requirement for Stewardship Easement Agreements. In addition to providing control measures for Category I and Category II exotic species, nuisance species such as cattail, dog fennel, and pasture grasses, shall not be allowed to flourish and count toward successful vegetation establishment. RECOMMENDATION 7: We agree with staffs recommendation that "additional specific maintenance standards [] should he included in all future SSA agreements and easements (draft LDCAmendment)." In addition, the agreements and easements must identify the long-term management entity who will maintain SSAs. Insuring funding for long-term management is essential. A suggested approach would be for each credit received, the owner would set aside monies into a long-term management endowment fund to be used solely for management of the property. This applies after all phases meet substantial success and ensures costs shall not be borne by taxpayers. ISSUE # 5 - Although the Planning Commission acts as the County's Environmental Advisory Committee, they do not review or hold hearings for SSA applications. Although the Collier County Planning Commission (CPCC) acts as the County's only Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC), the LDC does not provide for the CCPC-EAC to review Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) applications, they only review the Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) applications. This lack of review by CCPC-EAC is completely illogical, as SSA applications are incredibly complex and include a plethora of important reports and analyses related to preservation and restoration including: Restoration Plans, Natural Resource Index Assessments, SSA Credit Agreements, Restoration Analysis and Report, and SSA Easement Agreement. The Restoration Plan report alone includes numerous important sections warranting an in-depth review by the CCPC-EAC, including restoration goals, the description of work to be performed, entity responsible for the work, work schedule, success criteria, and management and maintenance.21 Below are just some of the reasons why an additional layer of review by the CCPC-EAC is necessary: 1. A review of SSA applications by CCPC-EAC would provide better assurances that SSA applications adhere to complex GMP and LDC rules for SSAs. 2. To ensure restoration plans are designed to achieve stated outcomes. 3. To ensure restoration credits are commensurate with restoration work provided. zl LDC 4.08.08.C.5J(5) 14140 Page 624 of 708 4. To ensure that habitat within SSAs will not be impacted by adjacent SRAs. 5. So that the CCPC-EAC fully understands the entirety of a developer's project. Not surprisingly, Eastern Collier Property Owner's (ECPO) opposes a review of SSA applications by the CCPC-EAC for reasons that do not add up.22 The reality is that ECPO simply wants little oversight of SSA applications because SSA Applications are the instrument by which RLSA landowners earn stewardship credits. Stewardship credits are the currency of the program and they substantially increase density and the value of their lands. Furthermore, ECPO understands that without a review and public hearing by the CCPC-EAC, there is less scrutiny of restoration plans and restoration work proposed. However, having only half the information of a development plan makes the CCPC-EAC susceptible to false claims and misinformation regarding what the applicant proposes for the preserve (SSA) and the number of credits generated. As example, the developer for the Town of Big Cypress, which includes Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar, claimed the following: Collier Enterprises will preserve more than 12,000 environmentally sensitive acres as part of the plan for the Town of Big Cypress and the Villages of Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar.23 When the statement is taken at face value, it seems like a great deal for Collier County. The applicant is setting aside 12,000 acres in exchange for 3,500 acres of development.24 However, the whole truth is that the SSA lands that make up the 12,000-acre preserve will generate 52,295 stewardship credits, which are enough credits to allow for approximately 6,425 acres of SRAs, not 3,500 acres as they claim.25 An accurate statement would have been: 22 Section 4 Public Participation and Comments, Committee Deliberations, Committee Actions Regarding Recommended Amendments to the Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay, p. 100 https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/23857/635883137282070000 23 TownofBigCypress.com 24 Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar total approximately 3,000 acres. Per the Town Agreement, the Town of Big Cypress core area equals 515 acres. Thus, the total development area = 3,515 acres. 25 The 12,372 acres of preserve that Collier Enterprises agreed to set aside for Town of Big Cypress is for SSA14, SSA 15, SSA 17, and SSA18. (SSA14 = 1,713 acres; SSA 15 = 5,253 acres; SSA 17 = 3,148 acres; SSA 18 = 2,258 acres; total preserve = 12,372 acres). These SSAs generated 52,295 stewardship credits for setting aside SSA14, SSA15, SSA17, and SSA18. (SSA14 = 12,893 credits; SSA 15 = 31,367 credits; SSA 17 = 4,528 credits; SSA 18 = 3,507 credits). The total SRA acreage from 52,295 credits = 6,425 SRA acres. (3,000 acres of SRAs for Longwater, Rivergrass, Bellmar; 515 acres of SRA for Town Core; plus credits left over to develop 2,909 acres of SRAs) MATH: The developer is using credits right now from those SSAs toward three villages totaling 3,000 acres: Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar. Rivergrass Resolution 2020-024 shows that 6,198 credits were used; Longwater's Submittal 5 - SRA Credit agreement shows that 6,697 credits will be used; Bellmar's Submittal 6 - SRA Credit agreement shows that 6,742 credits will be used. Total Credits applied toward 3,000 acres for those three villages = 19,637. The proposed Town Core would consume an estimated 3,559 credits (515.1 acres - 159.2 acres for public benefit acres which do not consume credits Per Amendment 4.20 = 355.9 acres); 355.9 acres x 10 credits per acre = 3,559 credits). Credits used for the three villages = 19,637 + estimated 3,559 credits used per Town Core = 23,196 total estimated credits to be consumed if Town Core is approved. Therefore, there are 29,099 remaining credits (52,295 - 23,196 = 29,099 remaining credits.) Based on Page 15 140 Page 625 of 708 "Collier Enterprises will preserve more than 12,000 environmentally sensitive acres as part of the plan for the Town of Big Cypress and the Villages of Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar. In addition, we may develop three more villages at nearly 1,000- acres each or we may use the credits from the preserve toward an additional 2,909 acre town." We believe the CCPC-EAC may not have understood this, as they were not tasked with review of the SSA agreements. Furthermore, they may not have been aware that approximately 86% or 10,625 acres of the 12,000-acre preserve was already protected from development, because of the RLSA's Group 5 policies.26 Grandiose claims of high preservation to development ratio may have been a primary reason for the CCPC to recommend approval of Longwater and Bellmar and for the Board to vote to approve the villages, even when the Conservancy demonstrated that the projects did not achieve the RLSA's requirements for design, fiscal neutrality, or traffic impacts. Since SSA applications are the vehicle to generate stewardship credits, which entitle development and, ultimately, the need for infrastructure and services provided by Collier County, it is irresponsible to prohibit a review and public hearing by the CCPC-EAC. It is our hope, that by adding another layer of review and a public hearing for SSA applications, restoration plans will yield better environmental outcomes, applicants will be granted restoration credits proportionate to extent of restoration work provided, and the public and the Board will have an accurate understanding of the true development -to - preservation ratios. RECOMMENDATION #8: We recommend that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), which is also Collier County's Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC), becomes an integral part the adopted RLSA Amendments, 10 credits per SRA acre would be required. So 29,099 credits / 10 credits per acre = 2,909 remaining SRA acres. This means that from the 12,300 acres of preserves there are enough credits for an additional 2,909-acre Town or three additional 970-acre villages, this is in addition to Longwater, Bellmar, and Rivergrass and the 515-Town Core. (Data found in SSA application materials and Town SRA agreement). 26 MATH: SSA14, 15, 17, and 18 = 5,057.2 acres of WRAs; 4,260.4 acres of FSAs; and 2,996.4 acres of HSAs = 12,314 acres. Policy 5.1 prohibits development and mining within all FSAs, unless the acre has an NRI score of 1.2 or less. There are 77 acres within the acres of FSAs that score 1.2 or less. Thus, 4,183 acres of the total 4,260.4 acres of FSAs is protected. Policy 5.3.1 prohibits site clearing and alteration in FSAs, WRAs, and HSAs within 80% of the property, unless lands are to be used for agriculture. Since FSAs are already protected, then we will apply Policy 5.3.1 to the remaining 8,053 acres of WRAs and HSAs. 8,053 x 80% = 6,442 acres. Thus, there are approximately 6,442 acres of WRAs and HSAs which are protected, plus 4,183 acres of FSAs = 10,625. Thus, 86% of the 12,372 site is already protected simply by being located within the RLSA. (10,625 / 12,372 = 86%). 12,372 acre preserve - 10,625 protected from development = 1,747 acres vulnerable to development. These protection measures were the trade-off, when the program was created, for the County granting landowners the opportunity to increase density 20-fold on RLSA lands and build compact cost efficient SRAs. (SSA data provided in SSA application materials). Page 16 140 Page 626 of 708 of the approval process for Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA). We recommend that LDC 4.08.06.C.6, 4.08.06.E, and 10.03.06 are amended to require the CCPC-EAC to review all SSA applications, including Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreements and Restoration Plans. In addition, the CCPC-EAC should hold a public hearing for each SSA agreement and provide a recommendation for approval, denial, or approval with conditions to the BCC. ISSUE #6 - SRAs may reduce habitat functionality in adjacent SSAs: Staffs 2019 RLSA White Paper includes a very important recommendation aimed at better protections for preserves (SSAs). The recommendation, under the "Environmental Protection" section, states: Require applicants to address the effect of potential SRA development on adjacent SSA values when SSAs are proposed (draft LDC Amendment). The Conservancy was pleased to see the recommendation in the White Paper, because we raised the issue in our 2018-2019 RLSA Comment letter.27 We do not believe that the framers of the RLSA program ever considered that an SRA's design could cause a reduction of listed species habitat value within an SSA preserve, however, we discovered that this could happen if the project is poorly designed. The Town of Rural Lands West's (RLW) application, which is another iteration of Collier Enterprises' villages, provides a good example of what could happen to listed species habitat values when a SRA is designed to surround an adjacent SSA (SSA17). Although the applicant withdrew RLW's application from Collier County in 2019, in lieu of the villages and the amended Town of Big Cypress, the applicant continues to seek state and federal approvals for the same lands within RLW's development footprint (Figure 3).28 The applicant's habitat conservation plan, for their federal incidental take permit application, states that preserves, which includes SSA17, "will be managed to preserve their existing ecological functions. "29 Contrary to this claim by the applicant, an analysis conducted by Dr. Robert Frakes, discussed below, demonstrates that RLW's design will actually reduce the ecological function of SSA17. SSA17, like other WRAs, provides high quality wetlands and habitat for listed species, which is why the GMP identifies WRAs, along with FSAs and HSAs, as lands with "the 27 Conservancy of Southwest Florida (January 2019) Critique and Recommendation of Collier County's Rural Lands Stewardship Area Program: 2018-2019 RLSA Restudy. "Flaw VI: Developments May Result in Reduced Habitat Functionality in Adjacent Sending Areas." 28 The landowner -developer has an Environmental Resource Permit conceptual approval for lands within the RLW footprint from the South Florida Water Management District. In addition, they continue to seek approvals for the RLW footprint through a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and under a federal incidental take permit application with the US Fish and Wildlife Service 29 Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Eastern Collier Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, Revised 2018. For submittal to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Page 17 140 Page 627 of 708 highest priority for natural resource protection."30 SSA17 WRA consists of 3,148 acres of an ecologically important wetland system, providing habitat for 11 listed species, including, among others, the Florida sandhill crane, Big Cypress fox squirrel, wood stork, limpkin, and the endangered Florida panther.31 Shaggy Cypress Swamp is a large wetland area, within SSA17, that received high rankings for Natural Resource Index Values (NRI) because of its importance for providing listed species habitat and wetlands.32 The applicant designed RLW to surround Shaggy Cypress with neighborhoods, a golf course, and the town center.33 Dr. Robert Frakes analyzed RLW's proposed site plan, using the landscape -scale adult panther habitat model.34 Applying Dr. Frakes' model to RLW's plans, Figure 3 illustrates how RLW would adversely affected Adult Breeding panther habitat (panthers three years or older). The left side of Figure 3 shows the current adult breeding panther habitat value, and the right side shows the Frakes et al. (2015) model re -run with the Rural Lands West project in place. The diagonal lines depict the proposed location of Rural Lands West, which are mostly farm fields today, but include many of the same lands within the approved Longwater Village and Rivergrass Village. The warmer the color, as depicted with reds, oranges, and yellows, the higher the value to adult breeding panthers. Gray and white colors depict lower value habitat for adult breeding panthers. 30 Collier County Future Land Use Element, RLSA Overlay Policy 1.18 31 Passarella and Associates. Stewardship Sending Area 17 NRI Assessment Listed Species Occurrence Map (July 2018). p. 1 and 10; and Passarella and Associates. Stewardship Sending Area 17 NRI Assessment Revised August 2020, p. 2 provides acreage of SSA17. 32 Passarella and Associates. Natural Resource Index Assessment Stewardship Sending Area 17. Revised August 2020. SSA17 2020 NRI Score Map, p. 17 of 17. 33 The same applicants are pursuing a permit through the Clean Water Action Section 404 permit for the same lands as RLW, in which Shaggy Cypress is proposed to be encircled by development. 34 Frakes RA, Beldon RC, Wood BE, James FE. (2015). Landscape Analysis of Adult Florida Panther Habitat. PLoS ONE, 10(7). Page 18 140 Page 628 of 708 Figure3: rakes (2018). Panther Habitat Value Before Development r � • i The Frakes et al. (2015) model demonstrates that there would be a significant decrease in adult panther breeding habitat value, not only within the Shaggy Cypress, but within all of SSA17 lands, should those lands be developed. Disturbances from the surrounding neighborhoods —light, noise, pets, and traffic—w uld deter the Florida panther and other species from occupying SSA17 lands. Furthermore, SSA17 lands south of Oil Well Road, adjacent to the approved Rivergrass and Longwater, would also be subject to a significant reduction in habitat value for adult breeding panthers. Making matters worse, Dr. Frakes' analysis shows that RLW would decrease habitat value within Camp Keais Strand Flowway Stewardship Area (FSA). This is unfortunate, because Camp Keais Strand is a primary wetland flowway system and designated by the RLSA program as lands critical for protection. It is also one of only two major south -to -north corridor for the panther and provides primary habitat. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had similar concerns regarding another iteration of RLW, the 2008 version of the Town of Big Cypress DRI, which also would have surrounded preserves within SSA17's lands. Upon review of the development proposal, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stated in a letter to the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers: Although there are internal waters and habitat preserves being proposed within the current development design, the overall development has been designed in such a way to discourage use by panthers and other large animals (see discussion below). Therefore, the entire development will be considered as being 19 140 Page 629 of 708 converted into habitat that is of no value to the panther. Please consider this when conducting your panther habitat analysis.35 (Emphasis added) Ironically, under the applicant's current federal incidental take permit application, they claim SSA17 as mitigation lands for panther impacts from their proposed "covered activities" (development)36 The developers approved villages of Rivergrass and Longwater are also designed to surround SSA17's lands. Despite the fact that habitat values with SSA17 will be diminished due to the development's design, the developer still generated 4,527 Stewardship Credits from Collier County for "preserving" Stewardship Sending Area 17 (SSA17).37 While the land development code allows SRAs to surround WRAs for water management activities,38 the code further explains that when additions and modifications to the WRA result in in a net loss of habitat function within the WRA, then mitigation and restoration that "provide[s] comparable habitat function" to other areas of the RLSA district is required. However, the required mitigation and restoration are only for impacts related to water management activities. There are no LDC policies to address loss of habitat function or value within a WRA as a result an SRA's design, which is why staffs White Paper recommendation is important and why the LDC must be improved. RECOMMENDATION #10: We believe the LDC should be strengthened to better protect panther habitat within WRAs and SSAs from the impacts of nearby development. In order to preserve habitat values and connectivity for the endangered Florida panther, we recommend language is added to state that SRAs are prohibited from surrounding or partially surrounding a WRA or SSA, when the WRA or SSA consists of adult breeding habitat or primary panther zone habitat. 35 Letter from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, dated November 18, 2008. Corps Application No. SAJ-2008-210 (IP-MAE). Project: Town of Big Cypress. 36 The developer's lands are part of a habitat conservation plan (HCP) to obtain a federal incidental take permit under the Endangered Species Act. Figure 2-1 of the HCP depicts SSA17 lands as a "Preservation." The "Preservation" areas are set aside as mitigation for impacts to the permitted areas. The HCP states: As residential/commercial and earth -mining activities are approved and implemented in the area designated for Covered Activities, commensurate acreages within the lands designated for Preservation/Plan-Wide Activities and Very Low Density Use will be placed under perpetual conservation easements to compensate for permitted impacts.."... "The lands designated for Preservation/Plan-Wide Activities and Very Low Density Use will be managed to preserve their existing ecological functions." 37 Resolution 2021-083 for Stewardship Sending Area 17, p. 2 38 Collier County LDC 4.08.06.A.1 and LDC 4.08.06.A.4.b. 20 140 Page 630 of 708 ISSUE #7 - LDC 4.08.010 fails to conform to the RLSA's Lyoal: Despite a concerted effort by many to create a planning program for eastern Collier County that protects listed species and their habitats, and regardless of the RLSA's goal of "directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitats" Collier County recently approved three developments directly within prime habitat of a critically endangered listed species. (Figure 4) Figure 4: Panther habitat zones with locations of approved villages. Layer Sources: ° ❑ Pa nth er Telemetry -Florida Fish 9 Wildlife Commission t ° RLS.A Boundary, Rivergrass, Longwater, Bellmar-Collier County ❑ ❑ Panther Zonea-RNC, USFINS G n❑ Hyde Park & Bellmar Town Connector- digitized loy CUBWFL ° CP n °❑° ° ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ o,p CO ❑ ° ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ a ❑ 80 $❑ CO °000lErm ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ G ° [P❑ $�6' ° cP ❑❑°�@ ❑ 4mCP ❑ ❑❑(h Clo ❑ ❑ ° ❑ ❑ ❑ CO ❑ ❑ o a0 ❑ ° df a a ❑ ° ❑ ° 00 ° ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ CIO W81b❑ ❑ ❑ m ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑$ ❑c00, e❑°d m ❑ °❑ a❑ ❑ �❑ m nm � cl❑ ❑ o $o0o ° eq Legend ❑ cpFyy❑�- 00% ❑ ° ° C60 ❑ ❑ ❑° ❑ FloridaPantherTelemetry(thruJuly2C21) ❑ Zip- I �❑ ❑ �RLSABoundary(2021] �❑ ° ❑❑ %0, ❑ �TownConnector ❑ ytf �� Rfvergrass°p Cb ❑ Longwater Q❑ ❑ ❑ Bellmar ❑ CP Hyde ParK 0 CA OOCOp, ZONE p., 0 Od, ,d,��r�r ❑ 0 ��y..pm�`1�� Primary ° ❑W, ip'CS0 ❑EP tl�a�❑ Secondary ❑ ❑ ❑ ° ❑ $ ° ❑ 9b` ° 11 ❑❑ ° $ ❑ 08❑q'� c ❑ o� ❑&c000 1 7 ° ❑°❑❑co ❑e $ m�b o CONSERVANCY $ 000 00,0 8 $ ❑ � ❑ es90 4-010 ❑ ❑ D❑ ❑ ❑ gC� ❑� ❑ 0-0 Iles Elates 1,1012022 0 0.37T.75 1.5 2.25 3 21140 Page 631 of 708 Figure 4 shows that both 1,000-acre sites for Longwater and Bellmar Villages are located entirely within primary zone habitat of the endangered Florida panther. The proposed 515-acre town connector is also 100% within primary zone panther habitat. In addition, over 700 acres, or about 70% of Rivergrass Village's site, is within Primary Zone panther habitat. Hyde Park Village is within secondary zone panther habitat. The Collier County Board of County Commissioners approved all projects, except for the town connector, in 2020 to 2021. Clearly, the County is not adhering to the RLSA's goal of directing incompatible uses from upland habitat. This is incredibly concerning as the situation for the panther is getting dire. There are only 120 to 230 Florida adult panthers left in the wild and the panther is restricted now to only 5% of its historic range.39 Furthermore, new evidence shows that the panther population may be declining.40 At the hearings for the villages, Collier County planning staff was questioned as to why they would recommend approval of projects that are mostly or entirely within primary habitat of an endangered species. Staff s response was that they were following LDC 4.08.01.Q requirements, which limit "preferred and tolerated" panther habitat to specific land cover FLUCFCS codes. LDC 4.08.01.Q states: Listed Species Habitat Indices: One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as preferred or tolerated habitat for that species. Land mapped, using FLUCFCS, as 310, 321, 411, 425, 428, 434, 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, and 630 is deemed to be preferred or tolerated habitat for panthers for the purpose of assigning a value for these indices. An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of preferred or tolerated habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. Yet, the land cover types considered "preferred and tolerated" for the panther, as provided in LDC 4.08.01.Q, are outdated. Data from late 1990's to 2000 informed the FLUCFCS for 39 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. http://myfwc.com/panther; Frakes RA, Beldon RC, Wood BE, James FE. (2015). Landscape Analysis ofAdult Florida Panther Habitat. PLoS ONE, 10(7). 