Ordinance 91-094 ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE
89-05, AN ORDINANCE ENACTING AND ESTABLISHING
A GROWTH MA~NAGEMENT PLAN FOR COLLIER COUNT~,
FLORIDA PURSUANT TO THE LOCAL GOVERNME~
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPME~
REGULATION ACT OF 1985 AND CHAPTER 9J-~
FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, MINIMUM CRITER~
FOR REVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSI~
PLANS AND DETERMINATION OF COMPLIANCE;
CORRECTING, UPDATING, AND MODIFYING CERTA~
COSTS, REVENUE SOURCES, SUPPORTING POLICIE~
AND THE DATES OF CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITI~
ENUMERATED IN THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PL~ CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS IN FISCAL YEARS 1991/92
THROUGH 1995/96; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes also
known as the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land
Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Chapter 9J-5, Florida
Administrative Code, also known as the Minimum Criteria for Review
of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of
Compliance requires that Collier County correct, update, and modify
costs, revenue sources, or the dates of construction of facilities
enumerated in the Collier County Growth Management Plan Capital
Improvement Element on an annual basis; and
;~EREAS, Collier County has prepared an Annual Update to
the Capital Improvement Element of its Growth Management Plan
(Ordinance No. 89-05) that takes into consideration the plans and
financial resources of the County and of the Agencies of the State
of Florida; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes,
Sections 163.3177(3) (b) and 163.3187(2) provide for annual updates
of local government Capital Improvement Elements that consider
corrections, updates, and modifications concerning costs; revenue
sources; acceptance of facilities pursuant to dedications which are
consistent with the plan; or the dates of construction of any
facilities enumerated in the Capital Improvements Element; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission in a
manner prescribed by law did hold a public hearing concerning the
correcting, updating, and modifying of certain costs, revenue
sources, and the dates of construction of facilities enumerated in
the Collier County Growth Management Plan Capital Improvement
Element for capital projects in Fiscal Years 1991/92 through 1995/96
on September 5, 1991 and recommended that it be submitted to the
Board of County Commissioners, as prepared, noting certain
considerations and recommendations; and
$~EREAS, the Board of County Commissioners did take
action in the manner prescribed by law and did hold a public hearing
on September 25, 1991, and October 1, 1991; and
%~EREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural
requirements of law have been met.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA:
SECTION ONE: Update of Costs, Revenue Sources and Construction
Dates of Facilities Enumerated in Capital
Improvement Element of Growth Management Plan.
This Ordinance, as described herein, shall be known and
cited as the 1991 Capital Improvement Element Annual Update for
Collier County, Florida. The Collier County 1991 Capital
Improvement Element Annual Update, attached hereto and incorporated
by reference herein, consisting of goals, objectives, and policies;
req%%irements for capital improvements implementation; and costs and
revenues, shall be the Collier County Growth Management Plan Capital
Improvement Element Annual Update of 1991 and shall supersede any
and all previous Capital Improvement Elements applicable to the
unincorporated area of Collier County.
~ECTIQ~ TWO: Severability.
If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by any Court of competent jurisdiction,
such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion.
-2-
~: Effective Date.
This Ordinancs shall become effective upon receipt of
notice from the Secretary of State that this Ordinance has been
filed with the Secretary of State.
DATED: October 1, 1991
',~TES'~'~.;'~[) ,'7/ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
J;tMES C. GILE$~ CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
~ ,.' / ..... Ma~r~eh~hy6h
'Approved as to fo~ and
legal sufficiency:
Marg~le ~. stu'dent
· Assistant County Attorney ~l~ ordlmance ~d ~ ~e
~ day
o~ ~knowledgem~n~ ~
-3-
CAPITAL IHPROVEHEI~ ELEMENT
Third ]~nnunl Update & Amendment
COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLaiN
Prepared by
Growth Management Department
1991
THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
THIRD ]~NNUliL UPDATE & AItEI~DMENT
WAS ADOPTED ~Y COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE 91-94
ON TUESDAY~ OCTOBER 1~ 1991~ WITH A 4-0 VOTE
THE 1991 GROWTH MA/~AGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS
WERE APPROVED FOR TRANSMITTAL TO
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
BY A 4-0 VOTE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ANENDMENTS
TO THE CAPITAL IMPROF~.MENT ELEMENT
HJkVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO
THE FLORIDA DEP~TMENT OF COMHUNITY AFFAIRS
PURSUA/ffT TO COLLIER COUNTY RESOLUTION 91-694
A SECOND PUBLIC HEARIN~ REGARDING THESE AMENDHENTS
WILL BE CONDUCTED IN M ARCH~ 1992~
Ai~TER THE STATE'S 90-DAY REVIEW PERIOD
Paqe
I, INTRODUCTION - i -
II. CAPITAL IMPROVEHENT CIE - 1
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND ]?OLICIES
III. IMPLEMENTATION CIE - 23
Schedule of Capital Improvements:
Roads Projects CIE - 24
Drainage Projects CIE - 32
EMS and Jail Projects CIE - 33
Library Buildings Projects CIE - 34
Government Buildings Projects CIE - 36
Parks Projects CIE - 37
Water Projects CIE - 39
Sewer Projects CIE - 46
Landfill Projects CIE - 51
IV. COST AND REVENUES CIE - 52
V. PRO(.IRAM8 TO ENSURI IMPLEMENTATION CIE - 54
VI. ANALYSIS (Support Documents)
Public Facility Requirements Appendix A
Capital Improvements Projects Appendix B
Capital Improvement Financing Appendix C
Capacity
Collier County School Board Appendix D
Capital Improvement Program
Timing & Location of Capital Appondix E'
Improvements:
Current Local Practices
Financing Plan Appendix F
* Indicatez, portions to be adopted
I. INTRODUCTION
In 1985 and 1986 the Florida Legislature significantly
strengthened the requirements for county and city ~omprehensive
plans. One of the new provisions of the Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act is the
requirement that the comprehensive plan must contain a Capital
Improvement Element to "... consider the needs for and location
of public facilities ..." (Section 163.3177(3}, Florida
Statutes).
The Capital Improvement Element (CIE) is supposed to identify
public facilities that will be required during the next five or
more years, including the cost of the facilities, and the sources
of revenue that will be used to fund the facilities.
One of the ~pecific requirements of the legislation states that
the public facilities that are contained in the CIE must be based
on "standards to ensure the availability of public facilities and
the adequacy of those facilities including acceptable levels of
service." The administrative regulation that implements the
statutes defines the phrase "level of service" as "... an
indicator of the extent or degree of service provided by ... a
facility based on and related to the operational characteristics
of the facility. Level of service shall indicate the capacity
per unit of demand for each public facility." (Section
9J-5.003(41), Florida Administrative Code).
- i -
IG 0'47 A . 07
CAPIT~,L IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
GOALS, O~JECTIVES A~D poLIcIE_s
COAL lz TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES CONCURRENT WITH
NEW DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN OR
EXCEED ;%DOPTED STANDARDS FOR LEVELS OF SERVICE.
OBJECTIVE 1.1:
Identify and define types of public facilities for which the
County is responsible, establish standards for levels of service
for each such public facility, and determine what quantity of
additional public facilities are needed in order to achieve and
maintain the standards.
Policy 1.1.13
The County shall establish standards for levels of service for
three categories of public facilities, as follows:
Category A public facilities are facilities which appear in
other elements of this comprehensive plan, including arterial
and collector roads, surface water management systems,
potable water systems, sanitary sewer systems, solid waste
disposal facilities, and parks and recreation facilities.
The standards for levels of service of Category A County
provided public facilities shall apply to development orders
issued by the County and to the County's annual budget, and
to the appropriate individual element of this Comprehensive
Plan. The standards for levels of service of Category A
facilities which are not County provided shall apply to
development orders issued by the County and to the
appropriate individual element of this Comprehensive Plan,
but shall not apply to the County's annual budget.
Category B public facilities are facilities for the County's
library, jail, emergency medical service, other government
buildings, 'and depende~t fire districts. The standards for
levels of service of Category B public facilities shall apply
to the County's annual budget, but not apply to development
orders issued by the County.
Category C includes those facilities operated by Federal,
State, and municipal governments, independent districts, and
private organizations. The standards for levels of service
of Category C facilities shall be advisory only, and shall
not apply to the development orders issued by the County or
the County's annual budget.
Public facilities shall include land, structures, the initial
furnishings and equipment (including ambulances, fire apparatus,
and library'collection materials), design, permitting, and
construction costs. Other: "capital" costs, such as motor
vehicles and motorized equipment, computers and office equipment,
office furnishings, and small tools are considered in the
County's annual budget, but such items are not "public
facilities" for the purposes of the Growth Management Plan, or
the issuance of development orders.
· Policy 1.1.2:
The quantity of public facilities that is needed to eliminate
existing deficiencies and to meet the needs of future growth
shall be determined for each public facility by the following
calculation:
O - (s x D) - I.
Where Q is the quantity of public facility needed,
S is the standard for level of service,
D is the demand, such as the population, and
I is the inventory of existing facilities.
A. The calculation will be used for existing demand in
order to determine existing deficiencies. The
calculation will be used for projected demand in order
to determine needs of future growth. The estimates of
projected demand will account for demand that is likely
to occur from previously issued development orders as
well as future growth.
B. There are three circumstances in which the standards for
levels of service are not the exclusive determinant of
need for a public facility:
1. Calculated needs for p6blic facilities in coastal
h.igh hazard areas are subject to all limits and
conditions in the Conservation and Coastal
Management and Future Land Use Elements of this
Growth Management Plan.
2. Replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities, and
repair, remodeling an renovation, will be
determined by the Board of County Commissioners
upon the recommendation of the County Manager.
3. Public facilities that provide levels of service in
excess of the standards adopted in this Growth
Management Plan may be constructed or acquired at
any time as long as the following conditions are
met:
a. the facility does not make financially
unfeasible any public facility of the same
type that is needed to achieve or maintain the
standards for levels of service adopted in
this Growth Management Plan, and
CIE - 2
47P,r, 09
b. the facility does not contradict, limit or
substantially change the goals, objectives and
policies of any element of this Growth
Management Plan.
Any public facility that is determined to be needed as a result
of any of the three factors li~ted in Section B of this Policy
shall be included in the regular Schedule of Capital Improvements
Contained in this Capital Improvements Element. Ail capital
improvement projects for such public facilities shall be approved
in the same manner as the projects that are identified according
to the quantitative analysis described in Section A of this
policy.
Policy 1.1~3~
The determination of location of improvements to expand public
facilities will take into consideration the projected growth
patterns as identified in the County's annual population
projections. Where applicable, public facility improvements will
be coordinated with the capital facility plans of any other
governmental entity providing public facilities within Collier
County.
Policy 1.1.4:
Public facility improvements within a category are to be
considered in the following order or priority:
A. Replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities,
including repair, remodeling and renovation of
facilities that contribute to achieving or maintaining
levels of service.
B. New facllitias that reduce or eliminate existing
deficiencies in levels of service.
c. New facilities that provide the adopted levels of
service for new growth during the next five fiscal
years, as updated by the annual review.of the Capital
Improvements Element. In the event that the planned
capacity of public facilities is insufficient to serve
all applicants for development orders, the capital
improvements will be scheduled in the following priority
order to serve:
1. previously approved orders ~ermitting
redevelopment,
2. previously approved orders permitting new
development,
3. new orders permitting redevelopment, and
CIE - 3
4. new orders permitting new developments.
D. Improvements to existing facilities, and new facilities
that significantly reduce the operating cost of
providing a service or facility.
E. New facilities that exceed the adopted levels of service
for new growth during the next five fiscal years by
either:
1. providing excess public facility capacity that may
be needed by future growth beyond the next five
fiscal years, or
2. providing higher quality public facilities than are
contemplated in the County's normal design criteria
for such facilities.
Policy 1.1.$~
The standards for levels of service of public facilities shall be
as follows:
Category A ~t~blio Facilities
A1 County Roads
Al.1 County arterials and collector roads: Level of Service
as indicated" "below on the basis of peak hour, peak
season traffic-volume:
Level of Service "E" on the following designated roads:
Roads From - To
Airport Road Pine~Ridge Road to Golden Gate
Parkway
Golden Gate Parkway Airport Road to Santa Barbara
Boulevard
Goodlette-Frank Road Pine Ridge Road to Golden Gate
Parkway
Goodlette-Frank Road Golden Gate Parkway to US 41
Pine Ridge Road Airport Road to 1-75
A1.2 Level of Service "D" peak hour, peak season on all other
County arterial and collector roads, however any section
of road may operate at Level of Service "E" for a period
not to exceed two fiscal years following the
determination of Level of Service "E" in order to
· provide the County with time to restore Level of
Service "D" by making appropriate improvements.
Development orders may be issued during the two year
period to the extent their issuance is consistent with
Policies 1.5.3 and 1.5.4 of this Element.
CIE - 4
St:~te and Fed(ira1 Road~:
~' 1-75 C D
US 41 C D
SR-84 D D
SR-951 - E
SR-29 C -
~;!, SR-82 C -
~2 County Surface Water Management Systemst
* A3.1 Future "private" developments - water quantity and
quality standards as specified in Collier County
Ordinances 74-50 and 90-10.
* A3.2 Existing "private" developments and existing or future
public drainage facilities - these existing levels of
service identified (by design storm return frequency
event) by the completed portions of the Water Management
Master Plan as listed in the Drainage/Water Management
Subelement of the Public Facilities Element.
A4 County Potable Water Systems:
A4.1 County systems
135 gallons per day per capita plus 21% for
non-residential
A4.2 City of Naples - 150 gallons per capita per day
A4.3 Private potable water systems:
Sewage flow design standards as identified in Policy
1.3.1 of the Potable Water Subelement of this Growth
Management Plan.
A5 County Sanitary Sewer Systems:
A5.1 County systems:
100 gallons per day per capita plus 21% for
non-residential
A5.2 City of Naples ~ 150 gallons per capita per day
A5.3 Private sanitary sewer systems:
Sewage flow design standards as identified in Policy
1.2.1 of the sanitary Sewer Subelement of this Growth
Management Plan.
· A~ended February 5, 1991
CIE - 5
A6 County Solid Waste Disposal Facilities:
A6.1 1.55 tons of Solid Waste per capita per year
A6.2 Two years of landfill lined cell disposal capacity at
present fill rates
A6.3 Ten years of landfill raw land capacity at present fill
rates
A? County Parks and Recreation Facilities:
A7.1 Regional Park land ~, 2.9412 acres per 1,000/pop.
A7.2 Community Park land ,, 1.2882 acres per 1,000/pop.
A7.3 Recreation facilities -, $122.00 capital investment
per capita (at current
cost)
Category B Public Faoilities~
B1 County Library Buildings : 0.33 square feet per capita
B2 County Library Collection : 1.0 books per capita
County Jail : 0.0033 beds per capita
B4 County Emergency Medical : 0.00006 EMS units per
Service capita
B$ County other Government : 2.58 square feet per capita
Buildings
B6 County dependent fire
districts:
B6.1 Isle of Capri District = 0.00097 apparatus and
stations per capita
B6.20chopee District ~, 0.00057 apparatus and
stations per capita
CIE- 6
I111 13'
Category C P%%blic Facilities:
C1 Municipal Str(~etst
C1.1 City of Naples ~ not to exceed annual
average capacity of "C" for all
streets
Cl.2 Everglades City - annual average of "A" for
all collectors
c2 Federal and State Lands Surface Water Management=
C2.1 Federal Lands Surface Water Management - to protect
Natural Resources, development allowed will be designed
so drainage will have no adverse impact on resources.
(No measurable standard)
C2.2 State Lands Surface Water Management = leased lands for
agriculture to have best management practices per clean
water act. (No measurable standard)
Municipal Surface Water Management=
C3.1 city of Naples = maintain existing level of
service
New development to conform with County surface water
C3.2 Everglades City = 10 year - 24 hour storm event
C4 Mun.[cipal Pot~ble Water Systsms~
C4.1 Everglades City = 135 gallons per capita per day,
plus 21% for non-residential
C5 Municipal Sanitary Sewer systems=
C5.1 Everglades City = 100 gallons per capita per day
plus 21% for non-residential
C6 Private Solid Waste Disposal Facilities:
C6.1 city of Naples - 1.55 tons per capita.
C6.2 Everglades City - 1.55 tons per capita
C7 Federal and State Parks:
C7.1 Federal Parks: Everglades National Park, Big
Cypress Preserve - to protect
environmentally sensitive lands.
Boundaries set by legislation.
(No measurable standard)
CIE - 7
C7.2 State Park: Policy is not to develop more than
20%. (No measurable standard)
C7.3 State Recreation Standard is of no particular
Area: size, physical development limited
to no more than 50% of land area.
C7.4 State Preserves: to maintain exceptional objects to
Conditions. Physical development
limited to no more than 5% of land
area. (No measurable standard)
C7.5 State Museum: no standard for size
C7.6 State Ornamental no standard for size
Garden:
C8 Municipal Park~3 and Recreation Facilities:
C8.1 City of Naples:
a. Community Parks - 2 acres/ 1,000 population
b. Neighborhood Parks = i acre / 1,000 population
c. Beaches = 1 mile /25,000 population
d. Recreation Facilities
Level of Service Standards:
1. Basketball Courts ~ 1/ 5,000 population
2. Baseball Fields = 1/ 5,000 population
3. Beach Access Points = 1/ 1,000 population
4. Boat Ramps = 1/ 6,000 population
5. Bike Trails = 1/ 1,500 population
6. Community Centers = 1/ 8,000 population
7. Football Fields = 1/10,000 population
8. Horseshoe Pits = 1/ 2,500 population
9. Meeting Rooms = 1/ 6,000 population
10. Pavilions = 1/ 5,000 population
11. Picnic Areas = ~/ 5,000 population
12. Play Areas = 1/ 6,000 population
13. Racquetball Courts - 1/ 2,500 population
14. Shuffleboard Courts = 1/ 2,500 population
15. Swimming Pools = 1/25,000 population
16. Tennis Courts = 1/ 2,000 population
17. Volleyball Courts = 1/ 4,000 population
C8.2 Everglades City:
a. Community Parks = 1.25 acres/534 population
b. Recreation Facilities:
1. Basketball Courts ~ 1/534 population
2. Baseball Fields = 1/534 population
3. Bike Trails = 1/534 population
4. Community Centers = 1/534 population
5. Football Fields = 1/534 population
6. Pavilions = 1/534 population
CIE - 8
7. P_cnic Areas = 1/534 population
8. Play Areas = 1/534 population
9. Tennis Courts = 1/534 population
Private Recreation Facilities:
a. No standard in industry
b. Collier County Usable Open Space Requirement
Ordinance $82-2 Sec. 7.27
1. Planned Residential Developments =
60% of gross area shall be devoted to
usable open space
2. Commercial, Industrial, & Mixed Purpose
Development =
at least 30% of gross area shall be
devoted to open space
3. Dedication of usable open space =
Maximum of 8% of gross project site
C10 Public Schools~
a. K - 5 Elementary School - 832 students/building
b. 6 - 8 Middle School m 1100 students/building
c. 9 - 12 High School ~ 2200 students/building
Cll Public Health Facilities: County Government Buildings
standard of 2.58 sq. ft. per capita includes the
County's public health facilities.
m
OBJECTIVE 1.2=
Provide public facilities in order to maintain adopted level of
service standards that are within the ability of the County to
fund, or within the County's authority to require others to
provide. Existing facility deficiencies measured against the
adopted level of service standards will be eliminated with
revenues generated by ad valorem taxes and intergovernmental
revenues receive~ based on economic activity. Future development
will bear a proportionat~ cost of facility improvements
necessitated by growth. Future development's payments ~,,ay take
the form of, but are not limited to, voluntary contributions for
the benefit of any public facility, impact fees, dedications of
land, provision of public facilities, and future payments of user
fees, special assessments and taxes.
Policy 1.2.1:
The estimated capital expenditures for all needed public
facilitie~ shall not exceed conserw~tive estimates of revenues
from sources that are available to the County pursuant to current
law, and which have not been rejected by referendum, if a
referendum is required to enact a source of revenue.
Policy 1.2.2:
Existing and future development shall both pay for the costs of
needed public facilities. Existing development shall pay for
some or all facilities that reduce or eliminate existing
deficiencies, some or all of the replacement of obsolete or worn
out facilities, and may pay a portion of the cost of facilities
needed by future development. ~oth existing and future
development may have part of their costs paid by grants,
entitlements or public facilities from other levels of government
and independent districts.
Policy 1.2.3:
Public facilities financed by County enterprise funds (i.e.,
potable water, sanitary sewer and solid waste) maybe financed by
debt to be repaid by user fees and charges for enterprise
services, or the facilities may be financed from current assets
(i.e., reserves, surpluses and current revenue).
POliCy 1.2.4=
Public facilities financed by non-enterprise funds (i.e., roads,
surface water management, parks, library, emergency medical
service, jail, other government buildings, and dependent fire
districts) shall be financed from current assets (pay-as-you-go
financing) except as otherwise provided in this policy. Public
facilities financed by non-enterprise funds shall not be financed
by debt unless uuch borrowing is the o~ly financing technique
available that will enable the County to provide facility
capacity sufficient to meet standards for levels of service
CIE - 10
concurrent with new development. Debt financing shall not be
used to provide excess capacity in non-enterprise public
facilities ~nless the exce~s capacity is an unavoidable result of
a capital improvement that is needed to achieve or maintain
standards for levels of service. Notwithstanding other
provisions of this policy, general obligation bonds approved by
referendum may be used for any public facilities to acquire
capacity needed within the five year capital improvements plan or
for excess capacity.
Policy 1.2.5:
The County shall not provide a public facility, nor shall it
accept the provision of a public facility by others, if the
County is unable to pay for the subsequent annual operating and
maintenance costs of the facility.
Policy 1.2.6=
Prior to fiscal year 1989-90, the County shall adopt a revised
Road Impact Fee Ordinance requiring the same level of service
standard as adopted in Policy 1.1.5 of this element in order to
assess new development a pro rata share of the costs required to
finance transportation improvements necessitated by such
· development.
Policy 1.2.7:
The County shall continue to collect impact fees for Parks and
Recreation and Library facilities requiring the same level of
service.standard as adopted in Policy 1.1.5 of this element in
order to assess new development a pro rata share of the costs
required to finance Parks and Recreation and Library improvements
necessitated by such development.
Policy 1.2.az
Prior to fiscal year ~998-9~ 1992-9] the County shall adopt a
Stormwater Run-off Utility Fee System or alternative revenue
source in order to fund drainage facility improvements.
~ns~%u%e-a-ge~era~-oB~ga%~on-bon~-for-the-purehase-o~-Reg~na~
ParR-Ban~-an~-~ae&}&~&es-&f-the-~th-een~-Sa}es-Tax-Referen~um
The-e~n~y-sha}~-p}a=e-a-re~erem~um-he~re-~he-v~ers-&n
Novem~erT-}99e-~o-&ns~&~u~e-~he-½ewy-~-~he-Bo=e~-ep~n-Sa½es
TaM-Bu=ehsrge-%~h-een~=--ReYemues-gemera~e~-w~}}-be-use~-~o
a-e~mb&nat&~n-of-bon~ng-an~-~ash-f~ow?--Revenue-genera~e~-~n
ba½}o~-eons½s~en~-w~h-~he-requ~remen~s-of-ehap~=Z~Z=e55~-P?S?
es~a~}&sh-a~eoun~y-w&de-Road-~mp=ovemen~-Assessman~-B&s~r~=~-&n
~mp~vemen~s-~den~ed-~n-~he-See~nd-Annua~-~-~pda~e-~r-wh~ch
P~n-es-ehe-p=~ma~y-revenue-~eu=ee= The County will establish
a~d imDlement a County-~'ide ~oad ImDroYe~eDt Asse~smeRt District
~ F¥91/92 to fund :he deficit for Cou~%y a~d State
imDrovemen~s identified, in the.SGhedule of Capital Impr0veme~ts.
Polioy 1.2.~e
The primary source of funding for CIE Project #400, County 5ail,
will be
e~e=~o=e~e-~n-Novembe~?-}99aT a General Obligation Bond
referendum for approval of a bond issue to be financed by a new
ad valorem tax.
If, for any reason, the County cannot adopt one or more of the
revenue sources identified in Policies 1.2.6 through 1.2.10 of
this Element and said revenue sources are identified as needed
funding for specific projects within the adopted Schedule of
Capital Improvements, the Growth Management Plan shall be amended
based on one or more of the following actions:
A. Remove through a plan amendment facility improvements or
new facilities from the adopted Schedule of Capital
Improvements that exceed the adopted levels of service
for the growth during the next five (5) fiscal years;
B. Remove from the adopted Schedule of Capital Improvements
through a plan amendment facility improvements or new
facilities tha~ reduce the operating cost of providing a
. service or facility but do not provide additional
facility capacity;
C. Where feasible, transfer funds from a funded Non-Capital
Improvement Element capital project in order to fund an
identified deficient Capital Improvement Element public
facility. The resulting revisions shall be reflected in
the required annual update.
D. Lower the adopted level of service standard through a
plan amendment for the facility for which funding cannot
be obtained.
CIE - 12
E. Do not issue development orders that would continue to
cause a deficiency based on the facility's adopted level
of service standard.
Policy 1.2.~4 12:
Collier County will not exceed a maximum ratio of total general
governmental debt servics to bondable revenues from current
sources of 13%. Whereas Florida Statutes. place no limitation on
the application of revenues to debt service by local taxing
authorities, prudent fiscal management dictates a self-imposed
level of constraint. Current Bondable revenues are ad valorem
taxes and State-shared revenues, specifically gas taxes and the
half-cent sales tax.
8ureher~e-~9~h-een~-~-~-~hou~d-be-t~dop%ed-By-~he-eo~½~e~
bond-~ssues-f~nded-by-%he-~h-eem~-Sa}es-Tax-w&½}-be-kem-~8~
yea=s. The Enterprise Funds operate under revenue bonding ratios
set by the financial markets and are, therefore, excluded from
this debt policy.
II 20
OBJECTIVE 1.3=
Effective with plan implementation public expenditures in the
coastal high hazard area shall be limited to those facilities
needed to support new development to the extent permitted in the
Future Land Use Element. In addition, public expenditures shall
include the following categories:
A. Maintenance of existing public facilities;
Beach, shore an waterway access;
C. Beach renourishment.
Policy
The County shall continue to expend funds within the coastal high
hazard area for the replacement and maintenance of public
facilities identified in the Conservation and Coastal Management
Element.
Policy 1.3.2:
The calculated needs for public facilities will be based on the
adopted level of service standards and future growth projections
within the coastal high hazard area. The Future Land Use Element
limits new residential development (thus obligations for
infrastructure expenditures) to a maximum of four dwelling units
per gross acre within portions of the coastal high hazard area.
In addition, re-evaluation of existing zoning on unimproved
properties that are inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element
will be undertaken as part of the zon£ng re-evaluation program
specified in Policy 3.1K of the Future Land Use Element.
Policy 1.3.3:
The County shall continue to insure that access to beaches,
shores and waterways remai~ available to the public and hy
December 31, 1992, develop a program to expand the availability
of such access and a method to fund its acquisition.
CIE - 14
O'47 t 21
~) IMPROVEMENT_~
OBJECTIVE 1.4~
The County shall coordinate its land use planning and decisions
with its plans for public facility capital improvements by
providing needed capital improvements for replacement of obsolete
or worn out facilities, eliminating existing deficiencies, and
future development and redevelopment caused by previously issued
and new development orders.
Policy 1.4.1:
The County shall provide, or arrange for others to provide, the
public facilities listed in the Schedule of capital Improvements
in the "Requirements for Capital Improvements Implementation"
section of this Capital Improvements Element. The Schedule of
Capital Improvements may be modified as follows:
A. The Schedule of Capital Improvements shall be updated
annually.
B. Pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187, the Schedule of
Capital Improvements may be amended two times during any
calendar year, and as allowed for emergencies,
developments of regional impact, and certain small scale
development activities.
C. Pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3177, the Schedule of
Capital Improvements may be adjusted by ordinance not
deemed to be an amendment to the Growth Management Plan
for corrections, updates, and modifications concerning
costs; revenue sources; or acceptance of facilities
purEuant to dedications which are consistent with the
plan.
Policy
Ail Category A public facility capital improvements shall be
consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the
appropriate individual element of this Growth Management Plan.
Policy 1o4.35
The County shall include in the capital appropriations of its
annual budget all the public facility projects listed in the
Schedule of Capital Improvements for expenditures during the
appropriate fiscal year. Projects for which appropriations have
been made in the annual budget will not be removed once they have
been relied upon for the issuance of a building permit. The
County may also include in the capital appropriations of its
annual budget additional public facility projects that conform to
POliCy 1.1.2 (B 3) and Policy 1.1.4 (C) and (E).
The County shall determine, prior to the issuance of building
permits, whether or not there is sufficient capacity of Category
A public facilities to met the standards for levels of service
for existing population and the proposed development. No
building permit shall be issued by the time mandated for the
adoption of land development regulations pursuant to Chapter
163.3202, F.S., including any amendments thereto unless the
levels of se~ice for the resulting development will achieve the
standards in Policy 1.1.5, Category A, and the requirements for
Concurrency Hanagement as outlined in the policies within
Objective 1.5 of this element are met.
CIE - 16
CONCURRENCY F~NAGEMENT_
OBJECTIVE 1.$~
In order to coordinate land use decisions and facility planning
by the time mandated for the adoption of land development
regulations pursuant to Chapter 163.3202, F.S., including any
amendments thereto, the County shall adopt a "Concurrency
Management System" Ordinance for the scheduling, funding and
timely construction of Category A public facilities concurrent
with, or prior to development in order to achieve and maintain
adopted standards for levels of service, and to exceed the
adopted standards when possible.
Beginning with the effective date of Plan Implementation through
September 30, 1994, the concurrency requirement for the Potable
Water, Sanitary Sewer, Drainage, Solid Waste and Recreation and
Open Space Level of Service Standards, of this Growth Management
Plan would be met if any of the following conditions of an
established Concurrency Management System are met:
A. The required facilities are in place at the time a
building permit is issued, or a building permit is
issued subject to the condition that the necessary
facilities will be in place when the impact of the
development occurs.
B. The required facilities are under construction at the
time a building permit is issued.
C. The required facilities are the subject of a binding
contract executed for the construction of those
facilities at the time a building permit is issued.
D. The construction of required facilities has been
included in the County's adopted budget at the time a
building permit is issued even though the facilities are
not yet the subject of a binding contract for their
construction.
E. The construction of facilities required to accommodate
the impact of development occurring before October 1,
1994 is scheduled in the County's Schedule of Capital
Improvements prior to October 1, 1994. The Schedule of
Capital Improvements shall be based on a realistic,
financially feasible program of funding from existing
revenue sources and shall be adopted as a part of this
Growth Management Plan.
1. A plan amendment is required to eliminate, defer or
delay construction of any Category A facility in
the, Schedule of Capital Improvements which is
CIE - 17
needed to maintain the adopted level of service
standard. Any development order issued pursuant to
a concurrency finding under this section is
e×pressly conditional so that the permit shall be
suspended and no further development shall be
carried out in the event any of the following occur
without a corresponding plan amendment:
a. The required facilities are delayed, deferred,
or removed from the adopted Schedule of
capital Improvements.
b. Annual funding is insufficient to maintain the
Schedule of Capital Improvements.
c. Construction of the required facility or
facilities is not undertaken in accordance
with the adopted Schedule of Capital
Improvements.
F. The construction of required facilities scheduled in the
County's Schedule of Capital Improvements prior to
October 1, 1994 will not be delayed, deferred or removed
from the Capital Improvement Element if the facilities
have been relied upon for issuance of a development
order.
Policy 1.$.2~
Effective October 1, 1994, the concurrency requirement for the
Potable Water, Sanitary Sewer, Drainage, Solid Waste and
Recreation and Open Space Level of Service Standards of this
Growth Management Plan would be met if any of the following
conditions of an established Concurrency Management System are
met:
A. The required facilities are in plaqe at the time the
building permit is issued, or a building permit is
issued subject to the condition that the necessary
facilities will be in place and operational when the
impacts of the development occur.
B. The required facilities are under construction at the
time a building permit is issued.
C. The required facilities are the subject of a binding
contract executed for the construction of these
facilities at the time a building permit is issued.
D. The construction of required facilities has been
included in the County's adopted budget at the time a
building permit is issued even though the facilities are
not yet the subject of a binding contract for their
CIE - 18
25
construction.
Poli~y 1.5.3~
Beginning with the effective date of Plan Implementation through
September 30, 1994, the concurrency requirement of the Traffic
Circulation Level of Service Standard of this Growth Management
Plan would be met if any of the following conditions of an
established Concurrency Management System are met:
A. The required facilities are in place at the time a
building permit is issued, or a building permit is
issued subject to the condition that the necessary
facilities will be in place when the impacts of the
development occur.
B. The required facilities are under construction at the
time a building permit is issued.
C. The required facilities are the subject of a binding
contract executed for the construction of these
facilities at the time a building permit is issued.
D. The construction of required facilities has been
'included in the State or local Government's adopted
budget at the time a building permit is issued even
though the facilities are not yet the subject of a
binding contact for their construction, provided that
the level of service (LOS) of any road dces not fall
beyond the next lower LOS below the adcpted standard
(i.e., LOS standard is "D" peak hour, peak season and
service does not fall below "E" peak hour, peak season).
E. The construction of the facility required to accommodate
the impact of development occurring before October 1,
1994 is included in the State's Five (5) Year Work
Program or the County's current five (5) year Capital
Improvement Schedule adopted as a pat of this Growth
Management Plan prior to October 1, 1994. A plan
amendment is required to eliminate, defer or delay
construction of any road project in the Schedule of
Capital Improvements which is needed to maintain the
adopted level of service standard. Any development
order issued pursuant to a concurrency finding under
this section is expressly conditional so that the permit
shall be suspended and no further development shall be
carried out in the event any of the following occur
without a corresponding plan amendment:
1. The required facility is delayed, deferred, or
removed from the State's Five (5) Year Work Program
or the Schedule of Capital Improvements.
CIE - 19
2.Annual funding is insufficient to maintain the
Schedule of Capital .Improvements.
3. Construction of the required facility or facilities
is not undertaken in accordance with the County's
adopted Schedule of Capital Improvements or the
State's Five (5) Year Work Program
F. The construction of required facilities scheduled in the
County's Schedule of Capital Improvements prior to
October 1, 1994 will not be delayed, deferred or removed
from the Capital Improvement Element if the facilities
have been relied upon for issuance of a development
order.
Effective October 1, 1994, the concurrency requirements of the
Traffic Circulation Level of Service Standard of this Growth
Management Plan would be met if any of the following conditions
of an established Concurrency Management System are met'
A. The required facilities are in place at the time a
building permit is issued, or a building permit is
issued subject to the condition that the necessary
facilities will be in place when he impacts of the
development occur.
B. The required facilities are under construction at the
time a building permit is issued.
C. The required facilities are the subject of a binding
contract executed for the construction of these
facilities at the time a building permit is issued.
D. The construction of required facilities has been
included in the State or local Government's adopted
budget at the time a building permit is issued even
though the facilitie~ are not yet the subject of a
binding contract for their construction, provided that
the level of service (LOS) of any road does not fall
beyond the next lower LOS below the adopted standard
(i.e., LOS standard is "D" peak hour, peak season and
service does not fall below "E" peak hour, peak season).
E. The construction of the required facility is included in
the State's Five (5) Year Work Program or the County's
current five (5) year Capital Improvement Schedule
adopted as a part of this Growth Management Plan and:
1. The Board of County Co~missioners have made an
express finding, after a public hearing, that the
current five (5) year capital improvement schedule
CIE - 20
047 27
is based on a realistic:, financially feasible
program of funding from existing revenue sources;
and
2. The level of service (I~S) on all roads serving the
development will not, at any time, operate below
peak hour, peak season LOS "E"; and
3. The level of service (LOS) on any road serving the
development will not operate at peak hour, peak
season LOS "E" for a period of more than two (2)
years; and
4. A plan amendment is required to eliminate, defer or
delay construction of any road project in the
Schedule of Capital Improvements which is needed to
maintain the adopted level of service standard.