40 Presentation by FWC at August 4, 2021 Commissioners meeting: "Staff are tracking all indicators of changes in the panther population, and for the first time since the genetic restoration efforts, and decline was detected in the motor vehicle mortality model. Similar dips were seen in the number of depredations. It is unclear if this is a sign of a stabilizing population or indicates a more widespread impact of FLM or other threats." Page 22 140 Page 632 of 708 4.08.01.Q.41 In addition, the same out-of-date data sets determined the locations of the RLSA's habitat stewardship areas. While data used for the report was current during the creation of the Immokalee Area Study, WilsonMiller, the report's author, acknowledged that science would continue to evolve, especially regarding the understanding of habitat use and needs of the endangered Florida panther. The report stated: The analysis involving panther habitat for the Study will be complemented by ongoing computer modeling of potential habitat and development of an updated panther recovery plan by interagency committees led by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service... . Exhibit 12A shows the same telemetry point data set at the scale of the study area. The data can be used within the study area for a variety of analyses involving panther occurrence and habitat utilization. Again, these analyses may be complemented by ongoing efforts by governmental interagency committees.42 (Emphasis added) Although the US. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) completed their panther recovery plan in 2008,43 the RLSA program was not updated with the USFWS' modeling of panther habitat. Since 2002, the RLSA's adoption date, there have been three major discoveries regarding panther habitat relevant to the program: the location and importance of the Primary Zone (Figure 5), the realization that agricultural fields are important to panthers and thusly included in the Primary Zone designations, and the delineation of Adult Breeding Habitat (Figure 6). What is Primary Zone Panther Habitat? Using all records of panther telemetry available from 1981 to 2001, land use cover data, satellite imagery, and GIS information, a group of eleven panther scientists, Kautz et al. (2006), identified regions that are most important for conservation of Florida panther habitat (Figure 5). Kautz et al. (2006) describes Primary Zone panther habitat as the minimum space needed to "support a population that is barely viable demographically as long the habitat base remains stable" and lands that are "essential to the long-term viability and survival of the Florida panther."44 The Secondary Zone is important to transient sub - adult males and may support expanding panther populations if habitat restoration were to occur. 41 Report and Recommendations of the Collier County Rural Lands Assessment Area Oversight Committee for the Immokalee Area Study, Wilson Miller May 2002, Table 1: Data Sets and Publications Obtained for Use in the Immokalee Area Study. 42 Wilson Miller, December 2000, The Immokalee Area Study Stage 1 Report. p. 14 43 US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008. Florida Panther Recovery Plan, 3rd Revision. 44 Kautz, et al. (2006) How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation 130, p. 122 Page 23 140 Page 633 of 708 Most importantly, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers Kautz et al. (2006) to be current best available science for prioritizing for panther protections, as it has been wrapped into the agency's recovery plan and Panther Habitat Assessment Methodology. The USFWS Florida Panther Recovery Plan states that habitat as identified by Kautz et al. (2006) should be maintained in order to maintain the existing population. Below is a quote from the USFWS 2008 Florida Panther Recovery Plan, 3rd Revision: "The Primary Zone supports the only breeding panther population. To prevent further loss of population viability, habitat conservation efforts should focus on maintaining the total available area, quality, and spatial extent of habitat within the Primary Zone. The continued loss of habitat functionality through fragmentation and loss of spatial extent pose serious threats to the conservation and recovery of the panther. Therefore, conserving lands within the Primary Zone and securing biological corridors are necessary to help alleviate these threats." p. 89 The Primary Zone included other land cover types that are not included in LDC 4.08.01.Q, such as row crops, pasture, orchards, and marsh as primary habitat for the endangered panther. Why are Agricultural Lands within Primary Zone Important? In addition to forested areas, agricultural lands are necessary to meet daily needs and support the prey on which the panther depends.45 Many agricultural areas contain important natural landscape connections that support panther home ranges, panther reproduction, dispersal movements, and availability of large prey.46 The Primary Zone consists partly of agricultural lands. USFWS Florida Panther Recovery Plan and other best available science acknowledge the importance of agricultural lands as habitat not only for the Florida panther, but also for the eastern indigo snake, crested caracara, and the Florida bonneted bat.47 What is Adult Breeding Panther Habitat? Frakes et al. (2015) found that conservation of Adult Breeding Habitat south of the Caloosahatchee River is also essential to the recovery and survival of the Florida panther.48 45 Kautz, et al. (2006) How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation 130, p. 118-133, Pienaar E. F. and Rubino E. C (2014) Habitat Requirements of the Florida Panther. Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation UF/IFAS Extension. 46 Cominskey et al (2002). Panthers and Forests in South Florida an Ecological Perspective. Conservation Ecology Vol 6, No. 1 47 Kautz, et al, 2006. How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation: Vol. 130, p. 118-133; Jackson, S., 2013. Home Range Size and Habitat Use of the Eastern Indigo Snake at a Disturbed Agricultural Site in South Florida: A Thesis Presented to Florida Gulf Coast University; Morrison and Humphrey, 2001. Conservation Value of Private Lands for Crested Caracaras in Florida. Conservation Biology, Vol. 15, No. 3, Pages 675-684. Bailey et al., 2017. Impact of Land Use and Climate on the Distribution of the Endangered Florida Bonneted Bat. 48 Frakes RA, Belden RC, Wood BE, James FE (2015) Landscape Analysis of Adult Florida Panther Habitat. PLoS ONE 10(7): e0133044. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133044 Page 24 140 Page 634 of 708 Ninety-three percent of panther's adult breeding habitat lies within the Primary Zone (Figure 6). Frakes et al. (2015) developed a distribution map for resident breeding panthers, ages 3 and up, by using telemetry of 87 adult panthers from 2004 to 2013. They concluded that, "protection of the remaining breeding habitat in south Florida is essential to the survival and recovery of the subspecies and should receive the highest priority by regulatory agencies."49 The RLSA and LDC 4.08.01.Q does not account for Primary Zone or Adult Breeding habitat nor does it consider the importance of agricultural lands to the Florida panther. Without a modification to the LDC to protect these important habitat areas, panther habitat will continue to be vulnerable to development and road impacts in the RLSA, contrary to the Overlay's very goal. I Panther Zones - Primary Zone - n Secondary Zone - Dispersal Zone ' f� J Figure 5 Kautz et al. Primary Zone 4 .r �^ Y r. Adult Panther Habitat + J Primary Zone Secondary Zone Study Area ; Figure 6 Frakes et al. Adult Breeding Habitat Even though Collier County did not update the program with current panther data, the County's Legal Counsel, during the 5-Year Review, stated that amendments to the RLSA must be based on current data.50 49 Ibid, p. 15-16 so Carlton Fields Memorandum, March 1, 2010. Analysis of Data Analysis requirements to support RLSA Review Committee recommended comprehensive plan amendments. 25 140 Page 635 of 708 Data relied upon must be the best available data. If a more recent analysis or study is available, then that analysis must be considered, p. 3 For all data used to support this proposed amendment the studies must be the most up-to-date version available at the time the amendment is adopted by the Commission. Any relevant analysis that has been conducted since the Report was finalized should also be used as supporting documentation. p. S Even Collier County Planning Staff stated that the RLSA Overlay should be updated with new panther studies and data. In 2008, during the first review of the RLSA program, staff from the Environmental Services Department wrote a memo to Tom Greenwood, Principal Planner who was responsible for coordinating the County's RLSA's 5 Year Review Committee, explaining that the land cover codes assigned in 2002 that determine preferred and tolerated panther habitat were outdated and should be updated. Below is that statement from a 2008 Memorandum:51 (Attachment B) What is considered to be habitat utilized by the Florida Panther has changed since 2002. The FLUEAND LDC use FLUCCS codes to define 'preferred and tolerated" panther habitat as 310 (dry prairie), 321 (palmetto prairie), 411 (pine flatwoods), 425 (temperate hardwoods), 428 (cabbage palm), 434 (hardwood - conifer mixed) 617 (mixed wetlands), 6172 (mixed wetland shrubs), 621 (cypress), 6218 (cypress melaleuca), 6219 (cypress wet prairie), 624 (cypress pine, cabbage palm), and 630 (wetland forest mix). The USFWS habitat types include marsh, pasture, row crops, orchards, and exotic plants that are not included in the current RLSA description. Utilization of the descriptive habitat types for listed species solves the issues of incomplete FLUCCS lists and minor interpretation differences. (Emphasis added) In addition, Collier County planning staff, in a 2011 email, requested that Stantec (formerly WilsonMiller) provide an analysis of newer panther studies and a re-evaluation of land cover types deemed as panther habitat.52 Stantec's consultant, Al Reynolds, who represented ECPO landowners, pushed back on this request. Mr. Reynolds likely knew that if the program was updated to reconsider habitat areas of the endangered panther based on newer panther studies, then his clients (ECPO) would have to modify their development plans. Instead, he claimed that when a property owner applies for a SSA or SRA application panther data is updated. Here is what was stated in that email: (Attachment C) si Memorandum from Collier County Environmental Staff to Tom Greenwood, April 24, 2008. (RLSA Restudy Phase 2 - Policy Comments, Environmental Services Department Draft) 52 Email between Al Reynolds, Stantec and Michelle Mosca, Collier County, November 30, 2011, Subject: Data and Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year Page 26 140 Page 636 of 708 Michelle Mosca , Collier County Planning Staff: A comparative analysis of current data/reports is needed to determine any changed conditions since the RLSA committee's review and recommendations. County staff is requesting that Stantec staff prepare an analysis/evaluation of the new SFWMD Land Use and Cover as well as new (since BCC consideration) panther habitat use studies and provide comments regarding changed conditions.553 Al Reynolds, Stantec: One of the basic principles of the RLSA is that there will always be more recent and more site specific data available as the program is implemented, and this is best addressed at the time a property owner and the county evaluate a specific application for an SSA or SRA, or when a property owner uses their baseline uses. This is all spelled out in detail in the GMP and LDC. As such, there is no need to continuously amend the GMP Overlay Map. Similarly, Panther information is always in a state of flux, as new telemetry is generated and new studies are performed." Mr. Reynold's suggestion to rely only on a review of the site -specific panther data under the rules of the existing LDC policies, does nothing to protect panther habitat. Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar's approvals are proof of this. The environmental consultant for the applicant of those three villages, Passarella and Associates, did update the site -specific data for all three SRA applications, per LDC rules. However, because Passarella utilized the same outdated FLUCFCS codes to determine "preferred and tolerated" panther habitat, as provided in the LDC, all three projects scored nothing or next to nothing for panther habitat within the "Listed Species Habitat Indices." Which is absurd, because all three sites are located mostly or entirely within Primary Zone panther habitat, according to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service GIS layers.54 The LDC has an egregious loophole that must be corrected. While the program has not been updated yet with recent panther habitat studies, it is still possible to protect primary panther habitat, and better protect habitat of other listed species by amending the LDC. However, there are three necessary changes to the LDC, provided in Recommendations 11, 12 and 13. 53 Email between Al Reynolds, Stantec and Michelle Mosca, Collier County, November 30, 2011, Subject: Data and Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year S4 Passarella and Associates. Bellmar Village SRA Natural Resource Index Assessment. Revised August 2020. Prepared for Collier Enterprises Management. p. 5 and Exhibit 9A; Passarella and Associates. Longwater Village SRA Natural Resource Index Assessment. Revised May 2020. Prepared for Collier Enterprises Management. p. 5 and Exhibit 9A; Passarella and Associates. Rivergrass Village SRA Natural Resource Index Assessment. Revised September 2019. Prepared for Collier Enterprises Management. (The NRI assessment for Rivergrass did not include an exhibit for Listed Species Habitat Indices, as it should have; however, the overall low NRI scores from Exhibit 7 illustrate that panther habitat was not scored). Page 27 140 Page 637 of 708 RECOMMENDATION #11: We recommend the following amendment to protect primary panther habitat and align the RLSA program with its stated Goal of "directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitats": Update LDC 4.08.01.Q to remove incorrect FLUCFCS codes and any reference to "preferred or tolerated" panther habitat. Replace language to instead state: "Lands mapped as Primary Zone55 panther habitat, per U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's GIS shape files, shall be utilized for the purpose of assigning a value under the `Listed Species Habitat Indices'." ISSUE #8 - Scores for Listed Species Habitat Indices must be increased to protect the endangered Florida panther: In addition to updating LDC 4.08.01Q to incorporate the Primary Zone, the Stewardship Matrix for scores within "Listed Species Habitat Indices" must also be increased (Figure 7). Figure 7: Six Indices that make up the Natural Index Score of RLSA land Stewardship Natural Resource Index Factors ENerx AppMeprmrr fon Fknvn StewarrK AfeatFSk a� H2kS[2131twartl9M Alec HSA �.6 WaLa Retertlon Area Rh 0.r Afe9 d Cfitltll3rae Cerrrern A D.4 Nor* of the M6M* 0.0 Prd0.'i15 ■MEAL 0.4 Entloaed FSA, H — or W Rh W rhin 30D Met of F&A or H&A 0.3 W 0 346 tact KA pubic or pffimie prawmel Wnd 0.2 N. D.D mernrnal certltler reeroraGen anee 8.5 CdYieELer.4CIId7eS ailtl reSiefatlLYS afeee U.5 Wsdnq blyd restoreldn crew OA oM,er ialed - re3GoraUtm arew 0.3 Nb1e Li the 8i'utr�� 0.0 Land Use • Land Cuw Y�1R FL �CC3 Cede Cftp 1 DA FL Code — 2 H _ FL= Coda Group 3 02 FUMCS Cede Cr 4 6.8 ss primary Zone panther habitat areas are described in US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008 Florida Panther Recovery Plan, 3rd Revision. Rage 28 140 Page 638 of 708 Figure 7 shows the Stewardship Natural Index Factors for the RLSA program set forth on the Stewardship Matrix Worksheet. Wilson Miller, working on behalf of ECPO, designed the NRI scoring and stewardship credit matrix system. There appears to be no rhyme or reason for selecting the scores for each of the six indices. Although the Conservancy requested a copy of the methodology for the NRI scoring from Collier County, during the 2018-2021 RLSA Amendment process, we were never provided with it. It appears that Collier County also does not have access to the methodology. Either a methodology that determined the NRI scores on the matrix was never created based on sound science, or Stantec (WilsonMiller) is just not willing to provide it. Without the methodology, we can only assume that WilsonMiller specifically chose 1.3 as the minimum score necessary for an acre to be protected from development. In addition, we can only assume that WilsonMiller designed the NRI system to ensure that their clients, Eastern Collier Property Owners, were assured an enormous footprint of lands that, no matter how the NRI values were applied, those lands would always score under 1.3, and therefore would always be eligible for intensification as SRAs, regardless of any updated best available science.56 The Conservancy conducted a GIS analysis on Open lands within the Primary Zone areas of the RLSA. Unless the scores under "Listed Species Habitat Indices" are increased, there is virtually no way to protect Primary Zone panther habitat under the RLSA's rules. This is so even if the outdated "preferred and tolerated" FLUCFCS were replaced with Primary Zone GIS files and there are panther telemetry points present.57 This is why values for "Primary Zone" must be increased to 1.3 and values for "Primary Zone plus other species" must be increased to 1.6. In that 2008 letter from the Environmental Services Department to Tom Greenwood, during the 5-Year Review, staff urged changes to the NRI scoring because panther habitat within Open Areas was not protected. They stated the following: (Attachment B) Protection of listed species and wildlife habitat from intense land uses is one of the requirements in the Growth Management statutes. The HSAs were delineated to protect listed species and their habitat. During the first S years of the RLSA program there have been several instances of listed species in Open areas. The HSAs alone do not provide adequate protection to listed species. Additionally the 2002 definition of panther habitat is very limited compared to habitat valuation matrix utilized by USFWS now. 56 RLSA Overlay Policy 4.9 states that "a SRA shall not be cited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2." 57 Policy 4.08.01Q states: "An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of preferred or tolerated habitat for that listed species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat." Page 29 140 Page 639 of 708 In addition to the FSA and HSA areas the NRI score was intended to protect important natural resources. The NRI was not intended to specifically provide protection for listed species, it is intended to direct development away from important natural resources. The NRI score necessary to prevent conversion to high intensity uses is 1.3. In the "Open Areas," only areas with panthers and other listed species or panthers in wetlands with muck soils will score an NRI of 1.3 or greater. The weighting is inadequate for the NRI alone to contribute significantly to natural resource protection. The listed species that depend on large amounts of dry prairie like sand hill cranes, burrowing owls, and caracara now utilize pasture lands and fallow areas also. Although some snuri,ea '. Pather Focus Areas-U 8_Fish and'.Nildllfeservice&Floritla Fish and`.Nildllfe Date2124f2g22 of these areas Consery etion Chiso,end W idrife Research Institute Panther Telemetry -Floritla Fish antl'Niltllife Conservation Commisson GPB Panther Telemetry -rand et al. Florida Paniher Habitat 9election.The Journal of'A'lldllFe 10 anagement. 2000 were included Figure 8: Bellmar Village site with panther telemetry and habitat data as HSAs the °� ° ° ° _ ° �° C . C C C C v- _ J C C C C D. OC ° ©°° ° so °� = °°0 ° CO °° °�° ° °o°�° cc I NRI scoring is oe I r° �. not weighted ft, ° co o ° °_� ° c ° c . C C to provide .. C c c° on C - C c C C ° • D � a _ ° ° ° ° °occC protection C c C C° * -� C° o o g� •� °° C. `• =� a ° ° °° outside of ® °P'° • === ° ® ° Stewardship ° °C� %l _ , _ ° .� _ or ACSC areas. (Emphasis .� _ -��� = ° added) cC cg /Z ° BCD cc°Fi �, The NRI valuing system =, _ has failed. Without the DC o °° °� C- -°°= . °J v ° _ r o°moo �aoo°00 changes we propose, it is ° a 6 ° �; o� °.4o ��� C°11 ii ��° �`COO° highly likely that many ° °°� o °6�° o° I _ o ° O more developments will ° ° -�- . ° C °' °s ° q °� ° C ° 0 C c $ be approved within o ° �. Cc o° ,Cc C om ° ° ° Cc °° °� ; ° primary panther habitat. ° ° 6 FLOi'lRID1 T11%��°W It is also likely that c o C g ° ° ° °'� ° ° °� ° °a °C : ° C° °° ° habitat of other listed ° ° ° ° ° ° ° °C ° o. ° CC °° species, which all score Legend CONSERVANCY under 1.3 on the matrix, . Panthertelemetry -GPS F.7�]FelimarVillage �fSouLhweslFloridas�r will also be Converted to C Panther telemetry thru July 2021 Prima, Pantherzone nh,Iorr,Itui- (D 9 Uf35 0.7 1.05 1.4 ® Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge Miles development. Bellmar Village provides a perfect example of the failing of the NRI scoring. Page 30 140 Page 640 of 708 Bellmar's site is only about 1.5 miles from the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and it is located entirely within Primary Zone panther habitat (Figure 8). Even though few panthers have been collared and the green and purple telemetry points represent only a small sample size of panthers, there are still numerous telemetry points near the site, which indicates that the Bellmar site is heavily traveled by panthers. Although the site is considered primary panther habitat and the area is heavily travelled, Bellmar scored a zero value for Listed Species Habitat Indices for most of the site. Only a small portion of the site scored a value of 0.4 NRI for listed species. Furthermore, because Bellmar scored low for all other indices and not one single acre achieved the 1.3 threshold, nothing could protect Bellmar from qualifying as a SRA, under Collier County's faulty rules. The issue all boils down to a faulty NRI scoring system and a refusal to update the program with current best available science, even though the landowner's own representative stated that the program would be updated with habitat modeling from the USFWS's Panther Recovery Plan. Now is the time to update the LDC to protect this critically endangered species. Under ECPO's "Habitat Conservation Plan," they propose to destroy 17,500 to 19,600 acres of primary panther habitat within the RLSA for uses such as development and mining!58 However, every single acre of Primary Zone panther habitat could be avoided and ECPO could still build the 91,480 dwelling units they propose, and more159 There are approximately 36,881 acres of "Open" areas within the RLSA that are outside of primary panther habitat (Figure 9: Conservancy Vision Map -pink areas on map). The RLSA program allows up to four units per acre for towns and villages. Thus, even if they build at an average density of 2.5 units, per acre, they could build 92,202 homes without touching 58 Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Eastern Collier Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Revised 2018. For submittal to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Table 4-1 and 4-3 59 [bid, p. iii Page 31 1 40 Page 641 of 708 one acre of Primary Zone panther habitat. If they increase the average density beyond 2.5, they could build even more homes. In addition, because the development areas would be more compact and closer to an existing road network and infrastructure, the costs to Collier County for providing infrastructure and services would be far less. Collier County cannot assume that wildlife agencies will protect the panther. From 1984 to 2012, the US Fish and Wildlife Service permitted 97,000 acres of panther habitat for development, mining, transportation projects, and other projects.60 Collier County can modify the program to achieve the goal of listed species habitat protection. During the 2003 hearings for creation of the LDC policies, Collier County's outside legal counsel, Nancy Linnan, stated the following at a planning commission meeting:61 "First of all, you can amend the comprehensive plan at any time assuming you do it during the twice a year state so you have that ability to see it getting out of whack. You have five year period where there is a mandatory check with certain requirements that you have to look at. You also have your EARS where you are going to be doing it and it doesn't preclude you from 60 Information from multiple US Fish and Wildlife Service consultation logs from FOIA. Some of the losses were prior to the delineation of panther habitat zones as defined by Kautz et al 2006, as the "line" of panther habitat was well westward of where it currently stands today. 61 Collier County Audio Tapes from May 1, 2003, Tape 1A. Conversation starts approximately 40 min 52 seconds. 32140 Page 642 of 708 asking at any point please bring us up to speed on where we are, give us an accounting on where we are on the credits. And so you will be seeing all of the SSAs coming in, you will be seeing all of the SRAs coming in, so you will have a pretty good idea of what is going on out there. " Dwight Richardson (Planning Commissioner) replied: "So we can change the rules at that time if it's not working?" Nancy Linnan: "Yes." RECOMMENDATION #12: We recommend the following amendment to align the RLSA program with its stated Goal of "directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitats." Modify Listed Species Habitat Indices within the Stewardship Credit Matrix by: Replacing language that states, "Panther occupied habitat (preferred and tolerated)" with "Primary Zone panther habitat." Increase value from 0.5 to 1.3. Replacing language that states, "Panther occupied habitat (preferred and tolerated) plus other listed species" with "Primary Zone panther habitat plus other listed species." Increase value from 0.8 to 1.6. RECOMMENDATION #13: Additional habitat protections for other listed species are necessary. If an acre of land scores zero for five of the six indices (Figure 7), but scores 0.4 for "Other documented listed species habitat" then that species' habitat is vulnerable to development. We recommend, for other listed species, that the LDC is updated to require habitat buffers found in Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' (FWS) Species Conservation Measures and Guidelines.62 As example, FWS recommends a 985 feet buffer around a caracara nest.63 FWC recommends a 400 feet buffer around a sandhill crane's nest and 575 feet around a big cypress fox squirrel nest.64 62 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Guidance Documents: https:I/www.fws.gov[guidance/ and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Species Conservation Measures and Permitting Guidelines. http s: I/myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/species -guidelines/ 63 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service South Florida Ecological Services Office DRAFT April 20, 2004. Species Conservation Guidelines South Florida Audubon's Crested Caracara, p. 3 64 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) Florida Sandhill Crane Species Conservation Measures and Permitting Guidelines, p. 6 https:llmyfwc.com/media/11565/florida-sandhill-crane-guidelines.pdf; FWC Big Cypress Fox Squirrel Species Conservation Measures and Permitting Guidelines, p. 6,7 https://myfwc.com/media111559/big-cvnress- fox-squirrel-guidelines.pdf 33 140 Page 643 of 708 ISSUE #9 -Issues with the proposed location for panther corridors. Conservancy provides recommendations for location of wildlife crossings. PROPOSED PANTHER CORRIDORS: The recently amended Policy 3.11.3 provides up to ten Stewardship Credits per acre for designation and restoration of lands within a northern or southern panther corridor. The policy states that the credits shall be granted for lands within a "federally approved corridor." The Conservancy is unaware of any federally approved corridor near or within the proposed "North Corridor General Location" and "South Corridor General Location" as identified by the red arrows on the RLSA Overlay map. Furthermore, there are serious issues with the County's proposed general locations of the corridors and policy language, including the following: 1. Two approved projects are located squarely within the area of the proposed "North Corridor General Location." Figure 10 shows the location of Immokalee Sand Mine,65 an 897 acre -mining project, and the 578-acre approved Immokalee Solar project for Florida Power and Light (FPL).66 Clearly a panther corridor is not appropriate for areas where there are permitted uses. Furthermore, while we are aware that FPL has the capacity to use panther permeable fencing, FPL has provided no evidence that panthers will access or utilize solar sites once panels and fencing have been installed. It is our understanding that FPL has been collecting data on other sites utilizing this panther friendly fencing in Hendry County for many years, but has not provided data to confirm that panthers continue to use these sites after the solar panels have been installed. 2. Collier County purchased 1,046 acres near the "South Corridor General Location" (Figure 10). Although, the proposed use has yet to be decided, ideas for the parcel provided by staff include a new location for the county fairground, EMS/fire, parks and recreation, hurricane debris management and horticulture processing, and/or workforce housing.67 Any proposed panther corridor should avoid proximity to the Collier County site, as any of those uses would add considerable traffic near the proposed corridor. 65 Collier County City View. Conceptual Conditional Use Re -Review Plans for Immokalee Sand Mine. July, 2020 66 Collier County City View. Immokalee Solar CU, Site Plan. 67 Collier County BCC Agenda Item 1113, March 9, 2021. Page 34 140 Page 644 of 708 3. Although Policy 3.11.3 provides landowners with the opportunity to generate substantial credits for panther corridors, there are no assurances that all landowners within the corridors will participate. If just one landowner within the proposed corridors chooses not to participate, and instead chooses to develop their lands, then the corridor will be fragmented and will not be viable. We believe that no credits shall be issued until all landowners within the corridor have committed to set aside their lands as a panther corridor. RECOMMENDATION #14. We provide the following recommendations for panther corridors: 1. The proposed corridor locations are relocated to areas where there are no permitted uses that are more intensive than existing agriculture. 2. Credits for "designating" property within a panther corridor shall 3. not be issued until the corridor is complete, where all landowners within the a 1 2 4 6 proposed corridors have designated their lands to a panther corridor. The SSA Agreements must stipulate that land use layers within the panther corridors are removed to an Agriculture or Conservation layer. 8 1 Miles 35 140 Page 645 of 708 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' Florida Panther Recovery Plan, 3rd Edition (p. 30-31), provides specifications for panther corridor widths depending on the length. The document states that corridors extending between 0.6 miles to 4 miles in length should be more than 1,312 feet wide (Beier,1995), perhaps up to 1 mile (Noss,1992), 5 (Beier,1995), or even 10 miles (Harrison, 1992) wide. As this is a landscape corridor covering a great distance, the Conservancy has previously targeted a 1 mile width for these corridors. " Once the County provides more information for the proposed corridor locations, the Conservancy may provide additional comments and/or recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR WILDLIFE CROSSINGS: Roads are one of the greatest threats to wildlife. Currently, the RLSA has a limited road network. However, Eastern Collier Property Owners' (ECPO) plans show that they would like Collier County to add approximately 200 miles of new and expanded road projects to the RLSA, to connect the many developments they would like built.68 This road network would add approximately 800,000 daily vehicle trips to Collier County's road network,69 dramatically increasing the risks to of vehicle strikes and roadkills to all of the RLSA's wildlife. The recently amended Policy 4.14 provides for ' provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossing" as one of the ways in which landowner -developers may mitigate or offset a SRA's traffic impacts. However, wildlife crossings must be strategically located and appropriately designed to better protect the RLSA's many threatened and endangered species. RECOMMENDATION #15: Three important studies have already been conducted to determine where wildlife crossings are most needed, due to the highest incidents of wildlife mortalities. To reduce road mortalities of wildlife and listed species, the Conservancy recommends that Collier County select the locations of wildlife crossings and fencing based on results of these studies, including crossing locations and designs for large mammal crossings: Florida Department of Transportation District One. Florida Panther Recovery Implementation Team. Transportation Subteam. June 2020. Southwest Florida Road Hot Spots 2.0. (Figure 11) This report is updated typically annually, so please refer to the most up-to-date information. https:,[/www.fws.gov/verobeachIFloridaPantherTransportation/20210127 S outhwestFloridaPantherHotSpotsReportRevised202O.pdf 68 Conservancy analysis of WilsonMiller 2008 Conceptual Build -out Roadway Network Map. 69 Panther Review Team (2009, October 15). Technical Review of the Panther Protection Program Proposed for the Rural Lands Stewardship Area of Collier County, Florida. Prepared for Rural Landowners and Conservation Organizations a Parties to a Memorandum of Understanding dated June 2, 2008.. Table 6.3-1 and 6.3-1 continued. 36140 Page 646 of 708 • Smith et al. 2006. Eastern Collier County Wildlife Movement Study: SR29, C11846, and CR858 Wildlife Crossing Project Final Report (Figure 12) https:Iiconservationcorridor.org/cpb/Smith Noss Main 2016.pdf • Florida Department of Transportation District One. December 2 02 1. Wildlife Crossing Feasibility Study. SR 29 North of Florida Panther Wildlife Refuge http: //www.swflroads.com/us29/northofpantherrefuge/images/449143- 1 SR 29 Wildlife Crossing Feasibility Final 12-13-21.pdf Once the County provides more information about this section of the LDC, the Conservancy may provide additional comments and/or recommendations. 37 140 Page 647 of 708 Figure 11:Southwest Florida Road Hot Spots Report Florida Panther Recovery Implementation Team Transportation Subteam.Adopted b/ OSFWS. Map of panther vehicle collisions. Panther Collision Hotapots as of 12131119 � ��� ■ y . . �.� iv . . � a � _ | � ,.� § � f ■ | § �.� L` Legend . Hots p•,#w# . ■� ��� ~ .) �� • \ . 6 - ® �/ Ir h 8.2 MWn Q w _ NMI so Cormspanding , [ygmmDo__" To ble WLOW Ro%■m* � Page 38140 Page 648 9 708 ihill@S Date- 813112021 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 In conclusion, the Conservancy is hopeful that you will consider these recommendations as the basis for amendments to section 4.08.00 of the Land Development Code, or if you believe the recommendations to be outside your current scope of work, please consider our recommendations for the next amendment cycle and EAR. If you would like to discuss these matters further, you may reach us at (239) 262-0304. 39 140 Page 649 of 708 Sincerely, April Olson Senior Environmental Planning Specialist (239) 262-0304, ext. 250 Apri1O@Conservancy.org Attachments: Nicole Johnson Director of Environmental Policy (239) 403-4220 Nicole)@Conservancy.org A. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Letter to Collier County Planning Commission re: Longwater and Bellmar SRAs, dated March 1, 2021. B. Memorandum from Collier County Environmental Staff to Tom Greenwood, April 24, 2008. (RLSA Restudy Phase 2 - Policy Comments, Environmental Services Department Draft) C. Email between Al Reynolds, Stantec and Michelle Mosca, Collier County, November 30, 2011, Subject: Data and Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year Page 40 140 Page 650 of 708 i .. Co'fI'f er County Memorandum. To: Tom Greenwood, Principal Planner From: Laura Roys, Senior Environmental Specialist Mac Hatcher, Senior Environmental Specialist Date: April 24, 2008 Subject: RLSA Study Phase 2 — Policy Comments, Environmental Services Department DRAFT Preliminary suggested changes from the Environmental Services Department: Lusted Species Protection Protection of listed species and wildlife habitat from intense land. uses is one of the requirements in the Growth Management statutes. The HSAs were delineated to protect listed species and their habitat. `;During the first 5 years of the RLSA program there have been several instances of listed species in Open areas. The HSAs alone do not provide adequate protection to listed species. :kdditionally the 2002 definition of panther habitat is very limited compared to the habitat valuation matrix utilized by USFWS now.. VII) Policy 3.2 Listed animal and plant species and their habitats shall be protected through the establishment of Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSAs), as SSAs within the RLSA Overlay. HSAs are delineated on the Overlay Map and contain approximately 40,000 acres. HSAs are privately owned agricultural areas, which include both areas with natural characteristics that make them suitable habitat for listed species and areas without these characteristics. These latter areas are included because they are located contiguous to habitat to help form a continuum of landscape that can augment habitat values. The Overlay provides an incentive to permanently protect HSAs by the creation and transfer of Credits, resulting in the elimination of incompatible uses and the establishment of protection measures described in Group 1 Policies. Not all lands within the delineated HSAs are comparable in terms of their habitat value; therefore the index shall be used to differentiate higher value from lower value lands for the purpose of Overlay implementation. Analysis of the Index Map Series shows that HAS lands score within a, range of 0.6 to 2.2. There are approximately 13,800 acres of cleared agricultural fields located in HSAs. The average Index score of HAS designated lands is 1.3, however, the average index score of the naturally vegetated areas within HSAs In addition to the FSA and HSA areas the NRI score was intended to protect important natural resources. The NRI score was not intended to specifically Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division Page 651 of 708 provide protection for listed species, it is intended to direct development away from important natural resources. The NRI score necessary to prevent conversion to high intensity uses is 1.3. In the "Open Areas" only areas with panthers and other listed species or panthers in wetlands with muck soils will score an NRI of 1.3 or greater. The weighting is inadequate for the NR1 alone to contribute significantly to natural resource protection. The listed species that depend on large amounts of dry prairie like sand hill cranes, burrowing owls, and caracara now utilize pasture lands and fallow areas also. Although some of these areas were included as HSAs the NRI scoring is not weighted to provide protection outside of Stewardship or ACSC areas. (V11) Policy 1.8 The natural resource value of land within the RLSA is measured by the Stewardship Natural Resource Index (Index) set forth on the Worksheet. The Index established the relative natural resource value by objectively measuring six different characteristics of land and assigning an index factor based on each characteristic. The sum of these six factors is the index value for the land. Both the characteristics used and the factors assigned thereto were established after review and analysis of detailed information about the natural resource attributes of land within the RLSA so that development could be directed away from important natural resources. The six characteristics measured are: Stewardship Overlay Designation, Sending Area Proximity, Listed Species Habitat, Soils/Surface Water, Restoration Potential, and Land Use/Land Cover. Approximately 6 % of the panther telemetry points (through 12/2007) in the RLSA are in "Open" areas (Figure 1). There are 8 documented panther deaths in or on the edge of open areas. There are 5 Florida scrub jay families and 1 rookery and an eagle nest in Open areas. 1 don't have GIS data for caracaras, sand hill cranes, gopher tortoises, or burrowing owls but they have all been observed in these areas also. LDC 4.08,01 Specific Definitions Applicable to RLSA District Q. Listed Species Habitat Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as preferred or tolerated habitat for that species. Land mapped, using FLUCFCS, as 310, 321, 411, 425, 428, 434, 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, and 630 is deemed to be preferred or tolerated habitat for panthers for the purpose of assigning a value for these indices. An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of preferred or tolerated habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. The scoring range is 0.8 for panther and other listed species, 0.5 for panther, and 0.4 for other listed species. No FLUCCS codes are listed for any other species. Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division Page 652 of 708 What is considered to be habitat utilized by the Florida Panther has changed since 2002. The FLUE AND LDC use FLUCCS codes to define "preferred or tolerated" panther habitat as 310 ( dry prairie), 321 (palmetto prairie), 411 (pine flatwoods), 425 ( temperate hardwoods), 428 ( cabbage palm), 434 ( hardwood — conifer mixed), 617 ( mixed wetlands), 6172 (mixed wetland shrubs), 621 (cypress), 6218 (cypress melaleuca), 6219 (cypress wet prairie), 624 (cypress, pine, cabbage palm), and 630 (wetland forest mix). The USFWS uses the following habitat types that occur in the RLSA to value panther habitat for compensation assessments: Habitat Type Assigned value Xeric oak scrub 10 Hardwood forest 10 Freshwater marsh 9 Bottomland hardwood 9 Bay swamp 9 Hardwood swamp 9 Cypress swamp 9 Sand pine scrub 9 Sandhill 9 Hardwood -pine forest 9 Pine forest 9 Grassland/pasture 7 Dry prairie 6 Shrub swamp 5 Shrub and brush 5 STA 4.5 Cropland 4 Orchards/groves 4 Exotic plants 3 Reservoir 1.5 The USFWS habitat types include marsh, pasture, row crops, orchards, and exotic plants that are not included in the current RLSA description. Utilization of descriptive habitat types for listed species solves the issues of incomplete FLUCCS lists and minor interpretation differences. I suggest we utilize the same list for black bears; native wetland and natural water bodies for alligators and wading birds; pastures, parries, and fallow agriculture for sand hill cranes, caracara, and burrowing owls; native uplands for gopher tortoise; and a 660 ft buffer for an eagle nest. For any other listed species the land cover shall be identified in a sate or federal management plan as utilized by that species. Protection of natural resources To provide protection to the areas providing significant habitat value to listed species in Open areas I suggest changing the scoring to Endangered species with other listed species 0.9; Endangered species or Threatened and other listed species 0:8; Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division Page 653 of 708 Threatened species, Eagle nest, or rookery 0.7; and Species of Special Concern 0.6. To provide some flexibility to property owners and benefit to listed species mitigation of areas with NRI values greater than 1.3 can occur off -site in similar habitat or restoration areas within or contiguous to Camp Keais or Okaloacochee sloughs at a ratio of at least 1:1 with a management plan and conservation easement. Proposed change to LDC: LDC 4.08.01 Specific Definitions Applicable to RLSA District Q. Listed Species Habitat Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as pr-efeffed e wed -habitat for that species. , 411, 425 428 434, 617, 61 ?'1 62 6218, 6219, 624 .,n deemed 630 i dee.. u sv l 7 7 7 t 7 7 7 7 auabe prefeffed of telefat .a Oak scrub, hardwood forest, freshwater marsh, bay swamp. hardwood swamp, cypress swamp, sand pine scrub, hardwood -nine forest, pine forest, grassland/pasture, dry prairie, shrub swamp, or shrub and brush shall be used as habitat for bears and panthers for the purpose of assi ,fin , a value for these indices. The following habitat types shall be used in the indices. Native wetland and natural water bodies for alligators and wading birds: pastures, prairies. and fallow agriculture for sand hill cranes, cascara, and burrowing owls; native uplands for gopher tortoise; and a 660 ft buffer for an eagle nest. An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of prefeffed er telefate habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. The scoring for the Listed Species Habitat Indices shall be: Endangered species with other listed species 0,9; Endangered species or Threatened and other listed species 0.8; Threatened species, Eagle nest, or rookery 0.7, and Species of Special Concern 0.6. Other Comments/Concerns: NRl score, Group 3 Policies, LDC 4.08.06.13.3 There should be an update of the initial mapping. Not all land use/land cover codes are included and there could be more areas like Lake Trafford Ranch and Half Circle Ranch that were improperly designated. Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division Page 654 of 708 Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSA) Policy 3.2 • The current acreage for all HSAs provided in the FLUE is incorrect. Acreage was added between Transmission and Adoption of the RLSA and needs to be updated. Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA): • Continuing agricultural use in the SSAs should be with Best Management Practice (BMP) standards, at a minimum. Policy 3.9 • No exotic removal and maintenance is required for SSA designation. Staff has observed substantial amounts of exotic pest plants, and are concerned that their growth will continue to decrease the habitat value in the years to come. The presence of high concentrations of exotic plants in the sub - canopy has long been recognized as deleterious to native species, 'both plants and animals. This would not be a concern where management of the exotics were part of a restoration plan. Goal 3 and LDC 4.08.06 SSA Designation Restoration - Policies 3.11 and 3.12, LDC 4.08.06.C.5.j • Any level of restoration or maintenance receives the same amount of credits. The credit value should be tied to the functional lift and there should be levels of credit that could be earned. • The Management Plan should be required with the Stewardship Easement to ensure enforceability. • The management plan should include more than the 12 exotic plants listed by County Code (FLEPPC Category 1). Various other exotics have been observed. • The LDC should define more specific requirements on what management plans entail. • Restoration should be to a native habitat. Development in the RLSA: • SRA: LDC 4.08.07 SRA Designation Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division Page 655 of 708 • Soil sampling and other relevant information that is normally required for submittal of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be required. Unless it is a DRI, staff can not request an EIS or even parts of the EIS. • Full, detailed wildlife surveys should be submitted at the time of SRA review. This information can be used to confirm the SSAs being used for development of the SRA are offsetting the impacts development of the SRA will have on listed species. i • EAC hearing should be required for all SYLA s. (LDC 4.08.07.F.1.a.) ! • Need detailed habitat management plans or information regarding species to be relocated, etc. JmWLrg C: ESD File: G:\RLSA\RLSA 5_year review Enviro 032808-draft.doc Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division Page 656 of 708 May 6, 2008 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA REVIEW CONMUTTEE Ave Maria, Florida, May:6'2009-'' LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted Business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Ave Maria University Academic Building 07 Conference Room 5, 5050 Ave Maria Boulevard, Ave Maria, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Ron Hamel VICE CHAIRMAN: Neno Spagna Brad Cornell Zach Floyd Crews Gary Eidson David Farmer Tom Jones David Woodley Bill McDaniel Timothy Nance Fred Thomas ALSO PRESENT: Thomas Greenwood, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Department Michael J. DeRuntz, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Department Laura Roys, Senior Environmental Specialist, Engineering and Environment Services Department Page 657 of 70$ May 6, 2008 Approximately 20 members of the public I. Call Meeting to Order The meeting was called to order at 9:07 AM by Chairman Hamel. II. Roll Call Roll call was taken, and a quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda Mr. Hamel requested that Item IX be move up in front of Item VI. Mr. McDaniel moved to approve the agenda as amended, Second by Mr. Farmer, Voice Vote - Unanimously Approved 11-0. IV. Approval of Minutes: February 5, 2008 Mr. Thomas moved to approve the minutes of the February 5, 2008 committee meeting, as amended, Second by Mr. McDaniel Voice Vote - Unanimously Approved 11-0. V. Presentation — Mr. Draper was on his way B. Clarence Tears, Jr., South Florida Water Management District Mr. Tears stated that the most important thing that needs to be accomplished from the South Florida Water Management District's perspective for the RLSA Program would be to help keep and improve the flowway of the