Any development permit issued pursuant to a
concurrency finding under this section is expressly
conditioned so that the permit shall be suspended
and no further development shall be carried out in
the event any of the following occur without a
corresponding plan amendment:
a. The required facility is delayed, deferred or
removed from the five (5) year capital
improvement schedule or the State's five (5)
year work program;
b. Annual funding is insufficient to maintain the
five (5) year capital improvement schedule or
the State's five (5) year program;
c. The level of service on any road serving the
development operates below peak hour, peak
season LOS "E";
d. The level ~f service on any road serving the
development operates at peak hour, peak season
LOS "E" for a period of more than two (2)
years; and
e. Construction of the required facility or
facilities is not undertaken in accordance
with the five (5) year capital improvement
schedule or the State's five (5) year work
program.
Policy
On or before the time mandated for the adoption of land
development~regulations pursuant to Chapter 163.3202, F.S.,
including any amendments thereto, the County shall implement,
CIE - 2~
through the adoption of an ordinance, a Concurrency Management
System and a monitoring program.
.';
REQUIREMENTS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE OF C;%PITAL IMPROVEMENTS
The Schedule of Capital Improvements on the following pages will
eliminate existing deficiencies, replace obsolete or worn out
facilities, and make available adequate facilities for future
growth.
Each project is numbered and named, and its cost during each of
the next five fiscal years is shown in thousands of dollars
(000).
Each project in Category A is consistent with the level of
service standards as identified within this element and the
appropriate individual element of this Growth Management Plan.
Each project in Category B is consistent with the level of
service standards as identified within this element. Optional
elements were not developed for Category B facilities.
CIE - 23
30
C~TEGORY A
HOAD PROJECTS: COLLIER COUNTY 5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT $(000)
Pro eot 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
I 111th Avenue North 190 60 150 150 2200 2750
US 41 - Vanderbilt Drive
1 miles: replace 2 lanes;
add 2 lanes
2 Airport Pulling Road (CR-31) (COMPLETED)
Radio Road - Golden Gate
Parkway: 1.4 miles: add 2
lanes
3 Airport-Pulling Road
41 - Radio Road
US
1.8 miles: add 2 lanes
4 .Davis Boulevard (BR-84)
Santa Barbara Boulevard -
County Barn Road
1.4 miles: add 2 lanes
3450
5 Golden Gate Parkway (CR-886) 322 328 2800
CR-851 - CR-31
1.6 miles: add 2 lanes
6 Immokalee Road (CR-846)
CR-31 - 1-75
3.5 miles: replace 2 lanes;
add 2 lanes
283 307 400 4525 5515
8 Immokalee Road (CR-846) ~
1-75 - CR-951
3.4 miles: replace 2 lanes;
add 2 lane~ "
~TEGORY X
RO~D PROJECTS: COLLIER COUNTY S-YEAR CAPIT~L IMPR~S'~ $(000)
91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
Project ..................
4900
10 Isles of Capri Road (CR-951) '21 4879
US 41 - Rattlesnake Hammock
Road: 3.4 miles: replace 2
lanes; add 2' lanes
11 Isles of Capri Road (CR-951) -. 250 4480 4730
SR-84 - Rattlesnake Hammock
Road: 3 miles: replace 2
lanes; add 2 lanes
12' I~le~ of Capri Road (8R-951) (COMPLETED)
US 41 - Marco Bridge
R-O-W Acquisition
13 Isles of Capri Road (CR-951) (COMPLETED)
'23rd Ave. S.W. - Golden Gate
Blvd.' 2.8 miles: replace 2
lanes; add 2 lanes
1500 8950 12650
14 Pine Ridge Road (CR-896) 2200
US 41 - CR-31
2 miles: add 2 lanes
15 Radio Road
CR-31 - Santa Barbara
Boulevard: 3 miles; replace
2 lanes; add 2 lanes
16 Radio Road 235 2000 2235
Santa Barbara Boulevard -
SR-84:1.5 miles: replace 2
lan~s; add 2 lanes
~ATE~ORY A .. .
ROAD PROJECTS: COLLIER COUNTY 5-~ CAPITAL IHPRO~S ELEHENT $(000)
Project 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
17 Rattlesnake Hammock Road 750 900 3500 5150
US 41 - County Barn Road
2 miles: replace 2 !~nes;
add 2 lanes
19 Goodlette Frank Road (CR-851) 1000 1000
Carica Road"- CR-846
2.5 miles: build 2 lanes
20 Gulf Shore Drive (DELETED)
Vanderbilt Beach Road
lllth Ave. 1.3 niles: add 1
lane.
21 Livingston Road (North) 16000 16000
.CR-846 - Imperial ST+EW Conn.
6.2 miles: build 2 lanes
22 Santa Barbara Blvd./Logan 75 2370 2445
Green Canal - Pine Ridge
Road: 1 mile: replace 2
lanes; add 2 lanes
23 Vanderbilt Beach Road 210 500 3800 4510
US 41 - CR-31
2.2 miles: build 2 lanes
24 Vanderbilt Beach Road (COHPLETED)
Oaks - CR-951
2.9 miles: build 2 lanes
CATEGORY A
ROAD PROJECTS: COLLIER COUNTY 5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEKENT $(000)
Project 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
25 Vanderbilt Drive (CR-901) 250 100 250 250 250 1100
lilth- Bonita beach Road
3.9 miles: replace 2 lanes;
add 2 lanes
26Nestclock Road
Carson Road - SR-29
1 mile: build 2 lanes
27 Hajor Reconstruction 307 630 628 600 2165
in-house major road
reconstruction at various
locations
600 2325
28 Traffic Signals 490 605 630
major installation at
various locations
31 Bonita Beach Road 880 2800 3680
Vanderbilt Drive to County-
line: 1.7 miles: add 1 lane
(1/2 in Lee County)
32' Santa Barbara Boulevard 200 200 200 218 3575 4393
Davis Blvd to Rattlesnake-
Hammock Road: 2 miles: build
4 lanes
437 208 400 3190 4235
33 County Barn Road
Davis Blvd. to Rattlesnake-
Hammock Road: 2 miles:
build 4 lanes
CATEGORY X
ROAD PROJECTS: COLLIER COUNTY 5-~R CAPITAL IMI~FE~ENTS ELEHENT $(000)
Project 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
34 J%dvanced ROW ~cquisition 200 200 200 200 200 1000
Carson Roa~
Lake Trafford Road to
Immokalee Drive - 0.6 miles;
add 2 lanes
36 New North-South Road (COMPLETED)
CR-858 to CR-846, 5.7 miles;
2 lanes
37 Isles of Capri Road (CR-951) 560 560
Golden Gate Blvd. to CR-846,
3.0 miles; add 2 lanes
38 -Pedestrian Overpass on SR-29
at Farmworkers Village
39 Airport-Pulling Road 50 478 4290 4818
Golden Gate Parkway to Pine
Ridge Road, 2.6 miles; 6
laning including grade
separation at Golden Gate
Parkway
40 Goodlette-Frank Road 100 230 2431 2761
Golden Gate Parkway to
Solana Road, 1.7 miles;
6 laning
41 Pine Ridge Road 100 208 200 350 2200 3058
Airport Road to 1-75, 2.0
miles'; 6 laning
RO~.D ~O~CrS~ COLLZ]m COUm~ S-~ C~~ Z]~R~S ~T~m(n~ ~¢000)
P~o ec~ 9L-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Tota~
42 Vanderbilt Beach Road 50 390 3080 3520
.US 41 to Gulfshore Drive
1.4 miles; 4 laning
52 Livingston Road 160 200 1210 1570
Pine Ridge to Wyndemere ..
1.5 miles; 2 lanes
53 Livingston Road 370 500 2815 3685
Golden Gate Parkway to Radio
Road
1.5 miles; 2 lanes
** Interim Loan Pay Back 13500 13500
. Pay-off or refunding of
o .commercial paper used to begin
~ projects needed for concurrency
~ COUNTY ROADS SUBTOTAL 23483 24695 34355 5616 29556 117705
CATEGORY A
ROAD PROJECTS: COLLIER COUNTY S-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT $(000)
Project 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
43 Tamiami Trail East (US 41) (DELETE)*
Davis Boulevard to Airport
Road.
44 Tamiami Trail North (US 41) 1000 1000 8000 10000
Grade separation at Pine --
Ridge Road
45 Tamiami Trail North (US 41) (DELETE)* ~
Immokalee Road to Laurel Oak
Drive
46 Tamiami Trail East (US 41) 500 ' 500
Rattlesnake-Hammock Road to
Barefoot WMS. Road
47 Tamiami Trail East (US 41) (DELETE)*
o Airport Road to Rattlesnake-
Hammock Road
48 Davis Boulevard (SR-84) (DELETE)*
Airport Road to Kings Lake
Boulevard
49 David Boulevard (SR-84) (DELETE)*
Kings Lake Boulevard to
County Barn Road
50 Tamiami Trail North (US 41) 4600 4600
Immokalee Road to Wiggins Pass ~
CATEGORY A' '
RO~D PROjECTS~ COLLIER COUNTY 5-YEAR C~PZT~L I~PROVEMENTS ELEHE~T $(000)
Project 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
~mmmm mmmmm mmmmm mmmmm mmmmm mmm--m
51 SR 951 3100 7400 10500
New York Drive to Marco Bridge
STATE ROADS SUBTOTALS 0 4100 13500 8000 25600
TOTALS '23483~ 28795 47855 5616 37556 143305
* Note:
To be funded in the revised FDOT 5-year work program with revenue from the additional
4 cent gas tax enacted by the 1990 Legislature.
CATEC, ORY 2~
DRAINAGE PROJECTS: COLL'rER COUNTY 5-YEAR CAP~T]t?., ~S ELEMENT $(000)
Project · 9~-92 .92-93 93-94 94-95 ~5-96 Total
290 Stormwater Master Plan (COMPLETED)
291 District No. 6 (Lely) 225 1598 2947 2797 1293 8860
Basin Plan and series of canals
and/or structure improvements
' 292 Gordon River Extension 400 '- 1860 5956 8216
Basin Plan and series of canals
and/or structure improvements
293 Cocohatchee River S~stem 2560 975 3535
Aerial Mapping and Basin Plan
294 Main Golden Gate System 1626 330 75 2031
C.~ Aerial Mapping and Basin Plan
~ ~ 295 Henderson Creek Basin 160 160
'-~ Detailed engineering/
~ ! environmental Basin Plan
~ ~ 296 Faka-Union Basin 105 1240 1345
Aerial Mapping and Basin Plan
297 Southern Coastal Basin 20 48 398 53 180 699
Aerial Mapping and Basin Plan
298 Barton River Basin 53 .53
Aerial Mapping
3157 3157
299 Naples Park Drainage ~
TOTALS ' 4831 5133 4660 5950 7482 28056
~n~ ~ ~x~. ~o,~_,o~s: co~.z~. Oom~z s-Ymt~ ~x~ ~s ~~ ~(ooo).,
p~oject 9~-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96
,mmm~m
301 Lely/East T~i~i ~S (COOL.ED) ·
Station and Vehicle:
Lely/East Tamiami Trail area
302 Golden Gate Par~ay 264 264
~S Station and Vehicle:
Golden Gate Par~y - A~ort
Road
303 System Status Float Unit 366 366
304 ~S Station ~d Vehicle: 366 366
Location to ~ dete~ined
based on need
~ 996
TOT~ 264 366 366
400 Jail Expansion 2000 23000 25000
Increase of 256 jail beds at
Naples Jail Center including
Administration and Support
Facilities ~
LIBRARY BUILDINGS PROJECTB~ COLLIER COUNTY 5-YE3LR'~ITAL IMPRO~B ELEHE~T' $(000) .,
Project 9~1-92- 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
500 Headquarters Addition - (COMPLETED) '122 122
26,575 sq. ft. addition
501 East Naples Branch (COMPLETED)
Construction of 6600 sq.ft.
branch library
502 Collier North Branch 32 344 376
3000 sq.ft, addition
503 Marco Island Branch 40 409 449
3300 sq.ft, addition
504 Library HQ Renovation (DELETE)
Renovate/remodel upon
.completion of Project
#500
505 Immokalee Branch 2 30 288 35 355
3000 sq.ft, addition
506 Golden Gate Branch 362 362
3000 sq.ft, addition
507 Vineyards Branch Library 50 776 826
10,000 sq.ft. Branch
Library
Library Buildings Total 518 384 439 338 811 2490
P~o~ect 9~-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 To~l
550 L~ra~ Collection 290 320 340 350 350 1650
Keep book stock ~ I book 9er
capita
Pro ect 9~-92 92-93 93-94 9~-95 95-9~ To~al
600 Ne~ Courthouse {COI~PLETED)
115,000 sq.ft, finished;
2~,000 ~q. Et. to be
completed at a future
time
601 New Health Building (COMPLETED) "662 662
50,000 sq.ft, finished + ·
25,000 sq.ft, to be
finished in FY91/92 to
house health related
activities, Social Services,
Veterans Services and Public
Services Administration
604 .Building W Expansion 2100 2100
15,000 sq.ft, expansion of
warehouse + day care facility'
231
605 New Agriculture Center (COMPLETED) 231
12,000 sq.ft, new structure
for agricultural activities/
emergency operating center
893 2100 2993
CATEGORY ~ ·
PARKS PROJECT8~ COLLIER COUNTY 5-1'EX~ CAPIT~L IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT $(000)
Pro ect 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
J -
700 Amphitheater
New structure in North Naples
Community Park or Mobile
Facility
701 Bicycle Trails
7.8 miles of pave~ trails 75 75 75 225
linking to schools or
existing trails
702 6th co~munity Park - Phase' I 868 1800 1821 4489
Land & Phase I facilities
(32 acres)
5511
703 Community Parks - Phase II (5) 1450 2665 1396
· Phase II of community Park
facilities for Immokalee, Marco,
East Naples, Golden Gate &
North Naples
704 Community Pool 670 670
25 meter pool in Immokalee .
705 Multi-purpose Facility 1453 1453
Wood floor, baskets, bleachers
and locker room facilities
706 Jogging Trails 58 28 86
3 miles, unpaved
PARKS PROJECTB: COLLIER COUNTY 5-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT $(000) ..
Project 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
707 Regional Park Land (DELETE)*
200 acres of land only
708 Competitive Pool 1500 1500
25 meter pool, deck grandstand,
locker room facilities
709 Track and Field 17 204 221
Full size equipped track
710 Boat Ra~ps 799 856 456 456 2567
12 lanes, parking, rest rooms,
lights, landscaping
711 7th Community Park - Phase I 100 2194 1471 3765
E II
Phase I & II facilities
(32 acres) in the Vineyards
712 8th Community Park - Phase I 868 2214 1407 4489
& II
Land & Phase I & II facilities
(32 acres) location to be
determined
7~3 Regional Parks Facilities 200 200
Parking Lot and Nature Trail
at Barefoot Beach
TOTALS 6445 8335 6319 2670 1407 25176
* NOTE: Additional regional park land is not needed during the CIE planning period due to
the addition of State parks land to inventory
C~TE(~ORY A
WATER PRCkTECT8: COLL'rER CO~ 5-~ ~IT~ ~R~S ~~ $(000)
Pro ec~ 9~92 92-9~ 93-94 94-95 95-96 To~I
801 Rattlesnake H~ock Road 20" (COOL.ED) '
6560 L.F. of 20" Water Main
802 County Barn Road 16~ (CO~LETED)
5900 L.F. of 16" Water Main
803 Davis Boulevard 16~ (CO~LETED)
11070 L.F. of 16" Water Main
804 Davis Boulevard 20" (CO~LETED)
2640 L.F. of 20" Water Main
80591st ~venue 12" Intercon. (CO~LETED)
200 L.F. of 12" Water Main
806 .7th Street 12~w Intercon. (CO~LETED)
100 L.F. of 12" Water ~ain
808 ~ud~on County Cl~ 16~ (CO~LETED)
5230 L.F. of 16" Water Main
1700
809 Carica Road P~ping 1700
Storage Ta~ ~mping
Facilities
810 Carlca Road Tank (CO~LETED)
Water Storage Ta~ and Land
replacement costs to Naples
811 Land for North Reg. (CO~LETED)
Treatment
Land Ac~isition
CATEGORY A
WATER PROJECTS~ COLLIER COUNTY B-YEAR C~PITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT $(000)
91.-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
Project ...........
812 Coral Reef Wellfield Study (COMPLETED)
813 Radi° Road 12" 102 102
2430 L.F. of 12" Water Main
815 Pine Ridge Road 16" (COMPLETED)
5280 L.F. of 16" Water Main
816 Goodlette Road Extension 16". (COMPLETED)
10560 L.F. of 16" Water Main
817 Seagate Drive 12" (COMPLETED}
2640 L.F. of 12" Water Main
818 Airport Road 16" (COMPLETED)
10,560 L.F. of 12" Water Main
819 Immokalee Road 20"
2000 L.F. of 12" Water Main
820 Immokalee Road 20"
3500 L.F..of 16" Water Main
821' Vanderbilt Drive 16" (COMPLETED)
5840 L.F. of 16" Water Main
823 CR-951 12"
23700 L.F. of 12" Water Main
824 CR-952
5500 L.F. of 12" Water Main
CATEGORY A ' '
W~TEIt PROJECTS: COLLIER COUNTY 5-YE~ CAPIT~L IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT ~(000)
P~:oject 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
825 Rattlesnake-Hammock Road 20" (COMPLETED)
7920 L.F. of 20" Water Main
826 6th Street 12"
6600 L..F. of 12" Water Main
827 Gulfshore & Vanderbilt 16"
12585 L.F. of 16" Water Main
828Coral Reef Wellfield Phase I .(DELETE)
Phase I of Master Plan Project
829North County Reg. Treatment
Plant
Construction of North County
,
Regional Water Treatment Plant
830 Im~okalee Road 36" (DELETE)
10560 L.F. of 36" Water Main
831 CR-951 36"
10560 L.F. of 36" Water Main
832 Immokalee Road 24"
7920 L.F. of 24" Water Main
833 Im~okalee Road 20"
5280 L.F. of 20" Water Main
834 Qua~l Creek PUD 16"
7920 L.F. of 16" Water Main
CATEGORY A
WATER PROJECTS~ COLLIE~ COUNTY 5-YEA~ CAPIT~L IMPROVES E~ $(000)
Pro ect 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
835 Immokalee Road 16"
2640 L.F. of 16" Water Main
Immokalee Road 12"
5280 L.F. of 12" Water Main
837 Livingston Road Extension 16"
23600 L.F. of 16" Water Main
838 1.5 MG Elevated Tank (DELETE)
839 Old US 41 16~w
1800 L.F. of 16" Water Main
640
840 Pine Ridge Road 16" 640
7920 L.F. of 16" Water Main
(COMPLETED)
841 Davis Boulevard 16~'
6450 L.F. of 16" Water Main
3325
842 5 MG Ground Tank 325 3000
Storage Tank & Pumping
Facilities at Collier DRI
843 12~' Main at Pine Ridge Road
8000 L.F. of 12" Water Main
844 12" Main at Pine Ridge Road (COMPLETED)
2800 L.F. of 12" Water Main
CATE~)RY A
UT~ PRO~CTS: COr. r.T~ CO~ s-~a ~~ ~o~s ~ $ ~oo0~
Project 92-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 To~l
846 12" Water ~tn a2 US 41 19 205 224
12" Water '~atn at I~okaZee
Road
5280 L.F. of 12u Water Main
848 12t* Water Ma~n at ~S 41 26 283 309
8300 L.F. of 12" Water ~ain
849 North County Wellf~eld - (DELETE)
850 Golden Gate Wellf~el~ 800 800
E~ans ion
851 ~aw ~ooster Station (CO~LET~)
85220" Hain on Goo~lette Road
~tens~on
10560 L.F. of 20~ Main
853 16se Loop Hain on Pa~ Drive
11450 L.F. of 16~ ~ain
854 20" Hain - US 41 North
8000 L.F. of 20" Main from
I~okalee Road to Wiggins
Pass
CATEGORY X
WATER PROJECTS= COLLIER COUNTY 5-YEAR CAPITAL _TWPR~S ELEKENT $(000) ·
91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
Project ...........................
855 12" Main on Radio Road
21120 L.F. of 12" Main
between Commercial Drive
and Davis Blvd.
400
856 16" Main - Livingston l~0ad 400
to w~ndemere
8000 L.F. of 16" Main from
Pine Ridge Road to
Wyndemere
264
857 16" Main on Santa Barbara 264
5280 L.F. of 16" Main from
Davis Blvd. to Radio Road
2196
2196
858 36" Main on CR-951
15840 L.F. of 36" Main from
Davis Blvd. to Rattlesnake
800 4000 4800
859 N. county Treatment Plant
Expansion
Add 4 MGD of capacity
400
860 Aquifer Storage & Recovery 400
Up to 4 MGD storage for
peak season
861 16" Mai~ - US 41 South 300 1580 1880
31,600 L.F. of 16" Main
C~TEGORY A "'
1rATER PROJECT8] COLLZER ~~ 5-~ ~ZT~ ~~B ~~ ~(000) .,
Pro~ect 9~-92 92-93 93-94 9~-95 95-96 Total
862 ~6" ~in - US 4Z Sou2h at ~-95~ '150 750 900
15,000 L.F. of 16" Main
863 30" Hain T~0ugh Pine Ridge 1200 1200
6,000 L.F., of 30" Main
T~ 8597 4149 7231 283 20260
CATEGORY A '-~'
SEWER PROJECTS: COLLIER CO~"E S-YEAR CAPIT~ IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT $(000) ..?
Project 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
901 North County Expansion (COMPLETED)
Design & Construction of
Wastewater Facility and
Effluent Disposal
902 East and South Naples ..
Collection System
Construction of the Facility
904 South County Reg. Treatment .(COMPLETED)
Facility~
906 Utility Administration (DEFERRED)
~C~ Building
.~ O Design and Construction
.~ 907 South County Pump, Mains
I Disposal
'C,~ ~ Pump Station, Transmission
C~. ~ Mains and Effluent Disposal
System
908 8" Force Main 700 700
Pump Station 15 to Pump
Station 20
10800 L.F. of 8" Force Main
909 12" Force Main 1100 1100
Pump Station 19 to Pump
Station 20
11300 L.F. of 12" Force Main
CATEGORY A ' '-~'
SEWER PROJECTS: COLLIER COUNTY 5-T~H CAPITAL IMPR~S ELEMENT $(000) .,
Project ' 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
m m mm -mmm m m m m m
910 10" Force Main - Davis .Blvd. (COMPLETED)'
Pump Station 11 to Santa ,
Barbara
2400 L.F. of !0" Force Main
911 Davis Blvd. Pump Station No.ll 700 700
' Design and Construction "
912 10t~ Force Main Davis Blvd. (COMPLETED)
Pump Station 14 to Pump
Station 11
7800 L.F. of 10" Force Main
913 Davis Blvd. 700 700
Pump Station No. 14
· Design and Construction
914 Force _w~_n CR-951/US a. 1 700 700
~0'"
Pump Station 18 to Pump
Station 1
11400 L.F. of 20" Force Main
915 Pump Station No. 18 700 700
Design and Construction
916 South Count~ Reg. Treatment 9000 9000
Facility Expansion
Design and Construction of
4 MGD Facility Expansion
CATEGORY ~
8~J~. PROu-'~CTS: COLLXEIt COUNTY Z-Yin%It C]t~I'T]LT~ Tl~~8 ~ $(000)
Pro ect 91-92' 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
917 North County Reg. Treatment 3600 2500 6100
Facility Expansion
Design and Construction of
2 MGD Facility Expansion
918 20" Force ~ain 600 600
Rattlesnake-Hammock Road -
CR-951 to Polly Avenue
11400 L.F. of 20" Force Main
919 Rattlesnaka--~ammock Road 700
700
Pump Station 20 - Design and
Construction
920 Pump Station No. 16 700
700
.CR-951 - Design and
Construction
921 12" Force Main
CR-951 - Pump Station 16 to
Pump Station 18
10800 L.F. of 12" Force Main
922 North County Pump Station (DELETE)
Telemetry BI, stem - Radio
Telemetry System
923 North County Wastewater (DELETE) *
Treatment Plant Operations
Building
office and Laboratory
· Move to non-CIE status.
SEWER PROJECTBz COLLIER COUNTY $-~E~R C]~PIT~ !M~MENTB ELEHENT ~(000)
Project 91-92 92'93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Total
924 North County
Master Pump Station 1.10
925 Pelican Bay-Improvement District
47520 L.F. of Force Main and 2
Pump Stations
926 Immokalee Road Sewer/Effluent
System -
Force Main & effluent line from
,,". Plant to Quail Creek
927 Master Pump Stations 1.03 & 1.07
2 pump stations on Immokalee Road
92S -24" Force Main from 1.06 to 1.07
20,000 L.F. of Force Main from
Airport Road to Orange Blossom
Drive
929 P~mp Station 3.17 100 700 800
US 41 South - Design and
Construction
930 12" Force Main 100 600 700
US 41 South Pump Station
3.17 to Station 3.18
20,000 L.F. of 12" Force Main
SEWER' PILOJECTB$ COLL'rER COUHT~ 5-YR]LR (:~ILPIT21LL 3:]GrR~fJ ~~ $(0OO)
P~o~ec~ 9~-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 To~
93~ ~2fl/~6"" Force ~in ~100 1000 1100
[~okalee ~oad - Oua[1
to ~-951
15,000 L.F. of 12"/16~ Force
~ain
T~S 18100 5500 700 24300
.,~:~_ ~ .,~i.~'~'?~c'' '~.'~'
~TEGORY ~ '
9L-92 92~3 . 93-94 94-95 95-96 TO~I
~ro~eck - --
95O
~000 Naples ~ndE~ll ~s[on '950
Land ~c~isi2ion, approximalel~
300 acres
750
~002 Leachate Trea~en2 Plant 750
~un-oEE management ~nd _.
proces~in~
~002 Naples LandE[ll (COOL.ED)
Cell ~6. Phase ~[
100
100
1003 Naples Landfill
Cell $6, Phase III
1800
1800
1004 .Naples Landfill
Cells 3 & 4 Clos~e
1280
1005 Naples Landfill 1280
Cell 6 Closure
1006 Naples Landfill 1253 253 11069 250 12825
Develop 300 acres
1007 I~okalee 25 2180 2205
10 acre landfill, New
Cell Construction
1008 I~okalee 675 675
Closure, Landfill Cell I
TOT~S 6833 2180 253 11069 250 20585
COSTS & REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY
In the tabl'e below, the left column itemizes the types of public
facilities and the sources of revenue. The center column
contains the 5-year (FY92-96) amounts of restricted revenues.
.The right column is a calculation of the deficit for each type of
public facility. All deficits are accumulated as a subtotal.
Below the subtotal deficit is the source of additional revenue
that will be used by the County to pay for the deficit in order
to maintain the standards for levels of service listed in CIE
COUNTY ARTERIAL & COLLECTOR ROADS $117,705,000
LESS Available Revenues:
Constitutional Gas Tax $ 7,341,000
~ Road Impact Fees 34,251,000
':' MSTD (Livingston Road) 16,000,000
Carry Forward 851,500
~:"' County-wide Road 59.261.500 117.705,000
~.. Assessment District
.~.. Balance 0
~J' STATE ROADS NETWORK 25,600,000
~ LESS Available Revenues:
FDOT Pay-backs (State/ 10,500,000
· "~ Federal Gas Taxes)
County-wide Road _~ _ 25.600,000
i~i~:' Assessment District
~' Balance 0
DRAINAGE PLANS AND PROJECTS 28,056,000
.~:. LESS Available Revenues:
· Stormwater Utility 15,246,000
~" Big Cypress Basin 4,685,000
~' Developer Contribution 300,000
Drainage Assessment 7.825.000 28.056.000
~,. Districts
· Balance 0
WATER & SEWER SYSTEMS 44,560,000
LESS System Development Fees . 44,560,000
Balance 0
SOLID WASTE/LANDFILL 20,585,000
.:i:' 'LESS Solid Waste User Fees 20,585,000
!:<,,,.. Balance 0
PARKB & RECREATION 25,176,000
LESS Available Revenues:
Park Impact Fees 8,358,500
Boating Improvement 3,025,000
Program
Carry Forward 6,50~.000 17.~4,50Q
Deficit ( 7,291!500)
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE 996,000
LESS EMS Impact Fees 552.400
Deficit ( 443,600)
JAIL 25,000,000
LESS G.O.B. Referendum 25,000,000
Balance 0
LIBRARY
Buildings 2,490,000
Collection 1,650,000
Reserve for Impact Fee Eligible' 527,9Q0
Projects
Total Library Costs 4,667,900
LESS Available Revenues:
Library Impact Fee 3,646,300
carry Forward ~$3,600 3.929.900
Deficit ( 738,000)
~OVERNMENT BUILDINGS Deficit ( 2,993,000)
:','~ FIRE DISTRICT
Isle of Capri 0
6:;~. Ochopee 0
i;:,:'! Balance 0
. Subtotal Deficit of Restricted Revenue vs. Costs (11,466,100)
~':'-. ADD Unrestricted Revenues:
".~'~!i' Ad Valorem Taxes 11,466,100
'!~!' (Capital Revenue Fund)
~ "' Balance $ 0
.... "" CIE - 53
PROGRAMS TO ENSURE IHPLEMENTATION
By the time mandated for the adoption of land development
regulations pursuant to Chapter 163.3202, F.S., including any
amendments thereto, appropriate land development regulations will
be adopted and the following programs will be implemented to
ensure that the goals, objectives and policies established in
the Capital Improvements Element will be achieved or exceeded.
1. Buildin~ Permit Review
As part of the review of all applications for building permits,
the County will determine whether or not there will be sufficient
capacity of Category A public facilities to meet the standards
for levels of service for the existing population and for the
proposed development in accordance with the requirements of the
Concurrency Management System.
2. Development Order Review
As part of the review of requests for all development orders
having negative impacts on Category A Public Facilities other
than building purmits, thQ County will det~rmine whether or not
sufficient capacity of Category A public facilities is planned
for completion concurrent with the impacts on levels of service
that will be created by the proposed development during the next
five fiscal years.
3. Impact Fees
Impact Fee Ordinances will require the same standard for the
level of service as is required by Policy 1.1.5.
4. ~nnual BudGet
The annual budget will include in its capital appropriations all
projects in the Schedule of Capital Improvements that are planned
for expenditures during the next fiscal year.
5. Bemiannual Report
The mandatory semiannual report to the Department of Community
Affairs concerning amendments to the comprehensive plan due to
emergencies, developments of regional impact and selected small
developments will report on changes, if any, to adopted goals,
objectives and policies in the Capital Improvements Element.
~. Update of CaDital Improvement Element
The monitoring of and adjustment to the Capital Improvement
Element to meet the changing conditions must be an ongoing
process. Beginning in April of each year, the element will be
updated in conjunction with the County's budget process and the
release of the official BEBR population estimates and
projections. The update will include:
1. Revision of population projections;
2. Updates of facility inventory;
3. Update of unit costs;
4. Update of facilities requirements analysis to project 10
year needs (by fiscal year) in order to program projects
to meet the service standards.
5. Update of revenue forecasts in order to evaluate
financial feasibility and the County's ability to
finance capital improvements needed to meet the service
standards.
6. Revise and develop capital improvement projects for the
next five years. The first year's schedule of projects
will be incorporated into the County's budget effective
October 1st.
7. Update of the public school and health facilities
analysis.
In addition to the annual update, the County will perform an
assessment of the status of the Capital Improvement Element in
November of each year in conjunction with the release of the
.preliminary BEBR population estimates and projections. This
analysis will include an assessment of the status of capital
projects funded during the prior fiscal year along with an
assessment of existing and projected service levels versus the
adopted standards.
7- Conourreno¥ ~ana~ement System
The County shall establish by ordinance and maintain a
Concurrency Management System. The system shall consist of the
following components:
A. Annual monitoring report on the capacity and levels of
service of public facilities compared to the standards
for levels of service adopted in Policy 1.1.5. of this
Element. The report shall summarize the actual capacity
of existing public facilities and forecast the capacity
of existing and planned public facilities for each of
the five succeeding fiscal years. For the purposes of
long range capital facility planning, a ten year fore-
cast of projected needed capacity will also be done.
These forecasts will be based on the most recently
updated Schedule of Capital Improvements in this Capital
Improvement Element. This annual report will constitute
the evidence of the capacity and levels of service of
public facilities for the purpose of issuing development
orders during the 12 months following completion of the
annual report.
B. Public facility capacity review. The County shall use
the procedures specified in Implementation Programs 1
and 2 to enforce the requirements of Policy 1.5.1. and
1.5.3. of this Element.
C.' Review of changes in planned capacity of public
facilities. The County shall review each amendment to
this Capital Improvement Element in particular any
changes in standards for levels of service and changes
in the Schedule of Capital Improvements in order to
enforce the policies of this Element.
D. Concurrency Management Implementation Strategies.
The County shall annually review the Concurrency
Management Implementation Strategies that are
incorporated in this Capital Improvements Element:
1. Standards for levels of service are applied within
appropriate geographical areas of the County.
Standards for'county-wide public facilities are
applied to development orders based on levels of
service throughout the County.
2. Standards for public facilities that serve less
than he entire County are applied to development .
orders on he basis of levels of service within
assigned areas.
3. L~vels of service are compared to adopted standards
on an annual basis. Annual monitoring is used,
rather than case-by-case monitoring, for the
following reasons:
a. annual monitoring corresponds to annual
expenditures for capital improvements during
the County's fiscal year; and
b. annual menitoring covers seasonal variations
in levels of service.
8. 5-year Evaluation
The required 5-year evaluation and appraisal report will address
the implementation of the goals, objectives and policies of the
Capital Improvement Element. The monitoring procedures necessary
to enable the completion of the 5-year evaluation include:
a. review of annuals reports of the Concurrency Management
System;
b. Review of semiannual reports to DCA concerning
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan.
~i~: c. Review of annual updates of this Capital Improvements
~," Element, including updated supporting documents.
APPENDIX A
PUBLIC FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS
Third Annual Update & ~mendment
COLLII~R COUNTY FLORIDA
CAPITAL IMPROVEME}F~$ ELEMENT
Prepared by
Growth Management Department
1991
T~B~E OF CO]~ENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES -ii -
1. INTRODUCTION - i -
Purpose of this Study
Study Methodology
Data Collection and Analyses
Format of the Report
Compliance with State Regulations
Conclusion
~. 2. CALCULATION OF PUBLIC FACILITY REQUIREMENTS - 13 -
Arterial and Collector Roads
Potable Water System
Sewer Treatment Plants
Landfill
Emergency Medical Service
Fire Station
Jail
Library Buildings
Library Collection
Government Buildings
Park and Recreation Facilities
, 3 · REVENUE FORECASTS - 87 -
FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ;uNALYSIS - 90 -
COLLIER COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIO~;S - 95 -
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMHUNITiES - 97 -
.LIST OF TABLES
Paqe
I. LEVEL OF SERVICE; ANALYSIS OF NEED
~. Arterial and Collector Roads 16
Potable Water System 20
Sewer Treatment Plant : North County 24
Sewer Treatment Plant : South County 25
Solid Waste : Two Year Lined Cell Capacity 28
Solid Waste : Ten Years of Raw Land 29
Emergency Medical Services 33
Isle of Capri Fire District 37
Ochopee Fire District 38
Jail 42
Library Buildings 46
~,.%~ Library Collection 50
Government Buildings 53
Drainage 57
~i~/'~ Parks & Recreation 61 - 84
FACILITY INVENTORY
Arterial and Collector Roads 17
Potable Water System 22
Sewer Treatment Plant 26
Landfill 31
Emergency Medical Services 34
Fire Station and Apparatus 39
Jail 43
Library Buildings 47
Library Collection 51
Government Buildings 54
Drainage 58
Park & Recreation Facilities 85
III. COST COMPONENTS AND AVERAGE COST
Arteri'al and Collector Roads 18'
Potable Water System 22
Sewer Treatment Plant 26
Landfill 31
Emergency Medical Services 35
Fire Station and Apparatus 40
Jail 44
Library Buildings 48
Library Collection 51
Government Buildings 55
Drainage Canal 58
Park & Recreation Facilities 59
- ii -
INTRODUCTIOI~
I. PURPOSE OF THIS STUD~
In accordance with Section 7.2 of the Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance No. 90-24, adopted March 21, 1990, the Board of County
Commissioners reviewed its second Annual Update and Inventory
Report (AUIR) on June 25, 1991. The AUIR, using standards of
service levels identified in the other elements of the Growth
Management Plan, forecasts the amount of public facilities that
will be re~lired in Collier County by 1995/96, including the
costs of, and revenues for, the required facilities. In addition
to the Public Facilities standards defined in the Plan, this
report includes objective, measurable standards for other
facilities such as Emergency Medical Services, Fire Stations,
Jail, Library Buildings, Library Collection amd Government
Buildings. The intent of including these additional "Facility"
standards in the analysis of need is to update and amend the
comprehensive capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Collier
County.