Ramp Keais Strand and Okaloacoochee Slough open and flowing. He stated that local utilities are using reverse osmosis for their supply of potable water and it is becoming increasing important to provide all means to recharge aquifers. He added that the RLSA program. in Collier County has been a huge.success in establishing SSAs within the Kamp Keais Strand, and to a lesser degree the Okaloacoochee Slough. One of the District's goals is to work with property owners to develop "Regional Land Stewardship Flow Restoration." The District, at the request and support of the property owners in the Kamp Keais Strand, completed modeling for the Kamp Keais Strand drainage area. Through this model, restrictions to the flowway were identified and plans for the reduction and elimination of restrictions and environmental restoration were developed. Those plans included structural improvements, the enhancement of the CR 846 bridge, new CR 858 bridge, replacement of existing culverts, and the removal of old railroad grade. Non-structural measures were also included such as the eradication of non-native vegetation through a grant sponsored by the Soil & Water Conservation District. Mr. Tears added that the District is working with property owners in the Okaloacoochee Slough to try to re -introduce natural seed sources in existing grazing areas. Mr. McDaniel asked if Mr. Tears could share his definition of disturbed, and what could this Committee do to work together to find answers to the many water resource issues that exist within the RLSA. Mr. Tears stated that soil data and remnant 9 37 Page 658 of 708 May 6, 2008 vegetation provide clues of historic flowways. From that information they look at the human impact to the area to distinguish the extent of flowway alterations. The continuation of this program and the cooperation of the land owners will be a tremendous aid to improving water quantity, water quality and environmental conservation. Gary Eidson questioned whether the potential build out of this area will impede natural flowways. Mr. Tears stated that, with each development that occurs in the RLSA, the developer will be required to identify the watershed, flowways, the proposed impervious area, and provide storm water detention, structural and non-structural improvements to an extent that no net impact occurs and, where possible, provide for the enhancement of the existing storm water system. Mr. Thomas suggested that the committee consider the general location of roadway corridors during this review to lessen the impact to the flowways, the environment, and agricultural activities. Mr. Jones asked if Mr. Tears could cite further examples of successes of how the RLSA program has furthered the District's goals. Mr. Tears stated that, with the establishment of each of the. SSA's, conservation easements are established which contain preservation and management plans. Through this process, the unique flowway area is captured, and as these are linked together, the slough flowway area is preserved. Mr. Hamel asked if Mr. Tears would be kind enough to remain for further questions, and asked Mr. Draper of the Audubon Society to begin his presentation. A. Eric Draper, Florida Chapter of the Audubon Society Mr. Draper stated that his presentation will focus on the State's perspective on the Collier County's RLSA program. The State Chapter is very supportive of any furtherance of wildlife species protection. Funding for land acquisition is becoming tighter with constraints on the State Budget, but the Florida Forever Bill did pass, which included a continuation of $300,000 for land acquisition and land use easements over agricultural land for conservation and preservation. While the list of identified lands targeted for acquisition far exceed the funding that is available, programs such as Collier County's RLSA further the objectives of the Audubon Society and support compact development, watershed restoration, wildlife conservation, recreation, transportation, and food and agricultural production. Mr. Jones,,*ed if Mr. Draper could provide any suggestion to the Committee. Mr. Draper stated that the loss of agricultural lands should be taken very seriously, and that the area of development should be compressed to the greatest degree possible. Mr. Hamel asked Mr. Draper to provide some perspective on the land use easement initiative for agricultural properties. Mr. Draper stated that this type of program is much more cost effective than buying the property outright, and that several states have 1>30 Page 659 of 701 May 6, 2008 similar programs. He had heard some discussion that this may not be well received by the land owners in Florida, but time will tell. Mr. Hamel stated that the Committee would be recessed for 5 minutes. IX. Next Meeting/future extra meeting to meet Committee schedule Mr. Greenwood informed the Committee that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) appointed this Committee for a one year term, which will end on September 11, 2008 [actually October 24, 20081. He stated that with the present schedule and issues to be addressed, he suggested that the Committee may wish to recommend to the BCC that the sunset date be extended. He also suggested that the Committee may wish to consider having meetings twice a month to address the many policies in the Phase II Report. Mr. McDaniel made a motion to double up the Committee meetings, with the first meeting taking place at Ave Maria and the second meeting to take place at the CDES Building in Naples. The meeting time would remain at 9 AM. to 12 Noon. The Committee also recommends that the BCC approve a 6 month extension to the Committee. Mr. Thomas second the motion. Voice Vote: 10 — Yes, 1 — No. APPROVED. Mr. Neno opposed the extension because he believed that the tasks could be completed within the allotted time frame. Mr. Jones stated that hoped the staff would be able to provide a listing of the received comments and suggestions with the related policies for the Committee to review at the next meeting. VI. Old Business A. Phase I — Technical Review Mr. Hamel thanked the six Committee members that attended the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC} for the presentation of the Phase I — Technical Review on May 1, 2008. He stated that the presentation made by the staff was well done. Mr. Greenwood stated that the CCPC recommended approval of the Phase I -- Technical Review with a stipulation that the nine page list of comments and suggestions be addressed by the Committee during the Phase H review. This list was distributed during the meeting. Mr. Neno also thought that the staffs presentation was very good. Mr. McDaniel questioned if the Committee was required to address the list of comments. Mr. Greenwood stated that the Committee should try their best to address this list of comments and suggestions, but the supporting data and analysis needs to be provided to ,justify any substantial changes. 2. Mr. Greenwood reviewed the "Working Paper," which summarized the build -out potential for the RLSA with the existing regulations. 9,,--3 9 9 Page 660 of 708 May 6, 2008 Mr. Cornell thanked staff for the overview of the "Working Paper." He requested the staff to prepare an analysis of the program incorporating agricultural preservation credits. B. RLSA Review Committee. Phase H (Groan 2 AyIcuiturall 1. Ms. Payton stated that she was not expecting to speak, but she would like to have an opportunity to meet with staff to help in the coordination of the "Comments and Suggestion" with the RLSA policies. Mr. Greenwood stated that he would coordinate a meeting with the authors of the "Comments and Suggestions." 2. Mr. Nance stated that his comments were provided to ask the question: "How would the Committee address comments from DCA's "RLSA Report to the State Legislation." If particular comments are not identified by any existing policies, how should the Committee address them? Mr. Greenwood suggested that the Committee focus on addressing policy related comments first, and then unrelated policy comments at the end of the report if the Committee desires. Mr. Jones stated that the format for addressing all the comments and suggestions should consist of the Committee's recommendation being stated first, and then the staff s recommendation would follow. Mn McDaniel commented that the County's RLSA program may not be perfect but it is working. VII. New Business ,A._ RLSA Review Committee, Phase H... Review of Group 3 and 5 Policies of the Rural Land -Stewardship area Overlay [Environmental] Laura Roys stated that the copy of the concerns from the Environmental Services Department that was provided in the agenda was an early draft and a comprehensive report of the Department's concerns will be provided. VM. Public Continents Mr. Reynold stated that 5—Year Review requirement by the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and the Growth Management Plan (GMP) applied only to the Phase I Review. The review was to provide a measured assessment of the program. He reviewed a memo that he prepared (See Attachment) in which he shared some observations and suggestions. Ms. Ryan stated that the Conservancy had provided comments to the County when the RLSA program was enacted and were told that there would be time to address their concerns when the review process occurred. During the Phase I Review the Conservancy was told that their concerns would be addressed during the Phase II review. She added that the Conservancy would be glad to meet with County staff to coordinate the positioning the concerns with the specific policy for the Committee's review. UL Staff Comments 61 74o Page 661 of 708 I I May 6, 2100S Mn Greenwood stated that he would contact those interested parties to coordinate a meeting date and time to facilitate the positioning of concerns with the related RLSA policies. X. Adjournment Mr. McDaniel moved to adjourn the meeting, second by Mr. Jones. Voice Vote - Unanimously Approved 11-0, Adjournment 12: 02PM. Rural, Lands Stewardshi Area Review Committee o Ha 4 Chairman These minutes approved by the Committee on O as presented_ or as amended Attachment: WilsonMiller memorandum May 6, 2008 C% C/ / 6 Page 662 of 708 WIspnMlller TO: Rural Land Stewardship Area Review Committee Members FROM. Alan Reynolds, AICP 41—DATE: May 6, 2008 SUBJECT: RLSAO Five -Year Review Process - Phase 2 First, my compliments to the Rural Land Stewardship Review Committee and County Staff for preparing a comprehensive Phase 1 Technical Report that is has been well received and accepted by both the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council and the Collier County Planning Commission, As the Committee begins substantive work on the second phase of the 5-year review process, I would offer a few observations and suggestions on the process going forward. My point of reference is my mole as the Principal Planner involved in the Immokalee Area Study that led to the creation of the RLSAO, and as one of the primary authors of the actual RLSAO implementing language. i have also been closely involved in the majority of the actual implementation of the program on behalf of participating property owners since it was adopted, so i have both detailed knowledge and experience to support my perspective. Policy 1.22 was very specific regarding the purpose of the Five Year Review: "to assess the participabon in and the effectiveness of the Overlay implementation in meeting the Goal Ob'ective and Policies set forth herein. The specific measures of review shall be as follows..." The Phase 1 Technical Report has documented each of the 8 speck items required and demonstrates both a level of both participation and effectiveness that is far beyond expectations for such a new and innovative program. In my thirty years of experience as a professional planner in Florida, I cannot point to any other such program in the State that has come so far, so quickly, in accomplishing its stated goal and objective. As an example, the implementation of the RLSAO was expected to take approximately 25 years to protect the estimated 89,300 acres of agricultural and natural resource lands depicted on the Overlay Map as FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs. At this five year anniversary, approximately 27% of such land is now within approved SSAs, and an additional 36% of such land is included in pending SSA applications. Clearly the level of participation in the RLSAO is exceeding its goal. With respect to effectiveness, one need only to look at the maps contained in the Report to recognize the significant progress that has been made toward permanently protecting the two major environmental systems in the region, the Camp Keais Strand and the Okaloacoochie Slough. In addition, the approval of the Town of Ave Maria SRA has enabled the realization of another major goal, accommodating growth and economic diversification within the RLSA in a more innovative, sustainable, mixed -use pattern. " �L CD'.' 6MODe-202481.V r..,-AaaMM OMI-OW-M-ACOR-2185e Page 663 of 708 While some have criticized the provision of the RLSAO that protects a property owner's baseline zoning rights as an alternative to use of the RLSAO, it must be noted that since its inception, not a single new platted lot or rural subdivision has been proposed or approved in the entire 300 square mile area. Phase 2 is not a required part of the GMP mandated process; it was proposed prior the beginning of the Five Year Review in anticipation that there would be certain changes that may be necessary and appropriate to correct issues "in the participation and effectiveness of the Overlay" that may become evident based on the factual data from Phase 1. As the Committee considers and deliberates on the ever increasing amount of public input in the form of comments, questions, and suggestions for changes, I would suggest the following approach be used- 1. All comments, questions and suggested changes should be referenced to a specific policy in the adopted RLSAO, to facilitate effective discussions and decision -making by the Committee. County staff can facilitate this process. 2. The old axiom "if it isn't broken, don't fix if should be used as a qualifier for making substantive changes to the RLSAO. Recommendations for changes should cite specific data and analysis in Phase 1 Technical Report, or documented examples from approved SSAs and SRAs that support the need for such change. 3. Whenever possible, specific language should be proposed and alternatives explored that best target the specific issue in question and cause the least amount of collateral changes to the overall program. This will hopefully prevent unintended consequences from disrupting the program. 4. As has been pointed out by several property owners and committee members, the RLSAO program relies on a voluntary, incentive -based approach and a balance between competing uses of land. It also requires'a soured basis in market based economics and deference to private property rights. There is a point at which regulatory changes could compromise the acceptance of the program, and the Committee should be mindful not to disrupt the careful balance that has been realized by the proven utilization of the current program. 5. Finally, bear in mind that a collaborative process extending over three years and involving thousands of hours of meetings, hearings and deliberations was needed to create the adopted RLSAO. At the end of this process, there was unanimous approval by the County Commission and universal support for the adopted program by the stakeholders. We must also keep in mind that the RLSAO does not operate in a vacuum; it does not supplant any of the myriad regulatory procedures and requirements that apply to land development activities. Proposed development in the RLSAO must obtain the same permits that all other development must, including Development of Regional Impact review, jurisdictional wetland permitting, surface water management and groundwater resource permits, site development plan approvals and plats, and other local, state and federal requirements. 7 5MFAM-202481- Ver 1-AReynold OOU11-000 W=-ACOR-21868 Page 664 of 708 While some have made reference to the Department of Community Affairs - 2007 Annual Report to the Legislature, and the need to respond to specific points of criticism about the Collier County RLSAO therein, I would point out the following: 1. The Collier County RLSAO is not subject to the State RLS Statute (although it is a model for it). 2. The DCA Report was prepared prior to the Collier County Phase 1 Technical Report, 3. The DCA Report was prepared without any substantive input from the stakeholders and organizations that participated in the creation of the RLSAO, or the participating land owners in the RLSAO. DCA never sought out input or factual information from those most familiar with the program. 4. The DCA found the Collier County RLSAO in full compliance with all applicable Growth Management Laws upon Its final adoption in 2002. 5. Until the recent change in administration, DCA strongly promoted RLS and hailed Collier County for its innovative approach to good planning. 6. The Collier County RLSAO has won numerous recognitions and awards from Statewide organizations including_ a. 1000 Friends of Florida b. Council for Sustainable Florida c. Florida Chapter American Planning Association d. Florida Planning and Zoning Association In closing, I would urge the Committee to continue with its thoughtful and measured evaluation of the RLSAO, and to continue to encourage broad -base participation by interested citizens. Part of the value of this review is to further the level of understanding and awareness of the program, and to that end, the process of receiving input and responding to questions and comments is healthy. I am convinced that the more people understand about this innovative program, the more supportive they will be. The challenge for the Committee will be to identify those specific changes that are essential to maintaining and improving the effectiveness of the RLSAO without compromising its effectiveness, and separating out well -intended suggestions for changes that are not essential. :'9 1 -)- 7- 5rd20O8 - 202481 . Vor: 1-AReyno7d 00011.00a000 - ACO R - 21850 Page 665 of 708 JohnsonEric From: Al Reynolds Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 3:37 PM To: MoscaMichele Subject: FW: Data & Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year Thanks Michelle - I've noted a couple of clarifications below, please advise if you concur. Thanks for your help. From: MoscaMichele fmailto:MicheleMosca2na collier og v.netl Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 11:00 AM To: Reynolds, Al Cc: Perry, Margaret; BosiMichael; WeeksDavid; HatcherMac; LenbergerSteve Subject: Data & Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year Al: You requested that staff provide a listing of any additional data and analysis needed to support the RLSA 5-year review amendments to the Growth Management Plan (GMP), so that you can prepare a Scope of Services for ECPO members prior to the formal GMP amendment submittal and the BCC's discussion of RLSA amendments scheduled for December 13, 2011. As we previously discussed, staff has conducted a limited review of the data and analysis contained within the RLSA 5-Year Review Phase I and Phase II Reports and the Carlton Fields Memorandum, dated March 1, 2010, to generally determine if additional data and analysis may be needed to move forward with these amendments. The following is a summary of the data and analysis commitments that were discussed by telephone on November 17, 2011 and the additional data and analysis needed to support the GMP amendments to the RLSA based on staff s limited review. It should be noted that after receipt of the "repackaged"/formal submittal, staff will evaluate the GMP amendment package to determine if additional supporting data and analysis is needed. If staff determines that additional data and analysis is needed, preparation of that additional data and analysis may or may not require the assistance of Stantec staff. Once we have a draft package of our items prepared, we would anticipate one round of review with you and the county staff team to address any gaps or clarifications. We would then give you our completed documents in electronic format, so they can be incorporated into the full package. We are not proposing to make a "formal submittal" as the documents will be part of the larger GMP package that staff will be preparing. As we are proposing to act in a technical capacity only, based on the recommendations of the BCC accepted Committee Report, we need to keep all of our work product strictly objective and quantifiable. Carlton Fields Memorandum: Issue #1— Identify the purpose and need for each amendment as determined by the RLSA committee. Stantec to provide "repackaging" of amendments to include concise explanation of each change, including narrative of issue(s) raised by the RLSA committee and cross reference(s) to support documentation, including original data source and date. Issue#2 (ref. 163.3177(1)(f), F.S.) — Use best available data to support proposed amendments. A comparative analysis of current data/reports is needed to determine any changed conditions since the RLSA committee's review and recommendations. County staff is requesting that Stantec staff prepare an analysis/evaluation of the new SFWMD Land Use and Cover as well as new (since BCC consideration) panther habitat use studies and provide comments regarding changed conditions. With respect to SFWMD land cover mapping, we will compare the most recent mapping (2011) to that used in 2001- 2002 to evaluate whether there have been any macro level changes that would affect the RLSA Overlay Map, i.e. delineation of FSAs, HSAs and WRAs. We can accomplish this by sampling various areas, as was done in the initial program, as opposed to a complete analysis of the entire RLS, which is well beyond our scope. One of the basic principles of the RLSA is that there will always be more recent and more site specific data available as the program is implemented, and this is best addressed at the time a property owner and the county evaluate a specific application for SSA or SRA, or when a property owner uses their baselines uses. This is all spelled out in detail in the GMP and LDC. As such, there is no need to continuously amend the GMP Overlay Map. Similarly, Panther information is always in a state of flux, as new telemetry is generated and new studies are performed. We will identify any pertinent data sources or studies that we are aware of and comment accordingly, but keep in mind that the basis for our work is the BCC accepted Committee Report, and we do not intend to propose any modifications to those conclusions and recommendations. Page 666 of 708 County staff will review relevant population and transportation studies to evaluate changed conditions. Issue #3 (ref. 163.3177(6)(a), F.S.) — Include a comprehensive land use analysis to support any changes to the amount of credits and SRA acreage in the program. Stantec staff to provide comprehensive land use analysis. Analysis should include existing and proposed development scenarios that were considered during the five year review process. Issue #4 (ref. 163.3177(6)(a) 9.a.