The AUIR, together with instructions from the Board of County
Commissioners, is the foundation for the preparation of the Third
Capital Improvement Element Update and Amendment (1992-1996).
The Capital Improvement Element (CIE) is updated and amended
annually to provide information on:
1. The financially feasible standards of service which are
used to calculate the type and amount of public
facilities that are required during the next six years;
2. Specific capital improvement projects which are
necessary to provide the amount of public facilities
specified in this report; and
3. The goals, objectives and policies that ensure the
adoption and implementation of public facilities
concurrent with development.
II. STUDY METHODOLOGY
Given the statutory and regulatory requirement that the CIE be
based on financially feasible, measurable standards of service
levels for a period of at least five years, this report was
updated in order to answer two questions:
1. What' is the quantity of public facilities that will be
required in 1995/967
2. Is it financially feasible to provide the quantity of
~?,,: facilities that will be required in 1995/967
The answer to each question can be calculated by using objective
data and two formulas.
Ouest!on ~. ~hat is the quantity of public facilities that will
be recp/!red iX 1995/967
Formula 1.1: Demand x Standard m Requirement
Where Demand is the estimated 1995/96 population (or
othc~r appropriate measure of need),
and Standard is the amount of facility or service per
unit of demand.
Formula 1.2: Requirement - Inventory - Surplus (Deficiency)
Where Requirement is the result of Formula 1.1,
and Inventory is the quantity of facility available as
of September 30, 1991.
Ouestion z. Is it financ~a11¥ feasible to provide the q~/antit_v
of ~ac~it~s that are required in 1995/96~
Formula 2.1: Deficiency x Average Cost/Unit = SDeficiency
Where Deficiency is the result of Formula 1.2,
and Average Cost/Unit is the usual cost of one unit of
facility.
Formula 2.2: SDeficiency - Revenue = $Surplus/(Deficiency)
Where SDeficiency is the result of Formula 2.1,
and Revenue is the money availabl& for public
facilities.
The result of Formula 2.2 is the test of financial feasibility of
the standards of service. A surplus of revenue over cost means
the standard of service is affordable with money left over (the
surplus), therefore, the standard is. financially feasible. A
deficiency of revenue compared to cost means that there is not
enough money to build the facilities, and therefore the standard
is not financially feasible.
III. DATA COLLECTION AND ~IALYSI$
The calculations in this report provide answers to the questions
and formulas described above. In order to perform the
calculations, six separate areas of data collection and analysis
were investigated:
a. Types of public facilities,
b. Population and other demand factors,
c. Standards for levels of service,
d. Inventory of existing facilities,
e. Average costs of new facilities, and
f. Revenue sources.
TYpes of Facilitios
Florida Statutes require the CIE to include" .... transportation,
sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water,
educational, parks and recreational, and health systems and
facilities." This study includes all of these facilities except
education and health facilities which are not provided by the
County. The regulations also require the CIE to include all the
public facilities for which the County is financially
responsible. The following types of public facilities are
included in this report as a result of this regulation:
Jail, Emergency Medical Service, Dependent Fire District
Stations and Apparatus, Libraries and other Government
Buildings.
If a type of public facility is not included in the CIE, the
County is still permitted to expend money on such facilities, but
such discretionary expenditures will have to compete with all the
"mandatory" expenditures that maintain the standards of service
levels.
For information purposes, Appendix D outlines the newly approved
5-year Capital Improvement Plan for the Collier County Public
Schools.
D. ~opulation and Other Demand Factors
The Collier County Growth Planning Department prepared the
population and housing data that are the basis for the demand
factors contained in this study. The Growth Planning Department
started with the high-range forecasts by the University of
Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR).
High-range data was selected instead of mid-range projections
because an analysis by the Department shows that the County's
actual growth rate corresponds to the high-range forecasts more
than to the mid-range.
The BEBR data is provided on a County-wide basis as of April 1st
in five year increments (i.e., 1991, 1996, 2001 etc.). The
County-wide forecasts were extrapolated from April 1st to October
1st in order to coincide with the County's fiscal year. Linear
extrapolations were used to estimate the population during
intermediate years 1991 through 1996 ir~ order to accommodate the
time period of the CIE. The adjusted high-range forecasts were
expanded for peak seasonal population for use with public
facilities that are sensitive to seasonal population variations.
Finally, the adjusted County-wide permanent population total was
allocated three ways: Urban vs. Rural; Incorporated vs.
Unincorporated; and among thirteen planning areas. (To date,
there is no satisfactory methodology for allocating the peak
seasonal population among urban/rural, incorporated/
unincorporated or planning areas). Section 5 of Appendix A
summarizes the most significant population projections.
¢, ~ta~dards for Levels of Service
The standards of service that are used in this study were
reviewed by Staff, the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), the
Collier County Planning Commission, and accepted by the Board of
County Commissioners at the time of adoption of the Growth
Management Plan on January 10, 1989. Only by formal amendment of
the Growth Management Plan can the standard of service and the
corresponding level of service, be altered, replaced or deleted.
In general, the standards which have been adopted were selected
from one of the following sources:
1. A standard adopted by Collier County in the existing
comprehensive plan, or other official County study or
publication (i.e., land development code, ordinance,
engineering study, etc.);
2. A standard of a state agency or professional
association, if recommended (with or without adjustment)
by the appropriate department of Collier County
government;
3. A "standard" development from the existing level of
service or the present ratio of facilities to demand in
Collier County.
The standard that is recommended for a public facility appears on
the "cover sheet" for the facility, and other standards that can
be used as reference points are listed below the recommended
standards.
D. annual update and I~vento~ Report CaUIa} o~ Ex~st~n~
All public .facilities operated by Collier County are located and
counted annually, and the inventories are summarized in the AUIR
and Appendix A of the CIE. The inventory of existing facilities
is extended through the end of the current fiscal year by adding
any facilities that are planned, budgeted, under construction and
scheduled for completion by September 30, 1991. Facilities
appearing in the CIE that will be completed after September 30,
1991, are considered currently available for concurrency
determinations if they will be completed, under construction or
under contract prior to September 30, 1994. Facilities appearing
in the CIE after October 1, 1994 are not available for
concurrency determination until they are completed, under
construction, under contract, in the adopted Collier County
Budget or, in the case of roads, in either the FY96-01 CIE or
FDOT 5-Year Work Program and meet the requirements of CIE Policy
1.5.4.E.
E. AveraGe Costs.of New Facilities
To test the probable financial feasibility of the standards of
service, an average cost per new facility is used in Formula 2.1,
described above. The average costs are re-evaluated annually by
the County department which is responsible for the facility. The
results appear in a separate table of "Cost Components and
Average Costs" that accompanies the calculation of each public
facility's requirements. After standards of service are reviewed
by the Planning Commission, and they are adopted by the Board of
County Commissioners, the County prepares specific capital
improvement projects to meet the standards, and each project
includes detailed cost estimates which will replace the average
costs used in this report.
F. Revenue Sources
Most counties have a few. revenue sources that are regularly used
for capital improvements, and others that are used for operating
costs. .Chapter 3, Forecasts of Revenues, lists the revenue
sources that Collier County can rely upon to pay for public
facility capital improvements. Each revenue source is listed and
an estimate of receipts is forecast for the period 1991/92 -
1995/96.
IV. FORMAT OF THE REPORT
Thi~ document represents an important phase in the annual
re-evaluation of the Capital Improvement Element of Collier
County's Growth Management Plan. The report contains this year's
analysis of public facilities that are provided by the County,
including:
o Recommendations for standards of service;
o Forecasts of population and other indicators of demand
~or service;
o Calculations of present and future requirements for
additional facilities;
o Summaries of inventories of existing public facilities;
o Identification of surpluses and deficiencies of existing
facilities compared to present and future requirements;
o Calculation of the costs of eliminating deficiencies;
o Forecamts of revenue to pay for the facilitie~; and
o Determination of the financial feasibility of the
recommended standards of service.
The report is primarily statistical in nature because of the use
of objective, quantifiable standards of service that indicate the
capacity per unit of demand for each public facility. The
following narrative describes the format of the report.
This report is presented in four parts:
A. Introduction;
B. Calculation of Public Facility Requirements;
C. Forecasts of Revenue; and
D. Analysis of the Financial Feasibility of the
Recommendations.
~. Intro~uction
This introduction presents the purpose, methodology, and data
collection and analyses that produced the study. Following this
description of the format of the report, the introduction will
conclude with a list of State regulatory requirements that are
fulfilled by this report.
B. Calculation of Public Facility Requirements
The calculation of requirements in Chapter 2 uses a standardized
four-part format for each type of public facility: (1) population
and standards, (2) calculations, (3) inventory, and (4) cost
bomponents and average costs.
~, ?~Dulation an~ standards
The population and standards page begins with the "title" which
identifies the name of the type of public facility that is
analyzed. "
The "population to be served" identifies the "service recipient,"
the "service area," and 'the "service period." Usually all
residents of the County receive the service in all areas of the
county, but some facilities are provided to only part of the
population and part of the geographical area of the county (i.e.,
utilities and fire stations). The service period indicates
whether service is targeted for the permanent population, the
peak seasonal population, or a weighted average of the two (8
months permanent, 4 months peak). Population figures used in
this report have been updated to reflect the most recent forecast
from the University of Florida's BEBR.
The recommended standard of service for the facility is a
numerical amount of service capacity per person (or other unit of
demand, like a utility account). The standard indicates how much
service each person is likely to use, and it is the "standard" in
Formula 1.1, described above. The source of each standard is
also listed. Immediately following the recommended standard is a
list of standards from other sources that can be used for
reference purposes.
~. Leve~ Of serv~c, Standard~ ~
The second section of analysis provides calculations according to
type of recipient and/or time period. The data at the bottom of
the page is presented in seven columns, as follows:
(~) (m) (3) (4) (s) (6) (?)
AMOUNT
REQUIRED AMOUNT SURPLUS OR VALUE
TIME POP- AT PLANNED AMOUNT DEFICIENCY OR COST
~ERIOD UL~TION STANDARD ~ ~ . MOUNT ~
Column 1 is used to create a separate line of data and
calculations for three time periods:
1. from now through the end of fiscal year (9/30/91);
2. the five fiscal years from October 1991 through
· September 1996; and
3. the second five year time frame from October 1996
through September 2001.
These three time periods distinguish between the needs of current
reside~ts and those for future growth. Under Column 1, the first
line of data is for current residents as of the end of fiscal
year 1990-91. This line establishes whether or not there is a
deficiency of existing service compared to the recommended
standard. The second line of data shows the additional facility
requirements for growth that will occur during the next five
years (October 1991 - September 1996). The total of the two
groups (current residents + growth) is displayed on the next line
. ? -
of data. The fourth line of data shows the additional facility
requirements for growth that will occur during the second five
year period (October 1996 - September 2001). The total for all
three groups is displayed on the last line.
Column 2 shows the number of people or other demand factor (i.e.,
utility customer accounts). This number is the "demand" in
Formula 1.1, described above. The population or other demand
factor will be allocated between present population and new
growth, as described above.
Column 3 shows the quantity of the facility that is needed to
provide the standard of service to the populations. This
"requirement" is calculated by using Formula 1.1:
multiply the demand (i.e., population) times the
standard (i.e., service units per capita).
The standard that appears in the heading for Column 3 is the
"standard of service" that was reco~uended on the population and
standards page.
Col~m 4 displays the next fiscal year inventory anticipated to
be added during 1991-92.
Column $ lists the amount of the public facility that is
available for the present population (i.~., current facilities
plus any planned for completion by 9/30/91, or contracted for
completion before 9/30/96). This inventory of facilities is
always attributed to the existing population, and is never shown
on any data line for future growth. The data in Column 4 is the
"inventory" in Formula 1.2, described above, and a full summary
of the inventory is presented on the page following the
calculations.
Col~mm 6 shows the surplus or deficiency of current facilities
(Column 5) compared to required facilities (Column 3). The
amount in Column 6 is the "surplus/(deficiency), calculated using
Formula 1.2, and any deficiency is also the "deficiency" in
Formula 2.1, described above. If the requirement for a facility
is less than its inventory, the County has more than enough
facilities to meet the standard, and the extra facilities are
counted as "surplus." If the requirement is greater than the
inventory, the shortage is listed in parentheses ( ) as a
"(deficiency).', The surplus/deficiency for 9/30/91 is combined
with the deficiency for 10/91 - 9/96 in order to arrive at the
total surpluS or deficiency as of September 30, 1996. In other
words, a surplus of existing facilities will reduce or offset the
deficiency caused by growth and any deficiency of existing
facilities will be added to the deficiency caused by growth.
Co1%tmn ? shows the cost to eliminate each deficiency (or the
value of surplus public facilities). The average cost of one
unit of facility (i.e., mile, gallon, ton, etc.) is listed in the
Column heading, and is itemized on the Cost Component and Average
Cost page. The cost is the "Average Cost/Unit" in Formula 2.1,
described above. The estimated cost of eliminating the.
deficiency is determined by Formula 2.1:
multiply the deficiency times the average cost/unit.
Any cost surplus/deficiency for 9/30/91 is combined with the
deficiency for 10/91 - 9/96 in the same manner as Column 6. The
difference is that Column 6 shows the quantity of the facilities,
and Column 7 shows the dollar cost.
~, Inventory
The third section of the requirements analysis presents a summary
of the inventory of existing public facilities. The "title"
names the type of facility, and the "subtitle" indicates the unit
of measurement (i.e., miles, gallons, tons, etc.) that is used to
report the inventory. The data is presented in six columns, as
follows:
(~) (2) C3) (4) (5) (6)
IN PLACE &
USABLE ADD IN ADD IN
~EA 1TAME & NO. 9/30/90 1990-91 ~91-92 TOTAL
Col,,m- I lists the planning area or other service area names.
Column 2 lists the planning area number.
Column 3 counts the number of facilities that were in place and
either in use or usable "as is" as of September 30, 199Q.
Col,~m- 4 counts the additional facilities that are included in
the current fiscal year budget (1990-91) and which will be
completed by September 30, 1991. Where appropriate, facilities
that are contracted for completion after October 1, 1990, but
before September 30, 1996, are also included. These facilities
are counted "in inventory" because their costs are already
financed from approved funding mechanisms, therefore such
facilities will not constitute any additional "cost" as shown on
the calculations page.
Co111nm 5 counts the additional facilities that will be included
in the 1991-92 budget and will be completed by September 30,
1992.
Co1%unn 6 is the total usable facilities, the sum of Columns 3
through 5. 'The usable facilities in Column 6 appear in the
calculations, of facility requirements as the inventory of
facilities that are presently available to meet the requirements
of the standard of service (see Column 5 on the level of service
page).
{. Cost ComponeBts and Average Costs
The final section of the analysis of each public facility is an
itemized list of cost componen'~s and average costs. This page
details the component parts of a "prototype" or "average"
facility, and estimates the cost of each component. The data is
presented in four columns, as follows:
(1) (2) (3) (4)
# COST COST PER COST/FACILITY
COST COMPONENT COM~O~S COMPONENT (2) x (3)
Col~um 1 lists each component of the facility (i.e., land,
construction, equipment, etc.).
Column 2 lists the number of components in the "average" facility
(i.e., the number of acres of land at a Water treatment plant).
Col%mn 3 gives the unit cost for components (i.e., the average
cost of one acre of land).
Co1%umn 4 is used to display the results of calculations (i.e.,
the result of multiplying "X" acres of land by "SY" per acre).
At the bottom of Column 4 the total cost of the prototype
facility is converted to a cost per unit. For example, the cost
of a 4 million gallon per day (MGD) water treatment plan is
divided by 4 MGD in order to estimate the cost per MGD. The cost
per unit is the figure that is used in the calculations of
facility requirements to estimate the cost of eliminating any
deficiency of public facilities compared to the requirement (see
heading of Column 7, level of service page).
C, Revenue Forecasts
The forecasts of revenue in Chapter 3 present the sources of
revenue that Collier County will use, including alternatives, to
finance its public facility capital improvements. Each source of
revenue is described, and the basis for each forecast is given.
D. Fina~c~a~ Feas~bilit¥ Analysis
The analysis of the financial feasibility of the recommendations
appears in Chapter 4 as a comparison of the costs of required
facilities (presented in Chapter 2), to the available revenue
(forecast in'Chapter 3). The calculation is performed using
Formula 2.2, described above. If the revenue is greater than the
cost, the recommended standards of service are financially
feasible. If the cost exceeds the revenue, the standards of
service are not financially feasible.
- 10 -
In the event that a standard of service is not financially
feasible, there are four options available to the County:
1. Re'duce the standard of service, which will reduce the
cost;
2. Increase revenues to pay for the proposed standard of
service (higher rates for existing revenues, and/or new
sources of revenue);
3. Reduce the average cost (and possibly the quality) of
the public facility, thus reducing the total cost; or
4. Any combinations of options 1 - 3.
F, COMPLIANCE.WITH STATE REGULATIONS
As part of the research conducted for this report, data was
collected and analyses were performed that are required by
Chapter 9J-5 of the Florida Administrative Code as part of the
preparation of the CIE. This report contains summaries of data
and analyses required by the following sections of Section
9J-5.016, F.A.C.:
Section (1) (c) requires an inventory of revenue sources and
funding mechanisms available for capital improvements:
See Chapter 3, Revenue Forecasts.
Section (2) (b) requires an analysis of the general fiscal
implications of existing deficiencies and future needs for
each type of public facility:
See the net value of surplus assets and net cost of required
facilities for present populations, five years of growth and
total population in Column 7, "Value or (Cost)," of the table
of calculations for each type of public facility.
Section (2) (c) requires estimates of t~e costs of needed
capital improvements and an explanation of the basis of the
cost estimates:
See the Cost Component and Average Costs table for each
public facility.
Parts of Section (3) require various objectives and policies
dealing with adopted level of service standards:
See the specific standards of service on each population and
standards page and in the table of calculations for each
public facility.
Parts of Section (3) also require various objectives and
polioie~ dealing with the financial feasibility of the CIE,
and the ability to make facilities available concurrent with
development:
See Chapter 4, Financial Feasibility Analysis.
FI. CONCLUSION
The Collier County Board of Commissioners formally adopted the
original CIE of the Growth MaDagement Plan on January 10, 1989.
Chapter 163 Florida Statutes, requires that the CIE be updated
annually. Rule 9J-5 of the Florida Administrative Code requires
that the CIE cover a period of at least five fiscal years. As a
result, this Third CIE Update and Amendment, covers the 1991/92 -
1995/96 period.
· .. 2. CALCULATION OF PUBLIC F~CILITY REQUIREMENTS
COUNTY ]%RTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROADS
POPULATION TO BE SERVED :%S OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996:
'~,: 1.. Service Recipients: X Ail County Residents
Other:
~'~ 2. Service Area: County-wide
Other:
3. Service Period: Permanent Population - 225,205
Peak Period Population = 308,849
X Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak = 252,807
STANDARD OF SERVICE: County arterial and collector roads:
Level of Service as indicated" "below on
the basis of peak hour, peak season traffic
volume:
Level of Service "E" on the following
designated roadways:
Road From - TO
Airport Road Pine Ridge Road to Golden Gate Parkway
Golden Gate Parkway Airport Road to Santa Barbara Boulevard
Goodlette-Frank Road Pine Ridge Road to Golden Gate Parkway
Goodlette-Frank Road Golden Gate Parkway to US 41
Pine Ridge Road Airport Road to 1-75
Level of Service "D" peak hour, peak season shall be maintained
on all other County arterial and collector roads, however, any
section of road may operate at Level of Service "E" for a period
not to exceed two fiscal years following the determination of
Level of Service "E" in order to provide the County with time to
restore Level of Service "D" by making appropriate improvements.
Rule of Thumb: Mileage equivalent of LOS =
0.00424 lane miles per capita (1)
Source of Standard: Collier County Board of County
Commissioners
Other Standards for Reference
I?'- 0.0045 lane miles/ Current Level of Collier County
"~' ": capita Service ( 1 )
LOS C Collier County Comgrehensive Plan (2)
~S D Collier County Imgact Fee Ordinance (3)
~S C Rural Florida DOT Transgortation Plan (4)
~S D Urban Exgressways 80% or more ~ ~S
Non-exgressways 70% or more ~ ~S
~S D seminole County (5)
~S C off-season Lee County CIP (6)
~S D season
(1) 676 lane miles/148,722 weighted average population @ 9/30/87
(2) Collier County ¢o~prehensive Pla~, p.29. Arterial LOS
benchmark for land use point rating system
(3) Ordinance 85-55, as amended by Ordinance 90-14, Collier
County
(4) Florida DOT: ADDendiX A. Florid~ Tra~sDortation Plan,
1986, pp. 57-58, 60-61, 74
(5) Seminole County: "Recommended Facility Types and
Standards," October 17, 1986
(6)-Lee County CIP: 1986-87 - 1990-91, p.9, based on local data
A~YE~IAL Alto Ct~.~E~ ~ '
FI~ DWIDE ~IB P~ AVAI~ ~EFICID~) (~) AT
PReSeNT TO
~ S ~R ~N
,~ I0~1-9~ SS,~ ~.3 93.6 ~.6 C~3.~ C~,~1,~)
~ 5-v~ ~TOTAL ~,~ 1,118.& 113.4 ~.2 (2!3.2) C132,610,~)
10 YE~ TOTAL
MOTE:
Th~ i~ a r~feronce staf~tard only ~ is mc ~t{c~te to
~e issue of ~t~t ~., I.e.. lc is ~t the
~t~ L~t of Se~t~ St~.
SUMMARY OF ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROAD INVENTORY
(Lane Miles)
(x) ¢21 Ca)
USABLE 0 ADD BY ADD BY USABLE
'pLaN AREA N;~ME & NO. 9130190 9130191 9130192 TOTAL
North Naples 1 82.6 17.4 100.0
Central Naples 9_ 72.8 2.8 4.2 79.8
Golden Gate 3 81.2 2.5 83.7
East Naples 4 32.4 32 .4
South Naples 5 19.8 19.8
Marco 6 55.8 55.8
Royal Faka-Palm 7 64.8 64.8
Reek
Rural Estates 8 31.4 31.4
Urban Estates 9 99.2 3.1 102.3
Corkscrew l0 138.6 11.4 150.0
Immokalee 11 29 4 29.4
Big Cypress 12 62.2 62 · 2
Count ide Total 770.2 19.8 21.6 811.6
· Includes County arterials and collectors, excludes State and.
Federal roads.
COUNTY ~RTERIAL AND COLLECTOR RO~D
COST COMPONENTS ~ND AVERAGE COSTS
URBAN RURAL COST/FACILITY
'AVERAGE COST COMPONENT SECTION SECTION AVG.¢2~ X
A. Design 50,000 40,000 $ 45,000
B. Right-of-Way 110,000 160,000 135,000.
C. Construction (1) 390,000 335,000 362,000
D. Other (2) 83,000 77,000 80.000
, ~. AVERAGE COST PER LANE $ 622,000
MILE
(1) Includes culverts and bridges - also applies to both arterial
and collector costs.
(Z) Includes lighting, sidewalks, bikepaths and administrative/
overhead costs.
POTABLE WATER SYSTEM SERVICE AREA
POPULATION TO BE SERVED ~S OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996=
1. Service Recipients: All County Residents
~ Other: Water Customers
2; Service Area: County-wide
~ Other: Water System
3. Service Period: Permanent Population =
X Peak Period Population = 110,058,*
Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak =
STANDARD OF SERVICE: 135 gal/day/capita plus 21% for non-
residential
Source of Standard: Utilities Division, based on Water Master
Plan (1) and on historical ratios of
residential and non-residential water
consumption
Other Standards for Reference
~tandard Source
100 gdpc*** Lee County CIP (2)
125 gdpc 6 County region (S.W. Florida)
100 gdpc Seminole County (4)
Fire Flow**** Seminole County (4)
144 gdpc Florida Governor's Office (5)
125 gdpc Sipe and Starnes (5)
* Includes wells, storage tanks, treatment plants, and aquifer
storage and recovery
** Peak eeasonal population basod on U of F uppor range
projections
Includes County Watmr/Sewer District and proposed expansions
Excludes Marco Water/Sewer District and Goodland Water
District
*** gdpc = gallons per day per capita
**** Fire Flow = 500 gpm residential & 1250 gpm commercial,
institutional or industrial
(1) Phase I Water Master Plan for Western Collier CouDty,
October 1985, p.41
(2) Lee County CIP: 1986-87 - 1990-91, p.200, (based on local
engineering standard)
(3) S.W. Florida Regional Planning Commission, "Economic Views,"
v.10, n.2, February, 1986
(4) Seminole County: "Recommended Facility Types and Standards,"
October 17, 1986
(5) Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Needs: 1990 and 2000.
Chapter 3
F~OI. ATIiJl NGD
FISCAL CI~IiTT ~1~ ~ A~I~ ~ICI~) (~ AT
~ ~Vl~ ~ 0.~ ~ CZP ~,~,~
~ ~,~ ~.0 12.0 (7.0) C12,~,5~0)
~91 ~,~ ~ &.3 16~ (&.O) C~,~,~)
~-~ ~,~ ~.6
~-~ ~,~ ~.0 C2
~-~ 1~,6~ ~.6 ~.0 ~.5 6.9 12,~,117
~ 115,521 ~3
~-~ 1~,~ ~.6 o.o ~.5 2.9 5,318,39~
~*~ 1~,~ 31.0 0.0 ~.5 1.5 2,~0,~
~ 131,~ ~.3 0.0 ~.5 0.2 ~,~
t~l~
M ~ 9~ ~,~ ~.3 ~.3 ~6~ Ca.O) C~,~5,~)
~0~9~ 27. ~ 6.7
~ 5-~ UTOTAL 110,~8 ~.0 20.5 ~.5 5.5 10,~,615
~ S-~ ~u ZT, 150 6.6 0.0 O.O
~0 ~ T~
I0~9~ 1~,~ ~.6 20.5 ~.5 (1.1) C2,017,3~)
T~c ptmt ~J~ ptm MiL~Le ~i~)
A GW ~it ~ ~ai~ f~ ~, Ft~J~
to J~ ~ ~c~ pt~z t~ ~f~ ~ ~ for a ~rf~ ~ ~ (2) ~.
FURTHER NOTES REGARDII~a WATER TREATMENT PLANT REQUIREMENTS
Standards of Service = 135 gdpc + 21% for non-residential, which
totals 163.485 gdpc. The standard is multiplied times 1.5 to
.incorporate peak design factor of 50%:
163.485 X 1.5 = 245 gdpc.
Existing "deficiency" is met by private utilities which may be
phased out by future County capacity increases. Utility planning
requires the development of larger scale facilities in order to
provide for needs beyond 1996.
POTABLE WATER SYSTEM FACILITY INVENTORY
(Millions of Gallons per day)
(1) (~) (~) (4) (,5) (6)
USABLE @ ADD BY ADD BY USABLE
ARF,~ NAME ~ NO. 9130190 9130191 9/30192 TOTAL
Water Service Area 19-.0 MGD 4.3 MGD 13.2 MGD 29.5 MGD
FATE2 T~E:XTMENT PLa31T COST COMPONENTS AND AFERAGS C08TS
(1) (2) (~) (4)
COST COMPONENT # COST COST PER COST/FACILITY
COMPONENTS_ COMPONENT ( 2 ) x ( 3 )
10 MGD Treatment Plant
A. Treatment Plant 10 $ 10,156,590
(MGD)
B. DeJign (% of Plant) Z0,156,~90 17% 1,726,620
· C. Land (acre) 14 22,326
'. ? ' (5) TOTAL COST 12,195,774
(6). MGD IN PLANT
(7) AVERAGE COST PER MGD 1,219,577
'~: 15 MGD Wellfield
A. Equipment (Well) 15 4,460,985
:...~ . B.. Design (% of Well) 4,460,985 17% 758,367
':~. C. Land (acre) 0 215 36,000 7,740
'~" ~ (5) TOTAL COST 5,227,092
(6) MGD IN WELLFIELD 15
':' (7). AVERAGE COST PER MGD 348,473
?' (5) / (6)
~'~'~' 10 MGD Storaae Tank
~.',"i · A. Structure (Ta~Lk) I 2,177,066
B. Design (% of Tank) 2,177',066 17% 370,101
~-~ C. Land (acre) 5 22,326 11~,6~Q
~!ii. (5) TOTAL COST 2,658,797
!" (6) MGD IN STORAGE TANK ],0
~;.'~' (7) AVERAGE COST PER MGD 265,880
'~'"': (s) / (6)
'<.~ TOTAL FACILITY COST PER
.~, Treatment Plant 1,219,577
"' Well 348,473
Storage Tank
~ pr I,JGD 1,833,930
- 22-
SEWER SERVICE AREA TReaTMENT PLANTS
POPULATION TO BE SERVED AS OF SEPTF~ER 30, 1996:
1. Service Recipients: All County Residents
~ Other: Sewer Customers
2. Service Area: County-wide
~. Other: Sewer System
3. Service Period: Permanent Pop. =
X Peak Period Pop. - North 44,360
South 87,295
Weighted Average
of Permanent and
Peak =
STANDARD OF SERVICE: 100 gal/day/capita plus 21% for non-
residential .
Source of Standard: Utilities Division, based on Sewer Master
Plan (1) and on historical ratios of
residential and non-residential water
consumption
Other Standards for Reference
Standard Source
100 gdpc** Collier County Comprehensive Plan (2)
80 gdpc Lee County CIP (3)
34 gdpc Union County (lowest in Florida) (4)
510 gdpc Nassau County (highest in Florida) (4)
122.5 gdpc Governor's Office: State average (4)
100 gdpc 6 County region (S.W. Florida) (5)
100 gdpc Seminole County (6)
* Includes effluent disposal facilities a~d collection systems
** gdpc - gallons per day per capita
South County Sewer Master Plan, May, 1986, p.VIII-6
Collier County Comprehensive Pla~, p.215. Reference to
benchmark used in "201" plan
Lee County, CIP: 1986-87- 1990-91, p.208 (based on local
engineering standard)
Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Needs: 1990 and 2000.
Chapter 4, (based on 85% of Florida average water consumption
of 144 gdpc) '.
S.W. Florida Regional Planning Council, "Economic Views,"
v.10, n.2, February, 1986
Seminole County: "Recommended Facility Types and Standards,,,
October. 17, 1986
FISCAL. ~ ~ It~QUIREI) P'L.MIIED AV&ILAII, E COEFICIEMC'r) (COST) AT
YEAII SEZtViC~ ~ O.O00TZ1 II CIP
8~-90 29,Z79 3.5 Z.S Ct.O) CZ,~4O, I~3)
· 9Q-91 33°020 &.O Z.0 t .$ 0.5 'i,4,ZO,OT2
91-92 ~5,291 4.3 4,.5 0.2 568,029
9Z-193 37,561 &.S $.0 7.5 3.0 8,52C),&29
93-94, 39,835 &.8 ' 7.S Z.7 7,668,3M
94-95 ' 42,10S S. 1 7.5 2.4,
9S-96 4,4,360 $.& 7.5 2.1 '5,964,300
96-97 &6,&17 . 5.6 7.S "1.9 5,]96,2?2
97-98 4.8,873 5.9 7.5 ~.& &,SU,,229
98-99 SI, 129 6.2 7.5 1.3 3,692,
99-00 5~,386 6;5 7.5 ~..~ Z,8~0,14.3
00-01 5~,64,3 6.7 7..~ 0.8 2,272,114,
POotJ~TIC~ G ~ G SUitPLUS/ VALUE
Cl2JT'r I. EQU! RED ~ AVA 11~_!t_LL'_ CDE.':I CZ F. XCY) CCOST) AT
Tll4~ PEltlC:C) SERVIC~ MtF. A IZ1/CAPITA 111
~..'
I ~ PIESt'MT TO
· .~ 9/30/~I 33,O2O .:.0 ?.0 .~.5 O.5
5 Y~J.,t GJtCLITH
I ~ 't0/9'i-9/96 1't,340 't.~ 3.0 3.0 :.~, &,SU.,229
I~a''. 5-YEAJt SUBTOTAL U.,360' S.& $.0 ?.5 2.1 5,964,3O0
2JCD 5-'tX (2CX, J'TN 11,~ 1.3 0.0 0.0 ¢'1.3) C3,692,18~)
10 TF.~E TOTAL
10/91-9/01 55,643 6.7 5.0 7.5 0.8
SE1,/ER TREATI4ENT PLANT: SIXITI COWETY
POI~I. ATIOII 14GO 14G) . 14G) SLNIP'LUS/ VALI. J~
FISCAL C~UNTT REQUIRED I)LANXED AVAILABLE (DEFICIE. gCY) CCOST) AT
YEAR ~ERVICE AP, F.A 0.000121 IN CZP S2,84.0,143
89-90 63,062 7.6 3.3 C4.3) C12,212,615)
90-91 67,061 8.1 4.7 8.0 CO. 1) C284,014)
91-92 71,109 8.6 8.0 C0.6) C 1,7G4,,0~6)
92-93 75,158 9.1 8.0 16.0 6.9 19,596,987
93-94 79,209 9.6 16.0 6.4 18,176,915
94.-95 83,256 10.1 16.0 5.9 16,756,8X.X,
95-96 87,~5 10.6 16.0 5.4, 15,336,772
.96-97 91,274 11.0 16.0. 5.0 14,200,715
97-98 95,2~0 11.5 16.0 4.$ 12,780,644
98-99 99,290 12.0 16.0 4.0 11,360,572
99-00 103,299 12.5 16.0 3.$ 9,940,501
00-01 107,3:~2 13.0 16.0 3.0 8,
~1~ POPt~T loft HGD HGD HGD SURPLUS/ VALUE C~
CCU~TY REQUIRED PL.A~XED .,s, VA l LARL£ (DEFICIENCY) (COST) AT
~ TII, tE PERICO SERVIC..E AREA 1211C~,PITA IH ~IP ..~-,~'~,,;~..~
14 C~ PRESENT TO
U~ I,~' 9/30/91 67,061 8.1 &.7 3.3 (~,.8) ¢ 13, ~2,686)
~ $ TEAR GROgT#
--" 10/91-9/96 ZO, Z..T~ 2.5 8.0 8.0 5.5 15,620,797
S-YEAR SUBTOTAL 87,295 10.6 12.7 11.3 0.7 1,988,100
~ ZND S-TR GROWTH 20,027 Z.4 0.0 4.7 ~.3 7,9S2,~00
10 YEAR TOTAL
10/91-9/01 107,322 13.0 12.7 16.0 3.0 9,940,.501
SUMMARY OF SEWER TREATMENT PLANT INVENTORY
(Millions of Gallons per day)
(1) (2) C3)
USABLE @ ADD BY ADD BY USABLE
]%REA NAME ...... ~ NO. ' 9~30/90 ~/30/91 9/30/92 TOTAL
North 2 · 5 2.0 4.5
· South 3.3 4.7' 8.0
Existing interim facilities phased out by 1992, upon
completion of South County Regional Treatment Plant.
SEWER' TREATMENT PLANT COST COMPONENTS AND AVERAGE COSTS
(1) (2) (3) (4)
~ COST COST PER COST/FACILITY
COST COMPONENT C0~ONF~NT COM?ONE~ (2) x (3)
10.5 MGD Treatment Plant'
A. Treatment Plant (MGD) 8.0 $1,336,000 $ 10,688,000
B. Design (% of Plant) 10,688,000 17% 1,816,960
C. Land (acre) 60 12,799 767.940
(5)' TOTAL COST 13,272,900
(6) MGD 'IN TREATMENT PLANT 8
(7) AVERAGE COST PER MGD 1,659,112
(5).1(6)
11 MGD System Effluent
A. Percolation Pond Land 2 294,667 589,334
(MGD)
B. Effluent Distribution 6.6 757,576 5,000,000
(MGD)
C. Design (% of above)" 5,000,000 17% 850.000
(5) TOTAL COST .6,439,334
(6) MGD SYSTEM EFFLUENT '- -
(7) AVERAGE COST PER MGD
(5) / (6)
Treatment Plant 1,659,112
Total Cost per MGD 2,840,143
LANDFILL
POPULATION TO BE SERVED AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996:
1. Service Recipients:' ~ All County Residents
Other:
2. Service Area: ~ County-wide
Other:
3. Service Period: Permanent Population = 225,205
Peak Period Population = 308,849'
~ Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak = 252,807
BTAND~RD OF SERVICE: 1.55 tons of solid waste/capita/year, and 2
years capacity of lined cells, and 10 years
capacity of raw land
Source of Standard: Mid-range of 5 year forecast by Solid Waste
Department
CCPC citizen's Advisory Committee
Other Standards for Reference
Standard Source
1. 40 tons/capita/year Current Level of County Service (1)
1. 14 tons/capita/year Lee County CIP (2)
1.095 tons/capita/year 6 County region (S.W. Florida) (3)
1. 00. tons/capita/year Seminole County (4)
200,000 tons/year/142,498 weighted average pop. @ 9~30/86
.Lee County CIP: 1986-87 - 1990-91, p.22~, (based on 1986
service level)
S.W. Florida Regional Planning Council, "Economic Views,"
v.10, n.2, February, 1986
Seminole County: "Recommended Facility Types and Standards,',
October 17, 1986
TM3 YEA~S LIIl~,m~ ~JJ~Z~Tt (lapL~ end tmobLee) '
FI~ ~ ~W ~l~ ~I~
~ ~1~ A~. AVAI~ 1.55
.~ ............................................ ~,~ 2.1
~.~ ~,~ 1,~7,~ ~,~ 3~,159 1,~,~ 1~,1~,~ Z~,~o * 1.2
92-93 219,812 2,~,~7 ~,~ ~,~ 1~,1~9 19,~,~ 0.0
93-~ ~,~ 2,1~,o~ 357,~ ~,~ . 1,~,~ 15,~,~ o.o
~.~ ~,~ 1,~,~9 39~,~1 ~,~ 1
~-97 ~,~ 2,~,~ ~ ~1,130 I,Z~3,~ 13,~3,~ o.o
98-~ ~,7~1 1,~,~ ~Z,~ ~, 1~ ~,~ 3,~1,~ O.0
~*01 ~7,9~ ~,~ ~,~1 ~,~ C~,7~
~Vl~ ~P~I~ ~ii~ ~P~I~ ~N~ CDEFICIE~) ~T AT
~ TI~ PEII~ ~IGHT~ A~. AVAl~ 1.55~ RE~I~ IN ClP ~ ~ L~ S11.~
PRESEHT TO
m ~ S Y~AR
S'Y~ ~TOTAL ~2,~7 1,~,~9 391,051 4~,~ 3,2~,~ 593,~1 6,5~,~
~ c13,~s,1~)
10 YE~ TOTAL
I0~1-9/01 ~?,9~ 3~,~ ~,381 C91,~ Z,~7,653 C~,?~) (7,301,~)
¥OTES:
SOLID WI~TE
LEVEL O~ ~tVlC~ ~TANOA~z 1.53 ~'ITA
FI~ ~UIDE ~ ~ ~I~. ~S ~S ~ (DEFICI~ A~ ~ AT
~ ~IG~ A~. TOT~ ~Y' AVAI~ ~I~ I~ CIP (lO-Y~S ~) S10,~
~ 1~,7~ 2,~,~7 27.1 ~.2 ~.2 0 10.0 1~,~9
' ~-91 1~,~ 2,&~,~ ~.7 ~.1 ~.& ~ .16.7 167,~
~-~ ~,~ 2,~,~ ~.7 &76.0 ~.9 0 67.1 6~,9~
fl-~ · ~2,~7 · 3,~,~ ~.9 ~7.1 ~1.3 0 (~.2) (~1,853)
97-~ 274,7~ 3,~,~ 40.1 ~1.8 &7/.O 0 (1~;3) C1,422,~9)
~-~ 285,741 3,~,61& 41.7 ~1.7 4~.5 0 (198.9) C1,~,537)
~-~ ~,816 3,4~,~ 43.3 ~0.0 ~07.2 0
01-~ 319,161
~-~ ~1,~18
" ~-~
I ~ 07-~ ~,0~
~ ~-gfDE TEN Y~ RE~R~ A~ES A~ES P~NED (DEFtCZEN~) A~ ~T AT
~ TZ~E PERZ~ ~ZGgT~ AVG. TOTAL ~LLY AVA]~LE tE~IR~ ~g CZP. (10 YEXRS ~) SIO,~
PRESENT TO
9/30191 196,780 2,4,70,970 28.7 3:)7.1 ~0.:, 0 C3.3.3) -S332,611
5 YEAR ~g
10191-9~ ~,027 554,~ 8.2 ~.0 ~.9 I~ 189.1 I,~, ~8
~ S-~ ~H 55,181 ~,~1 8.0 (~.4) ~.7 0 C2~.0) (2,~0,410)
10 Y~ TOT~
I'
LANDFILL NOTES
~i.- 1. Total acreage of the Naples and Immokalee Landfills was 400
acres as of 9-30-89. An additional 300 acres of land
adjacent to the Naples Landfill is scheduled to be acquired
during FY92 for future expansion but may take longer to
complete..
2. For inventory and surplus/deficiency calculations, the
combined capacity of the Naples and Immokalee landfills is
considered available to serve the county-wide population.
3. The remaining capacity of Cell 6 is projected to be 2,496,748
tons by the end of FY91. A recycling rate.of 30% and
diversion of all biomass, inerts and construction/demolition
materials will allow the Naples Cell 6 to last until 1998 at
our present growth rate of 6%. However, mining is not yet a
certainty.
4. Projection which indicated true present capacity: Gross tons
per acre is based on a design of 90t cell height using one
square foot of lined area to contain one ton of waste; Cells
constructed with 3:1 side slopes.
5. 'Cell 6 - Phase I 1,182,213 Tons Capacity
Phase II 1,036,551 Tons Capacity
Phase III 1,182,213 Tons Capacity
Immokalee 906,048 Tons Capacity
SUMMARY OF LANDFILL INVENTORY
(1) (2) C3)
USABLE ~ ADD BY ADD BY USABLE
Countywide 2,195,606 1,182,213 3,377,819
(lined cell/tons)
Countywide 327 50 190 567
(raw land acres) ..
L~NDFILL COST COMPONENTS AND AVEI~AGE COSTS
(~)
# COST COST PER COST/FACILITY
COST COMPONEb"~ COMPONENTS C0M~ONENT (2) x ( 3 )
One Acre Cell
A. Design $ 5,000
B. Site Development 45 000
& Equipment '
C. Cell base & line 200,000
D. Closure 50,000
' E. Post Closure 30,000
F. Leachate Treatment 5,000
(5) TOTAL COST : $435,000
(6) TONS IN ONE ACRE 43,560
CELL
(7) AVEPJ%GE COST PER TON 9.99
G. Land: 45,000/acre divided by :~,03
43,560 tons/acre
TOTAl. AVmU~. COST P~a TO~ ~1.02
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE
POPULATION TO EE SERVED AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996~
1. Service Recipients: ~ All County Residents
Other:
2. Service Area: ~_ County-wide
Other=
3. Service Period= ~ Permanent Population - 225,205
Peak Period Population = 308,849
Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak = 252,807
STANDARD OF SERVICE= 6 minute, or less mean average response time
between call for service and arrival at
scene for emergency responses to or in
major population centers of Collier County
Rule of Thumb= 0.00006 EMS units/capita (1)
Source of Standard= Director of Emergency Medical Services
Other Standards for Reference
0.00005 EMS stations/ Current Collier County Service (2)
.capita Average
:. 0.00003 EMS stations/ Lee County current ratio (3)
capita
. 0.00650 EMS calls/-' Lee County current call load (4)
capita
(1) 1986 response time in the City of Naples was approximately'
the standard of service (actually 5.72 minutes), therefore
the ratio of EMS units to Naples population is presumed to
provide the level of service of 6 minute response time.
Naples service units in 1986 ~ 1.19 units
(365 calls in Naples/
307 average calls per unit
'countywide)
Naples population in 1986 = 18,343, therefore,
1.19 units/18,343 population ~ 0.00006 units/capita\
(2) 6 stations/132,084 population @ 9/30/87
(3) Ratio of Lee County 1986 peak population to EMS stations
(4) M.G. Lewis Econometrics memorandum re Lee County development
project "The Parklands," 10/17/85
99
B~'ItG~ICT NEDICAL S~tYIC~S
LEVEL OF ~.RVIC;~ ~I'AJ4OA~z O.~ ~ITS/~ITA
FI~ ~TI~ ~IR~ ~ AVAI~ CDE~ICI~) (~T) AT
~ (~glOE ~) 0.~ IN CIP ~,~
~-~ 1~5,~ 9.9 9.0 (0.9) (~, I~)
' ~-~ 1~,~ 10.5 9.0
· gl-~ 18S,%4 11.1 9.0 (2.1) (~6~,9~)
~-~ 1~,3~ 11.T 1.0. 10.0 (1.7) (~1,~)
~'~ ~5,3~ 12.3 1.0 11.0 ( 1.3) (4~, 410~
~'~ 215,2M 12.9 1.0 12.0 ~0.9) (~, 1~)
~'~ 2~,205 -- 13.5 12.0 C1.5)
~-97 ~5,143 1~. 1 12.0 ( 2.1 ) (76~, 9~)
97-~ 245,~ 14.7 12.0
" ~'~ . ~5,028 15.3 12.0
~-~ 265,057 15.9 12.0 (~.9) C1.426.~0)
00-01 2~, 17& 16.5 12.g
~S ~iTS ~S ~ITS ~S ~ITS ~PL~/ VAL~
.. ~ ~TI~ R~IR~ P~NNED AVA~BLE (OEF~C:EVCY) (C~T)
~ ;)RESENT TO
~ ~ 9/~0/91 1~,~5 10.5 I 9.0
..
'~ I0~1-9~ 49,~0" 3 3 3.0 ~.0
~ S T~ ~TOTAL 22~,~05 13.5 4 12.0
"
~0 5-~ ~H &0,031 16.5 -I O.O (3.0) (1,~7,:00)
10 YE~ TOTAL
10/91-9/01 Z~, 1~4 16.5 3 12.0 C4.5)
The t~: cos~: incr.:les
BU~MARY OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE INVENTORY
(Un its )
USABLE ~ ~DD BY ADD BY USABLE
PL~ ~E~ N~E & NO. ~30/~0 9/30/9~ 9/30/~2 TOTRL
North Nagl~s 1 2 2
Central Naples 2 I 1
Golden Gate 3 i 1
East Naples 4 i 1
South Naple~ 5 1
~rco 6 i 1
Royal F~a-Palm 7
~eek
Estates 8
~ban Estates 9
' Corkscrew 10
I~okalee 11 2 2
B~g ~ress 12
Count~ide Total 8 i 9
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE
COST COMPONENTS AND AVERAGE COSTS
(1) (2) (3) ¢4)
~ COST COST
COMPONENT/ PER COST/FACILITY
COST COMPONENT JlECTION ~ECTION
~ A. Vehicle 1 70,000 $ ?0,000
~'~ B Building (square feet) 2,750 65 178,800
C. Design (% of building) 178,800 5% 8,900
~: D. Furniture (rooms) 5 1,500 7,500
-!!': E. Equipment i 24,000 24,000
.~ ~,
~i,. F. Land (1/2 acre) i 75,000 75,000
G. Appraisal Fee i 1,500
%. AVERAGE COST PER EMS U~IIT $ 365,700
DEPENDENT FIRE DISTRICT STATIONS AND APPARATUS
POPULATION TO BE SERVED AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996=
1. Service'Recipients: All County Residents
...~... Other: Fire District Residents
2. Service Area: County-wide
X Other: Fire Districts
3. Service Period: ~. Permanent Population =
Isle of Capri = 1,005
Ochopee = 2,233
Peak Period Population =
Weighted Average of
Permanent & Peak
STANDARD OF SERVICE: x.xxxx apparatus & fire station per
capita
0.00097 Isle of Capri/0.00057 Ochopee
Source of Standard: CCPC Citizen's Advisory Committee
2.3 of present ratio of apparatus to
population (1)
Other Standards for Reference
Standard Source
Level of Service 7 or Collier County Comprehensive Plan (2)
less, w~thin 3 miles of
a fire station
0.0001641 fire station/ Lee County current ratio (3)
capita
0.0356 fire calls/capita Lee County current call load (4)
5 minute Countywide
average response time
from receipt of alarm to.
arrival ~ 3,251 ERU~s per
apparatus + 0.5 station
(1) Isle of Capri = i apparatus/ 685 population x 2/3 = 0.00097.
Ochopee ~ 2 apparatus/2,351 population x 2/3 = 0.00057
(2) Collier County Comprehensive P~aD, p.29. Service benchmarks
for land use point rating system
(3) Ratio of Lee County 1986 unincorporated peak population to
unincorporated stations
(4) M.G. Lewis Econometrics memorandum re Lee County development
project "The Parklands", 10/17/85
($) Seminole County: "Recommended Facility Types and Standards,"
October 17, 1986
Note:
I ERU (Equivalent Residential Unit) = I dwelling unit with 2.82
persons
- -
ISIE OF C~,~Itl fll~ DISTItlCl*
~ OF ~lt'tlCI ~1'AN1~1410:.55697 AI~AIATtJ~/ r.A~ITA
~TI~ ~ ~ ~ ~/ V~
flS~ DI~I~ ~l~ ~ AVAI~ ~FICI~) (~)
T~ ~ ~ 0.~ IN CIP ~,~
~-~ ~ 0.9 0 1 0.1
~-91 ~ 0.9 0 I 0.1
91-~ ~ 0.9 0 1 0.1 ~,~
~-~ ~ 0.9 0 I O.J ~,~
93-~ ~ 1 .o o I o.o o
~-~ 1~ 1.0 0 J 0.0 0
~'~ ~ % 1.0 0 J 0.0 0
~-97 1~ 1.0 0 1 0.0 0
97-~ 1~ 1.0 0 J 0.0 0
~'~ 1~ 1.0 0 1 0.0 0
~'~ ~ 1.0 0 1 0.0 0
~-01 1~ 1.0 0 I 0.0 0
~TI~ ~ ~ ~ ~PLUS/ V~
PRESENT TO
9/~0/91 ~ 0.9 0 1 0.1 ~,~
5 YEAR
5-Y~ MT~A 1~ 1.0 0 I 0.0 0
~ 5-YR ~l 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0
10 Ym
10~1-9/01 1~ 1.0 0 1 0.0 0
- I
OGEI)EE FII~ DISTRICT
LEVEL Of S~RVlC~ S?~OAItOt .OCC~7 AI~JtTUS/CAPI?A
pQI)ULATIOR APPARATUS APPARATUS APPARATUS S~PLUS/ VALUE
FISCAL DISTRICT II~QUI RED PLANNED AVAI LAILE (DEHCIEJdCY) CCOST) AT
YEMt SERVIC~ AREA O.OOO~' IN CIP S1&?,219
89-t0 2101 1.2 0 Z 0.8 117,775
90°91 2123 1.2 0 2 0.8 117,77~
91-9~ 2145 1.Z 0 2 0.8 117,7~
92-93 2166 1.2 0 2 0.8 117,775
93-94, 2188 1 .Z O Z 0.8 117,775
94,-95 2210 1.3 0 2 0.7 103,053
95-96 ~"- ZZ.T5 1.3 0 Z 0.7 103,053
" 96-97 2256 1.3 0 2 0.7 103,053
97-9~ 2279 1.3 0 2 O. ? 103,053
98-99 2302 1.3 0 2 O. 7 103,053
99-00 237.5 1.3 0 2 0.7 103,053
00-01 23~ 1.3 0 2 0.7 103,053
POPULATION APPARATUS APPARATUS APPARATUS SLI~J~.US/ VALUE OR
DISTRICT ~OUIRF. D PLANNED AVAI LAgL£ (DEFZC~E.qCY) (COST) AT
TIRE P~tICO S~ItVICE AltEA .O0057/CAPITA IN CIP $1&?,219/UNIT
,
O) "~ PRESENT TO
9/30/91 21~',5 1.2 0 2 7.8 117,775
~ 10/91-9/96 M 0.1 0 O CQo ~)
~T~ S-YEAR SUBTOTAL 2233 1.:~ 0 2 0.7 103,05'3
~ S-YR ~o~r. ll5 0.0 0 0 0.0 0
10 YEAR TOTAL
10/91 - 9/01 Z3~,8 1.3 O 2 O. 7 103,053
SIIMM~RY OF FIRE STATION ]tND APP~R~TUS INVENTORY
(]~pparatus)'
¢3.1 (~1 (3) C41 (si (6)
USABLE ~ ADD BY ADD BY US/~BLE
PLAN ,~.REA N'A~E & NO. 9130190 9/30/~3, 9/30!9:~ TOT]fL
North Naples 1
Central Naples 2
Golden Gate 3
East Naples 4
South Naples 5
Marco 6 i 1
Royal FakalPalm 7
Creek
Rural Estates 8
Urban Estates 9
Corkscre. w 10
Immokalee 11
]~tg Cypress 3.2 2.
Countywide Total 3 3
FIRE STATION AND APPARATUS
COST COMPONENTS AND AVERAGE COST
(1) (2) (:3) 14)
# COST COST
COMPON~.NT/ PER COST/FACILITY
COST COMPONEN~ SECTION SECTI0~ (2) x ( $ )
ISLE OF CAPRI
A. Apgaratus i $135,000
B. Structure (square feet) 1,816 35.00 63,560
C. Design (% of building) 63,560 8% 5,085
D. Furniture (rooms) 1,145
E. Land (square feet) 70,000 3.25 227.500
AVERAGE COST PER APPARATUS
+ STATION $ 432,290
OC~OPEB
' A. Apparatus 2 $ 202,790
· B. Structure (square feet) 3,650 21 76,650
C. Design (% of building) 76,650 2% 1,533
D · Furniture 3,464
E. ' Land (acres) 5 2,000 10. 000
(5) TOTAL COST $ 294,437
(6) APPARATUS 2
(7) AVERAGE COST PER APPARATUS 147,219
+ STATION (5)/(6)
JAiL
POPULATION TO BE SERVED AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996:
1. Service Recipients:. ~ Ail County Residents
Other:
2. ~ervice Area: ~ County-wide
Other:
3. Service Period: Permanent Population = 225,205
~ Peak Period Population = 308,849
Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak - 252,807
STAND~RD OF SERVICE: 0.0033 beds per capita (1)
Source of Standard: Collier County Sheriff's Office
Other Standards for Reference
Standard Source
0.0031 beds/capita Current Level of Collier (2)
County Service
0.0010 beds/capita Lee County (3)
0.0029 beds/capita Seminole County (4)
(1) Based on increase in average daily jail population through
September 1992 at same rate as part 21 months (August 1985 -
January 1987)
(2) 565 beds - 182,501 peak population @ 9/30/87
(3) Lee County CIP: 1986-87 - 1990-91, p.156, (based on 1986
service level)
(4} Seminole County: "Recommended Facility Types and Standards,"
October 17, 1986
LEVEL OF SERVII~ .~TAII~UID: .0033
~TZ~ ~S BEDS B~S ~PL~/ V~
FIlL ~*UIDE ~I~ PL~N~ AVAI~LE (DEFICiEnt) (~T) AT
y~ P~ 0.~ IN ClP ~,1~
~-~ 227130 ~0 ~1 CI~) (3,~1,~)
~-91 2402~ ~ ~1 C152)
91-~ 253392 ~ ~1 (1~)
92-~ 26~27 ~9 ~1
93-~ 282~ 933 256 891 (~) (1,~,8~)
9~-~ ~ 976 897
~*~ 3~9 1,019 897 (~) (3,~.fl~) -.
97-98 335011 1,1~ 897
98-~ ~7 1,1~9 ~7
~-00 ~1~6 1.192 897
00-01 37~ 1,~6 697
~TZ~ RE~IR~ PL~N~ AVAI~BLE (DEFICZEN~) (C~T) AT
T]HE PERI~ (p~K) .O03]/~ITA [g CIP ~28.1~1T
PRESENT TO
9130/91 ' 2~0,2~ ~3 0 ~1
5 YEAR
10/91-9/96 ~. 589 226 256 256 ~0
S-YEAR ~8TOTAL 300,~9 1,019 256 397 ~122) (3.~36.8~)
2N~ ~-YR GR~H 65,760 ~17 0 0 (217) (6.103.125)
10 YEAR TOTAL
10/91-9/01 ~7~,~ 1 ,~6 256 897 (339) (9. ~40,000)
SUH1/ARY OF J]%IL INVENTORY
Caeds)
(~) (21 (3) (41 (5) (61
USABLE ~ ADD BY ADD BY USABLE
pLaN ~A~E~ N~MB & NO. 9/30/90 9/30/91 9/30/9~ TOTAL
North Naples 1
Central Naples 2
Golden Gate 3
East Naples 4 469 469
South Naples 5
Marco 6
l~oyal Faka-Palm 7
Creek
Rural Estates 8
Urban Estates 9
~°rkscrew 10
Ill~okalee 11 172 172
Big Cypress 12
· Countywide Total 641 641
- 43 -
JAIL
COST COMPONENTS AND AVERAGE COSTS
~ COST COST
CC.MPONENT/ PEa COST/FACILITY
COST C0}~]~0N~"~ SECTION SECTION (2) x (3)
A. Structure (modular cell) I $28,125 $28,125
B. Equipment & Furniture N/A
. (per cell)
C. Land (per cell) N/A
(7} AVERAGE COST PER BED $28,125
(1 Bed/Cell)
Jail support and contingency $10,050,000
256 New Beds $ 7,200,000
Sheriff Admin. Expansion $ 7,7~0,000
$25,000,000
LIBRARY BUILDINGS
POPULATION TO BE SERVED AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 19965
1. Servic~ Recipients: ~ Ail County Residents
Other:
:~'.',~ 2 Service Area: X County-wide
-,~.~ Other:
3. Service Period: Permanent Population = 225,205
Peak Period Population = 308,84.9
~.. Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak = 252,807
BTAND~%RD OF SERVICES 0.33 Square feet per capita
Source of Standard: CCPC Citizents Advisory Committee (1)
Other Standards for Referenae
Standard Sourc~
0.19 sq:ft./capita Current Level of Collier County Service (2)
0.31 sq.ft./capita Lee County CIP (3)
0.60 sq.ft./capita Florida Library Association (4)
0.4-0. § sq. ft. / capita Wheeler-Goldhor formula (5)
(~) Based on 50% increase over present level of service
(2) 28,500 sq.ft/148,722 population as of 9/30/86
(3) Lee County CIP: 1986-87 - 1990-91, p.159, (based on 1986
service level)
(4) Standards and Guidelines for Florida Public Library Services
May. 1985, p.14
($) Wheeler and Goldhor's Practical Administration of Public
~T_~, 1981, p.405
LlllAIrt IU! LDIIIG~
I,,~L OF SERVICE Sq"AMOAII~: O..'~ S~ FEET/GI, PITA
P~:,UI. ATrON ~ fr~.i S~LIARE FEET .~ FEET SURIq.US/ VALUE
FISCAL CX)-IJIDE REQUIREO PLAMNED ' AVAILABLE (DEFICIENCY) (COST) AT
YEAq ~.~IGHTED AVG. 0.33000 I# CIP Sl15.27
~9-90 1SS, 76~ 61,382 ~,OQO C27,~02) C~, 1&7,~7~)
9Q-91 ~96, 7~0 6A,9~7 26,000 60, OQO CA.9~7) C569,
91-9~ 207.800 6~,$7& ~,OOQ ~.QQO CS.S?&) C6A2,S1~)
92-93 219,812 72,538 3,000 66,000 C6.538) C753,635)
93-9~ 230,836 ?6,176 3,300 69,3O0 ¢6,3?6) C79:),585)
9/.-95 2/,I ,835 79,806 3,000 ~,300 (7,506) (865,171
95-96 252,807 83,426 10,000 -. 82,300 (1,126) (129,829)
96-97 263,783 87,c~8 82,300 (&,7~8)
97-98 27/., 760 90,671 82,300 (8.371) (96/.,902)
98-99 285, ?&l 9,&, 29~ 52,.300 (11,99~) (1,382,606)
99-0Q 296,816 97,9/,9 52,300 (15,~9) C1,803,89~)
O0-Q1 307,988 101,636 82,.~00 C19,336) C2,228,861)
S~tARE FEET SQUARE FEET .SQUARE FEET SURP',.U~/ VALUE OR
~%gULAT l OM XEQUXR~) Pt. JU~MED AVAZ LX~LE ~.:Ef XC:EXCY) {COST) AT
TIN~ PERiCX) (I.~IGHI'ED AVG.) O..~3OQO IN CIP $115.27
PRESE#T TO
9130191 196,780 6~, 937 26,000 60,000 ~' A, :;37) C 569, ! ]J, )
10/91-9/96 56,027 18,A89 22,300 ~'2..'.~0 ~..~11 A39,3C~!5
S-YEAIt SUBTOTAL 252,807 ~3,&26 /.8,300 52,300 (1,126) (129,529)
2gO 5-YR GRO~H 55,181 18,210 0 ~} ¢~8,210) ¢2,099,032)
10 YEAR TOTAL
I0/91'9/01 307',988 101.636 /.8,300 82,300 C19.336) (2,228,~61}
SUMMARY OF LIBRARY BUILDINGS INVENTORY
{Square Feet)
(~) (2) (3) (4) (S) (6)
US~U~LE @ ADD BY ADD BY US~LE
PL,~N ltRE~ NI~[E & NO. ~ 9/30/9~ ~ TOTAL
North Naples i 4,000 3,000 7,000
Central Naples 2 9,800 26,000 35,800
Golden Gate 3 4,000 4,000
East Naples 4
South Naples 5 6,600 6,600
Marco 6 5,600 5,600
Royal Fake-Palm 7
Creek
Rural Estates 8
Urban Estates 9
Corkscrew 10
Im~okalee 11 4,000 4,000
Big Cypress 12
Countywide Total 34,000 26,000 3,000 63,000
LIBRARY BUiLDIN~
COST COMPONENTS AND AVERAGE COSTS
(1) (2) ¢3) (4)
# COST COST PER COST/FACILITY
COST COMPONENT COMPONENT COMPONENT ¢2) x (3)
A. Structure (sq.ft.) 10,000 93.40 $ 934,000
B. Design (% of structure) 934,000 8% 74,720
C. Land (acres) i - 2 Donated 0
D. Parking (spaces) 50 300 15,000
E. Shelving (sections) 250 300 75,000
F. Equipment (items) 60 900 54,000
(5) TOTAL COST $ 1,152,720
(6) SQUARE FEET IN AVERAGE 10.000
LIBRARY
(7) AVERAGE COST PER SQUARE
FOOT (5)/(6) 115.27
LIBRARY COLLECTION
NOTE:
The CCPC Citizen's Advisory Committee recommended excluding the
library collection from the Capital Improvement Element of the
.County's Comprehensive Plan.
POP~TION TO BE BERVED A.~ OF.SEPTEMBER 30, 1996%
1. Service Recipients: X Ail County Residents
Other:
2. Service Area: ~ County-wide
Other:
3. Service Period: Permanent Population = 225,205
Peak Period Population = 308,849
X Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak = 252,807
BTANDARD OF BERVICE: 1.0 books per capita
Source of Standard: CCPC Citizen's Advisory Committee
Other Standards for Reference
Standard Sour~
0.99 volumes/capita current Level of Collier County Service (1)
1.23 volumes/capita Lee County CIP (2)
1.50 volumes/capita Lee County Comprehensive Plan
1.15 volumes/capita 1986 average of 7 systems (Brevard,
Pasco, Sarasota, Seminole, Volusia,
Central Florida Regional, & West
Florida Regional)
1.00 voiumes/capita Seminole County (4)
F16rida Library Association (5)
1.00 volumes/capita Level B for libraries serving 100,000 - 600,000 population
1.50 volumes/capita Level C for libraries serving
100,000 - 600,000 population
(1) 148,000 volumes/148,722 population @ 9/30/87
(2) Lee County CIP: 1986-87 - 1990-91, p.159, (based on 1986
statewide average service level)
(3) Lee County ~Q~prehensive Plan, p.28
(4) Seminole County: "Recommended Facility Types and Standards,"
October 17,.1986
(5) Standards and Guidelines for Florida Public Library Services,
May, 1985
L I ll~ltY CQLLECTIC}II
LEVEL OF S~.RVIC~ STANOX~O: ~.0 ~ ~ ~ITA
~TI~ ~LE~I~ ~X~ ~L[~I~ ~/ V~
fl~ ~IDE RE~I~ p~ AVAI ~ (DEFICl~) (~f) AT
T~ ~IGHT~ A~. I IN CZP ~'~
~-~ 1~,7~ 185,T~ ~,~ 17,~7 ~5,~
91-~ ~7,~ ~7,~ 8,011 ~,~ 12,&S7
~-~ 219,812 219,812 8,~0 2~,~T 9,2~ ~,11T
9&-~ 2~1,~5 2&1,~S 9,~ 2~, 157 6,~22
~-~ ~2,~? ~2,~7 9,~ ~7,~ S,0~8 181
97-98 ~7A,7~ ZTA,7~ 257,~ C16,935) C613,~7)
98-~ ~85,7&1 ~5,7~1 ~7,~5 C27,916) C1,010,559)
~-OO ~,816 ~,816 ~7,~ (~,~1) C1,~11,47~)
00-01 307,9~ ~7,~ ~57,~ C50,1~) C1,815,~I)
P~TI~ RE~XR~ P~NNED AVAI ~LE CDEFXGX~) C~) AT
PRESENT TO
9/30/91 207,~ ~7, ~ 8,~6 ~1~, 2~ 4, ~ 1~, 945
10~1-9/~ 45,~7 45,~7 45,5~ 45,5~ 5~ ZO,~
181,652
ZWD 5-YR ~H S5,1~1 55,~81 0 0 C~5,181)
I0 Y~R TOTAL
NOTE:
The unit cost of S~.20 represents the cost to ~ the tibrar,/
correct{on ~hite pertcx~icatty reptacir~j exiscirJg vottnes due to
~elf. lOSS. etc.
!
'"' S~Y OF LIBI~,ItY COLLECTION INVENTORY
'~. (Books)
(z) (2) (~) (4) (s) (6)
I~ PLACE &
USLBLE ~ ADD BY ADD BY USABLE
'. PL~.N ~REA I~AME & NO. 9/30190 9/30!9~ 9/30/92
North Naples i 21,600 900 800 23,300
Central Naples 2 103,000 4,500 4,500 112,000
: Golden Gate 3 21,100 900 800 22,800
East Naples 4 14,500 900 800 16,200
South Naples 5
Marco 6 25,000 900 700 26,600
:.:. Royal Fake-Palm 7 2,600 46 11 2,657
';~ Creek
Rural Estates 8
Urban Estates 9
Corkscrew 10
:~i,' I~okalee 11 15,800 500 400 16,700
..~;. Big Cypress 12
!?,. Cotmtywide Total 203,600 8,646 8,011 220,257
LIBRARY COLLECTION COST COMPONENTS ~ND AVERAGE COSTS
: (1) (21 (3) (4)
$ COST COST PER COST/FACILITY
COST COMPONENT COMPONENT COM~0N~NT .(2 } x ( 3
A. Book $ 36.20
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS *
POPULATION TO BE SERVED AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996:
1. Service Recipients:' ~ All County Residents
Other:
· 2. Service Area: ~ County-wide
Other:
3. Service Period: ~ Permanent Population - 225,205
Peak Period Population - 308,849
Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak - 252,807
STANDARD OF SERVICE: 2.58 square feet per capita
Source of Standard: CCPC Citizen's Advisory Committee
(based on County's Master Plan)
Other Standards for Referenoe
Standard Sourc~
2.46 sq. ft/capita Collier County present level of " (1)
service (1987)
Includes offices, courts, customer/public service areas,
other county employee work space, all elected officials and
the Health Department. Excludes temporary'or leased space
and facilities that are presented in other parts of this
study: EMS Stations, Fire Stations, Libraries, Recreation
Facilities,-Water and Sewer Treatment Plants, and the Jail.
(1) 325,240 sq.ft./132,084
GOVEPJe4E]T ~JILD INGS
LEVEL OF S~L'YIC~ STAIIDARD: ~ S~XJt~ F~T/CAPITA
Iq~PULATIGII SQU4U~ FEET SQUARE FEET ~ FELt1' SIJRPL~/ VALU~
FISCAI. CQ-Vl~ I. EOU~ REZ) P~ AVAI LAIt. E Ct)EHCZ£NCY) CCOST) AT
YEAR ~ 2.58 IN C~P S131.07
89-90 165,3~8 &2&,701 /~1,7~B 15,0~? 1,97~,210
90-91 175,365 &52,4,4~2 58,000 4,99.7/,,8 /.7,306
91-9~ 18Sr34~ 478,188 Z~,OOQ 524,7~ /,6,561 ' 6,102,685
92-93 195,3~ S03,939 15,00Q 5~9,7T8 35.810 &,693,551
93-9~ 20'J,~09 529,697 539,7~8 10,051 1,317,358
9~-9S 215,268 555,391 539,7&8 (15,~3) C2,050.580)
9~-96 7~5,~0S 581,029 $39,7L9 (&1,281) ($,&10,688)
96-97 Z~S,I&3 606,669 $39,7&& {66,921) (8,771.322)
97-98 2&$,0~, 632,317 539,7~8 C92,569) C12,132,980)
98-99 ~S,O~ 657,972 539,7TA (118,Z24) C 15.~9~,6/.6)
99-00 7.~,0~7 68~,8~7 539,77.8 (1~.,C)99) (18.887,069)
00-01 Z7~,17& 709,9~9 539, 7~& C170,ZQ1) C22,308,23~)
/)Qi)ULATI~II S~ JrT~T SQUARE FELrl' SQUARE FTET SU~tPLU$/ V~,LUE Gdt
(CC)-VZD~ ~) JLEQUIRED Pt. ANNED AVAILABL~ (DEFZCZEJ~C'f) (~T) AT
TZHE PF. RZCX) Z.58/CM)ITA ZN C:P S131.OT/UNIT
PRESEHT 1'0
9/30/91 18~5,34~ 478,188 58, OGO $2&, 7T, A :.6.561 $. 102.685
5 TEAR GROI./TH
10/91-9/96 &9, 7~9 128,/81 4.0,000 4Q,OOQ C88,/.~I) (11.597,257)
S-YEAR SUgTOTAL ~,1&3 606,669 9~. OOO 56~. ~'Y~ C4t,921)
~ S-YR ~,RC~it &O,031 103,280 O CZ~,OOO} C1:~8,290) ¢16,813.660)
10 YEAR TOTAL
10/91-9/01 :~7~, l?& 709,9/,9 9~,000 539,7~8 C170,201)
SUMMARY OF GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS INVENTORY *
(Square Feet)
(~) ¢~) (~) (4) (~)
US/~BLE @ ~tDD BY ADD BY USABLE
PLaN ARZX N~MB & NO. 9/3~/90 .~J_~ _~ TOTAL
North Naples ~ I 2,247 2,247
Central Naples 2 40,000 40,000
Golden Gate 3 7,000 7,000
East Naples 4 329,187 46,000 25,000 400,187
South Naples 5 17,210 17,210
Marco 6 3,710 3,710
Royal Faka-Palm 7 6,288 6,288
Creek
Rural Estates 8
Urban Estates 9
Corkscrew 10
I~mokalee 11 36,106 12,000 48,106
Big Cypress 12
Cou~ltywide Total 441,748 58,000 25,000 524,748
· Includes offices, courts, customer/public service areas,
other county employee work space, all elected officials and
the Health Department. Excludes temporary or leased space
and facilities that are presented in other parts of this
study: EMS Stations, Fire Stations, Libraries, Recreation
Facilities, Water and Sewer Treatment Plants, and the Jail.