(v), F.S.) — Provide data and analysis to demonstrate program will not result in a premature conversion of agricultural lands. Stantec staff to provide data and analysis. Data and analysis to include detailed explanation of the proposed agricultural credit and comparative tables (existing vs. proposed maximum development scenarios). Additional Data and Analysis Needed to Support RLSA Changes: • Table of existing and proposed RLSA maximum credit generation by category (e.g. restoration, agricultural, early entry, etc.). If this information is already contained within the five-year review documents, please provide the locational reference. Please contact me should you have questions. Michele Michele R. Mosca, AICP Principal Planner Growth Management Division/Planning and Regulation Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 tel. 239.252.2466 fax 239.252.2946 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. Page 667 of 708 United States Department of the Interior FIS SEH"ULIFE SERVICE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Southwest Florida Gulf Coast Refuge Complex , !P-1101 Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge`"" 12085 State Road 29S. Immokalee, Florida 34142 PH:239-657-8001 FAX:239-657-8002 March 1, 2021 Collier County Planning Commission 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: PL20190001836 and PL20190001837, Longwater and Bellmar Village SRA Resolutions respectively Dear Collier County Planning Commissioners, The Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (FPNWR) is 26,609 acres adjacent to the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) and approximately 1.25 miles southwest of the proposed Bellmar Village. Administered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the FPNWR was established in 1989 to assist in the recovery of endangered species such as the Florida Panther. FPNWR staff have worked cooperatively with the applicants and other landowners within the RLSA for many years to assist in habitat management activities across the FPNWR's boundary lines, and more generally, in discussions on how to keep landscape connectivity for far ranging species like the Florida panther and black bear. Both of the villages of Longwater and Bellmar are currently under federal review for a more comprehensive planning approach in the Eastern Collier Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (ECMSHCP), which would lead to the protection of 106,000 acres within the RLSA. It is preferable to delay permitting individual developments in the ECMSHCP development area until the Environmental Impact Statement and Endangered Species Act Section 10 review for the ECMSHCP is completed. In addition, the County should complete the adoption of the RLSA 5 year review amendments prior to approving developments within the RLSA so that the County's development permit and RLSA requirements are not contradictory to the mitigation requirements proposed by the ECMSHCP. Separate and apart from the Service's work considering the ECMSHCP, the Service has concerns about the proximity of these developments to the FPNWR that the planning commission should address with the applicant prior to approval of Longwater and Bellmar villages. First, the future development within the RLSA, including both Longwater and Bellmar, will encroach upon several current conservation areas such as the FPNWR. These conservation lands are intensely managed using prescribed burning to manage the fire -adapted ecosystems for the benefit of wildlife and to reduce high fuel loads, the latter of which contributes to more catastrophic harmful wildfires. The Stewardship Sending Areas within the RLSA and adjacent to the proposed developments include fire -adapted habitats that will need to be managed with silvicultural activities such as prescribed fire and exotic invasive plant control. Page 668 of 708 This encroachment toward conservation lands can complicate the appropriate management of the FPNWR. For instance, the refuge's southern boundary is 1-75, and eastern boundary is State Road 29. As such, we often have to burn habitats on the refuge with a prevailing southerly or easterly wind direction. These prescriptions are in place to mitigate risk of serious traffic accidents on those major roads, and cannot be changed, leaving the locations for high -density residential and commercial developments in the RLSA directly in the path of our current smoke management protocols. On some prescribed burns, we will not have the ability to redirect smoke away from the location of these future developments. We recommend that all existing and future landowners and leaseholders (e.g., residents, businesses, health care providers, and homeowner associations) within the RLSA sign an acknowledgement notice within their deed or lease agreement that recognizes and accepts the use of prescribed fire to manage the adjacent habitats on both public and private conservation lands. We believe this indemnification is necessary for fire managers to be held harmless for any adverse impacts from the inconveniences of smoke produced by prescribed fires, and to ensure that this critically important management tool is not further limited by new developments. The Florida Forest Service's Prescribed Fire in Florida Strategic Plan 2013-2020 identified two objectives to facilitate this action: 4-2 states: "Introduce Smoke Disclosure Language in deed transfers and homeowner association agreements with county planning," 4-3 states: "Develop a smoke easement template." There are a few examples of these Indemnifications being used in other states. I look forward to working with the Planning Commission, Collier County Commissioners and the Florida Forest Service to construct the appropriate language for such an instrument prior to any further development of the RLSA. Secondly, the application does not address the need for hydrologic restoration of the adjacent Camp Keais Strand Flowway Stewardship Area. Hydrological restoration of the Camp Keais Strand was identified as a unique functional group within Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, which the County and Service both participated in. During this effort, members of local and state agencies, NGOs, and the Federal government made every effort to take a holistic approach to hydrological restoration. We implore the County and other regulatory authorities to require the applicants to include wetland restoration activities identified within the Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, especially those within the Camp Keais Strand functional group. Hydrologic restoration of the Camp Keais Strand is clearly a component of the RLSA Stewardship Sending Areas, and is critically important for downstream conservation lands such as the FPNWR. Currently two farm fields restrict the flowway to a few culverts in a span of 100 yards, whereas restoring these farm fields back to wetlands would result in a nearly 1 mile wide flowway immediately adjacent to the proposed Longwater development. The applicant's original plans for the Town of Rural Lands West included restoring these approximately 935 acres of farmland in the middle of the Camp Keais Strand Stewardship flowway in SSA15, to benefit the hydrology of downstream conservation lands. This wetland restoration was not included in the plans for Rivergrass Village, Longwater Village or Belmar Village, and we believe that it should, as this type of wetland restoration was clearly the intent when the RLSA was established. Page 669 of 708 If properly implemented, Camp Keais Strand hydrological restoration activities could ultimately benefit one of the most biodiverse forested wetlands in the state of Florida (i.e., Fakahatchee Strand), as well as the Picayune Strand. In conclusion, we believe the planning commission should take a pause in considering developments within the RLSA on an individual project approach, and implement a more comprehensive planning approach. By incorporating our recommendations, we believe that they will: 1) Minimize impacts to one of the most important land management tools in the state of Florida (i.e., fire); 2) Protect important habitats; 3) Provide for critically important wetland restoration within hydrologic flowways such as Camp Keais Strand; 4) Improve the quality and quantity of water entering the FPNWR; and 5) Address the landscape connectivity needs of wildlife such as the Florida panther and black bear. Sincerely, Digitally signed by Kevin GodsKevin Godsea Date:2 Date: 2021.03.01 13:54:16 -0"()0. Kevin Godsea Refuge Manager Southwest Florida Gulf Coast Refuges Cc: Ray Bellows, Planning Commission Liaison Nancy Gundlach, Principle Planner Corby Schimidt, Principle Planner Matthew McLean, Director, Development Review Kirsten Wilkie, Environmental Services Manager Jamie Cook, Principal Environmental Specialist James Sabo, AICP, Principal Planner Michael Sawyer, Principal Planner Page 670 of 708 n E O V 2 vi V) � N � N Q) O v O O N V�v1 L a) L � E d N V L W aU+ ro O C -0 Zn M 7 a I--O 5 O V c a) E t V a) c� G O m (U a) 7 O M d a) a) a+ C Y E V E R +' 0 C +. LL V) H U IA Q U W a) 0 co � Q) t L � C � O 'O u U C C �: O p t +' o t � O v N a) a) N u w E L bz C Ln O as c O � , w U Q)O s vi +, a) L i C Q) M O v +� b0 to L 4.1 Ln vi L � O "Ya r6 T w u V aJ L Q) .7 v c c a) a) _0 a) c o Q) — _0 U 0aJ E n > O a) � L O L C -?M 2 +' � 4- N 7 CT�, iS32 a) L t N - _ c6 Q)in _ O tts a••' L 4� to w M a) N r"Fluvi L Q) Q)i U X M 7 U .- Q to M ro p rzs a) C C Ql � Ln v to 2 ro E L Qj a) a-1 � r 5 Li c°Ao M O va Sit a) V) M ai +I � fq � �c � > � = a) O Ll � C () `~ O L ra O SA v -0 a) C n. N a) o c a) ri N N L - a-1 L CC 1 U (Tj ro 'tS a) a} C VI E 7 rD U O +' 0 N O L V) a) M c C N O E �� +� v L C +, i `, C ry +� m te a_ c L O L 'D a) rO O 7 O O O 'a C 4! V) O t in N- C s E M 4 '—� co � o " m om' � N O u G c1 O Ol u C o 11 •N X 3 C E t a) a) +� U Sn o L L _�' I O '� In p O 3 G V O} O d5 M — ° >- a _0 a5 Q) w U� a V,o O — +� a O a) 0 ra 17 'o_ c r_ -0 p ` N 17 U)O 4- 1O 4! aJ z ti 4 -' Q L p IV) p a) � y w a r Nam `� C o—� 15 -LE0 I U C �' U 4! j Q US 7 ,;`� c a) vi ut — aJ V1 Q L Er U_ Q " %A .1 SU/1 � 4.2 Q) Q) -) cc p — '.LA cn a) v �..� V bb.0 n v 5 L a c� t E C O io C 13 M n b M M U tB 4� to -O G V O u1 ro L C u1 `~ O c v L +� "` O O O 06 •L 00 00 00 o M> �, 4-o v o� o � +ro•' i) aJ C C O Q ro O C O Q C C > O v N Y t e*Y r+5 �n %b cam.) � .0 O ry 3 r 1[ [wl eq r i a) C Q st � a) m n a) cn v1 (/) l0 N (n +' rl 7 N M Q u C O L L a) O U O qp O a) 7 a) O U a) Y to L v v U 4- O c a) E c v H a) f6 a) N (>O i a) 0 0- 0 Q LJ U I O a, O t c a) a) U 0 a) a) N N Y Ln O 06 O O U a) Ln L( a) C L > U O V, b0 O >• a -0 O L U Q- L LJ U C O a) On U aC•. a) C � 7 C � O a) to -0 O O E O C a) L a) 4� 4� to a) c = •E +� a) Q- O O } •� o c c O U N a) > � -0 v ca v a) C U l6 c Q M N N N ai L Q a) cai L) in L V) a) v Q O x U a1 I V) C O L a) c O U a) E c m ai a) �, N U U -r 0 4- a) of a) to _0 LJ U 06 I a) Ln O 06 a) O dA C O +, +- O Ln -0 d v C � v v O E bn C t 4 v E tr w, %o 1 O V) a) UN a) t u L L t v O O U L L Q) a) a) L N = dA o o Q W 4=-1 U U C OTC O vi 3 O bb a) -C fB a) a Y C OU � M Q O _0 a) U_ — M a1 > 4) rl > L m C Q) V) _0 ,O �' vI Q C U a1 +1 C L N -0 Q +a) C m - O U Q) E 'O hA 4-1 C C C Q C O J E Q N C 4_ m L 4-E v v Y O +� E -0 O 4 a) � c 4 a) c t V) 4- E ° o ai � " v U c ac) — E 0 > 0 U N L 4-1 L ca c cu Q a) E _ L O 3 Ln 0 Q) aA S? m N f6 7 _6 4-1 L C (9 L) C E O ra1U-7 as v v N N ri c � oA •� VI U rlj 4-1 O L 3: P,} C O L U O L N O w C 7 "` U N C 3 c I O nl } C N 0 0 a) U L O L N O U N C •> L [0 O -O >= cr Q) L U U -0 O i) Ln a1 L ') tv - Ln 41 L t0 N bA I Q � T O QL .O 0 L a) L tv Q) Q o 7) ° y i) ar a Q) Q)v0i c 1-0 o L C 'O O G. O H- h0 cc Vf > f6 � ° a'' U N -0 y .D i �� F+I y E m O it - Q cLa c 7 m E a/ GA U O Q) «� cd vi O c + aJ v = " N L a) is o L � 4•' p E E t +1 a) - -0 c u T te0 >~ c� U Vf O U 3 e� Zun ., w .> Ca o " '0 (� O aJ ° (D V) Q C i1 w y Cu i, L O C L O - t, �, i'" . +O > f6 O a) O L v y 1 O U Y vL 4 � IT > c a°i '0 d o ri a) Q) W L a, a) E L L no O 7 s Y U $w E 6� M U U t t Ln Q N M L, Q v C L (U = O 4.1 w C o a) v � � U N Q a-•� Q •s m N L — N On C t N N N E N = O l U E CAC O H � co 0 0 (6 C O 7e r CO.1.Hty Growth Management Community Development Department 2022 Land Development Code Amendments - Public Meeting - Development Services Advisory Committee - Land Development Review Subcommittee Wednesday, September 21, 2022 2:00 p.m. 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL Growth Management Community Development Department Building Conference Room 609/610 Agenda: 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Agenda 3. Old Business 4. New Business a. PL20220003445 RLSA Updates b. Discussion of Landscape/Buffer and Miscellaneous Sections in the LDC 5. Public Comments 6. 2022 DSAC-LDR Subcommittee schedule reminder a. December 14, 2022 7. Potential Special Meeting in October 8. Adjourn For more information please contact Eric Johnson at (239) 252-2931 or Eric.Johnson@colliercountyfl.gov Page 674 of 708 .� w c 0 � s 0 � k E / LL V 0 ¢ 2!- _ ) / w k 0 _ % { \}ro � 2 ( / 0 _- » 7 \ ƒ / } A = m k\� 0 > _ 0 / u \ \ \ { a / 0 ; @ .R m .g 0 / v/ =/2 # B E 3 CL (\7 § ( § / E\k ( \ ) 2 \ \5\ \ \§/ ) / § / 0 /M< $ / a E 7 \ ƒ 2 )\% 7 / f = 2 u \ 2 j �� k / ) / oa) \ CL u ± e \ \ \ » 2 z ( > /\ g 0 y % _ .e CL CL \ 7=/ 0 ® _ / �\\ LDC code proposed changes to accommodate RLSA update changes (indicated in red) 1.22 3.04.02 Species Specific Requirements G. Panther. For projects located in Primary and Secondary zones, the management plan shall discourage the destruction of undisturbed, native habitats that are preferred by the Florida panther (Felis concolor coryi) by directing intensive land uses to currently disturbed areas. Preferred habitats include pine flatwoods, hardwood hammocks, wetlands, farm areas, range areas, and citrus groves. In turn, these areas shall be buffered from the most intense land uses of the project by using low intensity land uses (e.g., parks, passive recreational areas, golf courses). Golf courses within the RFMU district shall be designed and managed using standards found in that district. The management plans shall identify appropriate lighting controls for these permitted uses and shall address the opportunity to utilize prescribed burning to maintain fire -adapted preserved vegetative communities and provide browse for white-tailed deer. 4.08.01 Specific Definitions Applicable to the RLSA District Q. Listed Species Habitat Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as preferred or tolerated habitat for that species. Land mapped, using FLUCFCS, as 1180, 1900, 1920, 2110, 2120, 2130, 2140, 2150, 2156, 2210, 2230, 2240, 2320, 2420, 2430, 2500, 2510, 2610, 3100, 3200, 3210, 3300, 4110, 4200, 4220, 4340, 4270, 4271, 4280, 4340, 4370, 4410, 4430, 5110, 5120, 6170, 6172, 6180, 6191, 6200, 6210, 6215, 6216, 6218, 6219, 6240, 6250, 6260, 6300, 6400, and 6410. is deemed to be preferred or tolerated habitat for panthers for the purpose of assigning a value for these indices based on the scientific studies of Kautz et al. 2006, Florida Panther Recovery Plan (2008) and Frakes et al. 2015.' An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of preferred or tolerated habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. R. Natural Resource Index (Index). A measurement system that establishes the relative natural resource value of each acre of land by objectively measuring six different characteristics of land and assigning an index factor based on each characteristic. The sum of these six factors is the Index value for the land. The six characteristics measured are: Stewardship Overlay Delineation, Proximity, Listed Species Habitat, Soils/Surface Water, Restoration Potential, and Land Use/Land Cover. S. Natural Resource Index Map Series (Index Maps). The Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Map Series adopted as part of the GMP. T. Natural Resource Index Value (Index Value). The sum of the values assigned to each acre, derived through the calculation of the values assigned to each of the six (6) characteristics included in the Index. A value of 1.2 shall be assumed for primary panther habitat and a value of 0.5 shall be assumed for secondary panther habitat regardless of whether panthers were actually seen on site. 'All of these FLU CCS Codes have been demonstrated to occur within primary panther habitat using GIS overlays. Page 676 of 708 X. Open space. Open space includes active and passive recreational areas such as parks, playgrounds, ball fields, golf courses, lakes, waterways, lagoons, flood plains, nature trails, native vegetation preserves, landscape as public and private conservation lands, and agricultural areas (not including structures), and water retention and management areas Buildings shall not be counted as part of any open space calculation. Private property surrounding privately owned homes (i.e. yards) shall not be counted as part of any open space calculation. Vehicular use surface areas of streets, alleys, driveways, and off-street parking and loading areas shall not be counted as part of any open space calculation. Y. Designated Panther Corridors — panther corridors shall correspond to the requirements set aside in the Florida Panther Recovery Plan (2008) and shall include the following requirements. (a) minimum width of 1250 ft and average width 1 mile, exclusive of any buffer or transition zone between the corridor and any development activity. (b) Have ample woody cover and lack artificial outdoor lighting (c) Alignment should be along areas known to be used by panthers and should connect panther refuges and other public lands. (d) Construct fencing, a 50' native vegetation border, a berm or a 225' lake between corridor and developments, or allow 250' of open land between the corridor and a development. (e) The location and widths of the corridor must be approved by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. SS. Town Center. A defining Context Zone that is intended to provide a wide range of uses, including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, and residential uses within a Town. The Town Center is an extension of the Town Core; however, the intensity is less as the Town Center serves as a transition to surrounding neighborhoods; it shall include high density housing. TT.Town Core. A defining Context Zone within a Town. The Town Core is the most dense and diverse Context Zone with a full range of uses. The Town Core is the most active area within the Town with uses mixed vertically and horizontally. It shall be easily accessed from the residential neighborhoods and be pedestrian focused. Parking should be focused along the rear of buildings and not along the main streets. UU.Village. Villages are a form of SRA and are primarily residential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include an easily accessed, mixed - use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. VV.Village center. A defining Context Zone within a Village that is intended to provide a wide range of uses including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, and residential uses. It shall be easily accessed from the residential neighborhoods and be pedestrian focused. Parking should be focused along the rear of buildings. WW.WRA - Water Retention Area. Privately owned lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map, that have been permitted by the SFWMD to function as agricultural water retention areas and that 2 Page 677 of 708 provide surface water quality and other natural resource values. They shall not be used for stormwater management unless they are designated as part of an SRA. XX. Flow -Way. A flow -way is a wetland which filters algae, suspended sediments and nutrients from water in order to improve the water quality as it flows through the system. YY. Wildlife Crossing Structures. These may be roadway underpasses or overpasses and are designed to accommodate the wildlife likely to use them (these should be a minimum of 8' by 24'). They are needed to facilitate wildlife movement linkages while avoiding unnecessary wildlife deaths and improving vehicle safety. Locations of wildlife crossings will be identified within 12 months of any proposed public roadway or roadway modification. ZZ. Walkability. The entire designated SRA should be walkable. Dwelling units are connected to the Village or Town Center with sidewalks or walking trails. At least 75% of multi -family units are within'/4 mile of the Center. Walkability means sidewalks and pathways that are interconnected and buffered from cars by trees and landscaping. To be walkable, Village and Town centers shall not have parking lots in front of stores and offices, this area is reserved for pedestrians and bicyclists and trees. Block size throughout the development shall be limited to a'/4 mile (1360ft) perimeter to facilitate walkability. AAA. Diversity of housing. Dwelling units are offered in a range of styles and price points, including workforce housing. At least 25% of the dwelling units are multi -family. Good design recommends the use of at least four separate types of housing and price points within a Village or Town.2 BBB. Primary and Secondary Panther Habitat -= shall be provided on the Natural Index Map indicating the boundaries of Primary and Secondary Panther Habitat as determined by Kautz et al. 20063 and the Florida Panther Recovery Plan (2008). 4.08.04 Implementation of Stewardship Credits G (2) Subsequent to the June 2008 review, the RLSA Overlay and RLSA District Regulations may be amended in response to the County's assessment and evaluation of the participation in and effectiveness of the Stewardship Credit System. Credits do not vest development rights. (a) Panther Corridor Credits shall be awarded for land designated and platted as panther corridor meeting the requirements set forth in the definition above in 4.08.01. Credits are only awarded when a corridor is complete. Eight Credits will be awarded per acre of completed panther corridor recorded and platted. 4.08.05 Baseline Standards J. Standards applicable outside the ACSC. Except to the extent superseded by L. or M. below, the following standards shall apply to all development within those areas of the RLSA District that are outside of the ACSC, other than agricultural operations that fall within the scope of sections 163.3162 (4) and 823.14 (6), F.S., and single-family residential dwellings, unless or until such lands are subject to transmittal or receipt of Stewardship Credits: IA. Wildlife Survey Z Duany Plater-Zyberk, Smart Core, Version 9.2, 2003. 3 Kautz et al. (2006) How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida Panther. Biological Conservation 130 pp. 118-133. 3 Page 678 of 708 1. A wildlife survey, as set forth in Chapter 10, shall be required for all parcels when listed species are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site or where listed species are directly observed on the site. 12. If listed species are directly observed on the site of the project or are indicated by levidence, such as denning, foraging, or other indications, first priority shall be given to preserving the habitat of such listed species a minimum of 40% of native vegetation on site shall be retained, with the exception of clearing for incidental purposes. x. Primary and Secondary Panther habitat areas should be indicated on the Wildlife Survey. 3. If the wildlife survey indicates that listed species are utilizing the site, or the site is capable of supporting and is likely to support listed species, a wildlife habitat management plan shall be ... vi. Panther. For projects located in Primary Priority 1 or Second aryPr+erity 11 Panther Habitat areas, the management plan shall discourage the destruction of undisturbed native habitats that are preferred by the Florida panther (Felis concolor coryi) by directing intensive land uses to currently disturbed areas. Preferred habitats include pine flatwoods and hardwood hammocks. In turn, these areas shall be buffered from the most intense land uses of the project by using low intensity land uses (e.g., parks, passive recreational areas, golf courses). 4. On property where the wildlife survey establishes that listed species are utilizing the site or where the site is capable of supporting listed species and such listed species can be anticipated to potentially occupy the site, the County shall, consistent with the RLSA Overlay of the GMP, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the State of Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and recommendations from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development orders. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case -by -case basis may change the requirements contained herein and any such change shall be deemed consistent with this Code. 5. Where the survey indicates likelihood of wildlife/roadway interference, appropriately sized underpasses or overpasses shall be required at least every 1000 yards and in areas where animals have been demonstrated to be most likely to cross. 6. During development design, every effort should be made to avoid fragmenting wildlife habitats. Development and roads shall not fragment SSAs, HSAs, FSAs and WRAs, unless there are adequate wildlife crossing structures provided. B. Flow -way Management Plan 1. The two -primary flow -ways in the RLSA, Camp Keais Strand and the Okaloacoochee Slough need regular maintenance. As incoming water passes through the flow -ways, the emergent vegetation slows the water's velocity, causing suspended particles and algae containing phosphorus and other nutrients to settle out. These accumulated organic particles, along with decayed wetland vegetation, continuously form new sediments, which store the filtered nutrients. Flow -ways also balance periodic flooding. On a periodic basis these flow -ways require maintenance to remove the sediments and refresh the systems. Upstream landowners will be required to prepare a Flow -ways Management Plan to ensure that the flow -ways that pass through or beside their properties and into which their properties drain are 0 Page 679 of 708 maintained properly to relieve downstream impacts. This shall be done through maintenance fees or through conducting the actual maintenance as set forth in the Flow -way Management Plan. 2. WRAs are an important water resource for clean water and ground water recharge and shall not be used for stormwater management unless the WRA is part of the SRA. 3. SRAs should only discharge the amount of water currently discharged before development. 