- 54 -
GOVE~LNMENT BUILDING *
COST COMPOI~ENTB AND AVERAGE COSTS
(~) (2) (3) (4)
$ COST COST PER COST/FACILITY
,' COST COM~ONE~T ~ ~ ¢21 x (
~ A. Structure (sq.ft.) $88.00
~:' B. Furniture (open 21.00 * (2)
office system)
C. Design (% of structure 7.35
& furniture)
D. Land (provided by Real 10.00
Property)
E. Parking (1 per 250 sq. 4.72
ft. of structure)
~, AVERAGE COST PER SQUARE FOOT $131.07(3}(4)(6)-
, * (1) Includes ~ landscaping, carpet tile and window
'<~-.' covering. Does not include energy management systems,
"~ phones, or computers
{,',',. * (2) Furniture costs are based on open office furniture
systems, in accordance with County policy, excludes
interior demountable partitions
(3) Includes meeting or exceeding fire code, and meeting or
exceeding all handicapped codes (handicap "friendly").
(Does not include sprinklers)
(4) This is a square footage cost estimate and is subject to
the type of occupant programmed into the structure.
(Standard office space)
(5) These figures are based on the following: A. Recently completed construction projects at the
Government Complex
B. Estimations on projects currently being designed by
multiple architectural firms on contract with the
Board
C. Reviewed by prominent Naples Architectural firms
D. Reviewed by the largest architectural firm in the
State of Florida
E. Compared to major projects completed nationally
F. Are compatible with government construction in
other counties in close proximity to Collier County
by our Growth Management Consultant
(6) Single story structure
DRAI NAO E
POPULATION TO BE SERVED AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996=
1.' Service Recipients: ~ All County Residents
Other:
2. Service Area: X County-wide
Other:
3. Service Period: _~_ Permanent Population - 225,205
Peak Period Population = 308,849
Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak = 252,807
STANDARD OF SERVICE~ A County Surface Water Management Systemst
Future "private" developments - water
quantity and quality standards as
specified in Collier County Ordinances
74-50 and 90-10.
B Existing "private" developments and
existing or future public drainage
facilities - those existing levels of
service identified (by design storm
return frequency event) by the completed
portions of the Water Management Master
Plan as listed in the Drainage/Water
Management Subelement of the Public
Facilities Element.
Source of Standard: CCPC Citizen's Advisory Committee and the
Collier County Stipulated Settlement
Agreement with DCA.
Other Standards for Referenoe
~ Sourc~
0.0025 miles/capita Current Collier County miles/capita (1)
0.0006 miles/capita Lee County CIP (2)
(1) 311 miles/123,893 population as of October 1, 1986
· (2) Lee County CIP: 1986-87 - 1990-91, p.231 (based on 1986
..~ urban unincorporated service level)
~. C~LCUL~TION OF DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS
:~,~: ' 1991-92 - 1995-96
NO standard has been identified for drainage canals and
structures that "... indicate(s) the capacity per unit of demand
..." as required by State regulations. Drainage flows are
traditionally measured by hydrologists in terms of "design
storms" (e.g., 10-year 25-year, 100-year storms, etc.). Collier
' County has prepared a Stormwater Master Plan which identifies, at
a planning level degree of accuracy, the ability of the various
public water management facilities to pass the expected
stormwater flows from various design storms. These design storms
were based upon the existing and future land use for the various
parts of the County.
The project totals listed below (in lieu of the usual
"Calculation of Requirements") reflect the recommended plan of
action to improve the public water management system facilities
for the years 1991-1996. These improvements are identified in
the Stormwater Master Plan as a part of a 20-year program.
~LF~LT_~9. P~oJzc~ COST
291 District No. 6 (Lely) $ 8,860,000
292 Gordon River Extension 8,216,000
293 Cocohatchee River System 3,535,000
294 Main Golden Gate System 2,031,000
295 Henderson Creek Basin 160,000
296 Faka-Union Basin 1,345,000
297 Southern Coastal Basin 699,000
~.~'~ 298 Barton River Basin 53,000
.:, 299 Naples Park Drainage 3,157,000
:/~. Countywide Total $ 28,056,000
' 0'47 124
;~' - 57 -
SUMMARY OF DRaINaGE INVENTORY
(miles}
(3.) (2) C31
CANAL STRUCTU~LES
(miles) (number)
~' ~ 9/30/90 9/30/90
'!. Primary 228 51
Countywide Total. 311 62
DRAINAGE CANAL COST COMPONENTS AND AVERAGE COSTS
(2) (2) (3) (4) (5)
PRIMARY SECONDLY PRIMARY SECONDARY
~ CANAL STRUCTURE STRUCTURE
~OST COMPONENT COSTS COSTS costs .. 'COSTS
A. Design $ 40,000 $ 25,000 $ 55,000 $ 30,000
B. La~d 140,000 125,000 60,000 30,000
C. Facility 380. 000 ~ 335. 000 220.000
AVERAGE COST $ 560,000 $ 340,000 $ 450,000 $ 280,000
:h. ~2 'M~L~
PARKS ~ RECREATIOI~AL FACILITIES
POPULATION TO BB SERVED AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996=
1. Service Recipients: ~. All County Residents
Other:
2. Service Area: ~ County-wide
Other:
3.. Service Period: X Permanent Population = 225,205
Peak Period Population = 308,849.
Weighted Average of
Permanent and Peak m 252,807
STAND]~RD OF SERVICE: 1.2882 acres of community park land/1000
population :
2.9412 acres of regional park land/1000
population :
$122.00 of recreation facilities inventory
value per capita *
Source of Standard: CCPC Citizents Advisory Committee
(") (2) (3) (4) (s)
REQUIRED
FOR
STAND~RD 9/30/96
PER 1000 POP. V~LUE TOTAL
TYPE OF F~CILIT¥ PERSONS ~ ~
Amphitheater 0.0118 2.7 100,000 270,000
Baseball Fields 0.0353 7.9 530,000 4,187,000
Basketball/Volleyball 0.1765 39.7 22,800 905,160
Bicycle Trails: Miles 0.0553 12.5 28,900 361,250
Children ' s ' Playgrounds 0. 1059 24.0 33,500 804,000
Community Centers 0.0353 7.9 834,000 6,588,600
Community Pool 0. 0059 1.3 695,200 903,760
Fitness Station Trails 0.0353 7.9 76,000 600,400
Football/Soccer Fields 0. 0353 7.9 325,000 2,567,500
Multi-purpose Facility 0. 0059 1.3 1,453,000 1,888,900
Jogging Trails: Miles 0.0353 7.9 28,500 225,150
Competition Pool 0.0059 1.3 1,500,000 1,950,000
Picnic Pavilions 0.0706 15.9 37,300 593,070
Racquetball Courts 0.1412 31.8 71,300 2,267,340
Shuffleboard Courts 0. 0706 15.9 21,500 341,850
Softball Fields 0. 0706 15.9 345,000 5,485,500
Tennis Courts 0 0706 15 9 48,000 763,200
Track and Field 0.0059 1.3 221,000 287,350
Boat Ramps 0. 1059 23.8 228,000
TOTAL . 36,386,380
· .. Value per capita (Value/225,205 population) $ 161.71
- FACILITIES PER 1~000 PERSONS
STANDARDS
.COUNTY FRPA* OTHER
TYPE QF FACILITY STANDARD STANDARD ~
,:! .Amphitheater 0.0118 0.04
Baseball Fields 0.0353 0.17 0.17 (2)
0.02 (4)
'~" Basketball/Volleyball 0.1765 0~02 0.04 (2)
!?~ Courts 0.02 (4)
~ ' Bicycle Trails: Miles 0.0553 1.00
Children's' Playgrounds 0.1059 1.00 (5)
Community Centers 0.0353 0.067(6)
Community Park: ac 1.2882 2.00 2.00 (2)
· Community Pool 0.0059
Fitness Station Trails 0.0353 0.10 0.13 (5)
Football Fields 0.0353 0.25 0.25 (2)
~;.
~!,' 0.05 (4)
.i? Multi-purpose Facility 0.0059
'~'~ Jogging Trails: Miles 0.0353 0.50
~i~i' Competition Pool 0. 0059 0.04 0.04 (2)
-~. 0.05 (4)
~'!~' Picnic Pavilions 0. 0706 0.05 (5)
~. Racquetball Courts 0.1412 0.10 0.01 (2)
· .~ 0.05 (4)
Regional Park: acres 2.9412 20.00 20.00 (2)
5.00 (3)
Shuffleboard Courts 0.0706 0.20 0.02 (2)
i'~,' 0~05 {5)
~'* Soccer Fields 0 0353 0.25 0.25 (2)
0.01 (4)
~,, Softball Fields 0.0706 0.30 0.17 (2)
~'"~' 0.02 (4)
~. Tennis Courts 0.0706 0.50 0.05 (2)
.,*. o.25 (3)
,~' O. 02 (7)
Track and Field 0.0059 0.05 (4)
Boat Ramps - Freshwater 0.0529 25.00** 3.03 (8)
Boat Ramps - Saltwater 0.1118 25.00** 3.03 (8)
;~,? Boat Ramps - Combined 0.1059 3.03 (8)
· FRPA - Florida Recreation and Parks Association
· * Standards are. per 1,000 registered boats
(~) Collier County Comprehensive Plan quoting Outdoor Recreatio~
in Florida. 1981 as a guideline.
(~) L%e County CIP: 1986-97 - 1990-91 (based on County
Comprehensive Plan
(4) National Recreation and Parks Association
(5) Kansas City, Missouri
(6) Jackson,. Tennessee
(7) Seminole County: "Recommended Facility Types and Standards,"
October 17, 1986
(s)Florida Department of Natural Resources: I lane/300 boats
P&IU~ JUID I~Dtf. ATZC]I CJU)ITAL FACiLZTZE~
VALLI~ Of FACiLiTIES PtJJIX~ ~# TII~ C:ZP
LLr~L OF S~YiC~ STAND,~O: S122.QQ P~t CAPITA
(2PITAL
P~KILAT I~11 FACILITIES FACILITIES CAPIT~L VAtLJ~
FISCAL CO'UIDE I~QUIRED P~ FA¢ILITIES RIRPt.US P~
YEJ~A ~T AT SlZ2~JU)ITA IN CIE AVAIL,4BL~ (06~PlCIENCY) C~ITA
89-~0 165,388 ~ 1,19Z,000 ~ CT./,T&,.T11~ S77
90-91 175,365 Z1,~,5~30 Z,706,000 15,&09,025 C5.9~5,505) S88
91-9~ 185,~3a~ 22,611,96~ &,&78,000 19,887,025 CZ.72/.,9~3) S107
9:)-9~ 195,325 Z3,829,650 8,70~,600 28.593,62S /.. 76~, 97'J S1~6
93-9& 205,309 Z5,0~7,69~ &,[31~70Q ~3,/.25,~325 8..~7,(~7 S163
9~-9S Z15,26~ ~,6,262,696 Z,ZI&,IO0" 35,639,&Z5 9.37&,729 S166
95-96 ~)2S. ~)05 27,&73,010 1,26&,900 ~6,9~,325 9,/.~9,315 S16~
96-9~ Z~5,1&3 -~q,687,~6 0 ~36.90&,325 8.Z16,879 S157
97-98 ~&5,O~ Z9,900,24~8 0 ~6,90~,~25 ?.OG~,077 S151
98-~ ~5,028 31,113,416 0 ~,~,3~ 5,~,~ S1&3
~-01 Z~, I~4 ~,~ 0 ~,G,~ 3.~,~ Sl~ ~ ·
FAC! L! TI ES FAC I L ! T ! ES AVA I
F~m~AT I Old RECIJII~) pt~dNED FACILITIES v~
TI~ ~I~ C~*~IDE PE~) AT S1~ IN CIE AVAI~ ~ ~ITA ,
~ ~ 9/~
~ 5 ~ ~N 49,~0 6,~,~ 18,~,~ ~.~,~ S1~
I ~ 10~1-9~
~ 5-YR ~N ~9,969 6,~,218 0 ~,~,3~
10 ~ TOTAL 2~,174 ~,~,~ 0 ~,~,~
10~1-9/01
PAftI:S ANO RECXEATIO# CAPITAL frAcILITIES~ ACTUAL VALtf Jtl~It~ In Tile
LE~I. OP SERVIC~ STANDAItOZ S'122.00 INVENTOItY VALLe/CAPITA
BAS~O ~ IIIOIVIOUAL FACILITY STAXOddOS
FACILITY 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-9~ 199~°9~ 1995'-96
TYPE INVENTOItY I liV[ifl'CRY IN#TONY INVENTOItY INVERTONY IIIVqERI~Y I IIVTJfTOKY
VALU~ VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE VALI~
PC~Jt~T ICWCCO-VIDE PERX) 163,~3 17~,]65 I~,3-~ I~S,~S 205,~G9 21S,26G 22~,205
AI~! THEATERS . S20Q,O00 S211),000 S220,00Q S230. GOQ S240,0QQ S~0,00Q S270,00Q
BASEBALL FIELDS ], 07&,000 3,286,000 ],;*~5,00Q ],657,0QQ ],816,0Q0 &,02~, 000 &, 187,000
IASI~E T BALL/VOLLEYBALL MS,76Q 706,800 7&$,$60 7~6,6Q0 8~,~dSO 8~6,400 905,160
" BICYCLE TRAILS 262,990 280,330 294,780 · 312,120 ]29,;,60 3~],910 361,2~0
I~IILDRENS PLAYGRCUNOS 60], 04X) 6~6,500 670,000 703,500 7~7,000 770,500 80&,0GO
I:~H~I TY CE#TERS &,837,2OO 5,170,800 5,421,000 5,7~4,600 6,0G&,800 6,~B,&00
I:3:JqKIN 1TY KXX. 695, ?IX) 695,200 ?6&, 720 fl~,, 240 8.~, 240 gQ], ?6Q 903,760
FITNESS TRAILS U,O, 8OO ;.71,200 49;*,000 $24,400 5~7,200 577,600 600,;*00
FCX)TRALL/SOCCER FIELDS 1,~,C~O 2,015,000 2,112,500 2,242,500 2,~,0,000 2,&70,000 2,567,50Q
6m~GING TI~AILS 765,300 176,-700 185,250 196,650 205,200 216,600 22~,150
mJt. T 1 -PURPOSE CENTER 1,45],GG0 1,45],000 1,$~,0GQ ~, 743,l:~0 1,743,g00 1, ?~.~, 9Q0
::KP[TITIO~i ~ 1,$00,0~3 1,500,C00 1,650,00Q 1,800,0(M 1.8QO,O00 1,9'50,000 1,9~0,000
PICNIC PAVILIONS ;.36,&10 462,520 4,88,6.30 $14,740 5;*0,850 5,IDS, 960 $93,070
~ RACQUETBALL CC2URTS 1,668,&20 1,768,240 1,8~)8,06~ 1,967,8,50 2,067,700 2,167.5:)0 2,267,3;*0
I J.~i~' S)IJFFL£BOARD COURTS 251,550 266,600 281,6~0 296,700 ' 311,750 32A,800 3~1,850
Ot ~ SQFTBALL FIELDS ;*, 036,500 4,27B,000 ;*,519,500 ;*, 761,0~0 $,002,500 5, :'.~'., 000 5,/,85,500
f~j --~ TENNIS CIIJRTS 561,600 595,200 628,800 662.400 696,000 729,600 763,200
~-, TP, AC)C & FIELD 221,000 221,000 243,100 265,200 265,200 287,]00 287,300
! '"" G~,AT ItA)4P'S 3,,990,.000 ;*,,240°800 ;*,468,800 4,.719,600 /,, ~r,7,600 5,198,/.00 5,426°/,00
~ TOTAL S26,g&7,7'JO S28,433,890 S30,099,350 S31,972,130 S3],2~3,86Q S35,12;.,650 S36,386.380
PE~ CAPITA VALUE S163 S162 S162 S16& S162 S16] S162
PARJC:S ANO REC~tEATICXl CAPITAl. IrAClLITIESt ACTUAL .VAL~,f PLANX~ III Tile CIP
~ OP S~RVlC~ STANOAIO~ S122.QQ lJfl~lTGtY VALUE/CAPl?A
~ OM PfnX, G~ FY91/gZ _4JMJAL BUDGET, PltlOI DEFERJL4~, AN0 PAPJC PLANS
FACJLETY 1909-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1995-94 199&-95 199'J-96
TYPE lil~'~JlTQtY INV~dTC~Y IIIVFATORY IMNTC~Y IMJITMY IlI~,~iTC~Y lliV~IITC~I'
VALU~ VALL~ VAL~J~ VALUE VAL~ VALU~ VAUf
I'q3'~LAT lflU ( CO*idl DE PE~) '1~,~ 175,36S ~8~,3~ ~9S,32S 205,309 215,2M 22S, 20S
iJ~BALL FZELOS 2,120,000 2,120,000 2,g&S,0OO 3,&7~,000 &,00~,00Q &,00$,0(X) 4,005,00Q
iASICETbLL/VOLLEYIALL 206,4~Q 273,6043' 273,600 T'fl,20Q 820,800 8M,&OQ 9'12,000
I ICYb"I.E TAAJLS 1,66&,OM 1,739,780 1,81/),920 1,890,06Q !,96S,20Q 1,965,20Q 1,465,200
C]IILDREMS I)LAYG~JliDS $02,SOQ - 502,500 S02,S00 670,000 670,000 670,0~0 670,000
C~04JI4 ITY C~TERS 1,6M,0CO 3,262,000 15,262,0(X) &,9]O,OOQ 6,$98,000 ?,;,:32,0GQ 7,~,$2, 0CX)
CC]4(MITT POX. 0 0 O 69S,200 69~,Z00 69~, 2~O 695,200
F ITIIESS TRAILS 0 0 0 &S6,OQQ 608,000 608,00Q 608,00Q
FGOTIJJ.L/StF..CFJ FIELDS 1,6~,000 1,62~, 000 2, 2.~0,000 2,900,000 2,900,000 3,225,000 3,22~,000
~A.T! -~ C~IITER 0- 0 1,&$3,000 1,~53,000 1,&53,0GO 1,&$3,0OO 1,453,000
.JOGGI ~G TRAILS 59, B.SO 59,850 96, K)O 1/,,8,20Q I~,2~Q
C::~T:T!C~f ~ 0 0 1,SOQ,0OO 1,S00,(X)O 1,~00,000
PiCillC PAVILICMS :37,~:~:) 37,300 37,]00 74,600
GTIALL COUItTS I, 1&0,800 1,1&0,~ I, 1~0,80G 2,281,600
SOFT~ALI. t'~'~S &, I~.O,0(X) .&, l&0,000 /,,, 1~,0, I~(X) $, 1~,000 5,$~,000 $,~.65,0(X) 6,210,000
~ZS CCIJITS. 1,632,000 1,~2,000 1,~2,000 1,9~),0Q0
T'AAC~ & FIELD 0 0 0 0 221,00Q 221,000 221,000
KAT IA)PS 1,$96,0(X) 2,7'36,000 3,192,00Q 3,6~.8,0Q(]
TOTAl. S17,011,914 $2S,644,81& S30,;,38,21& S32,60S,22& S34,SZS,3&3 S3,~,.528,3~S8 S,r,0,87'3,150
P~ r.~PI?A VALLE S103 S146 S164 S167 $168 $160 S181
IMfZ~ AND RF.J:RfATIOII: AI~PtIITNEATBtS
~ (}ir S~RVIC~ STANDARO: .0118/1000 IMP.
~ILATION AIIPNITNF. ATEIIS A~PIlITIIF. ATEIS ANPIIITHEATERS ~Jltf't. US/ ~UTRf~D ClP TOTAL St,tf'UJ~
FISCAL CZ~LIZDE ftEiXJIRED PLANNED AVAILABLE (DF. FICIEllCT) · VALU( AT PLANN~) AVAI~ (DEFICIENCY)
TEAft WEN]' 0.0000118 IN ClP 100,000 VALUE VALL~
89-90 165,388 2 o 1 (1.o) ~,oo,oo0 o !o0,0o0 ('tm,oeo)
' 90-91 17~,]65 2.1 1 2 (0.1) 210,0O0 lo0,000 200,000 (10,O00)
91-92 $~o~ 2.2 0 2 (0.2) 220,0O0 0 2O0,0O0
92-93 19~,325 2.3 0 2 (0.3) 230,0O0 0 200°000
93-9;, 205,309 2.4, 0 2 (0.4,) 2~0,0O0 0 2O0,O00 (~0,O00)
94~-9~ 215,2Z>fl 2.$ 0 2 (0.5) 250,O00 0 200o0O0
95-96 225,205 2.7' 0 2 C0.7) 270,0O0 O ZOO,OO0. C7O,O00)
96-9T 235,14,3 2.8 0 2 (0.8) 280,0O0 0 200,O00 (80,O00)
97'-98 Z&5,O~ 2.9 0 2 (0.9) 290,0O0 0 200,O00 C~),O00)
98-99 255,028 3 0 2 (I .0) 3O0,000 0 200,000 (100,O00)
99-O0 265,057 3.1 0 2 (1. J) 310,0O0 0 20'0, ~ C110,O00)
00-01 27'5,17/* 3.2 0 2 C1.2) 320,0O0 O ~O0,0O0
POPULATION ItEOUlRED ClP TOTAL
CO-UZDE $ VALU~ AT Pl..AM#ED AVAfLABLE (OEFZCZEIIC'I')
TZI~E PER ZOO PERMANENT ·IO0,O00/UNIT VALUE VALUE
9/30/91 ~.365 210,O00 ~O0,000 2O0,O00 (10.0O0)
10/91 - 9/96 49,799 60,O00 0 0 (64o0O0)
$ TEAR SUOTOTAL 2~,205 270,O00 100,000 200,0O0
ZN0 5-YR GROVTH 4,9,969 50,O00 0 0
10 YEAJt TOTAl. .27~,17& 320,0O0 100,000 2O0,O00 (120,0O0)
PARKS ANG REC3~..ATI(XIs IASEIALL FIELDS ' .'~ -'
PCPULATIGN IASEBALL FIELD IASEBALL FIELO IASEIALL SLW)LU~ f~L/llEO ClP TOTAL
FISCAL CO*YlDE REQUIRED PLANNED FIELOS (OEFICIEBCY) S VALUE AT PLAmlED AVAILABLE (DEFICIE]ICT)
YEAR PEIIJqAJfENT 0.0Q00353 IN CIP AVAIL.ABLE S530,00Q VALI~ VALIJE
89-90 165,388 S.8 1 4 (1.8) 3,07&,000 530,000 2,120,0Q0 cgs&,09O)
90-91 175,~S5 6.2 0 4 ¢2.2) 3,~M,O00 0 2,120,080 (1,166,000)
91-92 185,3~ 6.$ 1' S C1.5) 3,4~$,0Q0 825,0(20 2,9($,00Q
92-93 195,325 6.9 ~ 6 (O.e) 3,637,0G0 530,0G0 3,4?~,0C, Q
93-94 20S.309 7.2 I ? (O.Z) 3,8~6,000 530.000 4,005.000 C~06,0OO)
94-95 215,2M 7'.6 ? C0.6) 4°028,000 0 4,00S,000 (318o000)
95*96 22~,20S ?.9 7' (0.9) &,~87o000 0 &oO0~,O00 (4.77,000)
96-9? Z35,143 8.3 7' C1.3) 4,-399o 000 -- 0 4,00So000 ¢689,09O)
97-98 245°084 8.7' 7' (1.T) 4,6~,000 0 ' 4,00S,000 ¢90~,000)
98-99 715,028 9.0 ? (~.0) &,770o000 0 &,OOS,O00
99-00 265,057 9.4 ? ¢2.4) 4,962,0Q0 0 4,0QS.0QQ (1o272.0C)0)
oo-01 273,174 9.? ? ¢2.7) 5,141,000 o' ~,oo~,09o c1,431,09o)
P~IAATIGN REQUIRED Cl P TOTAL SI,RPLUS/
COoUID£ $ VALUE AT ;L~#F.D AVAILABLE (DEFICIENCY)
TINE PER IGO PEJUqANENT SS30, O00/UNIT VALUE VALUE
PRESENT TO
9/~/91 175,~5 3,286,000 5~O,OOO 2,120,000
10/91-9/96 &9,7~9 901,000 1,8~5,000 1,590,000 6~9,0Q0
$ YEaR SUOTOTAL 225,205 &,187,000 1,885,000 3,710,000 C477,0Q0)
2NO $-YR G~O~TH 49,969 954,0O0 0 0
10 TEAR TOTAL ~75,17/. 5,1/,I,000 1.885,000 3,710,000 C1,431,00Q)
*NOTE:
ExpeneJQfl of Pofncf~rm ELe-entary School eLJmirmtecl
cr~ ~sebeLL field from the F~9O-91 rvaiL*bLe inventory.
T~Q CZ) b~seblLL fleLdl ire ~eduLecl for c~rmtructJcn
in F~9O-91 for · net pin of orm b. sebeLL field.
P.&__--~__ All I~CIIfJ, TIOII: Id~IC[FI~L/YIXI..~'IXLL
FI~ ~DE ~IR~ ~ ~FICI~) S V~ AT ~ AVAI~ ~FICI~)
Y~ ~ 0.~7~ IN CIP AVAI ~ ~,~ ~ V~
~-~ 165,~ ~.2 13 (16.2) ~,~ 0 ~,~ (~,~)
~ ~ ~ ~.2 2 ~ (0.2) ~ ,~ ~5 ~ ~,~ C~.~)
~-~ ~,~ ~9.7 2 ~0 0.3 ~,1~
~-97 ~5,1~3 &1.5 &0 (1.5) ~,~
~-~ 265,~7 ~.8 &O C6.8)
~-01 2~,17~ ~.6 &0 C8.6) 1,1~,~ 0 912,~ C1~,~)
~TI~ RE~IR~ CZP TOTAL
~-gZDE S VAL~ AT ~N~ AVAI~ (DEFICI~)
9/30/91 1~,~5 ~,~ 0 2~,~ (~,~)
lO/9~-9~ ~9,~ 1~,~ ~,~ ~,~oo ~,~o
5 Y~ .TOTAL 2',205 ~,~ ~,&~ 9~2,~ 6,~0
2~ 5'YR ~H &9,~9 161,~ 0 O C~.~)
10 Y~R TOTAL 2~,174 1,1~,~ 6~,400 912,~0 C1~,~)
*NOTE:
Loss of or~e avnlLmbl, e ~it from Inventory due to deterioration.
/E1. ANO REC~IE. ATIOli: llIC~ PATNS~ ~Z~, ~
FI~ ~VI~ ~I~ ~ AVAI~ ~FICI~) S V~ AT
~-~ 1~,~ 9.1 6.7 57.6 ~.S ~,~ 1~,~ 1,~,~ 10~1
~-91 1~,~ 9.7 2.6 ~.2 ~.S ~,~ ~,~ I,~,~
91'92 1~,~ 1Q.2 2.6 ~.8 ~2.6 . ~,~ ~,~ 1,BI&,~ 1,~,1~
92-~ 1~,~ 10.8 2.6 65.4 ~.6 312,
~-~ ~,~ 11.4 2.6 ~.0 ~.6 ~,~ ~,~ I,~,~ 1,~,74Q
~-~ 215,2~ 11.9 ~.O ~.1
fl-~ ~,~5 12.5 ~.0 55.5 ~I,~0 0 1,~,~ 1,~,~0
~-9~ ~5,143 13.0 ~ ~.0 55.0 3~,~ 0 1,~,~ 1,~,5~
97-98 245,~ 13.6 ~.Q ~.& 3~,~0 0 I
98-~ ~S, 0~8 14.1 ~.0 53.9 ~07,4~ 0 1,~5,~ 1,557,710
~-~ 26S,057 14.7 ~.O ~.3 4Z&,~0 0 I,~5,2~ 1,~,3~
~-01 2~, 174 15.2 ~.0 52.8
~TI~ REWIRO ClP TOTAL
~-~[0E S V~ AT P~NO AVAt~LE
TIHE KRIW PE~EXT ~,~IT VAL~ VA~
PRESENT TO
9/30~1 1~,~5 ~,~ ~,l&O 1,~9,~ 1,459,450
~ 5-YR ~H ~9,~9 ~,~0 0 0 C~,O~)
10 Y~ TQTA~ 2~,17~ 4~9,~ ~,S~ 1,~5,~ 1,5~,~
PAItI~ AN~ REClIF. ATIOIII Cllll.fitiJl'S PLATGI~
LEVEL OIr SLqVICl STANOAiO: .1059/1000
PGI~JLATIOll PLATGIIOUI~S P~S Iq. AYGII~LIIdOS StAU't. LIS/ iL~IJIRED ~ TOTAL
Ir ~ RE~UII~D AVAIL.A81~ CI~FICIEMCY) $ VALIf AT AVAILABL~ (DEfiCI~ICY)
~,L 0. OOOll~J' tll CtP ' K33,54~ VALL~ VALU~
89-90 165o388 18 0 15 C3.0) 6~3,000 0 502,500 (100,500)
90-91 17~,]65 19 0 15 (4.0) 6.36,500 0 502,[~0 (134~,0G0)
91-92. 185,]4~ 20 0 ' 15 ($.0) 670,000 0 502,500 (167f500)
92-93 195,325 21 0 20 C1.0) 703,500 2AS,0GO 670,000
93-9~ 205,309 :':' 1 20 (2.0) 737°000 33°$00 670°000 (6?°000)
94-95 23 1 20 c3.0) 770,5o0 33,500 670,0e0 c~00,500)
213,268
'-95-96 225,205 2& I 20 (&.O) 804.,000 33,500 670,000 ¢134%000)
96-97 235,143 25 ' 0 20 ($.0) 837,500 " 0 670,000 (167,500)
97-98 21,5,084 26 0 20 (6.0) 871,000 0 670, OOQ (201,000)
98-99 255,025 27 0 20 C?.O) 904.,500 0 670,000 C23~,500)
99-00 265,057 28 0 20 C8.0) 9'38,000 0 670,000 (26~,000)
00-01 ~'7'~, 17& 29 0 20 (9.0) 971,500 0 670,000 C301
I~:X:%ILAT IC~ IIEOUIRED CIP TOTAl. SLJlIPLU~/
lO-VIDE $ VALL~ AT PLANNED AVAIL. ABLE (DEFICIENCY)
TII~ P~R IGO PERIVUIEJIT S33,$O0/lJIf IT YALU~ VALL~
PRESL~iT TO
9/~0,~I 175,365 636,500 0 50::~,5G0 (1~4,,000)
10/91 - 9/96 &9,B;,O 167,500 368,500 167,500 0
$ TF. Aft SI.~TOTAL 225,205 8~4,000 368,500 670,000
2ND 5*Tit GIIOUTH &9,969 1~,,000 0 0 (134,000)
10 TEAR TOTAL 275,174 971,500 ]~J~,SO0 670,000
I
"
I
I
P,IUU~ kilo IF.J:I~..ATIOII: O~IIJIIITY C~ITERS
~ Or' S~tYIC! ST,UID,UWs .0353/1000 IK~P.
I~I~JLATION (:X~IN. C~'NTERS (:~N4. CEN'rE~S C~WJNITY StJl~t.I$/ II~UIR[D tip TOTAL
FISCAL CO-WID~ II:[QUIREO PLANNED C~TERS CD~FICIENCY) S ~ AT P%AMIffiO AVAILABLE (DEFICIBICT)
YEAJt ~ 0.0000353 IN C~P AVAILABLE SS~,OC)Q TMLU~ VA.L~
89-90 163 3M 5.8 ~ C3.8) S&,,E~7,2QQ 0 1,MS,0QQ
90o91 1~ ~65 6.2 3 5 C1.2) S~, 1?0,,BOQ 1,$94,, OQO 3,Z~.,OOQ CI,0OO,BIIQ)
91-9~ 18~ ~ 6.5 S (1.$) S5,4~.1,00Q 0 3,.?.~., OQO CI,,~I,0~Q)
92-g3 195 ~ 6.9 2 7 0.1 SS,7~,6QQ 1,668,000 .I., ;.~G, OOQ
93-9~ 205 309 7.2 I 9 1.8 S&,O~,SQQ 1,668,00Q 6, $98,(X)Q 1,501,20Q
94-95 Z15 ~ 7.6 I 10 2.4. S,6,~8,400 ,&.~, 000 7, I]Z,OOQ
-~.9S-96 225 lOS ?.9 10 ~.1 S6,S88,G 0 ?,&3;',OQQ 1,7'J1,4QQ
96-97 Z35 143 8.3 10 1.7 S6,97~,200 O ?,432.000 I,&17,~00
97-98 245 ~ 8.7 10 1.3 ST',~$,BQO 0 7,&3~,0OO 1,984,200
98°99 :~5 028 9.0 10 1.0 S7',$06,0OO 0 7, ~,32,000
99-00 265 057 9.& 10 0.6 S7,B39,600 0 7.&3:;',000
00o01 ~'7~ 174 9.7 10 0.3 S~,089,800 0 7,432,00Q
I~TIC~ IIEQUIRED C:lP TOTAL S~mPLUS/
iD-ViDE S V~LUE AT PL4~NED AVAZL.~BLE CDEFICTE#CY)
Tine PERIOD P~RnAJdEN! $~.30, OO0/un l T VALU~ VALUE
PRESEMT TO
9/~0/91 17~o36~ $, 170,800 2°502,000 4,170o000
5 TEAR
10/91 o 9/96 49,7~9 I,/.17,800 /.,I70,000 4,170,000
$ TEAR ~.'B?OTAL Z2~,205 6,588,600 6,672,000 ,8,340,000 1,7~1,400
2Ho 5-~'R ~C~TH 49,9~9 1,501,200 0 0 C1,501.200)
10 )'£,~R IOTaL Z7~,174 ~,089,£00 ~,672,000 $,.3/,0,000 Z$0,2~0
cc~cncrl
P~.Y~5 ~ REC~.ATION: C{NLIIITY PARK
LEVEL. OF S~RVIC~ STA/dOAJU)z 1.2882,'1000 J~P. '
F'~JFli,)IJ~TZOllC~344 PIC ACRES ~ PIC JU~IP. ES CC)14 PIC .JU~tF.S SURPt. US/ RECIJIRED C2P TOTAL
FISCAL CC)-VZDE REQUIRt:O PLANNED AVA[LAB~ Ir CDEFICZEJ~.'~') S COST .~T PLAIIEO AVA[~ COE~:lCIEICY)
~ PERJ44NEN? O. GO12~?. IN CIP ~7,12S COST VALUE
89-90 16S,388 Z13.1 0 9.0 4~.9 S,7~,338 0 6,998,25Q I,Z17,91~S
90-91 17~,365 ~ .9 0 2S8o0 32.1 6, IZ7,~ 0 6,998,~S0 870, 7'13
91-92 185,34~ Z38.8 32 ~3.0 51.2 6,&77,&~O ~68, OOO 7,866,2~Q 1,~8,~Q0
92-9~ 19S,3~'~ ~1.6 0 290.0 38.& 6,82&,650 0 7,866,~SQ 1.0/,1,600
95-9& 205,309 26~.5 32 322.0 57.5 7,17&,56~ 868,000 8, 73&,-~O
9&-9S 215,268 2ir~.3 O -. 322.2.0 ~.7 7,521,763 0 8,7~,~S0 1,ZlZ,L~8
9~-96 225,20S 290.1 0 322.0 31.9 7,~S8,963 0 8,T~,~SO 865, ~S8
96'97 2~5,1&3 302.9 0 322.0 19. I 8,216,163 0 8, T~, ~SO $18,088
9?'98 245,08~ 315.7 0 322.0 6.3 8,563,363 0 8,T~,ZSO 170,888
98-99 2~5,028 328.5 0 322.0 (6.5) 8,910,563 0 8,T'~,~0 C176.313)
99-QQ 265,057 ~l.& 0 3~.0 C19.&) 9,~,&~ 0 8,~,~.
~'01 2~, 17& 3~.5 0 3~.0 (~.5) 9,615,813 0 8,~,~
~-glOE RE~ZR~ P~NNED AVAI~ CDEF[CIE~}
PRESENT ~
5 Y~ UTOTAL 225,205 ~ ~ ~
~ 5-n ~, 49,969 ~ 0 0 (~)
10 YE~ ~TXL 2~. 174 355 ~ ~ (~)
I0/91-9~1
IKIqLATIOll CCII(.P(XX.S CCI~. _11~_~_ CaOILJNITY StJtPLUS/ LtmJllt~ ClP TOTAL
FISCAL CO-I~ID( It~Ulfl~D PL.AMNED P(XX.S (DEPICIF. JICY) S VAUf AT ~ AVAILABL~ (DEFICIENCY)
YEAR .PE]UIAJd~IT 5.9e-06 IN ClP .AVAILABLE S695o200 YAU,E YALU[
89-90 16S o3~8 1.0 0.0 (1.0) 695,200 0 0 C693,20Q)
90-91 1750365 1o0 0.0 (1.0) 695,200 0 0 C6950200)
91092 185,34,4 1.1 0.0 (1.1) 76~0720 0 O
92-93 193,~2S 1.2 1.0' 1.0 (0.2) 8~,240 695 °200 695,2~0 (139,0~0)
93-94, 205,309 1.2 100 C0.2) 83~,2~0 0 695 °2C)0
94-95 215,268 1.3 1.0 (0.3) 9~3,760 0 695,200 ¢208,560)
--95-96 22~ 0205 1.3 1.0 (0.3) M30760 0 695°200 C208,560)
% 96-97' 235° 143 1 o& 1 o0 CO.&) 97302M" 0 69~ 0200 C2780080)
97-98 245,,08~ 1 .& 1 o0 CO.&) 9?3,280 0 695°200 ¢278.080)
9e-99 255,02~ 1.5 1.0 C0.$) 1,0~,800 0 69~,200
99*.00 265°0'J? 1.6 1.0 (0.6) 101120320 0 695°200
00-01 273° 17& lo6 1.0 C0.6) I0112°~20 0 695°200
POPUI.~T I1~i ~..~OU I R~ ~'IP TOT,~L
I k~' TINE P~ICO PERXdUIE#T S69~,~X]/UN IT VALL~ VALLE
id ~ PRESEI~ f TO
.-, 9/:30/91 175,365 695,200 0 0 (695,~)
~L 10/91 - 9/96 &9,799 208,560 693,200 695,200 556,160
$ YEAR SUBTOTAL ?.25,20~ 90~,760 695°Z00 695,~00
2J~O $-YR G~C~rH 49,969 208,560 0 0 (2C)~,~)
10 YEXR TOTAl. :~75,17& 1,11z,~0 695,20Q 695,2O0
PAIt%S ~ ~C~...~%1C%~% FI11~.1 111AILS
~Tl~ Pl~ T~ILS FI~ ~ILS Fi~ ~I~ ~/ ~%~
fl~L ~-~I~ ~) REQ ~ MI~S ~FlCl~) S V~ AT
~-~ 1~,~ S.8 0 O.O (5.8) ~,~ 0 O (~,~
~-91 1~,~ 6.2 0 0.0 c6.2) &~,~ 0 o (&~,~)
91-~ 1~,~ 6.S 0 0.0 ~6.5)
~*~ 1~,~ 6.9 6 6.0 (Q.9) ~,~ &~,~ &~,~ C~,~)
~-~ 2~,~ 7.2 2' 8.0 0.8 ~7,~ 152,~ ~,~ ~,~
~-~ 215,~ 7.6 0 8.0 0.& ~,~ 0 ~,~ ~,~
~-~ 2~,~ 7.9 0 8.0 0.1 ~,~ 0 ~,~
~-97 ~5, I~ 8.3 0 8.0 C0.3) ~,~ 0 ~,~
97-~ 2&5,~ 8.7 0 8.0 (0.7)
~-~ ~5,~ 9 0 8.0 (1.0) ~,~ 0 ~,~ C76,~)
~-~ 265,~ 9.& O 8.0 Cl.&) ~&,~ 0 ~,~ (I~,~)
~-Q1 2~,1~ 9.7 0 8.0 C1.7) ~7,~ 0 ~,~ CI~,~)
~T I~ ~i R~ ~ % P TOTAL ~/
TI~ KR%~ K~ S76,~IT VALe.
PRE~NT TO
9/~/91 1~,~ &~,2~ O 0 C&~,~)
5 YE~
10/91 - 9/~ 49,~ 1~,~ ~,~ ~,~ 4~,~
S Y~ ~TOTAL 2~,~ ~,4~ ~,~ ~,~ 7,~
~ 5-TK ~N &9,~9 I~,~0 0 0 C1~,~)
I0 Y~ TOTAl. 2~,17& ~,2~ ~,~ ~,~ (1~,~)
fAgS ANO RECtF. ATIOII: FOOTIALL/SOC~'R FIEU)S
LEVEL O~ SERVIC~ STANOARO: .0353/100Q POP.
PGPULAT]Oll F/S FIELDS F/S FIELDS F/S SlJIU~/ I~UZlrg) C]~' TOTAL SURPI. US~
FISCAL CO-b'ZDE RI~QUIRED PLANNED FIELDS CDEFICIEMCY) S VALUE AT Pt.ANIdED AVAILABLE (DEFICIE]ICY)
TEAR I~.RIIAII~IIT 0.0000353 ill LiP AVAILABLE ~,0O0 V~ VALU~
89-90 165,38~ 5.8 5 (O.a) 1,~8S,000 0 1,625,000 ¢260.000)
90-91 175,~65 6.2 0 5 ~1.2) 2,015,00Q 0 1,625,000 (390,OOO)
91-92 18S,344 6.5 I 6 C0.$) 2,112,$O0 625,000' 2,250,000 ¢162,500)
9~-93 $9~,325 6.9 ~ 8 1.1 2,242,500 650,000 2,900,000 357.5O0
93-94 20~,309 7.2 8 0.8 2,340,000 0 2,900,000 2.60,000
9&-95 ZIS,268 7.6 ! 9 1 .& 2,A70,OOQ 325, OOQ 3,225,000 A55.0O0
--95-96 225,205 7.9 9 1.1 2,567,$O0 O 3,225,000 35?.500
96 - 97 235,143 8.3 -- · 9 0. ? 2,697, 5O0 0 3,2~, 0O0 227,50O
97-98 Z,~5,08;, 8.7 9 0.3 2,827,500 0 3,225,000 97,500
98-99 235,028 9.0 9 0.0 2,9~,000 0 3,2U,0O0 0
99-00 ~65,057 9.4 9 C0.A) 3,0~5,000 0 3,225,000 C130.0~01
O0-01 275 o 17& 9.7 9 ¢0o?) 3,152,5O0 0 :3 o 225 ° 000 (227,5O0)
PO)IAATICBI 8EOU1RED tIP TOTAL SURPLUS/
CO-UII~ S VALUE AT PLJJIWED AVAILABLE (DEFICIEMCY)
I ~ T~I4E PERLGO PEIDIAJ~dT S32_5,000/IJ14 Z T VALU~ VALU~
~J PRESE14T TO
f'~ ~,~ 9/30/91 17~,~65 2,015,000 0 1,6~,000 (390,000) '
~-~ 10/91 ° 9/96 49, r99 552,500 1,600,000 1,600,000
~ 5 YEAR SUBTOTAL 225,~05 2,56?,500 1,600,000 3,225,0O0 35?,5OO
~ND 5-YR GROId'TH 49,969 585,000 0 0 (585,000)
10 YEAR TOTAL 275,174 3,152,$O0 1,600,000 3,225,000 C2:)7,500)
eMOTE
Cost includes Lighting of t~o (2) fields st S150,000 per
field ~ co~str'%K:tJocl of ~ field st S37_5,000.
PARKS ANO REC~ATIC]I(z liATI-PtJ~ C~(TERS
~ OIr SERVIC~ STANDAJtO: .oQsgl'lOQO PCP.
P(X)ULAT loll (:ENTERS C~TERS CZNTEDS SIIPLUS/ IL'GUllED tIP TOTAL SUiU~JS/
FISCAl. CO-~JIDE REQUIRED Pt. JWNED AVAILABLE CDEIrlC:IENCY) S VALUE AT PLANNED AVAILABLE CDEFlCZ~IC'T)
YEAR PERNAKENT 5.9e-06 IN C:IP $I,&53,000 VALUE VAU. J(
89-90 165,.3M 1.0 0 0 C1.0) 1,&33,000 0 0 C1,&53,000)
9(]-91 't7~,365 1.0 O 0
91-92 !95,~ 1.1 I 1 C0.I) 1,59e,300 !,/.53,(X)Q 1,453,000 CI&S,30Q)
92-9:3 195,325 1.2 1 C0.2) 1,7/.3,600 0 I ,/.53,000 (290,600)
93-9~ 205,309 1.2 1 (0.2) 1,7~,600 0 1,/.,.53,000 C290,MM)
9&o95 215,26& 1.3 1
~95-96 225,205 1.3 I (0.3) 1,8M,900 0 ~J ./,53, OOQ C&35,900)
96-97 2.35,1/.:3 1./. 1 CO./,) 2.03&,200 0 I,&53,000 C581,200)
97-98 2/,5,084 1 ./. 1 (0./,) 2,0~,ZOO 0 I,/.53,000 C581,200)
98-99 255,028 1.5 1 (O.S) 2,179,500 0 ! ;&53,000 C726.500)
99-00 265,057' 1.6 1 (0.6) 2,32(,800 O 1,&$3,000 C871.,S00)
00-01 275,17/. 1 .& I (0.6) 2,32/.,800 0 1 ,/.53,000 C871,800)
PO~LATION REQUIRED tIP TOTAL S~PLUS/
CO-~/IDE S VALUE AT PLANNED AVAILABLE (DEFICZENCY)
TZHE PERZCO PERHANENT S1,/,$3,O00/UNZT VALUE VALUE
PRESENT TO
9/30/91 175,365 1,/.53,000 0 0 C1,/*$3,000)
10/91 - 9/96 49,799 435,900 1,/.53,000 1,453,000 C435,9C)0)
5 YEAR SUBTOTAL 22S,20~ 1,8M,900 1,/*~3,000 1,453,000 C/.35,900)
2~dD 5-YR GRC3.'T. /,9,969 290,600 0 0 C435,900)
10 YE~.I~ TOTAL 275,174 :),324,800 I,/.53,000 1,453,000
I
PARI~ ANO R~CIF. ATICII~ ,J~(lil~ TIIAILS
LEVEL Odr IERVIC~ STANOARO~ .0333/1000 PCP.
POPIXATIOIi .iOGGIN~ TRAIL JOGGIIIQ TRAIL JOGGI#6 1'IJlL a. IPU~/ ILqlJll~) ClP TOTAl.
FISCAL CO-IJ~D( (RILES) Itl~O PLANMED NILES CDEirIClEMCT) S VALUE AT PLANNED AVAILAILE (D~FIClI]CY)
YF. Jd PERgR~ENT O. _~fJfJ~n~53 IN LIP AVA! LAILE ~2B,5~0 VALIJ~ VALUE
89-90 165,388 ~ ~8 0.0 2.1 (3.7) 165,300 O sg,,ISO
90-91- 17~,]65 : 0.0 2.1 (&.l) ' 176,700 0 59°050 (116,850)
91-92 105,~ 6.5 1.3 3.4 (3.1) 18~,250 37,050 96,900
92-93 195,32~ 6.9 1.8 5.2 (1.7') 196,650 51 ,]iX) 1~8,200
93-94. 20~,309 7.2 1.3 6.5 (0.7) 20~, 200 37,050 105o2~) (19o050)
94~-95 215,268 7.6 0.5 7.0 (0.6) 216,600. 14,250 199°~)0 (17,100)
-- 95-96 22~, 2OS 7.9 0.3 7.3 (0.6) 225, I~0 8,550 208,050 (17,100)
96-97 '" 235,14,3 8.3 0.0 7.3 (1.0) 2~6,550 0 208,050"
9?-98 24,15,084, 8.7 0.0 7.3 (1.4,) 24,7,950 0 ZOS,05Q (39,900)
98-99 255,0:28 9.0 0.0 7..3 ( 1.7) ~)6, .500 0 208°050
99-00 265,057 9.& 0.0 7.3 (2.1) 267, 9C)0 0 208,050 (59,850)
00-01 27~, 174. 9.7 0.0 7.3 (2.4,) Z76,4,50 0 208,050 (68,4.0Q)
POPUI. AT ZOli REc3JERED CZP TOTAL $URPLL~/
COoglD~ $ VALL~ AT PLANNED AVAILABLE (DEFICIENCT)
TIHE PERI(X) PER/4AJd~T S?.8,500/IJNIT VALU~ VALUE
PRESENT TO
9/30/91 175,365 176,700 0 59,85Q (116,850) ,
5 YEAR GROgTH
10/91 - 9/96 49,799 48,450 148,200 1:..8,200 $9,850
$ YEAR SU8TOTAL 22~,205 2~,150 1~.8,200 2(:M,050 C17,100)
2ND $-YR GROk'TH 4,9,969 39,900 0 0 (39,900)
10 YEAR TOTAL 27~,174. 27&,4,50 14.8,200 ;Z08,050 (68,4,00)
PAP3i3 Al4) RECIt~ATIGIIt CI:IIpLrTITICm IKXX
LEVEL OF SERVIC~ STAIIMfKI)s .0059/1QQQ PCP.
P4]~LATIGll CCI4PETITIiX ~ CGI4PETITIQN PCKX. CC#PETITIfl" POGL SURPLUS rEQUIRED tIP TOTAL SLIIIqJ~/
FISCAL CO-IJIDE REQUIRED PLANNED AVAILAII~ (I~FIClEDCY) S VALIf AT PL.~IIdED AVAILABLE (I~FICII3ICT)
YEAR PEIU4ANE#T 5.9e-06 IN CIP S1,500, OOQ V~
89-90 165,388 1 0 0 C1.0) 1,500,000 0 0 (1,500,0Q0)
1 0 0 C1.0) 1,500,0Q0 0 0
90-91 175,365
91-9Z 185,3~t, 1.1 1 1 co.1) 1,65o,ooo 1,5oo,o0o 1,~oo,~oo c15o,ooo)
9:2-93 195,325 1.2 o 1 co.2) 1,SOO,O00 0 1,500,000
93-~ 205,3C)9 1.2 0 1 C0.2) 1,800,OOQ 0 1,500,000 C300,000)
~-9~ 215,268 1.3 0 1 (0.3) 1,950,0(X) 0 1,50Q,000
-- 95-96 · 225,205 1.3 0 1 (0.3) 1,9'JO,O(X) 0 1,500,000
96-97 235,143 1.4 '" 0 1 C0.4) 2,100,.000 0 1,500,000 ·
97-98 245,08& 1.4. 0 1 CO.&) 2,100,00Q 0 1,S0Oo00Q
98-99 255,028 1.5 0 1 (0.5) 2,250,000 0 1,500,000 (7~0,000)
99-00 265,057 1.6 0 1 C0.6) 2,4.00,000 0 1 ,$00,00Q
QO-Ol 275,174 1.6 0 1 (0.6) 2,/,00,00Q O 1,50Q, 000 (900,000)
POPULAT ! C~d REQU ! RED C ! P TOTAL SURPLUS/
CI:)-I~ZDE S VALUE AT PLANNED AVAILABLE (DEFICZENC'r)
j~aI(~i~.. TIHE PER!CX) PER#ANEHT 1,500,O00/~JNIT VAL~ V~
PRESLrNT TO
9/30~1 175,365 1,500,000 O 0 Cl,500,000)
YEAR
YEAR SUBTOTAL 225,205 2,100,000 ~,500,000 1,500,000 (600, 0~0)
2ND 5-YJ~ G.qCXJTH 49,969 300,000 0 0
10 YEAR TOTAl. 275,17/o 2,400,000 1,$00,000 1,500,000 (900,000)
PAII~ AID ItE'Ot~TlON: PIC]IC PAVILLI(~(S
LEVEL Of SF. RVIC~ STANOA~: .07O6/1000 PGP.
PGPlJLATIO# PICXlC PAV PICXIC PAV PICXIC PAV SURPLI~/ IL'QUIRfl) C~P TOTAL St.tPLU~
FISCJ~ CO°~IDE REQUIRED Pt.A#I~D AVAIL.AILE (DEFICIEJiCY) S VALUE AT Pt.~dllEO AVAZI. ASL~ (I)EFlCI~ICY)
YEAJt PERMANENT 0.00007T)6 Ill CIP S37..300 VAJ. L~.
89-00 '165,388 1'1 .? 0 1 (10.7') 4;:36,4,10 0 (399o110)
90-91 `175,365 12.4, 0 1 (1'1.4,) &62,SZO 0 '37,3O0
91-92 185,3.r~ 1:3.1 0 ! ( lZ. 1 ) /*88,630 0 :3?,3OO (451
92-93 '1~,~25 13.8 1 2 Cl1.8) 514,74`0 37,3oo ?4,600 (4`/,0,1~0)
93-94 2O5,3O9 14.5 11 13 C1 .$) 5X.0,850 410,300 484,900 C$5,9rj0)
94-95 215,268 15.2 1 14 C1.2) 5~f,S,960 37°300 522,.200 (4`.4`,,?60)
--95-96 225,2O5 15.9 0 1/, (1.9) .. 5';3,O?O 0 522,200
96-9? ~5,1~ 16.6 0 14 (2.6) 619,180 0 .~22,200 ' (96,9e0)
97-98 245.0~4 17.:3 0 14 c3.:3) 645,290 0 522,200 (1Z3,09Q)
98-99 255,028 18.0 0 14 (4.0) 671,4`00 0 522,200 (1/.9,200)
99-00 265,05? 18.? 0 1/* (4.7) 697,510 0 $:)2,200 075,310)
00-01 :'75, I?/* 19.4 0 14 (5./,) 723.6Z0 0 5:)2,200 C:)01,/.20)
REQU I RED ¢1P TOTAL SURPLUS/
PI:J~tJLAT
CO-L/IDE S VALUE AT Pt. AJI#ED AVAZL.ABLE (DEFICIENCY)
TII4E PERI(X) PER:HANENT S37,3C)O/UN IT VALUE VAU.E
PRESENT TO
9/:30/91 175,3~)5 462,520 0 37,300 C 425,2ZO )
5 YEAR
10/91 - 9/96 4`9,7'99 130,550 /*.~,,900 ~/,,900 354`,:350
$ YEAR SUBTOTAL 225,:)0~ 593,070 4,S~,900 522.:)00 C?0,870)
ZHO $-YR Gm)fl'H 4`9,969 1:30,550 0 0 (1:30,550)
10 YEA.q TOTAL Z?5,17/* ?23,620 ~,900 5:)2,200 C201,/.20)
,1
f~ ~VIDE ~ ~ AVAZ~LE C~FZCT~) S ~ AT ~ A~ C~F~C~)
Y~ ~T 0.~1412 iH CZP S~,~ V~
~-91 1~,~3 24.8 16.0 (8.8) 1,7~,2~ 0 1,1~,~ C~7,~)
91-~ 1~,~ 26.2 0 16.0 (10.2) 1,~,~ 0 1,1~,~
~-~ 1~,~ 27.6 16 32.0 &.& I,~7,~ 1,1~,~ 2,~1,~ 313,~
~-g& ~,3~ ~.0 6 ~.0 9.0
~-~ 215,~ 30.& 6 ~.0 13.6 ~,167,520 ~7,~ 3,137,~ ~9,~
-- ~-~ ~,~5 31.8 6 SO.O 18.2 2,~7,~0 &27,~ 3,~5,~ 1,~7,~
~-97 - ~5,1&3 ~.2 50.0 16.8 2,~7,1~ 0 3,~5,~ -- 1,197,~
97-98 Z&5,~ ~.6 50.0 15.& ~,~,~ 0 3,~5,~ I,~8,~
98-~ ~5,~8 ~.0 50.0 l&.O
~-~ ~5,057 37.& 50.0 12.6 2,~,~0 0 3,~5,~ 898,~
~-01 ~, 17~ ~.9 50.0 11.1
PG~UL. AT 1 Off REQUIRED ClP TOTAL SI, J~LUS/
TII~E PERIC~ PEPJ4A#ENT S71,3C4)/U~ 1T VALUE VALUE
PRESEMT TO
9/30/91 175,365 I, 768,~)/.0 0 1,1/.0,800 (627,4.40)
5 YEAR
10/91 - 9/96 /.9,799 /.99,100 2,&2&,200 2,/.2/.,200 1,925,100
5 YEAR SUBTOTAL 225,205 2,2~)7,3A0 2,424,200 3,565,000
2HO 5-YR GROUTH 49,969 506,2.30 0 0
10 YEAR TOTAL 275,17/. Z,7'TJ,570 Z,424,200 3,565,000 791,430
PNI~ AND 11~31EATZ~I: REGZGliAL PARK
LEaL OF ~E]IVIC~ STANDARD: 2.~1~1~
~TI~ ~G P~ A~S ~G P~ ~S ~ P~ .A~S ~L~/
FI~L ~UIDE ~IR~ P~ AVAX~LE (DEFICIE~) S ~ AT P~ AVAI~ (DEFlCI~
Y~ ~T 0.~12 ZU tIP ~0,~ ~T V~
89-~ 165,~ ~.4 0 4~.4 (~.O) 4,~,~ 0 4,~.~ (~,~)
91-92 185,~ 5~5.1 0 2,~7.& 1,~.3
92-93 I~,~ 57&.5 0 2,~7.& 1,512.9 S,7~S,~ 0 ~,8~,~ 15,1~,~
93-~ ~5,3~ ~3.9 O 2,~7.& 1,~.5 6,~9,~ 0 ~,87&,~ I&,~S,~
9~-~ 215,2~ 633.1 ~ 0 2,~7.& 1,&S&.3 6,~1,~
96-97 ~5,1&3 691.6 0 2,~7.& 1,~.3 6,916,~ Q ~,~,~
97-98 2&5,~ ~0.8 0 2,~7.& 1,~.6 7,~,~ 0
00-01 2~,17& 8~.3 0 2,~7.~ 1,2~.1 8.~3,~ 0 ~.37&.~ 12,~1.~
~-UIDE ~IRED P~NN~ AVAI~LE (DEFICIENt)
TIME PERI~ ~ENT O.O IN
PRESEHT TO '
91~0/91 1~,~5 516 1,~9 2,~7
10/91-9/~ &9,~O 1~7 0 0 c1,7)
Y~R UTOTAL ~.Z~ ~2 1.K9 ~.~7 I.~
~0 Y~R TOTAl. 2~.17~ 8~ 0 2.~7 1
I0/91-9/01
· NOTE:
Xdditio~ of I~ acres of ta~l from CoLLier-SeminoLe State Park. This
acreage includes oflLy useable acres. Total p~rk acreage is 6243 acres.
The bataflce of the acreage C476Q acres) is wilderness i',,-~-.~.arv'e and
,~ostLy mmgrove. ALSO, the addttJo~ of 166 acres at OeLnor-t~Jggir.'
State Park is included in this inventory.
PARKS AMD I~;C31~.ATiCi: SIIffFLE~AiO COI. JRT~ ."
LEVEL
FI~ ~WIDE ~!~ ~ AVAI~ ~flCZ~) S ~ AT ~ XVAl~ ~FICI~)
..... ......... .......... ... . .............. ---
.....................
91-~ 1~,~ 13.1 17 3.9 ~,~ 0 ~,~ 1~,~
92-~ 1~,~ 13.~ 12 ~ IS.Z ~,~ ~,~ ~,~ 176,~
~'~ ~,~ 1~.S 6
~-~ 215,2~ ~5.2 6
- ~-~ ~,~ 15.9
~-97 ~5,~43 16.6 4~ 24.~ .. 3~,~ 0 ~1,~ 116,1~
97-~ 245,~ 17.3 ~1 ~.7 3~,~ 0 ~1,~ 1~,~0
M-~ ~5,~8 18.0 &l ~.0 ~,~ 0 ~1,~ ~,~
~-~ ~5,~7 18.7 ~1 ~.3 ~,~ 0 ~1,~ ~,~0
~-01 2~, 174 19.4 41 21.6 ~17, I~ 0 ~1,~ ~,~0
RE~IR~
~-UIDE S VAL~ AT P~ AVAI~ (DEFiCI~)
I TI~ ~l~ PE~ENT ~I,~IT VAL~ VA~
~ ~' PRE~T TO
~ 10 91 - 9~ 49,~ ~,~ &3,~ S16,~ ~,~0
~ S Y~ ~T~ ~,~ ~1,~ &3,~ ~1,~ 131,~50
~ ~'~ ~ ~9,~9 ~,~ 0 0 (~,~)
10 ~ TOT~ 2~,17& . 417,1~ 43,~ ~1,~ ~,~o
~NOTE:
NN ~J~ aC the C~ Go~t ~ter r~
ThrN (~) ~f~ c~rCs fr~ the aYai~[e i~co~
in
PAJUCS AIIO IIECIt~TIOII: SO~ FIELDS
~ Of SZItVI(:Z STA#ONIOz .0706/1000 IK~.
I~TICMI SOFTIALL FIELD SOI~L FIELD SOFllALL SUEPI.tJS/ rEQUIRED CIP TOTAL S~/
YEld ~ 0.0000706 IM tip AVAILABLE S3~S,0OQ VALLI~ VALIM
89-90 165,388 11.7 12 0.3 &,056,SOQ 0 &, 140,000 10~,SOQ
90-91 175,365 1:).4 I:) (0.&) 4,278,000 0 &, 140, 0OO (138,000)
91-92 185,3~L 13.1 12 C1.1) 4,$19,50Q O 4,140,000
9:)-93 195,~25 13.8 3 15 1.:) 4,761,000 1,035,000 5,175,000 41&,000
93-9& 205,309 14.5 1 16 I .$ S, 0Q2,5OQ 3~$,00Q 5,520,000 S17,500
9~-95 :)15,:)6~ 15.:) 1 17 1.8 5,24~,00Q 3~5,000 5,865,00Q 621,000
m ~-96 7.25,205 15.9 1 18 2.1 $,~',50Q ~$,000 6,210,Q00 724,$Q0
96-97 235,1&3 16.6 18 1 ./. 5,727,000 0 6,210,000 403,000 '
97-98 2¢5,08& 17.3 18 0.7 $,968,5QQ Q 6,210,000 2/.1 ,$0Q
98-99 255,028 18.0 18 0.0 6,210,000 0 6,210,000 0
99°00 :)65,057 18.7 la ¢0.7) 6, ~5 !,500 0 6, :)10,000 (Z& 1,500)
00-01 275,17/. 19.&' 18 C1./.) 6,693,000 0 6,Z10,00Q CL6.3,0(X))
~XoqJI.AT lO# REGUIRED CIP TOTAL S~fftPLUS/
CO-~IDE S VALUE AT PLA#NED AVAILABLE CDEFIClENGY)
TIHE PERICO PERJqANENT S~S, 000/T~4 IT VALL~ VALUE
PRESENT TO
9/50/91 175,365 &,278,000 0 &, 1~.O,OOO C138,GQ0)
10/91 - 9/~ ,~9,799 ~,?o7',500 2,070,c~0 2,0,~,GGO 1,10~.~,0
5 YF. AR SUETOTAL 225,205 5,/85,500 Z,070,O00 6,:)10,000 72/,,500
2KO 5-YR GR(~UTH /.9,969 1,207,500 0 0 (1,207,500)
10 YEAR TOTAl. 27~,17/. 6,693,CXX) 2.O?O,OOO 6,:)IO,OO0 C/.83,000)
PARJCS ANO RECREATION: TENNIS Cf~IRTS '
LEVEL OP SERVIC~ STAJI)AIO: .0706/10Q0 IK~P.
~3~,ULATICII TENNIS CTS TENNIS CI'S TENNIS SLtPLIJS/ ItL~QUIRf3) CIP TOTAL SURPLUS/
FISCAL CO*WIDE REQUIRED PLANNED C~TS (D~FICIEIICY) · VALU~ AT Pt..dJdJi(O AVAILABLE (DEFICIEJICY)
YEAR PERMANENT O.O0~Q7Q6 IN ¢IP AVAIL.ABLE S&8,GQO VALU~ VALU~
89-90 163,~S8 11.7 :S~ 22.3 S61,600 0 1,d32,000 1,070,400
. 90-91 17~,363 12.4 3~ 21.6 59S,20Q 0 1,632,0GG
91-92 185,~ 13.1 3~ 20.9 628,84X) 0 1,6.~o 000 1 ,OGS,20Q
92-93 19S,32S 13.8 6 ~ 26.2 662,4.0Q 288,0GQ 1,920,0QQ 1,257,60Q
93-9;, 205,~09 14.S 6 ;,6 31 .S 696,0Q0 2~, 04X) 2,208, 0(X) 1 ,S12,00Q
96-9S 215~268 15.2 46 30.8 729,600 0 2,20~,0QQ
-- 93-96 225,205 15.9 6 52 ]6.1 763,200 28&, 000 2,&98,OOQ 1,7'32,800
96-97 235,143 16.6" 52 35.& 7~6,800 0 2,&96,0GQ 1,699,20Q
97-98 245,0~ 17.3 52 3~.7 830/,0Q 0 2,496,0QQ 1,665,60Q
98-99 25.5,028 18.0 52 3~.0 86&,00Q 0 2,496,0QQ 1,632,0G0
99-00 26S,057 18.7 S2 33.3 897,600 0 2,496,000 1,$98,;,00
00-01 27~, 17;, 19.4 52 32.6 931,20Q 0 2,496,0QQ I
I F~q~It. AT l ON REQU ! RED C l P TOTAL SURPLUS/
CO C'~ COoUIDE S VALUE AT PLANNED AVAILABLE (DEFICIENCY)
lO l,,I;;;allTI~ PER i(3) P~RJ4ANENT S&8, OQQ/UNIT VALUE VA U.J~
"~ PRES~NT TO
I
:,-. 9/20/91 17'~,~S S93,200 0 1,63::),000
10/91 - 9/96 /.9,799 168,000 8~,000 86~,000 696,0Q0
S YEAR SUBTOTAL 2~,205 763,200 86/.,000 2,4.96,000 1,732,800
2ND S-YR GJ~OVTH &9,969 168,000 0 0 C168,000)
10 YEAR TOTAL 275,17& 9~1,200 8~,000 2,~.96,000 1,56&,800
I
PAKS AND I~EATION: TRN:X AgO FSELD
~ O(~ S~RVICE STANOAJ~: .~/1~ ~.
~T[~ T~F[E~ T~F~E~ T~ ~ ~/ RE~ZR~ CZP T~AL
Fi~ ~UZDE ~R~ ~ FIELD (DEFICit) S V~ AT ~ AVA~ (~F~C%~)
~-~ 165,~ I Q CI.O) ~1,~ 0 O C~1,~)
~-91 1~,~S I 0 (1.0) ~1,~ 0 0 (~1,~)
91-~ 1~,~ 1.1 0 C1.1) 2~,1~ 0 O C2~,1~)
9Z-93 1~,3~ 1.~ 0 (1.~) ~5,~ 0 0 (~,~)
~-~ ~,~ 1.Z 1 I (0.~) ~5,~ ~1,~ ~1,~ C~,~)
~-~ ZIS,~ 1.3 1 (0.3) ~7,~ 0 221,~ (~,~)
~ ~-~ ~,Z05 1.3 I (0.3) -. ~7,~ 0 ZZI,~ (~,~)
~-97 ~5,1&3 1 .& 1 CO.&) ~,&~ 0 221,~ CM,~)
97-~ Z&S,~ l.& 1 (O.&) ~,&~ O ~1,~
~-~ ~5,~7 1.6 1 C0.6) 353,~ 0 221,~ C132,~)
00-01 Z~, 17& 1.6 I (0.6) 353,~ 0 221,0~ C
POI~JLAT I0# REQUIRED tip TOTAL SUI~PLUS/
CO-VIDE S VALUE AT PLANNED AVAILABLE (DEFICIENCY)
Tll4E PERiCO PERAANENT S221,000/UNIT VAU.IE VALUE
PRESENT TO
· 9/..T0/91 175,365 221,000 0 0 C22.1,000)
5 YEA~
10/91 - 9/96 &9,~AO ~,.TO0 0 221o000 15,r~o700
$ YEAR SUSTOT,U. 22~,20~ 2~q7,300 221,000 221,000
2ND $-YR GROUTN &9 ,969 66,300 0 0
10 YEAR TOTAL 275,17/. 353,~00 221,000 221,000 C132,600)
I I II II '
PAKS JUIO RECREATIOlI: I(~T UJqPS ·
I.G'EL O~ SP. RVIC~ STANDARD: .1059/1000
POPULATZOl BOAT RAnPS ICM, T RAm'S 'IO4T RAi, EPS SLtI'9~/ R~QUII~O CZP TOTAL SWPLUS/
FISCAL CO-UIDE It~QUIRf~ PLAJINED AVAILABLE CDEFICIEMCY) S VALU~ AT ~ .~.VAII.ABLE CD~iC;ZEIICT)
YEAR PERffJXENT 0.0001059 IN CIP S228,lX)0 VALlf VALUE
89-90 165,3~8 1T.5 T.O C10.5) 3,990,0Q0 O 1,596,008 C2,394,000)
90-91 17~,36.5 18.6 4. 11.0 CT.6) 4,Z40,80Q 1,140,000 2, 7'J6, OOQ (1,504,8QQ)
· 91-92 185,344 19.6 0 11.0 C8.6) 4,4~8,800 456,000 3,192,000 (1,276,80Q)
92-93 193,325 20.7 4, 15.0 C5.~) &,~9,600 456,00Q 3,640,0Q0 (1,071,60Q)
93-94 205,309 21.7 2 17.0 (&.T) &,947,600 4,56,000 &,IO4,0G) C843,6Q0)
94-95 215,268 22.8 17'.0 (5.8) 5,198,40Q O &,IO4,OQO C1,094,40Q)
m95-96 225,205 23.8 17.0 C6.8) S,426,4,00
% 96-97 235,143 24.9 17.0 CT.9) 3,677,200 0 " &, 104,000 C1,573,20Q)
97-98 245,084 26.0 17.0 (9.0) 5,928,000 0 4,104,000 C1,824,,00Q)
) 98-99 ~5,028 27.0 17.0 (10.0) 6,156,000 ' 0 &, 104,00Q (2,052,QOQ)
99-00 265,057 28.1 17.0 (11.1) 6,406,800 0 4,104,000 (2,302,80Q)
OQ-01 27'J, 174 29.1 17.0 (12.1) 6,634,800 0 4,104,(X20 C2,3G2,SOQ)
~ POPtJLATION It~QUIREO ClP TOTAL StJtPt. US/
CO-~DE S VALUE AT PLANNED AVAILABLE (DEFIClFJt:Y)
~ TII~ PERICX:) PER/4AIIEIIT S228, O00AJIi IT VALtJE VALL~
I kq::h PR£SI~#T TO
CO --'~ 9/'30~Pl 17~,365 4,240,800 1,140,000 2, 7"36, OOQ (1,504,800)
I ,"~ S YEAR GROf~TH
j,.mb 10/91 - 9/96 4,9,840 1,185,600 1,368,000 1,368,00Q C4,5,600)
~ 5 YEAR SLIITOTAL 225,205 S,426,400 2,508,000 4,104,000 (1,322,400)
2ilo S-YR GROVI'H 49,969 1,208,40Q 0 0 C980,400)
10 YEAR TOTAL 27~,174 6,~34,80Q 2,508,000 4,,104,0QQ (2,302,800)
i
SUMM~RY OF PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES INVENTORY
COLLIER
COUNTY OTHER
TYPE OF FACILITY 9130191 ,GOVERNMENT ,PRIVATE TOTAL
Amphitheater 1 I 0 2
'~' Baseball Fields 4 5 1.5 10.5
Basketba I 1/Vo 11 eyba 11 17 44 3 64
Courts
:'' Bicycle Trails (Miles) 57.6 25.3 10 92.9
'~ Children' s' Playgrounds 15 24 9 48
Community Centers 2 3 30 35
?:/!:/ Community Park (Acres) 223 0 0 223
Community Pool 0 1 56 57
'.ii.:. Football/Soccer Fields 5 9 0 14
Multi-purpose Facility 0 10 0 10
.~,~::
+:~-~ Jogging Trails (Miles) 2 i i 1.5 4.6
': ::: Olympic Pool 0 0 0 0
!~.' Picnic Pavilions I 2 13 16
~:;~ ...,' Racq~/etbal 1 Courts 16 8 11 35
E:i~:;. Regional Park (Acres) 439.4 6842 0 7281.4
~,., Shuffleboard Courts 20 13 79 112
Softball Fields 12 28 1.5 41.5
~E .', Tennis Courts 34 51 188 273
Track and Field 0 8 0 8
· ,'~;3'z,.:'~ Boat Ramps 7 16 34 57
I~.~.. ~"
: ~: 'i: ~.~
'.i i' '
~'!: ~:,
- 85 -
$~MARY OF PARKS & RECREATION REG,,IONRL PARKS INVENTORY
~/:~o/~.
c0 ,LL~,E~. COUNTY
Acres
TigertaI1 31.6
Clam Pass 35.0
Vanderbilt 5.0
North Gulfshore 0.4
Barefoot Beach preserve 186.0
I.~ly Barefoot 5.0
Btatm Beach at Barefoot 156.0
951 Boat Ramp Parking 0.5
Caxalobas 4.2
Bayview 4.2
Pt. Mar&o Beach Access 1.0
Conkltn Point 6.2
Lake Trafford 3.2
Collier-Seminole State Park 1,483.0
Delnor Wiggins State Park
TOTAL 2,0 8 7 · 3
3. REVENUE FORECASTS
3. REVENUE FORECASTS
There are twenty (20) sources of revenue that Collier County will
use to pay for its capital improvements for public facilities.