4. For each segment of a flow -way within an SRA or SSA, a Flow -way Management Plan is required. 5. If Flow -way Management Plans are developed on a Flow -way basis rather than on a Flow -way Segment basis, the landowners will be required to contribute to the flow -way maintenance effort. 6. The Flow -way Management Plans shall incorporate the use of filter marshes to control discharges from SRAs. 4.08.06 SSA Designation 4.08.06.B.3. Natural Resources Indices and values e. Restoration Potential Index Value. If the applicant asserts that the land being designated as an SSA has a Restoration Potential Index Value of greater than zero (0), an evaluation of the restoration potential of the land being designated shall be prepared by a qualified environmental consultant (per Chapter 10 of the LDC) on behalf of the applicant and submitted as part of the SSA Designation Application Package. In the event that restoration potential is identified, the appropriate Restoration Potential Index Value shall be determined in accord with the Credit Worksheet. The credit value of each acre to which the Restoration Potential Index Value is applied shall be recalculated by adding the Restoration Potential Index Value to that acre's total Index Value. To protect wildlife and prevent wildlife/human conflicts site design standards for SRAs that are adjacent to SSAs, HSAs, FSAs, and WRAs require a 1000-foot upland habitat buffer. For conditional and escrowed SSAs, any new RLSA Master Plan amendments arising during the escrow/conditional period shall apply to the SSA. f. Restoration Stewardship Credits. Restoration Stewardship Credits are hereby established in addition to the Restoration Potential Index Value. In certain locations there may be the opportunity for flow way or habitat restoration such as locations where flow ways have been constricted or otherwise impeded by past activities or where additional land is needed to enhance wildlife corridors. Restoration Stewardship Credits shall be applied to an SSA subject to the following regulations: (1) Priority has been given to restoration within the Camp Keais Strand FSA or contiguous HSAs. Therefore, four (4) additional Stewardship Credits shall be generated for each acre of land dedicated by the applicant for restoration activities within any of the following areas: the Camp Keais Strand FSA, contiguous HSAs, or those portions of the Restoration Zone depicted on the RLSA Overlay Map that are contiguous to the Camp Keais Strand. 5 Page 680 of 708 (2) Two (2) additional Stewardship Credits shall be generated for each acre of land dedicated for restoration activities within the Okaloacoochee Slough, contiguous HSAs, or those portions of the Restoration Zone depicted on that are contiguous to the Okaloacoochee Slough. Credits can only be awarded once for land upon which restoration has occurred. (3) The actual implementation of restoration improvements is required for the owner to receive such credits referenced in (1) and (2) above. (4) SSA Agreements which include restoration of some areas, once accepted, cannot be amended to add more restoration credits. (4) Lands designated "Restoration" shall be restricted to Agriculture - Group 2 and conservation uses and all natural areas shall be maintained in their existing natural condition until such time as restoration activities occur. Upon completion of restoration, the land shall be managed in accordance with the applicable restoration permit conditions, which may impose further restriction on the allowed use of the property. (5) If the applicant agrees to complete the restoration improvements and the eligibility criteria below are satisfied, four (4) additional Stewardship Credits shall be authorized at the time of SSA designation, but shall not become available for transfer until such time as it has been demonstrated that the restoration activities have met applicable success criteria as determined by the permitting or commenting agency authorizing said restoration. One or more of the following eligibility criteria shall be used in evaluating an applicant's request for these additional Restoration Stewardship Credits: (a) FSA and/or HSA lands where restoration would increase the width of flow way and/or habitat corridors along the Camp Keais Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough so that, in the opinion of the applicant's environmental consultant and County environmental or natural resources staff, there will be functional enhancement of the flow way or wildlife corridor; (b) FSA and/or HSA lands where restoration would increase the width of flow way and/or habitat corridors within two miles of existing public lands so that, in the opinion of the applicant's environmental consultant and County environmental or natural resources staff, there will be a functional enhancement of the flow way or wildlife corridor; (c) Documentation of state or federal listed species utilizing the land or a contiguous parcel; (d) Lands that could be restored and managed to provide habitats for specific listed species (e.g., gopher tortoise, Big Cypress fox squirrel, red -cockaded woodpecker, etc.), or; (e) Occurrence of a land parcel within foraging distance from a wading bird rookery or other listed bird species colony, where restoration and proper management could increase foraging opportunities (e.g., wood storks). (6) Restoration Credits shall only be awarded when restoration is based on sound science and completed, and only for those areas where active restoration was undertaken. The removal of exotic species in SSAs is a required maintenance standard and does not constitute restoration for purposes of the RLSA except where removal exceeds the maintenance standard set out in 4.08.06.g. No credits shall be awarded merely upon designation. C. SSA Designation Package. 3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. b. Determine the effects of potential SRA development on adjacent SSA values, when an SSA is proposed. 6 Page 681 of 708 5. SSA Credit Agreement f. Land management measures; (1) No expansion of Ag1 is allowed in an area once it is designated as a conditional and/or escrowed SSA. (2) Require a maintenance standard that assures no greater infestation of exotic vegetation than existed at the time of SSA designation. h. Provisions requiring that, upon designation of land within either an FSA or an HSA as an SSA, the owner shall not thereafter seek or request, and the County shall not thereafter grant or approve any such expansion or conversion of agricultural land uses in violation of sections 4.08.06 A.2 and A.3. This applies to designations of SSAs by conditional and escrowed SSAs. j. (5) When restoration is to be undertaken by the applicant, a Restoration Plan that addresses, at a minimum the following elements shall be required: (a) Restoration goals and species potentially affected. (b) Description of the work to be performed; Clearly identify specific acreage location within SSA designated for restoration and type of restoration. (c) Identification of the entity responsible for performing the work. (d) Start Date and a Work Schedule with quantified milestones (e) Success Criteria (f) Agreed upon Metrics for measuring completion of milestones and success criteria (gZAnnual management, maintenance and monitoring. Monitoring must continue until restoration has been determined to be successful. 4.08.07 SRA Designation A.2 SRAs Within the ACSC. SRAs are permitted within the ACSC subject to limitations on the number, size, location, and form of SRA described herein. Nothing within this Section shall be construed as an exemption of an SRA from any and all limitations and regulations applicable to lands within the ACSC. Lands within the ACSC that meet all SRA suitability criteria shall also be restricted such that credits used to entitle an SRA in the ACSC must be generated exclusively from SSAs within the ACSC. No early entry bonus credits can be used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC. a. The only forms of SRA allowed in the ACSC east of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Hamlets and CRDs of 100 acres or less and the only forms of SRA allowed in the ACSC west of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Villages and CRDs of not more than 300 acres and Hamlets. Provided, however, two SRAs, consisting of any combination of Villages or CRDs of not more than 500 acres each, exclusive of any lakes created prior to the effective date of this amendment as a result of mining operations, shall be allowed in areas that have a frontage on State Road 29 and that, as of the effective date of the RLSA Overlay, had been predominantly cleared as a result of Ag Group I (Layer 5) or Earth Mining or Processing Uses (Layer 3). b. The Town form of an SRA shall not be located within the ACSC. c. SRAs shall not surround, fragment or isolate SSAs, HSAs, FSAs or WRAs. 7 Page 682 of 708 d. Aggregation of SRAs. For the purposes of reducing cost through economies of scale, coordinating infrastructure and providing economic diversification within the RLSA, two or more Villages or CRDs under common or related ownership that are physically proximate and share infrastructure shall be aggregated. When aggregated, the County shall review the SRA applications by the SRA standards (Town, Village or CRD) applicable to the total size of the aggregated development. The developer will be responsible for providing the amenities commensurate with the aggregated size, even for existing Villages if they are reclassified as a Town. 4.1. Towns. Towns are the largest and most diverse form of SRA, with a full range of housing types and mix of uses. Towns have urban level services and infrastructure which support development that is compact, mixed use, human scale, and provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile trips and increase livability. Towns shall be not less than 1,000 acres or more than 4,000 acres and are comprised of several villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and character. Towns shall have a mixed -use town center that will serve as a focal point for community facilities and support services. Towns shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Towns shall have at least one community park with a minimum size of 200 square feet per dwelling unit in the Town. Towns shall also have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Towns shall include both community and neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.07 J.1. Towns may al&e include those compatible corporate office and light industrial uses as those permitted in the Business Park and Research and Technology Park Subdistricts of the FLUE. Towns shall be the preferred location for the full range of schools, and to the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. Town centers must be built before 10% of the town housing units are completed and must include, at a minimum, grocery, pharmacy, restaurants, day care, office and hardware components. These will be expanded proportionally with other essential services as construction continues. Manufacturing should be accommodated in an industrial area. Town Centers must be tree -lined and designed to promote walkability. Town centers should have multiple access points from the surrounding residential communities. Towns must exhibit density reductions with movement away from town centers. A minimum density of 12 units per acre is required in the center with 8 units per acre at'/4 mile, 6 units per acre at 1/2/ mile, 4 units per acre at 3/4 mile and 2 units per acre at 1 mile radius from the center.4 4.2 Villages. Villages are primarily residential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be not less than 100 acres or more than 1,000 acres. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed -use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.07 J.1. Village centers must be built before 10% of the town housing units are completed and must include, at a minimum, grocery, pharmacy, hardware, restaurant, day care, office, and light industrial components. These will be expanded proportionally with other essential services as 4 Community Character Plan, Collier County, FL (2002). And Duany Plater-Zyberk, SmartCore, 2003. Page 683 of 708 construction continues. Village Centers must be designed to promote walkability. Village centers should have multiple access points from the surrounding residential communities. Village centers must be built before 10% of the town housing units are completed and must include, at a minimum, grocery, pharmacy, restaurant, day care, offices, and hardware components. These will be expanded proportionally with other essential services as construction continues. Villages must exhibit density reductions with movement away from town centers. A minimum density of 12 units per acre is required in the center with 8 units per acre at'/4 mile, 6 units per acre at 1 /2/ mile, 4 units per acre at % mile and 2 units per acre at 1 mile radius from the center. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. The Village form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.07 A.2. K. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessments. Impact assessments are intended to identify methods to be utilized to meet the SRA generated impacts on public facilities and to evaluate the self-sufficiency of the proposed SRA with respect to these public facilities. Information provided within these assessments may also indicate the degree to which the SRA is consistent with the fiscal neutrality requirements of Section 4.08.07 L. Impact assessments shall be prepared in the following infrastructure areas: 1. Annual reports shall be required to assess status of developer commitments in the following areas: (a) Number of dwelling units completed; impact fees collected. (b) Amenities constructed; percent of required. (c) Percent internal capture. (d) Monitoring of restoration completed. (i) Monitoring of forested habitats including number and size of trees and shrubs by species greater than 4' in height. (ii) Installation of continuous monitoring wells to confirm appropriate wetland hydroperiods. (iii) Installation of continuous monitoring wells to ensure roads are not interfering with flows upstream and downstream. (iv) Removal of berms and ditches. 2. A full fiscal neutrality analysis shall be required every 5 years to demonstrate that the development is not costing the county more than the income it is generating. This should present a description of the developer's contributions versus the expenses for infrastructure by the County. 33ransportation. A transportation impact assessment meeting the requirements of Chapter 10 of the LDC or its successor regulation or procedure, shall be prepared by the applicant as component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The extent of internal capture should be determined annually. 07 Page 684 of 708 a.ln addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the transportation impact assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the following issues related to the highway network: (1) Impacts to the level of service of impacted roadways and intersections, comparing the proposed SRA to the impacts of conventional Baseline Standard development; (2) Effect(s) of new roadway facilities planned as part of the SRA Master Plan on the surrounding transportation system; and (3) Impacts to agri-transport issues, especially the farm -to -market movement of agricultural products. (4) Impacts to established wildlife corridors. Special attention should be paid to not fragmenting habitats with transportation corridors. Wildlife underpasses may be used to address this. 4. b.-The transportation impact assessment, in addition to considering the impacts on the highway system, shall also consider public transportation (transit) and bicycle and pedestrian issues to the extent applicable. c. No SRA shall be approved unless the transportation impact assessment required by this Section has demonstrated through data and analysis that the capacity of County/State collector or arterial road(s) serving the SRA to be adequate to serve the intended SRA uses in accordance with Chapter 6 of the LDC in effect at the time of SRA designation. 2. Potable Water. A potable water assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either Florida Administrative Code for private and limited use water systems, or for Public Water Systems. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the potable water assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products, if any, generated by the proposed treatment process. The applicant shall identify the sources of water proposed for potable water supply. 3. Irrigation Water. An irrigation water assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall quantify the anticipated irrigation water usage expected at the buildout of the SRA. The assessment shall identify the sources of water proposed for irrigation use and shall identify proposed methods of water conservation. 4. Wastewater. A wastewater assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either Standards for Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems, contained in Florida Administrative Code for systems having a capacity not exceeding 10,000 gallons per day or for wastewater treatment systems having a capacity greater than 10,000 gallons per day. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the wastewater assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products generated by the proposed treatment process. 5. Solid waste. A solid waste assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall identify the means and methods for handling, transporting and disposal of all solid waste generated including but not limited to the collection, handling and 10 Page 685 of 708 disposal of recyclables and horticultural waste products. The applicant shall identify the location and remaining disposal capacity available at the disposal site. The use of bear -resistant trash containers shall be required for all residential and commercial property within the RLSA to reduce wildlife/human conflict. 6. Stormwater Management. A stormwater management impact assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as a part of an SRA Designation Application Package. The stormwater management impact assessment shall, at a minimum, provide the following information: a. An exhibit showing the boundary of the proposed SRA including the following information: (1) The location of any WRA delineated within the SRA; (2) A generalized representation of the existing stormwater flow patterns across the site including the location(s) of discharge from the site to the downstream receiving waters; (3) The land uses of adjoining properties and, if applicable, the locations of stormwater discharge into the site of the proposed SRA from the adjoining properties. b. A narrative component to the report including the following information: (1) The name of the receiving water or, if applicable, FSA or WRA to which the stormwater discharge from the site will ultimately outfall; (2) The peak allowable discharge rate (in cfs/acre) allowed for the SRA per Collier County Ordinance No. 90-10 or its successor regulation; (3) If applicable, a description of the provisions to be made to accept stormwater flows from surrounding properties into, around, or through the constructed surface water management system of the proposed development; (4) The types of stormwater detention areas to be constructed as part of the surface water management system of the proposed development and water quality treatment to be provided prior to discharge of the runoff from the site; (5) WRAs shall not be used to manage stormwater discharge from a SRA unless it is included within the boundary of an SRA. (6) If a WRA has been incorporated into the stormwater management system of an SRA, the report shall demonstrate compliance with provisions of Section 4.08.04 A.4.b.and credits will be required for the entire size of the WRA bordering the development out 200 feet. 7. Public Schools. The applicant shall coordinate with the Collier County School Board to provide information and coordinate planning to accommodate any impacts that the SRA has on public schools. As part of the SRA application, the following information shall be provided: a. School Impact Analysis (SIA) for a determination of school capacity only (refer to section 10.04.09 for SIA requirements); and b.The potential for locating a public educational facility or facilities within the SRA, and the location(s) of any site(s) that may be dedicated or otherwise made available for a public educational facility. 11 Page 686 of 708 L. SRA Economic Assessment. An Economic Assessment meeting the requirements of this Section shall be prepared and submitted as part of the SRA Designation Application Package. At a minimum, the analysis shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire, and schools. Development phasing and funding mechanisms shall address any adverse impacts to adopted minimum levels of service pursuant to Chapter 6 of the LDC. 1. Demonstration of Fiscal Neutrality. Each SRA must demonstrate that its development, as a whole, will be fiscally neutral or positive to the Collier County tax base. This demonstration will be made for each unit of government responsible for the services listed above, using one of the following methodologies: a. Collier County Fiscal Impact Model. The fiscal impact model officially adopted and maintained by Collier County. b. Alternative Fiscal Impact Model. If Collier County has not adopted a fiscal impact model as indicated above, the applicant may develop an alternative fiscal impact model using a methodology approved by Collier County. The BCC may grant exceptions to this policy of fiscal neutrality to accommodate affordable or workforce housing. 2. Imposition of Special Assessments. If the Report identifies a negative fiscal impact of the project to a unit of local government referenced above, the landowner will accede to a special assessment on his property to offset such a shortfall or in the alternative make a lump sum payment to the unit of local government equal to the present value of the estimated shortfall. The BCC may grant a waiver to accommodate affordable housing. 3 Each SRA must provide a report and supporting analysis to the County every 5 years showing the fiscal neutrality status of the SRA. 12 Page 687 of 708 5/15/2025 Item # 9.1) ID# 2025-1360 ** THIS ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD BEFORE 5:05 P.M. **PL20250000235 - Floating Solar Facilities (LDCA) - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the Comprehensive Land Regulations for the Unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, to define a Floating Solar Facility and allow a Solar Floating Facility as a permitted use in the Agricultural District (A), Estate District (E), Public Use District (P), Community Facility District (CF), and as an accessory use in the Commercial Professional and General Office District (C-1), Commercial Convenience District (C-2), Commercial Intermediate District (C-3), General Commercial District (C-4), Heavy Commercial District (C-5), Travel Trailer -Recreational Vehicle Campground District (TTRVC), Industrial District (I), Business Park (BP) and to establish regulations for Floating Solar Facilities, by providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to the Land Development Code, more specifically, amending the following: Chapter One — General Provisions, Including Section 1.08.02 Definitions; Chapter Two — Zoning Districts and Uses, including Section 2.03.01 Agriculture Zoning Districts, Section 2.03.03 Commercial Zoning Districts, Section 2.03.04 Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 2.03.05 Civic and Institutional Zoning Districts; and Chapter Five — Supplemental Standards, by adding a new Section 5.03.08 Floating Solar Facilities; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Six, Effective Date. [Richard Henderlong, Planner III] ATTACHMENTS: 1. LDCA (04-16-2025) Page 688 of 708 ..,)Collier County LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT PETITION PL20250000235 ORIGIN Growth Management Community Department (GMCD) HEARING DATES SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT To comply with F.S. 163.32051 and promote the development of renewable energy, this Land Development Code amendment (LDC) shall allow the siting of "floating solar facilities" as an appropriate use of water and land areas. They are typically located on wastewater treatment ponds, stormwater treatment ponds, reclaimed water ponds, abandoned mines., and other water storage reservoirs. The amendment proposes these types of solar facilities as a permitted use in the Rural Agricultural (A), Public Use (P), and Community Facility (CF) Zoning Districts and as an accessory use in Commercial and Industrial Zoning Districts. LDC SECTION TO BE AMENDED Board TBD 1.08.02 Definitions CCPC 05/15/2025 2.03.01 Agricultural Districts DSAC 04/02/2025 2.03.03 Commercial Zoning Districts DSAC-LDR 03/18/2025 2.03.04 Industrial Zoning Districts 2.03.05 Civic and Institutional Zoning Districts 5.03.08 Floating Solar Facilities (New Section) ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS DSAC-LDR DSAC Approval with changes Approval with changes CCPC TBD BACKGROUND The Florida legislature found that "Floating solar facilities" (FSF), also known as "floatovoltaics," represents a technology that involves installing solar panels on floating platforms or floating independently, and which can be an effective tool in harnessing energy in bodies of water that have been permitted for storage. "Floating solar facilities" are defined by the State in F.S.163.3205 (2) as "... a solar facility which is located on wastewater treatment ponds, abandoned limerock mine areas, stormwater treatment ponds, reclaimed water ponds, or other water storage reservoirs". They are a production facility for electric power, electricity -generating solar panels, affixed to a buoyant structure that keeps them above the surface of the water, and anchored at the bottom and/or to the water body's bank. Lakes, basins, and man-made bodies of water, such as reservoirs, are appropriate locations for floating solar, because the waters are calm compared to the ocean, rivers, or Gulf of America. Useful at any scale for man-made bodies of water, they are subject to physical water bodies limits and the proximity to the electric grid. F.S. 163.32051, became effective law on July 1, 2022, and requires local governments to cite these facilities as appropriate uses of water and land areas in their local planning process. The statute stipulates the adoption is to "...promote the use of floating solar facilities by requiring each local government to allow these facilities as a permitted use under certain conditions and amend its land development requirements to promote and expand the use of floating solar facilities." Pursuant to F.S. 163.32051(b), the legislature found that siting floating solar facilities "...are beneficial uses of those areas for many reasons, including the fact that the water has a cooling effect on the solar panels, which can boost power production, and the fact that the panels help decrease the amount of water lost to evaporation and the formation of harmful algal blooms." Further, Florida Statutes allows local governments to adopt appropriate standards related to setbacks and buffering, provided that the new standards do not exceed those which are required for similar uses in areas zoned for agricultural uses (see Exhibits A and B). G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearing s\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04- 16-2025).docx Page 689 of 708 ..,)Collier County Floating solar photovoltaics (FPV) are a relatively new use and an emerging industry, requiring responsible siting of solar energy development and an appropriate use of land. An objective of this amendment is to improve and identify appropriate siting locations and avoid areas of potential conflict, such as lands designated for conservation or preservation, including but not limited to an Everglades Agricultural Area Reservoir Project, or Florida's 404 General Permitting program for Water -Based Renewable Energy Generation Pilot Projects. Because the shading from panels can affect photosynthesis in aquatic plants, their location requires careful consideration and placement to avoid potential aquatic plant disruption. In addition, FPVs should not compete with lands used for other purposes, such as productive crop and pasture lands. They assist to retain the economic viability of agriculture and other predominantly rural land areas that do not compete for agriculture, industrial, or residental lands. It is easier to find sites near densely populated areas. Lack of land costs are an added advantage of floating solar systems with fewer competeing uses for development of water bodies, resulting in decreased water evaporation, anticipated lower leasing costs for the solar field when own by a property owner. These type of solar facilities, primarily shift solar energy's increasing demand for land to water, making them more reasonable areas with high land values or strong land conservation policies. FPV installation costs are similar to that of land -based installations, but improved efficiency, energy density, and location availability, with lower site costs (little, if any, land clearing and service access roadway construction), and with an added public benefit of water conservation. Research studies demonstrate the water's cooling effect boosts performance of solar panels. The panels are known to convert sunlight more efficiently when cooler, and are estimated to be 5-15% more energy efficient than land based solar panels. A typical installation on man-made bodies of water is comprised of the following components; floating solar panels, combiner boxes, inverters, mooring systems, electrical cabling to transmit generated electricity to inverters and grid connection points on land (See recent Duke Energy, Florida installations and FPV scematic- Exhibit Q. According to current industry practice, FPV installations, face fewer shading issues than ground -mounted systems, since the water surface is flat and systems are often distant from buildings or vegetation. During the planning stage phase, the issue of locating systems further away from bodies of water that are regularly visited by seabirds, help to avoid potential productivity losses. Bird deterrence systems can be deployed and adequate barrier methods are needed to manage animal activities and prevent animal visits. The positioning of FPV panels are at a lower tilt angle than their land -based counterparts, which allows for panel rows to be spaced much closer to one another. The benefits and siting of FPV relate to land conservation, reduced site -preparation costs, evaporation losses, integrated aquaculture activities, and lessening the demand for cost expensive traditional ground mounted solar facilities. To assure long term successful utilization, FPV maintenance and maintenance plans should be a submittal requirement prior to the issuance of permits. Staff recommends an biennial inspection of the anchor and measurement of tension of mooring line to be done as part of the preventive maintenance plan. When inverters are installed on land, they should be installed under shelter and periodic checks for signs of humidity, corrosion, or water ingress. Back up batteries are warranted pursuant to the manufacturer's warranty. According to the most recent literature, the life span of this type of solar facilities range from 20 to 25 years. For this reason, a decommission plan should be considered that would replace the system at the end of its useful life cycle, including recycling the disassembled materials. For FPV, the administrative code will be amended to address application and site development plan requirements related to panel type, spacing and sizes, location, minimum project size, distance to existing transmission lines and abutting residential uses, water depths, anchoring/mooring system, methods to minimize animal or avian visits, setbacks, buffers and landscaping, and decommissioning plan at end of system performance period. Staff will utilize the recommended assessment of siting and siting characteristices that are derived from the 2019 report produced by the World Bank Group, ESMAP (Energy Sector Management Assistance Program) and SERIS (Solar Energy Research Institute of Signapore). Where Sun Meets Water: Floating Solar Handbook for Practitioners. Washington, DC. See Exhibit D. 2 G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearing s\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04- 16-2025).docx Page 690 of 708 ..,)Collier County Depending on the location of a water body, further environmental impact assessment may be necessary to evaluate potential effects on marine life and the ecosystems. To understand how floating solar facilities can potentially impact water quality, staff recommends implementing a water quality monitoring program starting with a baseline sampling, prior to installation, and subsequent routine sampling of the water body. The data will provide a better understanding of water quality impacts, if any, resulting from these floating solar facilities power generating plants that will provide information to guide decisions regarding deployment. Policy 1.2.4 of the Immokalee Area Master Plan, states the County must initiate amendments to the LDC that allow agricultural facilities and apparatuses associated with an alternative energy use. These uses will be allowed on properties zoned (A) Agricultural, within the Low Residential Subdistrict land use designation. This amendment serves to implement the policy and support the economic importance of agriculture. Building permits shall be obtained for construction of any structures and/or improvements to the extent required by the Florida Building Code. In the review article, "An interdisciplinary literature review of floating solar power plants"*, the authors conducted a scan and review analysis of existing floating solar related publications (over 900) comprehensively as of October 2024. They scrutinized the FPV literature, dividing them into three main aspects: how FPV design has evolved to support PV panels, how computational and experimental modeling techniques have been used to evaluate and optimize the designs, and interactions between FPV and the water environment. It found that "the design for FPV structures has not yet been standardized and currently no universally accepted set of guidelines or specifications for designing FPV structures" exist. Therefore this LDC amendment does not address the design of FSF and instead focuses upon land use, deployment and installation, long term maintenance and replacement, and environmental interaction. DSAC-LDR Subcommittee Recommendation: On March 18, 2025, the subcommittee recommended approval with the following changes: reword "Gulf of Mexico" to "Gulf of America", require the permitted use in Agriculture zoning district to state "to be subject to requirements of LDC section 5.03.08.", consider adding residential zoning districts for approval through the conditional use process, strike number 8 the requirement for fencing, add text that address operations, maintenance and emergency repairs in addition to the deployment and installation plan, and create a new subsection `B" that will allow an applicant to request waivers through the conditional use process. DSAC Recommendation: On April 02, 2025, the committee members voted (9 to 5) to recommend approval subject to defining the term "minimal" impact to natural resources and water quality, adding in LDC section 5.03.08 A. number 9, text that the proposed facilities do not create a hazard to aircraft control from reflective glare and include DSAC-LDR Subcommittee's recommendations. Staff has incorporated the changes. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS GMP CONSISTENCY A Business Impact Estimate is not required The proposed LDC amendment has been reviewed by for this LDC amendment because it is in Comprehensive Planning staff and may be deemed compliance with state law, F.S. 125.66 (3) consistent with the GMP. (c). EXHIBITS: A) F.S.163.32051 Floating solar facitilies, B) F.S. 163.3205 Solar facility approval process, C) Examples of Floating solar facilities, D) Siting Assessment and Characteristics, E) Limnetic Zone Definition *"An Interdisciplinary Literature Review of Floating Solar Power Plants", Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 209 (2025) 115094. Published by Elsevier, Ltd. https://doi.org/l 0.1016/j .rser.2024.115094 3 G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearing s\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04- 16-2025).docx Page 691 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Amend the LDC as follows: 1.08.02 Definitions Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is G61rr9At text to be deleted Fire station services, ancillary. Fire protection activities imperative to carry out the purposes of a government establishment primarily engaged in firefighting, such as fire training camps, but which is not required to be located at a fire station for that fire station to serve its function. However, services designed to repair any firefighting equipment is not an ancillary fire station service. Floating solar facility: A solar facility as defined in Section 163.3205(2), Florida Statutes, as amended, which is located on wastewater treatment ponds, abandoned limerock mine areas, stormwater treatment ponds, reclaimed water ponds, or other water storage reservoirs. A solar floating facility does not require any significant modification of drainage, flora or fauna, littoral zone and dissolved oxygen for aquatic species survival at the site. Buffer and landscaping reauirements shall be in conformance with the underlvina zonina district. Flood: A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land area from the overflow of inland or tidal waters or the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source. * * * * * * * * ** * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 2.03.01 - Agricultural Districts. A. Rural Agricultural District (A). The purpose and intent of the rural agricultural district (A) is to provide lands for agricultural, pastoral, and rural land uses by accommodating traditional agricultural, agricultural related activities and facilities, support facilities related to agricultural needs, and conservation uses. Uses that are considered compatible to agricultural uses that would not endanger or damage the agricultural, environmental, potable water, or wildlife resources of the County, are permissible as conditional uses in the A district. The A district corresponds to and implements the Agricultural/Rural land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP, and in some instances, may occur in the designated urban area. The maximum density permissible in the rural agricultural district within the urban mixed use district shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land use element of the GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in A district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. The maximum density permissible in the A district within the agricultural/rural district of the future land use element of the Collier County GMP shall be consistent with and not exceed the density permissible or permitted under the agricultural/rural district of the future land use element. The following subsections identify the uses that are permissible by right and the uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in the rural agricultural district (A). a. Permitted uses 4 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 692 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 L11T-1121 Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is G61rr9At text to be deleted * * * * * * * * * * * 9. Essential services, as set forth in LDC section 2.01.03. 10. Schools, public, including "Educational plants. 11. Floating solar facility, except in conservation and/or preservation designated areas and subject to LDC section 5.03.08. B. Estate District (E). The purpose and intent of the estates district (E) is to provide lands for low density residential development in a semi -rural to rural environment, with limited agricultural activities. In addition to low density residential development with limited agricultural activities, the E district is also designed to accommodate as conditional uses, development that provides services for and is compatible with the low density residential, semi -rural and rural character of the E district. The E district corresponds to and implements the estates land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP, although, in limited instances, it may occur outside of the estates land use designation. The maximum density permissible in the E district shall be consistent with and not exceed the density permissible or permitted under the estates district of the future land use element of the Collier County GMP as provided under the Golden Gate Master Plan. 1. The following subsections identify the uses that are permissible by right and the uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in the estates district (E). a. Permitted uses. 1. Single-family dwelling. 2. Family care facilities, subject to LDC section 5.05.04. 3. Essential services, as set forth in LDC section 2.01.03. 4. Educational plants, as an essential service. 5. Floating solar facilities, subject to LDC section 5.03.08. # # # # # # # # # # # # # 2.03.03 - Commercial Zoning Districts A. Commercial Professional and General Office District (C-1). The purpose and intent of the commercial professional and general office district C-1 is to allow a concentration of office type buildings and land uses that are most compatible with, and located near, residential areas. Most C-1 commercial, professional, and general office districts are contiguous to, or when within a PUD, will be placed in close proximity to residential areas, and, therefore, serve as a transitional zoning district between residential areas and higher intensity commercial zoning districts. The types of office uses permitted are those that do not have high traffic volumes throughout the day, which extend into the evening hours. They will 5 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 693 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 L11T-1121 Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is G61rr9At text to be deleted have morning and evening short-term peak conditions. The market support for these office uses should be those with a localized basis of market support as opposed to office functions requiring inter -jurisdictional and regional market support. Because office functions have significant employment characteristics, which are compounded when aggregations occur, certain personal service uses shall be permitted, to provide a convenience to office -based employment. Such convenience commercial uses shall be made an integral part of an office building as opposed to the singular use of a building. Housing may also be a component of this district as provided for through conditional use approval. 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 C-1 commercial professional and general office district. * * * * * * * * * * * * * b. Accessory uses. 2. Caretaker's residence, subject to LDC section 5.03.05 3. Floating solar facility, subject to LDC section 5.03.08. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # B. Commercial Convenience District (C-2). The purpose and intent of the commercial convenience district (C-2) is to provide lands where commercial establishments may be located to provide the small-scale shopping and personal needs of the surrounding residential land uses within convenient travel distance except to the extent that office uses carried forward from the C-1 district will expand the traditional neighborhood size. However, the intent of this district is that retail and service uses be of a nature that can be economically supported by the immediate residential environs. Therefore, the uses should allow for goods and services that households require on a daily basis, as opposed to those goods and services that households seek for the most favorable economic price and, therefore, require much larger trade areas. It is intended that the C-2 district implements the Collier County GMP within those areas designated agricultural/rural; estates neighborhood center district of the Golden Gate Master Plan; the neighborhood center district of the Immokalee Master Plan; and the urban mixed use district of the future land use element permitted in accordance with the Iocational criteria for commercial and the goals, objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible in the C-2 district and the urban mixed use land use designation shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in a district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. 6 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 694 of 708 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 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 C-2 commercial convenience district. * * * * * * * * * * b. Accessory uses. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4. Outside storage or display of merchandise when specifically permitted for a use, otherwise prohibited, subject to LDC section 4.02.12. 5. Floatina solar facilitv. subiect to LDC section 5.03.08. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # C. Commercial Intermediate District (C-3). The purpose and intent of the commercial intermediate district (C-3) is to provide for a wider variety of goods and services intended for areas expected to receive a higher degree of automobile traffic. The type and variety of goods and services are those that provide an opportunity for comparison shopping, have a trade area consisting of several neighborhoods, and are preferably located at the intersection of two -arterial level streets. Most activity centers meet this standard. This district is also intended to allow all of the uses permitted in the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts typically aggregated in planned shopping centers. This district is not intended to permit wholesaling type of uses, or land uses that have associated with them the need for outdoor storage of equipment and merchandise. A mixed -use project containing a residential component is permitted in this district subject to the criteria established herein. The C-3 district is permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for commercial and the goals, objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible in the C-3 district and the urban mixed use land use designation shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in the C-3 district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. 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). * * * * * * * * * * * * * b. Accessory Uses. 7 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 695 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is G61rr9At text to be deleted 3. Outside storage or display of merchandise when specifically permitted for a use, otherwise prohibited, subject to LDC section 4.02.12. 4. Floating solar facility, subject to LDC section 5.03.08. * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # D. General Commercial District (C-4). The general commercial district (C-4) is intended to provide for those types of land uses that attract large segments of the population at the same time by virtue of scale, coupled with the type of activity. The purpose and intent of the C-4 district is to provide the opportunity for the most diverse types of commercial activities delivering goods and services, including entertainment and recreational attractions, at a larger scale than the C-1 through C-3 districts. As such, all of the uses permitted in the C-1 through C-3 districts are also permitted in the C-4 district. The outside storage of merchandise and equipment is prohibited, except to the extent that it is associated with the commercial activity conducted on -site such as, but not limited to, automobile sales, marine vessels, and the renting and leasing of equipment. Activity centers are suitable locations for the uses permitted by the C-4 district because most activity centers are located at the intersection of arterial roads. Therefore the uses in the C-4 district can most be sustained by the transportation network of major roads. The C-4 district is permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for uses and the goals, objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in a district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. 1. The following uses, as defined 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 general commercial district (C-4). * * * * * * * * * * * * * b. Accessory Uses. 3. Outside storage or display of merchandise when specifically permitted for a use, otherwise prohibited, subject to LDC section 4.02.12. 