Nineteen (19) of the revenue sources are "restricted" in that
they can be used only for specific types of public facilities.
The twentieth source of revenue, Ad Valorem Taxes (Capital
Revenue Fund) can be used for any typ.~ of public facility.
The revenue sources are presented in the same sequence as the
facility requirements calculations in order to relate the
"restricted" revenues to the appropriate costs.
In the forecasts listed below, each source of revenue is listed
with the amount that is estimated to be received by the County
from October 1, 1991 through September 30, 1996'. As a general
rule, revenue forecasts are based on recent actual collections,
statistical trend analysis and a 4% annual growth factor in
building permit issuance. There is no inflation factor in the
revenue forecasts, just as there was no cost inflator in the
requirements analysis.
ROAD REVENUES
1. Constitutional Gas Tax $ 7,341,000
2. Road Impact Fees 34,251,000
3. FDOT Road Funds (Pay-backs) 10,500,000
4. . Carry Forward 851,500
5. MSTD (Livingston Road) 16,000,000
6. County-wide Road Improvement 74,361,500
Assessment District
WATER ANDSEWERREVENUES
7. System Development Fees 44,560,000
SOLID WASTE REVENUES
8. Landfill User Fees 20,585,000
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
9. Emergency Medical Services Impact 552,400
Fees
JAIL
10. General 'Obligation Bonds 25,000,000
LIBRARY REVENUES
11. Library Impact Fees 3,646,300
12. Carry Forward 283,600
~OVERNMENT BUILDINO REVENUES 0
13. 8tormwater Utility 15,246,000
14. Big Cypress Basin 4,685,000
15. Developer Contribution 300,000
16. Drainag. Asse.sm.nt Di.tricts ?, .25,000
PARKS AND RECREATION REVENUES
17. Florida Boating Improvement Program 3,025,000
18. Parks Impact Fees 8,358,500
19. Carry Forward 6,501,000
UNRESTRICTED REVENUE
'20 Ad Valorem Taxes: Capital Revenue Fund 11,466,100
TOTAL $295,338,900
4. FIN~NCI/~L FEASIBILITY AN~LYSIS
One of the most important requirements of the Capital Improvement
Element of the Comprehensive Plan is that it must be financially
feasible. In accordance with Chapter 9J-5.016, F.A.C., the
County must be able to afford the standards of service that it
adopts. The preliminary test of the financial feasibility of the
Coun'~y~s standards of service is presented below. It compares
the estimated cost of required public facilities from Chapter 2
to the revenue forecasts from Chapter 3.
The relative priority of need among facility types is based on
two variables. First of all, Category A facilities which are
linked to the issuance of development orders (e.g. roads, water,
sewer, drainage, solid waste and parks) as a group will have a
higher priority than other facility types (Category B) in order
to assure that concurrency requirements are met. The second
variable is the type of revenue used to support each facility
type. There are revenue restrictions among the above mentioned
six facility types which prevent the County from using surplus
funds from one facility type to fund another facility type.
Water, sewer and solid waste facilities are each financed through
enterprise funds. This means that like a private business, the
costs of providing goods and services are financed primarily by
user fees. Any surplus revenues cannot be utilized to finance
other types of facilities. Road projects are funded with gas tax
and impact fee revenues. Again, these revenues are levied/
charged for a special purpose and cannot be used to fund revenue
deficits relating to other facility types. Drainage projects are
also funded with special revenue funds levied for a
special or specific purpose.
Because of the restrictiveness of revenues by facility type
prioritization of need among them will not help in eliminating
deficiencies caused by a lack of revenue or capacity since
surplus revenues for one facility type cannot be used to fund
deficiencies in other facility types.
Appendix B of the Capital Improvement Element includes a Capital
Improvement Schedule of Projects (Table 2). Within each facility
type all projects are identified as either providing required
capacity for existing deficiencies (as of 09-30-91} for future
growth or both. Within each facility type the schedule of
projects prioritizes projects in order to first eliminate
existing deficiencies.
In the following table of costs and revenues each restricted
revenue source is first compared to the cost of the facilities to
which the revenue is restricted. If the revenue is greater than
the cost, the -surplus. of revenue is shown as a reserve for
future projects or. expansion ok capacity for future growth. If,
a
however, the restricted revenue is less than the cost, the
'"deficit" for that type of public facility will be added to the
deficits from other types of public facilities in order to
determine the county-wide deficit of costs after crediting all
restricted revenues. The county-wide deficit is then compared to
unrestricted revenue, and a final surplus or deficit is
calculated.
If the bottom line is a surplus (or zero), the plan is
financially feasible; if the bottom line is a deficit, the plan
is not financially feasible and will need to be adjusted by:
1. reducing the levels of service;
2. increasing revenues;
3. reducing the cost and quality of facilities; or
4. any combination of the first three.
In the table below, the left column itemizes the types of public
facilities and the sources of revenue. The center column
contains the 5-year amounts of restricted revenues. The right
column is a calculation of the deficit for each type of public
facility. Ail deficits are accumulated as a subtotal. Below the
subtotal deficit is the source of additional revenue that will be
used by the County to pay for the deficit in order to maintain
the standards for levels of service listed in CIE Policy 1.1.5.
COUNTY ARTERIAL & COLLECTOR ROADS $ 117,705,000
LESS Av~ilable Revenues:
Constitutional Gas Tax $ 7,341,000
Road Impact Fees 34,251,000
MSTD (Livingston Road) 16,000,000
Carry Forward 851,500
County-wide Road 59.261.5Q0 117.705.000
Improvement Assessment
Districts
Balance 0
BTATE ROADS NETWORK 25,600,000
LESS Available Revenues:
FDOT Pay-back (State/ 10,500,000
Federal Gas Taxes)
County-wide Road 15,100,000 25.600,Q00
Improvement Assessment
Districts
~ Balance 0
047 159
DRAZN]kGE PLANS AND PROJECTS 28,056,000
LESS Available Revenues:
Stormwater Utility 15,246,000
Developer Contribution 300,000
Big Cypress Basin 4,685,000
Drainage Assessment 7.825,000 28.056.00Q
Districts
Balance 0
WATER & SEWER SYSTEMS 44,560,000
LESS System Development FeesBalance 44. 560.00Q.0
SOLID W~kSTE/L~kNDFILL 20,585,000
LESS Solid Waste User Fees 20.58~,000
Balance 0
PARKS & RECREATION 25,176,000
LESS Available Revenues:
Park Impact Fees 8,358,500
Boating Improvement Program 3,025,000
Carry Forward
Deficit ( 7,291,500)
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE 996,000
'LESS Emergency Medical Service
Impact Fees Deficit (443,600)
·AIL 25,000,000
LESS G.O.B. Referendum
Balance 0
LIBRARY
Buildings 2,490,000
Collection 1,650,000
Reserve for Impact Fee
Eligible Projects
Total Library Costs 4,667,900
LESS Available Revenues:
Library Impact Fee 3,646,300
Carry Forward 283,600 3. 929. 900
Deficit (738,000)
ffi 047
GOVERNMENT BUZLDtNGS Deficit (2,993,000)
Isle of Capri 0
Ochopee
Balance 0
SU~tOt&l Deficit of Restricted Revenue vs. Costs ( 11,466,100)
I~D Unrestricted Revenues:
Ad Valorem Taxes (Capital Revenue Fund)
Balance 0
,,~' 5. COLL3ER COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS
!
?
PERMANENT POPULATION
OCTOBEa I SEPTm~.Ea 30
P~tN ~REA NmE - No. 1991
North Naples i 27,038 36,161
Central Naples 2 15,990 20,117
· Golden Gate 3 22,551 32,098
.~.-,~ East Naples 4 21,580 27,428
South Naples 5 14,069 18,039
',~-,: ' Marco Island 6 12,594 16,602
· Royal Fakapalm ? 8,043 11,193
· Creek
Rural Estates 8 6,606 9,916
Urban Estates 9 5,332 7, ? 67
Corkscrew 10 4,086 5,155
: I~okalee 11 15,078 · 17,191
Big Cypress 12 339 351
City of Naples 13 21,521 22,619
~:'~ Everglades City 14 539 .
County Total 175,365 225,205
~.~ (Permanent)
Peak Seasonal Totals 240,260 308,849
... Weighted Average* Totals 196,780 252,807
.~,.~,
· Based on 8 months permanent population and 4 months peak
seasonal
Source~ Collier County Growth Planning Department,
Spring, 1991
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMUNITIES
2992/92 - 2995/96
COLLI~ CO~Y FLORIDA
CAPIT~ I~RO~TS EL~E~
Third ~nual Update
19 91 r~
~0'47
COLLIER COUNTY CAPIT~ IMPROVEMENTS
COUNTY ROADS $ 117 , 705 , 000
STATE ROADS 25,600,000
DRAINAGE 28,056,000
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE 996,000
LIBBY (BUILDINGS) 3,017,900 ~
GO~ BUILDINGS 2,993,000~
P~S E ~CR~TION 25,176,000 -~
P~LE WATER SYST~ 20,260,000 :'~'
SOLID WASTE/~DFILL 20 585,000'~
:
~~
i
CATEGORY A
ROAD PROJECTSz COLLIER cour~r S-YEAR CAPITAL IHP~-RLEHm~ $(000)
Pro~ect Prior 91-92 92-93 93-9& 9~-95 95-96 Futuro To~l
I lllth Avenue North (C) 270 190 60 150 150 2200 3020
US 41 - Vanderbllt Drive
2 A£~l~ogtPulling Road (CR-31) (COMI~LETED) (B) 2112 2112
Radio Road - Golden Gate
Parkway
3 A£~port-Pulltn9 Road (CR-31) (C) 2130 1441 3571
US 41 - Rad£o Road
4 Dav~s Boulevard (SR-84) (C) 1906 1906
Santa Barbara Boulevard -
County Barn Road
5 Golden Gate Parkwaf (CR-886) (C) 525 322 328 2800 9000 12975
CR~851 - CR-31
6 Immokalee Read (CR-8¢6) (B) 5750 5750
U$-41 - Z-75
8 Immokalee Road (CR-846) (C) 300 283 307 400 4525 5815
1-75 - CR-951
10 Isles of Capri Road (CR-951) (C) 730 21 4879 5630
US 41 - Rattlesnake Hammock
Road
(A) - Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) B Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) - Future Growth
TABLE 2
CATEGORY A
ROAD PROJECTSz COLLIER COUNT~ 5-~'~lt CAPI'"t~?. 1XPROVEHENTS KZ,,EHEr~ $(000)
Project Pr:Lot 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Future Total
11 Isles of Capr£ Road (CR-951) (C) 490 250 4480 5220
$R-84 - Rattlesnake Hammock
Road
12 Isles of Capri Road (SR-951) (COMPLETED) (B) 2730 2730
US 41 - Marco Bridge
13 Isles of Capri Road (CR-951) (COMPLETED) (C) 5412 5412
23rd Avenue S.W. - Golden
Gate Blvd.
14 Pine Ridge Road (CR-896) (B) 450 2200 1500 8950 13100
US 41 - CR-31
15 Radio Road
(B) 5665 5665
CR-3A - Santa Barbara Blvd.
16 Radio Road (C) 150 235 2000 2385
Santa Barbara Boulevard -
SR-84
17 Rattlesnake Hammock Road (B) 350 750 900 3500 5500
US 41 - Polly Avenue
19 Goodlette Frank Road (CR-851) (C) 918 1000 1918
Carica Road - CR-846
(a) - Existing Deficiency (09/30/91}
(B) I Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) - Future Growth
TIB?~ 2
CATEGORY A
ROAD PROJ~C~S~ COLLIER Cm2~TY 5-YEAR CAPITAL ~ BLBMB3~ $(000)
Project Prior 91-92 92-93 93-94 9&-9S 95-96 Futuro
20 Gulf Shore Drive (DELETED)
Vanderbllt Beach Road -
111th Ave. '
21 Livingston Road (North) (C) 2700 16000 18700
CR-846 - Imperial ST+EW Conn.
22 Santa Barbara Blvd./Logan (B) 115 75 2370 2560 5120
Green Canal - Pine Ridge
Road
23 Vanderbilt Beach Road (C) 250 210 500 3800 4760
US 41 - CR-31
24 Vanderbil~ Beach Road (COMPLETED)
Oaks - CR-951
25 Vanderbilt Drive (CR-901) (C) 250 250 100 250 250 250 5950 7300
111th - Bonita Beach Road
26 Westclock Road (C) 1065 1065
Carson Road - SR-29
27 Major Reconstruction 3313 307 630 628 600 3580 9058
28' ~raff~o S~gnals 1914 490 605 630 600 3000 7239
(A) = ExLst£ng Def£c£ency (09/30/91)
(B) - Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) - Future Growth
P~Je~ P~r 91-~2 92-93 ~3-9& 9~-95 95-96
31 ~ ~ach ~ad (B) S~ 880 2800 4~80
V~rb~lt Drive to County-
32 S~ ~r~ ~ul~ (C) 150 200 200 200 218 3575 4543
Davis Blvd to Rattlesnak~
H~k ~ad
33 ~t~ ~ ~d (C) 437 208 400 3190 423S
Davis BLvd. to Rattlesnake-
H~k ~ad
~ 34 ~d~ced IO~ ~c~isition 200 200 200 200 200 200 1300 2500
~ 35 ~n ~d (C) 780 780
~ Lake Y~af~o=d Road ~o
~ I~ka~ee Drive
~ 36 New No~-South ~d (~~) 225 225
CR-858 to ~-846
37 Isles of ~pF$ Road (CR-951)' (C) 560 34~0 3970
Go~den Ga~e BZvd. to CR-846
38 P~es~=~an ~e~ass on SR-29 ~00
a~ Fa~=ke=8 V~Zage
(A) - Ex£sting Def£c£ency (09/30/91)
(B) - Ex£st£ng Def£c£enc¥ and Future Grov~h
(C) I Future GroUch
ROAD PROJEC:2~t COZZ, X~R COTJli'X~ 5-~ ~X~ ~~ ~ ~(000)
P~ ~r 91~2 92-93 93-94 94-~S ~5-96
39 ~~-~ll~g ~ad (C) SO 478 4290 4818
Golden Gate Par~ay to P~
Ridge ~ad
&0 ~lette-Frank ~ad (C) 100 230 2431 2761
Golden Gate Par~ay to
Solana Road
~1 Pine ~dge Road (C) 100 208 200 350 2200 3058
Al~ Road to 1-75
42 Vanderbilt Beach ~ad (B) 50 390 3080 3520
US 41 to Gulfshore Drive
52 Liv~gston ~ad (C) 160 200 1210 1570
Pine Ridge to Wynd~ere
53 LivLn~lton Road (C) 370 500 2~15
Golden Gate Par~ay to Radio
Road
~* Inter~ ~an Pa.-back 13500 13500
COUNTY KOADS SUBTOTAL 41950 23483 24695 34355 5616 29556 30241 189896
(a) - Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) - Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) ~ Future Growth
ROJ~O PROJEC~St COX~XER COUI~ 5-~..,~lt CAPXT. J~ XMPItOVEMEN~S ~ ~(000)
Pro~ec~ Prior 91-92 92-93 93~94 ~4-95
TamLam~ Tra~l Eas~ (US 41) (D~)*
Davis Boulevard to Airart
Road
Tam,ami Tra~l No~h (US 41) (C) 1000 1000 8000 ~0000
Grade separation at Pine
Ridge Road
Tamiami Trail No~h (US ~) (D~FTE)*
I~okalee Road to Laurel Oak
Drive
Tam,ami Trail East (US ~1) (C) 500 500
Rattlesnake-H~ock Road to
Barefoot ~S. Road
Tamiami Tra~l East (US &l) (D~)'*
Airart Road ~o Rat~lesnake-
H~ock Road
Davis Boulevard (SR-84)
Airport Road to Kings Lake
Boulevard
David Boulevard (SR-8~) (D~)*
Kings Lake Boulevard to
County Barn Road
(A) = Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) ~ Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) = Future Growth
Tj~wr~_ ~ 2
CATEGORY A
ROAD PROJE~z COLL~ER ¢OU'A'I~ 5-~ ~~ ~RO~S ~ ~(000)
P~ec~ P~OF 9~-92 92-93 93-9~
50 Taml~ Tra~l No~h (US 41) (B) 4600 4600
I~okal~ Road to Wiggins
51 SR 951 (B) 25 3100 7400 10525
Bridge
STATE ROADS SUBTOTAL 25 0 4100 13500 0 8000 0 25625
TOTAL 41975 23483 28795 47855 5616 37556 30241 215521
$~ Notez To be funded in the revised FDOT 5-Year Work program with revenue from the additional 4 cent ga8 tax
~mh enacted by the 1990 Legislature
(A) ~ Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) = Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) ~ Future Growth
CATKGORY A
~RAINAGE ~RO~gCTSt COLL:IEit COUMTr S-YEAR ~~ ~ ~ '~(000)
P~ec~ Prior 91-92 92-93 93-9& 9&095 95-96 ~t~ ~1
290 Stomater hster Pin (~~) 343 343
291 DLstF~c~ No. g (~) (A) 360 225 1598 2947 2797 1293 9220
292 ~on ~veF E~enston (A) 400 1860 5956 921 9137
293 ~cohs~chee ~veF System (A) 82 2560 975 3617
294 Ha~ ~lden Ga~o System (A) 653 ~626 330 75 2684
295 HendeFson Cteek Basin (A) 75 160 235
296 Faka-~nLon .Basln (A) ~05 1240 1345
297 Sou~he~ ~as~al Bas~ (A) 8 20 48 398 53 180 707
53 53
298 ~aF~n R&ye~ Bas~ (A)
299 Haples Pa=k DFatnage (A) 208 3157 3365
~ ~729 4831 5133 4660 5950 7482 921 30~06
(A) = Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) = Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) ~ Future Growth
TABLB 2
CATEGORY A
EHS AND JAIL PitOJECTSt COLLXER COUFI~ S-YEAR CAPXTAL Z)(PitOVEIJENTS B:LEMEF~ $(000)
P~o~ect Prior 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 FutuFo Total
301 Lely/East Tamtmu£ EMS (COMPLETED) .*(A) 326 326
Station
302 Golden Oat~ Parkway EMS (B) 102 264 366
303 ~ystem Status Float Unit (B) 366 366
304 EMS Station and Vehicle (B) 366 366
EMS TOTAL 428 264 366 366 1424
400 Jail Ex~3ans£on (B) 2000 23000 25000
(A) - Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) - Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) m Future Growth
P~ec~ PF~F 9~-02 92--93 93-9~ 9~-95 95-96
500 Headwaters ~d~ (~) 4~77 ~22 4299
50~ Eas~ Naples Branch (~)
502 ~l~er No~h Branch (C) 32 344 376
503 ~ Islnd Brach (C) 40 409 449
504 L~ra~ H~ Renova~n (D~-~)
505 I~kalee Branch (C) 2 30 288 35 355
506 ~lden Gato Branch (C) 25 362
507 V~neya~s Branch L~Fm~ (C) 50 776
LIBBY BU~O ~ 4202 5~8 384 439 338 811 0 6692
550 L~ra~ ~llection (C) 290 320 340 350 350 0 1650
(A) - Ex£st£ng Def£c£ency (09/30/91)
(B) - Ex£et£ng Def£c£ency and Future Growth
(C) ~ ~ture Gro~h
TABLB 2
CA.,T~GOitY A '
GOVER,HH~NT BUILD:I3MS PROJECTS: COLLXKR COUNTY S-YEAR CAPXTAL D~PROVBM~NTS ELEMENT $(000)
Pro~ect Prior 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 IPuturm Total
600 New Courthouse (COMPLETED) 17316 17316
601 New Health Bu~ldin~ (CO~) (C) 9390 662 10052
60t BuildingW~nsion (C) 2~00 2100
605 New Agr~cultu~ Center (CO~) (C) '991 231 1160
27697 893 2~00 0 0 0 0 30690
(A) = Ex£sting Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) = Existing Defic~ency and Future Growth
(C) = Future Growth
CATEGORY A
PARKS PROJECTer COLLIF-q C~Jh~ S-YEAR CAPXTAL ZMPROVKMKNTS KLEMEN~ $(000)
Project Prior 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Future
700 Amphitheater 100 100
701 Bicycle Trails (C) 75 75 75 225
702 Comm~nity Park #6 (C) 868 1800 1821 4489
703 Community Parka - Phase II (B) 2593 1450 2665 1396 8104
704 Community Pool (B) 670 670
705 Hulti-Purpose Facility (B) 1453 1453
86
706 Jogging Trails (B) 58 28
70? Regions1 ParkLand (DELETE)* (B)
708 Competitive Pool (B) 1500 1500
709 Track and Field (C) 17 204 221
710 Boat Ramps (B) 273 799 856 456 456 2840
711 Community Park $7 (C) 100 2194 1471 3765
712 Community Park ~8 (C) 868 2214 1407 4489
(A) = Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(a) = Existing Deficiency and Future Crowth
(C) = Future GroUch
I II I
PL-o:Ject Pr~c)v 91-92 92-93 93-~& 94-95 95-96 IPuturo TOtl].
713 lo~Lonal P&rks Fec~l:L~tes (¢) 200 200
2966 6445 8335 6319 2670 1407 0 28142
NOTE t
~ddit£onal regional park land ia not needed during the CIE planning period due to addition of State parks
inventory
(A) = Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) - Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) ~ Future Growth
t, I
CATEGORY A
~ATER PROJECTSt COLLIER COUNT~ S-lEAR CAPXTAL XHFROVKNEHTS KI.ENEH~ $(000)
ProlJect Pr:Lot 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Future Total
801 Rattlesnake Hammock Road
802 County Barn Road 16" (COHPLL~KD)
803 Davis Boulevard 16" (COMPLKTKD)
804 Davis Boulevard 20" (COMPLKTKD)
805 91at Avenue 12# lntercon. (COHPLKTED)
806 7th street 12" Intercon. (COJ~)
808 Audubon County Club 16' (CONPL~I~-~)
809 Carica Road Pumping (B) 2040 1700 3740
810 Carlca Road Tank (COMPLETED)
811 Land for North Re9.
Treatment
812 Coral Reef wellfield Study (CO~PLZTKD)
813 Radio Road 12" (B) 102 102
815 Pine Ridge Road 16" (COMPLETED)
(A) = Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) = Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) = Future Growth
CATEGORY A
WATER PROJKCTSt COLLZEIt COUNT~ 5-YEAlt CAPZTAL ZMPROVEHEI~S KLEHKNT $(000)
Project Prior 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Future Tot~!
816 Goodlette Road Extension 16'
817 Seagate Dr£ve 12" (COMPLETED)
818 A£rl~r~ Road 16" (COI~LE~ED)
819 Immokalee Road 20" (B) 82 82
mm 820 Immokalee Road 20" (B) 203 203
821 Vanderbilt Drive 16" (COMPLETED)
~b 823 CR-951 12"
-.%1 (n)
~ 82¢ CR-gS2 12" (B) 204 204
(~0 825 Ratt~esnake-Hamnock Road 20'
826 6th Street ~2' (B) 245 245
827 Gulfshore & Vanderbilt IS' (n) 1775 1775
828 Coral Reef Wellfield Phase ! (DELETE)
829 North County Reg. Treatment (C) 17885 17885
Plant
830 Immokalee Road 36#
(A) - Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) m Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) - Future Growth
CATEGORY A
~ PROJECTSt COLLIER CO~ S-YEAR CAPITAL XHPROVEMEM'I~ KLKNKNT $(000)
Project Prior 91-92 92-93 93-9& 9&-95 95-96 ~utur~ ~o~L
831 CR-951 36" (C) 892 892
832 Immokalee Road 24" (C) 670 670
833 Immokalee Road 20" (C) 370 370
834 Quail Creek PUD 16" (C) 450 450
183
835 Inokalee Road 20" (B) 183
836 Imnokaloo Road 20' (C) 363 363
~ 837 Livingston Road Extension 16" (C) 1217 1217
'~ 83a 1.5 MO Elevated Tank
~ 120
~mb 83~ Old US il 16# (C) 120
OlD 71o
~. 8¢0 Pine Ridge Road 16# (B) 70 640
841 Davis Boulevard 16" (COHPLE~ED) 359 359
842 5 MG Ground Tank (C) 325 3000 3325
813 Pine Ridge Road 16" - J & C (B) 760 760
Industrial Park to Airport
Road
(A) = Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) = Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) = Future Growth
844 P£no l~Ldge Road 20' (COMPLETED)
8~6 US ¢~ A2' (n) ~9 205 224
8&7 Xmmokalee Ro&d 20" (B) 707 707
848 US 41 12" (U) 26 283 309
8~9 HoL~h County Well£~eld - (DK/~I~) '(C)
850 Golden G&te Hell~eld (C) !775 800 25?5
Exp&nsLon
851 R&wBoo~or Sta~Lon (COMPLEI~D) (C)
696
852 Goodlette Road Extension 20' (C) 696
853 Palm D=ive 16" Loop (C) 687
854 US 41 ~oFth 20" (C) 600 600
855 Radio. Road 12" (C) 982 982
(A) = Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(a) - Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) - Future Growth
TAB~B 2
~.ATEGORY A
WATER PROJE~I C:OX,LX~R ~ 5-~ ~X~ ~~S ~ ~(000)
P~oc~ Pr~r 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 ~ure
856 L~v~ngs~n ~ad 16" (c) 80 400 480
Nyndemero
857 Santa na~ara 16' (C) 57 264
858 CR-95~ 36' (C) 380 2~96 2576
859 8, ~unty ~rea~ment P~ant (C) 800 4000 4800
Expansion
860 A~fer Storage · Recovo~ (~) ~00 ~00 ~500
86~ US ~ South 16" (C) 300 ~580 2880
862 us 4x south X6' (C) ~S0 7SO 900
863 P~ne R~dge 30~ (e) ~200 ~200
86~ 16' Ha~n - P~no Ridge Road (C) ~20 ~000 2~0
~ 35833 8597 4~49 723~ 283 0 0 S&093
(A) A Existing Deficiency (09/30191)
(B) - Existing Def£c[ency and Future Growth
(C) ~ Future Growth
P~e~ PrLor 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96
901 No~ ~y g~na~on (~)
902 Eas~ and ~u~ Naples (B) 22286 22286
904 Sou~ ~t~ R~. Traa~ent
Facflft~
90~ UtilitF ~i~tration (DE~P) (C)
Bufldfn~
907 South ~ty P~p, ~fn~ & (B) 19749 19~49
908 8' Fo~a ~ - ~mp Sta2fon (C) 140 ~00 840
15 to ~mp ~a~ion 20
909 ~2" Fo~e ~ - Pump (C) ~R0 ~00 ~320
Station ~9 to ~mp Station 20
910 ~0" ~rce ~l. - Davis B~.d. (~~D) (B)
Pump Station 11 to Santa
'Barbara
~ll Davis B~vd. P~p Station (B) ~00 700 800
(~) - Exiating Def£cienc~ (09/30/91)
(B) ~ Existing Def~cienc~ and Future ~ot~ch
(C) - Future Growth
T]mLI 2
CATEGORY A
Pro~ec~ Prior 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 ru~uro Total
912 10" Fore ~n Droves B~. (~~) (B)
~p Station 14 to ~p
Station
~13 Divis BI~. P~p Station ~o. (~) 100 ~00 800
14
~11 ~0' ~o~, ~in a-iil/~S 11 (:) 100 ~00 800
~p ltation 18 to
S~ation 1
~1~ Davis ~1~. P~p Station ~. (C) 100 ~00 800
~16 south ~tl l~. ~rss~t (C) 1800 9000 10800
~actlitI Expansion
Vl? No~h ~ty Reg. ~reltsent (C) 500 3600 2500 6600
FacilitI Kxpanston
V18 20' Force Na~ - (C) 100 600 ?00
Rattlesnake-H~ock Road -
CR-951 ~o Polly Avenue
~1~ Rattlesnake-R~ck Road - (C) 100 ~00 800
~p Station 20
~20 CR-~51 P~p ~tatton No. 16 (B) 100 700 800
(A) - Ex£st£ng Def£ciency (09/30/91)
(B) m Ex£st£ng Def£c~ency and Future Gro,.rt:h
~ "~ (C) - Future Growth
m PROJKCTSt COV-v-X~ ~ 5-~ ~Z~ ~8 ~ ~(000)
~e~ PF~ 9Z-92 92-93. 93-9&
921 ~-951- 12' Fo~e ~- (B) 321 321
~p Station 16 ~o ~
Station 18
922 No~h ~t~ P~p Station (D~)
Telenet~ S~st~
923 ~rattons BuLldLng (D~)
No~h ~ty Waste Wa~er
Troa~ent Plant
~2& ~p Station (B) 798 7~8
No~h ~tF No. 1.02
925 Peli=in BAF Imp~vement (B) 2720 2720
D~ltrict
47520 L.F. of Force ~in
and 2 pump stations
926 I~kalee Road Sewer/ (B) 39~0 3950
Effluent S~,tem
Force main a effluent lin~
~rom N. Plant to ~ail Creek
917 Ma~t~r P~p ~tations ~.03 & (B) 1336 1336
1.07
2 pump stations on I~lee
Road
(A) - Existing Deficiency (09/30/91) ,
(B) - Existing Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) f Future Growth
Pro:Jec~ PF~o= 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 Future
928 2&' Force Main from 1,06 ~o (B) 1440 1440
1.07
20,000 L.F. of 'Force Hain
fr~n Airport Road to Orange
Blossom Drive
929 US &l South Pu~p Station No. (C) 100 700 800
17
US 41 South
C::D 700
),~b' 930 12' Force Main CC) 100 600
..~ Pump Station No. 17 to Pump
~" Station No. 18
~--b 931 12"/1&' Force Ma~n (C) 100 1000 1100
(~ Quail Creek to CR-951
TOTAL 55960 18100 5500 ?00 0 0 0 80260
(A) = Existing Deficiency (09/30/91)
(B) ~ Ex£st£ng Deficiency and Future Growth
(C) - Future Growth
II
y..zk.~Zv.v. P~OOZ~'~ COLZ.Z~ ~ 5-~11~ CZLPZ'J~I.T~ ~~ ~ ~(000)
P~ec~ Prior 91-92 92-93 93-9& 9&-9S 9S-96 ~t~ ~
1000 Naples ~f~11 ~s~n (C) 950 950
1001 ~achate T~a~ent PI~ (C) 750 750
1002 Naples ~ndf111 (~~)
Cell ~6, Phase ~I
lOO3 Naples ~ndf~11 (C) 3382 100 3482
Cell ;S, ~hase ~Z
100~ Naples ~ndf~11 (c) 1800 1200
Closure of ~lla ~3
and ;4
1005 Naples ~ndf~11 (C) 1280 1280
Cell ;~ ~hase ~ F~re~
Llf~
~006 Naples Landfil~ (C} 370 ~253 2~ ~1069 250 27214 40409
Develop 300 acres future
cells
~007 I~kalee ~ndf~11 (C} 25 2180 2205
10 acres new cell
construction
(A) - Existing Deficiency (09/30/9I)
(B) - Ex~st£ng Def£c~ency and Future Growth
(C) - Fu=ure Growth
P~ PrAor 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96
1008 ~loe~f~ll (C) 675 675
202,R.T, 3752 6833 2180 253 11069 250 27214 51551
(&) ,, EXJ. St:J. ng Def~J. cJ. enc~, (09/30/91)
(B) - Ex£-~:J. ng DefJ. cJ. enc~ and
(C) - Fut:uz:e
91192 92/93 93]94 94195 95~96
Transportation (a) 79,350 116,610 128,340 186,300 193,200
Water Management (b) 0 0 0 0 0
EMS (c) 0 196,100 196,100 392,200 588,300
Ja£1 (d) 0 0 1,600,000 1,600,000 1,600,000
Library 159,200 162,200 168,200 171,200 200,566
Government Buildings 490,410 490,410 526,860 526,860 526,860
Parks & Recreation 301,300 683,200 1,200,750 1,208,750 1,208,750
Solid Waste 0 0 0 0 0
Utilities 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 1,030,260 1,648,520 3,820,250 4,085,310 4,317,676
ESTIMATED MILLAGE IMPACT 0.0715 0.1054 0.2199 0.2125 0.2038
(a) County Road System only. State 18 responsible for maintenance of State roads improved by the County.
(b) Big Cypress Basin Board takes over the operational costs.
(c) 6 to 9 Paramedics per unit.