4. Floating solar facility, subject to LDC section 5.03.08. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # E. Heavy Commercial District (C-5). In addition to the uses provided in the C-4 zoning district, the heavy commercial district (C-5) allows a range of more intensive commercial uses and services which are generally those uses that tend to utilize outdoor space in the conduct 8 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 696 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is G61rr9At text to be deleted of the business. The C-5 district permits heavy commercial services such as full -service automotive repair, and establishments primarily engaged in construction and specialized trade activities such as contractor offices, plumbing, heating and air conditioning services, and similar uses that typically have a need to store construction associated equipment and supplies within an enclosed structure or have showrooms displaying the building material for which they specialize. Outdoor storage yards are permitted with the requirement that such yards are completely enclosed or opaquely screened. The C-5 district is permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for uses and the goals, objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. 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 heavy commercial district (C-5). b. Accessory Uses. 3. Temporary display of merchandise during business hours, provided it does not adversely affect pedestrian or vehicular traffic or public health or safety. Merchandise storage and display is prohibited within any front yard; allowed within the side and rear yards of lots. 4. Floating solar facility, subject to LDC section 5.03.08. * * * * * * * * * * * * * F. Travel Trailer -Recreational Vehicle Campground District (TTRVC). * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. The following uses are permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the travel trailer -recreational vehicle campground district (TTRVC). b. Accessory Uses. 5. Campgrounds containing 100 spaces or more shall be permitted a convenience commercial facility no greater than 15,000 square feet in total land area. This facility shall provide for the exclusive sale of convenience items to park patrons only, and shall present no visible evidence of their commercial character, including signage and 9 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 697 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is GUrr9At text to be deleted lighting, from any public or private street or right-of-way external to the park. 6. Floating solar facility, subject to LDC section 5.03.08. 2.03.04 - Industrial Zoning Districts A. Industrial District (1). The purpose and intent of the industrial district (1) is to provide lands for manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, and distribution. Service and commercial activities that are related to manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, and distribution activities, as well as commercial uses relating to automotive repair and heavy equipment sales and repair are also permissible in the I district. The I district corresponds to and implements the industrial land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP. 1. The following uses, as identified within the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section, are permitted as a right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the industrial district (1). * * * * * * * * * * * * * b. Accessory uses. 5. Recreational vehicle campground and ancillary support facilities when in conjunction with vehicle racing - applicable to the Immokalee Regional Airport only, and subject to the provisions of LDC section 5.05.10.C.1. - C.6. of this Code. Recreational vehicles, tents, and other structures and facilities allowed in the campground for temporary habitation, shall be allowed for no more than seventy- two (72) consecutive hours. 6. Floating solar facility, subject to LDC section 5.03.08. B. Business Park District (BP). The purpose and intent of the business park district (BP) is to provide a mix of industrial uses, corporate headquarters offices and business/professional offices which complement each other and provide convenience services for the employees within the district; and to attract businesses that create high value added jobs. It is intended that the BP district be designed in an attractive park -like environment, with low structural density and large landscaped areas for both the functional use of buffering and enjoyment by the employees of the BP district. The BP district is permitted by the urban mixed use, urban commercial, and urban -industrial districts of the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. 10 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 698 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is GUrr9At text to be deleted 1. The following uses, as identified within the latest edition of the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, or as otherwise provided for within this section, are permitted as of right, or as uses accessory to permitted primary or secondary uses, or are conditional uses within the business park district. * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Accessory uses to permitted primary and secondary uses: * * * * * * * * * * * * * 5. Recreational vehicle campground and ancillary support facilities when in conjunction with vehicle racing - applicable to the Immokalee Regional Airport only, and subject to the provisions of LDC section 5.05.10.C.1. - C.6. of this Code. Recreational vehicles, tents, and other structures and facilities allowed in the campground for temporary habitation, shall be allowed for no more than seventy- two consecutive hours. 6. Floating solar facility, subject to LDC section 5.03.08. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 2.03.05 - Civic and Institutional Zoning Districts A. Public Use District (P). The purpose and intent of public use district (P) is to accommodate only local, state and federally owned or leased and operated government facilities that provide essential public services. The P district is intended to facilitate the coordination of urban services and land uses while minimizing the potential disruption of the uses of nearby properties. 1. Any public facilities that lawfully existed prior to the effective date of this Code and that are not zoned for public use district (P) are determined to be conforming with these zoning regulations. 2. Any future expansion of these public facilities on lands previously reserved for their use shall be required to meet the regulations in effect for the zoning district in which the public facility is located. 3. Government -owned properties rented or leased to nongovernmental entities for purposes not related to providing governmental services or support functions to a primary civic or public institutional use shall not be zoned for the public use district (P), but rather, shall be zoned or rezoned according to the use types or the use characteristics which predominate. 4. The following uses are permitted as of right, or as accessory or conditional uses, in the public use district (P). a. Permitted uses. 11 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 699 of 708 DRAFT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 B. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 # 33 Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is G61rr9At text to be deleted 7. Fairgrounds. 8. Floating solar facility, except in conservation and/or preservation designated areas and subject to LDC section 5.03.08. 89. Libraries. * * * * * * * * * * * * Community Facility District (CF). The purpose and intent of (CF) district is to implement the GMP by permitting nonresidential land uses as generally identified in the urban designation of the future land use element. These uses can be characterized as public facilities, institutional uses, open space uses, recreational uses, water -related or dependent uses, and other such uses generally serving the community at large. The dimensional standards are intended to insure compatibility with existing or future nearby residential development. The CF district is limited to properties within the urban mixed use land use designation as identified on the future land use map. 1. The following uses are permitted as of right, or as accessory or conditional uses, in the community facility district (CF). a. Permitted uses * * * * * * * * * * * * 3. Civic and cultural facilities. 4. Floating solar facility, except in conservation and/or preservation designated areas and subject to LDC section 5.03.08. 45. Museums. * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # 34 5.03.08 — Floating Solar Facilities 35 36 A. A floating solar facility may be a permitted use or as an accessory structure and ancillary 37 use only where it complies with the following requirements: 38 39 1. Not located in, on, over, or upon aquatic preserves or environmentally protected 40 lands. 41 42 2. The floating solar facility coverage area is contained within the lot or parcel. 43 44 3. The installation, when proposed on stormwater conveyance, retention, or 45 detention areas does not interfere with stormwater management or stormwater 46 management infrastructure. 47 48 49 12 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 700 of 708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 I�.T_1*I Text underlined is new text to be added T@xt strkethrough is G61rr9At text to be deleted 4. Submittal of deployment, installation, operation and emergency maintenance plans that have minimal impacts to natural resources and water quality. For the purpose of this use, the term "minimal impacts" shall mean the facility is sited and constructed to minimize shading of habitats and species within the littoral or limnetic zone, soiling from dust, biofouling and biosoiling (bird droppings), barriers to animals in natural habitat at the site, and degradation of water quality within the site. To prevent the occurrence of damage and breakdown, an on site -specific conditions preventive maintenance plan is required and shall entail emergency repairs, routine inspection and servicing at predetermined intervals. Where appropriate, a bird deterrence system, barrier or non -barrier method may be deployed. A site survey for fauna and flora shall be undertaken to avoid the risk from animals visits on the floating system, shading aquatic vegetation at bottom of lake and overgrowth of algae and surface vegetation. Long-term monitoring is required to assess the effects on water quality and aquatic flora and fauna. 5. Power and communication lines running from the bank of land to interconnect with any building, transformer or inverter shall be buried underground. 6. Submittal of a decommissioning plan to ensure the proper removal after the facilitv's useful life. 7. Panels utilizing a reflector to enhance production shall control and minimize the glare from the reflector to adjacent and abutting properties. 8. The water is not being energized, system is properly anchored, and the water body use (such as active recreational purposes) does not conflict with floating solar facilities. 9. No facility shall produce reflective glare that could affect or impair aircraft traffic control or vehicular traffic. B. An applicant may request a waiver for approval of one or more of the provisions of LDC section 5.03.08 A. through a Conditional Use request. # # # # # # # # # # # # # 13 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 701 of 708 Exhibit A — F.S. 163. 32051 Floating solar facilities The 2024 Florida Statutes Title Xi Chapter 163 View Entire COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL Chapter RELATIONS PROGRAMS 163.32051 Floating solar facilities.— (1)(a) The Legislature finds that floating solar facilities, also known as "floatovottaics," can be effective tools in harnessing energy in bodies of water that have been permitted for storage. (b) The Legislature finds that siting floating solar facilities on wastewater treatment ponds, abandoned Limerock mine areas, stormwater treatment ponds, reclaimed water ponds, and other water storage reservoirs are beneficial uses of those areas for many reasons, including the fact that the water has a cooling effect on the solar panels, which can boost power production, and the fact that the panels help decrease the amount of water lost to evaporation and the formation of harmful algal blooms. (c) Therefore, the Legislature finds that the siting of floating solar facilities should be encouraged by local governments as appropriate uses of water and land areas. (2) For purposes of this section, the term "floating solar facility" means a solar facility as defined in s. 163.3205(2), which is located on wastewater treatment ponds, abandoned Limerock mine areas, stormwater treatment ponds, reclaimed water ponds, or other water storage reservoirs. (3) A floating solar facility shall be a permitted use in the appropriate Land use categories in each local government comprehensive plan, and each Local government must amend its land development regulations to promote the expanded use of floating solar facilities. (4) A county or municipality may adopt an ordinance specifying buffer and Landscaping requirements for floating solar facilities. The requirements may not exceed the requirements for similar uses involving the construction of other solar faciLities that are permitted uses in agricultural land use categories and zoning districts. (5) Notwithstanding subsections (3) and (4), a floating solar facility may not be constructed in an Everglades AgricuLturaL Area reservoir project if the Local governments involved with the project determine that the floating solar facility will have a negative impact on that project. History.—s. 1, ch. 2022-93; s. 46, ch. 2023-8; s. 12, ch. 2024-2. Copyright © 1995-2024 The Florida Legislature • Privacy Statement • Contact Us 14 GALDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 702 of 708 Exhibit B — F.S. 163. 3205 Solar facility approval process The 2024 Florida Statutes Title XI Chapter 163 View Entire COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL Chapter RELATIONS PROGRAMS 163.3205 Solar facility approval process.— (1) It is the intent of the Legislature to encourage renewable solar electrical generation throughout this state. It is essential that solar facilities and associated electric infrastructure be constructed and maintained in various locations throughout this state in order to ensure the availability of renewable energy production, which is critical to this state's energy and economic future. (2) As used in this section, the term "solar facility" means a production facility for electric power which: (a) Uses photovoltaic modules to convert solar energy to electricity that may be stored on site, delivered to a transmission system, and consumed primarily offsite. (b) Consists principally of photovoltaic modules, a mounting or racking system, power inverters, transformers, collection systems, battery systems, fire suppression equipment, and associated components. (c) May include accessory administration or maintenance buildings, electric transmission lines, substations, energy storage equipment, and related accessory uses and structures. (3) A solar facility shall be a permitted use in all agricultural land use categories in a local government comprehensive plan and all agricultural zoning districts within an unincorporated area and must comply with the setback and landscaped buffer area criteria for other similar uses in the agricultural district. (4) A county may adopt an ordinance specifying buffer and landscaping requirements for solar facilities. Such requirements may not exceed the requirements for similar uses involving the construction of other facilities that are permitted uses in agricultural land use categories and zoning districts. (5) This section does not apply to any site that was the subject of an application to construct a solar facility submitted to a Local governmental entity before July 1, 2021. History.—s. 1, ch. 2021-178. Copyright ac) 1995.2024 The Florida Legislature • Privacy Statement • Contact Us 15 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 703 of 708 Exhibit C — Examples of Floating solar facilities. ORANGE COUNTY UTILITIES - SRWSF Project Overview Completed in the Spring of 2023, this 1.2MW system is the largest system in the Southeast United States and one of the largest in the country. Orange County has significant green -energy goals over the next decade and found floating solar to be a perfect solution to power some of their most energy -intensive operations, water plants. This system will directly feed the Southern Regional Water Supply Facility. 16 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 704 of 708 Exhibit C — Examples of Floating solar facilities. DUKE ENERGY - HINES ENERGY COMPLEX Project Overview Duke Energy, one of the Largest utilities in the United States now has the first floating PV system on a cooling pond in the country. This project is incredibly unique as it sits on the 1,200-acre cooling pond of Duke's 2,000•MW power plant, the Hines Energy Complex. This is the second floating PV project that D3Energy has completed for Duke Energy, the first being Fort Liberty. A total of 1,872 of solar panels are connected and anchored down, right in the middle of Duke Energy's cooling pond. (Spectrum News) 12/12/24 Duke Energy has reached a milestone with the successful activation of its first floating solar project in Florida, situated at the Duke Energy Hines Energy Complex in Bartow, Florida. The nearly 1-megawatt floating solar array, comprising over 1,800 bifacial solar panels, floats on a 2-acre water surface within an existing cooling pond. The innovative design of the panels, absorbing light from both sides, is expected to generate 10%-20% more power than traditional single -sided counterparts. 17 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 705 of 708 Exhibit C — Examples of Floating solar facilities. Source Power Systems Technology: https://www.powersystems.technology/news-pst/duke-energy-floats- into-the-future-florida-s-first-floatin -solarolar-project-unveiled.htm Transmission Helical screw - _ Transformer bankanchor- Central PV moduies :-•,yaf T�,_„ inverter combine FIoaW box Surrounding ontoons "� topography Elastic Input from mooring line other arrays Anchoring Pe rc bankanchor Figure 3. Schematic of an FPV system Image credit Alfred Hicks, NREL Floating Photovoltaic System Cost Benchmark: Q1 2021 Installations on Artificial Water Bodies Vignesh Ramasamy and Robert Margolis National Renewable Energy Laboratory 18 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 706 of 708 Exhibit D Siting Assessment and Characteristics World Bank Group, ESMAP and SERIS. 2019. Where Sun Meets Water: Floating Solar Handbook for Practitioners. Washington, DC: World Bank. The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because the World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. SITE IDENTIFICATION The main considerations for assessing site suitability for FPV installations include: Solar resource (solar irradiance at proposed water surface ) and local climatic conditions (seasonal variations in weather- temperature range, precipitation, lighting and storm occurrences). Available water surface area (in general, for FPV deployment, one MWp requires roughly 1 hectare or 2.47 acres for the floating island and 1.7 hectares or 4.2 acres of water area, (after taking into account anchoring) and shape (rectangular or square). Bathymetry (shape of boundaries, average depth and depth distribution, structure of water bed and the water body banks, and hydrology). Water quality conditions and impact. Water level (variation over summer/winter months), wave amplitudes, and wind speeds. Subsurface soil conditions (accurate soil analysis and soil structure interaction). Shading (of habitats and species within the littoral and/or linnetic zones), soiling, and other site conditions: (openness and minimal shading, less soiling from dust than land installations, biosoiling (bird droppings -survey of bird species, etc.), avoidance of saltwater or briny coastal systems that create a more corrosive environment for metals, including structural elements, grounding, and electrical connectors and wiring, elavate the area for potential soiling (precipitates from the water) or biofouling that can lead to hot spots, provide good airflow around the panels, and create barriers to animals in natural habitats at the site. Environmental Considerations: Natural habitat ofpreserved species, frequency of bird activity, and water species that are sensitive to water temperature, dissolved oxygen, and sunlight. Grid access, substation location, and power availability. Access rights, permits, and regulations. Obtain FAA approval when near a airport that demostrates compliance with standards for measuring ocular impact, such as no potential for glare (flash blindness or distraction) or "low potential for afterimage" along final approach path for existing or future landings. RECOMMENDED SITE CHARACTERISTICS Be located within 1/2 to 1.8 miles to existing transmission lines: the water body should have a preferred shallow water depth at or between 7' to 15', and be a minimun facility size of two acres. (This is based upon studies that support cost efficiency, power capacity and sustainability for 20 or more years). Landscaping to screen and offset adjacent visual glare and position away from abutting residential uses (minimun 100 feet in distance). • Prohibited in designated Conservation and Preservation areas 19 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\05-15\Materials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16-2025).docx Page 707 of 708 Exhibit E- Definition of Limnetic Zone 418/25, 11.57 AM Limnetic zone - Wkipedia WIKIPEDIA ' S The Free Encyclopedia Limnetic zone The limnetic zone is the open and x well -lit area of a freestanding body of �+ fresh water, such as a lake or pond. Not included in this area is the littoral zone, Littoiai Zone which is the shallow, near -shore area of + , the water body. The key difference Open -water Lflne (Phclic Zone) between the littoral zone and the limnetic zone is the presence of rooted �j beep-waterlonejApnotic lone) plant growth.W The floor under the limnetic zone cannot sustain plant The primary zones of a lake, including the limnetic (photic) zone growth due to a lack of sunlight for photosynthesis. In extremely shallow bodies of water, light may penetrate all the way to floor even in the deepest center parts of the lake. In this situation, there is an absence of a limnetic zone and the littoral zone spans the entire lake.[21 Together, these two zones comprise the photic zone. There are two main sources of oxygen to the photic zone: atmospheric mixing and photosynthesis. Oxygen is dissolved when air interacts with water on the surface, and is increased with wave and wind action.L31 Unlike the profundal zone, the limnetic zone is the layer that receives sufficient sunlight, allowing for photosynthesis.L4 For this reason, it is often simply referred to as the photic zone. The limnetic zone is the most photosynthetically -active zone of a lake since it is the primary habitat for planktonic species.L51 Because phytoplankton populations are densest here, it is the zone most heavily responsible for oxygen production within the aquatic ecosystem.Ls1 Limnetic communities are quite complex. Zooplankton populations often consist of cow, cladocerans, and rotifers occurring in the open water of lakes. Most limnetic communities will consist of one dominant species of copepod, one dominant cladoceran, and one dominant rotifer.[61 Zooplanktons are able to move more freely through the limnetic zone than in the littoral zone, both vertically and horizontally. This is because the bottom of a lake's debris and substrates provide rich habitat niches.l61 A limnetic zooplankton population will usually consist of two to four species, each in a different genus.161 In addition to zooplankton, organisms in the limnetic zone include insects and fishes. Many species of freshwater fish live in the limnetic zone because of the abundance of food, though these species often navigate into the littoral zone as well. See also ■ Pelagic zone (in open ocean) ■ Benthic zone htlps://en.wikipediaorg/wiki/Limnetic_7one 112 20 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\CCPC\2025\05-15\Mate rials\PL20250000235 Floating Solar Facilities - LDCA (04-16- 2025).docx REV. 4/17/2025 Page 708 of 708