(d) 35 Correctional Officers and 4 LPNs plus supplies and operating expenses.
.~i '-. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT EL~NT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (2991)
RECONCILIATION OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEF~CIENC~
DEPARTMENTs TRANSPORTATION DIVISIONS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
TXPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY~ ROADS
: . AREAS County-wide ~ or Planning District or Special Area
(X) (~) (X)
~'~ 1992-96 DEFICIENCY~ ~81.9 Lane - Mile
· ~ (quantity) (unit of measurement)
"" ~ Thi~ Cumulative
~-. Number Pro4ect Name Project Total
1 lllth Ave (US 41 to Vanderbilt 2.4 2.4
:' Drive
2 Airport-Pulling ~oad (Phase I) COMPLETE --- 2.4
(Radio Road to Golden Gate Parkway)
3 Airport-Pulling Road (Phase II) --- 2.4
(US 41 to Radio Road)
4 Davis Blvd. (Santa Barbara Blvd. --- 2.4
to County Barn Road)
5 Golden Gate Parkway (CR-851 to 2.8 5.2
to CR-31)
6 immokalee Road (US 41 to 1-75) --- 5.2
8 CR-846 (I-75 to CR-951) 6.8 12.0
10 CR-951 (US 41 to Rattlesnake 6.8 18.8
· Hammock Road)
· 11 CR-951 (CR-864 to SR-84) 6~2 25.0
,~ 12 Isles of Capri Road (SR-951) COMPLETE 0.0'.* 25.0
~'~ (US 41 to Marco Bridge)
~ 13 CR-951 (23rd Avenue S.W. to COMPLETE --- 25.0
Golden Gate Blvd.)
14 Pine Ridge Road (US 41 to CR-31) 4.2 29.2
· 15 Radio Road (CR-31 to Santa --- 29.2
Barbara Blvd. )
16 Radio Road (Santa Barbara Blvd. 3.0 32.2
to Davis Blvd.)
,.- 17 Rattlesnake Hammock Road (US 41 to 4.0 36.2
Polly Avenue)
19 ' Goodlette-Frank Road (Carica Road 5.0 41.2
to CR-846)
20 Gulf Shore Drive (Vanderbilt Beach DELETE --- 41.2
Road .to 111th Avenue)
21 Livingston Road (CR-846 to 12.4 53.6
Imperial and E-W Route)
'.. 22 Santa Barbara/Logan (CR-896 to 2.0 55.6
South of Green Canal)
g3%PITAL IMPROVEME~ ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
RECONCILIATION .OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
~EPAItTMENT: TRANSPORTATION DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
TYPE'OF PUBLIC ~ACILITY: ROADS
SERVICE
~%RE~: County-wide ~ or Planning District or Special Area
(X) (~) (X)
199Z-gG DEFICIENCY: ~81.9 Lane - ~£1e
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
Size 0~
~ This Cumulative
Number Pro~ct Na~e Pro4ec~ Total
23 Vanderbilt Beach Road (US 41 to 4.4 60.0
CR-31)
24 Vanderbilt Beach Road (Oaks Blvd. COMPLETE --- 60.0
to CR-951)
25 Vanderbilt Drive (111th Avenue --- 60.0
to Bonita Beach Road)
26 Westclock Road (Carson Road to --- 60.0
SR-29)
27 Major Road Reconstruction --- 60.0
28 Major Traffic Signal Installations --- 60.0
29 Completed --- 60.0
30 Completed --- 60.0
31 Bonita Beach Road (Vanderbilt 3.2 63.2
Drive to County Line)
32 Santa Barbara Blvd. (Davis Blvd. 8.0 71.2
to Rattlesnake Hammock Road)
33 County Barn Road (Davis Blvd. to 4.0 75.2
Rattlesnake Hammock Road)
34 Advanced R.O.W. Acquisition --- 75.2
35 Carson Road (Lake Trafford Road --- 75.2
to immokalee Drive)
36 New N-S Road (CR-858 to CR-846) COMPLETE --- 75.2
37 Isles of Capri Road (CR-951) --- 75.2
(Golden Gate Blvd. to CR-846)
38 Pedestrian Overpass on SR-29 --- 75.2
at Farm Workers Village
39 Airport-Pulling Road (Golden Gate 5.2 80.4
Parkway to Pine Ridge Road
including grade separation at
Golden Gate Parkway)
40 Goodlette-Frank Road (Golden Gate 3.4 83.8
Parkway to Solana Road)
41 Pine Ridge Road (Airport Road to 4.0 87.8
1-75 including grade separation
of Airport Road)
C~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Annual Up4ate & Amendment (1991)
~E~ONCILIATION OF PROJECT~ ..TO.. 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT= TRANSPORTATION DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
. TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= ROADS
SERVICE
~RE~, County-wide X or Planning District __ or Special Area
(x) (~) (x)
1992-96 DEFICIENCY: 281.9 La~e - Mile
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
~ This Cumulative
.~'. Number project Name Pro4ect Total
~ 42 Vanderbilt Beach Road (US 41 to 2.8 90.6
~:' Gulf Shore Drive)
43 Tamiami Trail East (US 41) (Davis DELETE 0.0' 90.6
Blvd. to Airport Road)
44 Tamtami Trail North (US 41) 0.0, 90.6
(Grade separation at Pine Ridge
Road)
45 Tamiami Trail North (US 41) DELETE 0.0, 90.6
Immokalee Road to Laurel Oak Drive
46 Tamiami Trail East (US 41) 0.0, 90.6
(Rattlesnake Hammock Road to
Barefoot Wms. Road)
47 Tamiami Trail East (US 41) DELETE 0.0. 90.6
(Airport Road to Rattlesnake
Hammock Road)
48 Davis Blvd. (SR-84) (Airport Road DELETE --- 90.6
' to Kings Lake Blvd.)
49 Davis Blvd. (SR-84) (Kings Lake DELETE --- 90.6
Blvd. to County Barn Road)
50 Tamiami Trail North (US 41) 0.0, 90.6
(Immokalee Road to Wiggins Pass)
51 SR-951 0.0. 90.6
New York Drive to Marco Bridge
· 52 Livingston Road 1.5 92.1
Pine Ridge to Wyndemere
53 Livingston Road 1.5 93.6
Golden Gate Parkway to Radio
Road
State Roads do not add to County inventory
Right of Way acquisition does not add to County inventory
,11 0'47 , .195
~PIT~L IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
pROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPB OP PUBLIC FACILITYI COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 1
PROJECT N~/~E= .111th AVENUE
DESCRIPTIONI US 41 TO VANDERBILT DRIVE ¢4 LANING~ 1.2 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION= ~ ~ORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONI ~NSPORTATION Unit of Measurement~ LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT= T~ANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency= 281.9
ORG~IZATION: ~CONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: ~.4
FINANCIAL SUMM~RY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Lan~ Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 120 150 270
Forecast
1991-92 190 190
· ·BUdget Year
1992-93 60 60
1994-95 150 150
1995-96 2,200 2,200
Total 370 450 2,200 3,020
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY'
First Year of Impact 96/97
Cost per Unit ' $ 1.725
Number of Units 2 4 20
Gross Cost $ 4.140 (Years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Not Impact $ 4.140
,J g47 , [196
~C~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991}
PROJECT suMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY~ COUNTY ROADS PROJECT
PROJECT NAME~ ~IRPORT-PULbING ROAD (PHASE II)
DESCRIPTION= US 41 TO RADIO ROAD (6 LANING); 1.8 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: _4 EAST NAPbE$
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ TRANSPORTATION ...... Unit of Measursmsnt~ LANE MILE
DEPARTMENTZ TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ 281.9
ORG~NIZATION~ SECONDARY ROADS Size of This ProJect~ N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
~ ~nstructio~ ~ Construction
Prior
1990-91 280 250 1,600 2,130
Budget Year
Future 310 1,000 131 1,441
Total 590 250 2,600 '131 3,571
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ 1.72~
~,~her o£ Units :}, ~
Gross Cost $ 6,2~0 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 6. 210
,. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ~L~MENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
TYP~ OP P~BLIC FACILITY= STATE ROADS PROJECT $ 4
PROJECT NAMEs DAVIS BOULEVARD {SR-84] ¢80/20 PROJECT~
DESCRIPTION: SANTA.BARBARA TO COUNTY BARN ROAD {4 LANING): 1.4 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 ~ 5 EAST NAPLES: SOUTH NAPLES ($) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONS TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENTs TRANSPORTATION 1~92-96 Total Def~ciency: ~
OR~ANI~TION: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: 0
FIN~NCIAL 8UM~RY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
·ear Construction Land Constru~t~o~ Other Total
PTior 46 46
~ 1990-91 60 1,800 1,860
.~.. ~- Forecast
1991-92
~Budget Year
1992-93
1~93-94
· 1995_96
· Future
Total 46 60 1,800 1,906
?: IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
.~" LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact None - State ~oa4
cost per unit $
N~m~er of Units . 20
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
.. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
_PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 5
PROJECT NAME: GOLDEN GATE pARKWAY ¢CR-886)
DESCRIPTION: CR'-851 TO CR-31 (6 LANING%: 1.4 MILES INCLUDING GRADE
SEPARATION AT AIRPORT ROAD
PROJECT LOCATION~ 2 CENTRAL NAPLES
(#], (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEP~tTMENT~ TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORG~NIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: 2.8
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~ Construction Land .~onstruction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 375 150 525
Forecast
1991-92 150 ' 172 322
Budg~ Y~ar
1992-93 328 :328
1993-94 2,800 2,800
1994-95
Future 8,000 1,000 9,000
Total 525 650 10,800 1,000 12,975
IMP~'CT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
FiEst Year of Impact 94/95
Cost par Unit $ 1.7~5
Number of Units ~,~
Gross Cost $ 4,8~0 (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact
'-. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: ~QUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 6
PRO~ECT NJ%ME: IMMOKALEE ROAD ~CR-846)
DESC~IPTIONI US 41 TO 1-75 ¢4 LANING): 3.5 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: I & 9 NORTH NAPLES; URBAN ESTATE~
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEPICIENCY
DMBION~ TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurements LANE MILE
DEPARTMENTI TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATION~ SECONDARY. ROADS Size of This ProJect~ N;A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Tear Construction Land Construct~o~ Other
Prior 268 268
· 1990-91 150 832 4,500 5,482
121991-92
~ Bu4get Year
1992-93
1993-94
· 1994-95
Tota'! 4'18 832 4~§00 5~750
IMPJ%CT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMJ%TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impaot 91/9~
Cost per Unit $
~r~ss C~st $ 1~. gT~ (years)
Leis ~ser Revenue - 0
Ne~ Impaot $ 12. g75
xJJ
... CAPITAL IMprOVEMENT ELEMENT
- Third ~nnual Update & ~mendment (1991)
pROJECT sUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLXC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 8
PROJECT N]~MEI 'CR-846
DESCRIPTIONs 1-75 TO CR-951 f4 LANING~: 3.4. MILES
PROJECT LOCATIONs 9 URBAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DMBIONI TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement= LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT~ TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ 281.9
ORGANIZ~TION~ ~CONDARY ROADS Size of This Projectl ~.~
FI1TANCI~L SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year con~ruction Dan~ Construc~o~ Other Total
Prior
1991-92 283 283
Budget 'Year
1992-93 7 300 307
1993-94 400 400
Total 440 850 4,525 5,815
~CT ON FUT~E OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $ 1.725
~er of Units 6,8 20
~ross Cost $ 11,730 (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $ ~ ~, 730
.. ~PIT~L IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
p~OJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: cOUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 10
PROJECT N~ME~ CR-951
DESCRIPTIONs US 41 TO RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD ¢4 LANING); 3.4 MILES
PROJECT LOCATIOI~s $ & 7 SOUTH NAPLES: ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK (#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurements LANE MILE
DEPARTMENTs TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Defioienoy~ ~1.9
ORG]~NIZ~TION~ SECONDARY ROADS Size of This ProJect~ 6,8
FI1TANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUS~,NDS)
Pre-
Year ~onst~uction Land Construction Other Total
Prior 2O0 140 340
1990-91 190 200 390
Forecast
1991-92 21 21
Budget Year
19.92-93 4,879 4,879
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 390 340 4,900 5,630
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 93/94
Cost per Unit $ 1.725
Number of Units 6.8 20
(Jross Cost $ 11. 730 (years)
Less User Revenue - O
Not Xmpaot $ 11. 730
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= cOUNTY ROADS PROJECT
PROJECT NAME: CR-951
DESCRIPTION: ~R-864 TO SR-84 ~4 LANING); 3.1 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: 3, 5 & 7 GOLDEN GATE; SOUTH NAPLES; ROYAL FAKAPALM
CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: I~NE MILE
DEPARTMENT~ TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ 281.9
~.~. OROANIZATION: ~CONDARY ROADS Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSanDS)
Pre-
~ Construction Lan~ Construction Other Total
Prior 165 165
~,... 1990-91 75 250 325
~' ~ Forecast
-,. 1991-92 250 250
~. Budget Year
~'~:'. 1993-94 4,480 4,480
1994-95
~ 1995-96
· -~ Future
~'- Total 240 500 4,480 5,220
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 94~95
Cost per Unit $ 1,72~
~,~er of Units 6,~ ~0
Cross cost $ 10.69~ (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 10..~95
TY~E OF PUBLIC FACILITY: ~QUNT¥ ROADS PROJECT #
PROJECT NAME~ PINE RIDGE ROAD
DESCRIPTION: US' 41 TO CR-3% (6 LANING}; 2.1 MILES INCLUDING URBAN
INTERCHANGE AT AIRPORT ROAD
PROJEOT LOCATION: 1 & 2 NORTH NAPLES: CENTRAL NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
~.. DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
:.? ORGaNIZaTION% ~ECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project% 4,~
FIN~/~CI~L SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year COnstruction Land ¢o~structi0B Other Total
7. ;~ Prior
.~' ';' 1990-91 350 100 450
!..j. 1991-92 100 2,100 2,200
Budget Year
i .
~'~. ~ 1992-93
~.'. 1993-94 1,500 1,500
i~j.' 1994-95
i ~.~.~ ~ 1995-96
!~i, Future 8 ~ 950 8 ~ 950
'~:'"':~...~ ' Total 350 1700 11,050 13,100
~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
Pirs~ Year of Impaot 92/93
Coi~ per uni~ $ 1.72~
~er of ~nits 4, ~
OrosI Cost $ 7, ~45 (Years)
LISI ~ser Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 7. 245
C~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third ~nnual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT sU~MAR~ FORM
Tire OF PUBLIC FACILITY= ~QVNTY ROADS PROJECT #
PROJECT NAMEI RADIO ROAD
DESCRIPTION: ¢R-~1 TO SANTA BARBARA BLVD. ¢4 LANING~: 3.0 MILES
P~OJECT LOCATION: 2, 3 & 4 CENTRAL NAPLES: GOLDEN GATE: EAST NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficienc]~: 281.9
-~,,, OnG~/qIZATION: SECONDARY ROAD~ Size of This Project:
FI1TANCIAL SUMNARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~ Construction Lan~ Construction Other Total
~, Prior 275 275
~,~ ~, 1990-91 125 665 4,600 5,390
~ Forecast
.... ~ 1991-92
";:: Budget Year
Future
}':": Total 400 665 4,600 5,665
-;:, IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
": LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ 1.725
Number of Units 6.4 . 20
Gross Cost $ 11. 040 (years)
Less User Revenue -
Not Impact $ 11. 040
CAPITA~ II(?ROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PRQJECT SUM/~RY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTy ROADS PROJECT # 16
PROJECT NAME: RADIO ROAD
DESCRIPTION: SANTA BARBARA BLVD. TO DAVIS BLVD. (4 LANING); 1.5 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION:. 3 G0~D~N GATE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ T~ANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: 3.0
FINANCIAL SUMF,~RY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land C0~struct~o~ Other Total
1990-91 150 150
Forecast
1991-92 135 100 235
Budget Year
1992-93
1994-95
1995-96
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 94/9D
Cost per Unit $ 1,725
~er of Units 3.0
~ross Cost $ 5,%75 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net ~mpact $ 5,175
,. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Ugdate & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT
PROJECT NAMEs 'RATTLESNAKE,HAMMOCK ROAD
DESCRIPTIONs ~S 41 TO poLLy AVENUE {4 LANING): 2.0 MILES
PROJECT LOCATIONs ~ & 5 EAST NAPLES: SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurements LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT~ TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total De£ioienoy~
ORGANIZATION~ SECONDARY ROADS size of This ProJect~
FINANCIAL SU}94ARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ConstructioB Land Construct~oB Other To t_q],
Prior 100 100
1990-91 150 100 250
Forecast
1991-92 250 500 750
Budget Year
1992-93 900 900
1993-94 3,500 3,§00
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 500 1,500 3,500 5,500
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
Firs~ Year of Impact ...94~9§
Cost per'Unit $ 1.72~
Number of Units 4,0 ~
Gross Cost $ 6,900 (years)
Less User Revenue - Q
Net Impa~t $ . 6.900
~L ~MPROVEMENT E~EMENT
Third Annual Update & ;~mendment (1991)
~ROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT #
PROJECT NAMES ~QODLETTE-FRANK ROAD (PHASE I)
DESCRIPTIONS CARICA ROAD TO CR-846 (FIRST 2 OF 4 LANES); 2.5 MILES
PROJEC~ LOCATION: i NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENTs TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: _ 281.9
ORGANIZATIONs SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: 5,0
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Lan~ Constructio~ 0t~er Tota~
1990-91 250 168 500 918
Forecast
1991-92 1,000 1,000
Budget Year
1992-93
1~93-94
1994-95
1995-96
Total 250 168 1,500 1,918
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ ~,725
l~,~her of Units 5.0 20
Gross Cost $ 8,625 (years)
Less User Revenue - O
Net Impact $ _ 8~625
gAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 21
PROJECT NAME: LIVINGSTON RO~D (NORT~ NAPLES MSTU)
DESCRIPTION: CR-846 TO IMPERIAL STREET + AN E-W ROUTE CONNECTING TO
OLD 41; 2 LANES; 6.2 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: % NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONBIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: ~2.4
FINANCIAL ~U)~4ARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Xg]~ ¢onstruotion Lan4 ~onstruct~o_n Other Total
Prior
1990-91 1,000 1,700 2,700
Forecast
1991-92 2,000 14,000 16,000
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Total 1,000 3,700 14,000 18,700
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ 1,725
N!~m~er of Units 12.4 20
Gross Cost $ 2.1. 390 (year~)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 2.1,390
~L IMPROVEHE~; EnEHENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: C0~Y ROADS PROJECT # 22.
PROJECT NAME~ SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD~LOGAN BOULEVARD .
DESCRIPTIONS CR-896 T~ OF GREEN CANAL: 4 LANES; 1.0 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: 3 & 9 GCLDEN GATE; URBAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: T~ANS~ORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: ~ 281.9
ORGANIZATION: ~ECONDARY ~QADS size of This Project: 2.0
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construct~o~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91 50 65 115
Forecast
1991-92 75 75
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94 140 130 2,100 2,370
1995-96
Future 2,560 2,560
Total 190 270 4,660 5,120
IMPACT ON' FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impaot 94/95
Cost per Unit $ ~,725
Number of Units 2.0 20
Gross Cost $ ..3,450 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ ..$, 450
CAPITAL !M~ROVEME.NT ELEMENT
Third A/~nual Update & ~nendment (1991)
PROJ_~CT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # ..23.
PROJECT NAME: VAND~RBILT BEACH ROAD ~
DESCRIPTION: US 41 TO CR-31; .~4 LANES); 2.2 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LAN~ MILE
DEPARTMENT: TF4%NSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ 281.9
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS Si'.,,e of This Project: 4,4
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 250 250
Forecast
1991-92 210 210
Budget Year
1992-93 500 500
19'93-94 3,800 3,800
1994-95
Total .460 500 3,800 4,760
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 94/95
Cost per Unit $ . .1,725
N~mher of Units 4.4 20
Gross Cost $ 7,..~90 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ . ..7,590
· -. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTy ROADS PROJECT # 25
PROJECT NAME: V~ND~RBILT DRIVE
DESCRIPTION: lllth AVENUE TO BONITA BEACH ROAD (4 LANING); 3.9 ~ILES
PROJECT LOCATION:. 1. NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION · 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS size of This Project: 0
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ~onstruction Land ¢onstru~t~o~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91 150 100 250
Forecast
1991-92 250 250
Budget Year
1992-93 100 100
1993-94 250 250
1994-95 250 250
1995-96 250 250
Future 550 5,400 5,950
Total 400 1,500 5,400 7,300
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First .Year of Impact Future
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 20
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue' -
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMpROVEMenT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 26.
PROJECT NAME: WESTCLOCK ROAD
.. DESCRIPTION: CARSON ROAD TO SR-29 (2 LANES); 1.0 MILES
PROJ~.CT LOCATION: ~1 IMMOKALEE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TP~ANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: . LANE MILK
DEPARTMENT: T~ANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGAniZATION: SECONDARY ROADS size of This Project: ~/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Constructio~ other Total
Prior
~ 1,065
1990-91 365 700
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1993-94
1995-96
Future
Total 365 700 1,065
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL'
LIFE OF :FACILITY
First Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ 1,725 "
N,,m~er of Units 2.0 20.
Gross Cost $ 3,450 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 3,450
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT
PROJECT NAME: ~JOR RECONSTRUCTION (ROAD & BRIDGE SECTION)
DESCRIPTIONS ~T VARIOUS LOCATIONS PER BCC APPROVED ROAD ?~0GRAM
PROJECT LOCATION:
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs TRANSpQRTATION Unit of Measurements LANE MILT
DEPARTMENT: ~ANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARy ROADS Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constr~ct~o~ Land Constructio~ Other Tota~
Prior 2,463 2,463
1990-91 850 850
Forecast
1991-92 0 0
Budget Year
:? 1992-9~ 307 307
.1993-94 630 630
1994-95 628 628
· 1995-96 600 600
Future 3,580 3,580
Total 9,058 9,058
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 20
Gross Cost $ (Years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
CAPITAL I~PROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~endment (1991)
pROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # . 28
PROJECT NAME: ~AJOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION
DESCRIPTION: AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS PER BCC APPROVED 5-YEAR PLAN
PROJECT LOCATION:
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurements LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: T]{ANSPORT~TION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 28~.9
ORGANIZATIOn;: SECONDARy ROADS Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year construct~o_n Land construct%o~ 9_t_hg~ Total
Prior 1,408 1,408
1990-91 506 506
Forecast
1991-92 0 0
Budget Year. ~
1992-93 490 490
1993-94 605 605
1994-95 630 630
1995-96 600 600
Future 3,000 3,000
Total 7,239 7,239
IMPACT ON ~UTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF. FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 20
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 31
PROJECT NAME: BONITA BEACH ROAD
DESCRIPTION: VANDERBTLT DRIvE TO COUNTY LINE (4 LANING); 1.6 MIbES
(HALF IN LEE COUNTY)
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~RANSpORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
OR~ANI~ATION: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This ProJeot: ~,~
FINANCIAL SUM/dARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
year Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 500 500
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93 880 880
1993-94 50 2,750 2,800
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 550 880 2,750 4,180
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact . 94/95
Cost per Unit $ .1.725 _
Number of Units 3.2 20
Gross Cost $ 5,$20 (years)
Less User Revenue ' 0
Net Impact $ .~,520 __
· -. ~APITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ~05DS PROJECT # 32
PROJECT NAMEz SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD
DESCRIPTIONs DAVIS BLVD. ¢SR-84) TO RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD (4 NEW LANES}; 2.0 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: T~ANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: T~PORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ 251,9
ORGANIZATION: ~ECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: 8.0
FINANCIAL S~Y ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ~o~struct~o~ Land Construct.ion Other Tota__l
~rior
.1990-91 150 150
.Forecast
· 1991-92 200 200
Budget Year
1992-93 100 100 200
1993-94 200 200
1994-95 218 218
1995-96 3,575 3,575
Future
Total 450 518 3,575 4,543
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE O~ FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 96/97 ~.
Cost per Unit $ 1,725 ~-
Number of Units 8.0 20
Gross Cost $ !3,~00 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ __13,$00
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # _33
PROJECT NAME: COUNTY BARN ROAD
DESCRIPTION: DAVIS BLVD. (SR-84) TO RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD
(4 LANING); 2.0 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MIL~
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Defioienoy: ~
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY. ROADS size of This Project: 4.0
FINANCIAL S~(MARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructio~ Land .C. o~stru .ct!~n Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 337 100 437
Budget Year
1992-93 208 208
1993-94 400
40O
1994-95 3,190 3,190
1995-96
Future
Total 545 500 3,190 4,235
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 95/96.
Cost per Unit $ . 1,725
Number of Units 4.0 20
Gross Cost $ 6,900 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 6,900
'~i~ - '. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
~ Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SU~LMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 34
PROJECT NAME: 6DVANCED R.O.W. ACQUISITION
DESCRIPTION:
PROJECT LOCATIONZ
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION unit of Measurement: . bANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: ~RANSPORT~TION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATION: ~ECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year con. s. truction Land ¢:onstructio~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91,~ Forecast 200 200
1991-92 200 200
Budget Year
1992-93 200 200
1993-94 200 : 200
1994-95 200 200'
1995-96 200 200
Future 1,300 1,300
Total 2,500 2,500
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING,BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact .. N/A
Cost per Unit
Number of Units N!A
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue
Net Impact $-
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 35
PROJECT NAME: ~AR$0N ROAD
DESCRIPTION: I.~AKE TRAFFORD ROAD TO IMMOKALEE DRIVE (2 NEW LANES);
0.6 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ IMMOKALEE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENTs ~3RANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUKMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land. Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 180 600 780
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year -
19.92-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 180 600 780
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ 1,725
Number of Units 1.2 20
Gross Cost $ 2,070 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 2,070
CAPITA!J IHPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ROJECT ~UMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: CO~;TY ROADS PROJECT # 37
PROJECT NAME: '~SLES OF CAPRI ROAD CCR-951)
DESCRIPTION: ~QLDEN GATE BLVD. TO CR-846 {4 LANING); 3;0 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: 8 & 9 BURA~..~STATES; URBAN E:~
(#) (Planning District Name')
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs TRANSPQRTATION . Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENTs TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS size of This Projeot: . N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction. Land. Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 350 210 560
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future 3,410 3,410
Total 350 210 3,410 3,970
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact ~uture
Cost per Unit
Number of Units 20.
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMKNT ~LEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY,,,ROADS PROJECT # 38
PROJECT NAME: PEDESTRIAN OVERPASS ON SR-29
DESCRIPTION: FARMWORKERS VILL~..GE
PROJECT LOCATION: 11 IMMOKALEE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION , Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENTs TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUM~tARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year .~onstruct~o~ Lan4 ¢o~structio~ Other ~
· 1990-91 100 500 600
Forecast
1991-92
,,i~ . Budget Year
, 1992-93
~,i 1993-94
~ ~"' ~/' 1994-95
· 1995-96
b, 'i Future
" Total 100 500 600
.'!i IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 20
}. Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impaot $
CAPITAL !]{PROV,,EMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~RQJECT SUMMA~ FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNT¥ BO~DS PROJECT # 39
PROJECT NAME: AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD
DESCRIPTION: GOLDEN GATE PARKWAy TO PINE RIDGE ROAD (6.LA.~ING)
2,6MIL~S
PROJECT LOCATION: 2 CENTRAL NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGE~CY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: ... 281.9
OROANIZATION: ~_ECONDARY ROADS . Size of This Project: 5.2
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 50 50
Budget Year
1992-93 328 150 478
1993-94 4 , 290 4,290
Future
Total 378 150 4,290 4,818
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 94/95
Cost per Unit $ 1,725
h~er of Units 5.2 20
Gross Cost $ 8,970 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
~et Impact $ 8,970
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~:endment (1991)
?ROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 40
PROJECT NAME: '~OODLETTE-FRANK ROAD
DESCRIPTION: GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY TO SOLANA ROAD (6 LANING): 1.7 MILES
PROJECT LOCATIDN: ~ CENTRA. b NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: . LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency= . 281.9
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS _ Size of This Project:- 3.4
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ( $ IN THOUSANDS )
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction .Other Tota1
Prior
Forecast
1991-92 100 100
! !~/. Budget Year
~. 1992-93 230 · 230
i~i, Total 330 2,431
2,761
,~' IMPACT ON FUTURE OPEP.~ING BUDGETS ESTIMATED U~EFUL
· LIFE OF FACILITY
" First Year of Impact 96/97
Cost per Unit $ ,, 1,725
N~m~er of Units 3.4 , 20
Gross Cost $ 5,865... (years)
Less User Revenu~ - 0
Net Impact $ ..... 5,865..
CAPITAL I~RO~E~E~T ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~endment (1991)
~ROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 41
PROJECT NAME~ PINE RIDGE ROAD
DESCRIPTION: AIRPORT ROAD TO 1-75 (6 LAN!NG); 2.0 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: 9. URBAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
i DIVISIONS T~NSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE~
DEPARTMENT: TpANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROAOS Size of This Project: 4.0
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constr~ction Land Construc~o~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 100 100
Budget Year
.~!i 1992-93 208 208
~, 1993-94 200 200
1994-95 350 350
i~ 1995-96 2,200 2,200
Future
Total 308 550 2,200 3,058
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 96~97
Cost per Unit $ ~,725
Number of Units 4 20
Gross Cost $ 6,900 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net impact $ 6,900
C~PITAL IMPROVEmEnT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
P~OJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 42
PROJECT NAME: VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
DESCRIPTION: ~ 41 TO GULFSHORE DRIVE (4 LANI~G); 1.4 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ ~ORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILT
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATIQN . 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 251.9
ORGANIZATION: S~CONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: 2.8
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Co~stru~t~ol.l Land Constructto~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 50 50
Budget Year
1992-93 290 100 390
1993-94 3,080 3,080
1994-95
1995-96
~ture
~:. Total 340 100 3,080 3,520
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 94/95
Cost per Unit $ ~,7~5
Number of Units 2.8 20
Gross Cost $ 4,830 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 4,830
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: ~iTATE ROAp~ PROJECT # 44
PROJECT NAME: TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH
DESCRIPTION: GRADE SEPARATION AT PINE RIDGE ROAD
PROJECT LOCATION: I & 2 NORT~ NAPLES; CENTRAL NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT~ T~ANSPORTATION 1991-95 Total Deficiency: , N/A
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUKMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~ear ~onstructto~ ~a~d constructto~ Other Tota~
'1990-91
Forecast
Budget Year
1992-93 1,000 1,000
1993-94 1,000 1,000
1994-95
1995-96 8,000 8,000
. Future
Total 1,000 1,000 8,000 10,000
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact ~/A - STATE ROAD
Cost per Unit " $
l~umber of Units 20
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
~et Impact $
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PR,QJE__CT SU~]~AR¥ FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: STATE ROADS PROJECT # 46
PROJECT NAME: TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST
DESCRIPTION: ~ATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD TO ISLE OF CAPRI ROAD /SR-951)
(6 LANING); 4.4 MIL~S
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 & 5 EAST NAPLES; SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENTs TRANSPORTATION., 1992-96 Total Deficiency: _. N/A
ORGANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS . , Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
year Construction Land Construction OtheF Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94 500 500
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 500 500
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A - 8,T. ATE ,ROAD
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 20
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact
CAPITAL IMPR0VEME~P ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~nendment (1991)
~OJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: STATE ROADS PROJECT # 50
PROJECT N;~tE: TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH (US 41)
DESCRIPTION:- IMMOKALEE ROAD TO WIGGINS PASS ROAD (6 LANING) ;
1.4 MILES
PROJECT LOCATION: I NORT},~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: N/A
'DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION ,,, 1992-96 Total Deficiency: , N/~
'ORGANIZATION: ~CONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: N/~
.~. FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
':' ? ~ Pre-
Year Constructio~ Land Construction Other Total
Prior
~il ' 1990-91
~.iii. Forecast
..... '~1991-9
'~ ' Budget Year
19.92-93 600 600
1993-94.
1994-95
~ :., "' Future
Total 600 600
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact ~/A - STATE ROAD
Cost per Unit $
N~m~er of Units 20
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ROJECT SUMMARy FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: ~TATE ROADS PROJECT # 5!
PROJECT NAME: $R-951
DESCRIPTION: N~W YORK DRIVE TO MARCO BRIDGE (4 LANING)
[3.2 miles)
PROJECT LOCATION: 6 MARCO
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT: T~ANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficienoy: N/A
ORGANIZATIOM: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This ProJeot: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
· 1990-91 25 25
'~ - 'Forecast
Budget Year
1992-93 ·
' · 1993-94
1995-96 7,576 7,576
· Future
Total 25 7,576 7,601
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A" STATE ROAD
Cost per Unit $
N~,m~er of Units ~Q
O~OSS Cost $ (years)
Loss User Re, venu~ -
Net Impact $
~RPITAL IHPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECY SUMMARY ~FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # .~2
PROJECT NAHE: L~VINGSTON ROAD
DESCRIPTION: PINE RIDGE ROAD TO.WYNDEMERE
PROJECT LOCATION: 2 CENTRAL NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILS
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORGANIZATIONz SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project: 1.5
FINANCIAL 8UM}~tRY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construc~o~ Land ~onstructio~ Other To__tal
Forecast
Budget Year
.19~2-93 160 160
1993-94 200 200
Total 160 200 1,210 1,570
· IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 96/97
Cost per Unit $ 1,725
N-mher of Units 1.5
Gross Cost $ 2,588 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ ~,588
·
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY ROADS PROJECT # 53
PROJECT Nm{E: LIVINGSTON ROAD
DESCRIPTION: GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY TQ RADIO ROAD
PROJECT LOCATION: 2 CENTRAL NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: TRANSPORTATION Unit of Measurement: LANE MILE
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 281.9
ORaANIZATION: SECONDARY ROADS Size of This Project:
. FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ Il{ THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construct%on Land Construction other Total
Prior
~ 1990-91
::'il . Forecast
:' 1991-92
.::' ~ Budget Year
~ .. 1992-93 370 370
1993-94 500 500
1994-95
" 1995-96 2,815 2,815
Future
Total 370 500 2,815 3,685
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED U~3EFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY.
First Year of Impact 96/97
Cost per Unit $ 1,725
Number of Units ~.5
Gross Cost $ 2,588 (years)
Less User RE, venue - 0
Net Impact $ 2.5~
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~¢ONCILIAT!0N OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: ~ATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DP~INAGE CANALS AND/OR STRUCTURES
SERVICE
AREA: County-wide or Planning District or Special Area X
(X) (#) (X)
1992-96 DEFICIENCY: F/~ $ in thousands
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
size o~
Pro4ect This Cumulative
Number Pro4ect Name Proiect Total
291.002 District No. 6 (Lely) Basin Plan 180 180
291.101 Lely Canal Spreader Swale 3,300 3,480
291.107 Lely Main Canal - Lower 550 4,030
291.108 Lely Main Canal - Middle 186 4,216
291.109 Doral Circle Bridge/Weir 660 4,876
291.110 Lely Main Canal - Upper 524 5,400
291.111 Rattlesnake-Hammock North Swale - 159 5,559
Naples Estate
291.112 Rattlesnake-Hammock North Swale - 54 5,613
Riviera Golf
291.113 Lely Branch Canal Weir 401 6,014
291.114 Lely Branch Canal 548 6,562
291.115 Lely Manor Outfall Canal Spreader 476 7,038
291.116 Lely Manor Outfall Canal - Lower 222 7,260
291.117 Lely Manor Outfall Canal - Middle 388 7,648
29'1.118 Lely Manor Outfall Canal - Upper 714 8,362
291.120 Lely Manor Canal 524 8,886
291.121 Naples Manor/Treetops Canal 76 8,962
291.122 Lakewood Outlet, Beachwood Drive & 179 9,141
Duchess Court Culverts
291.123 Rock Creek/Hazel Road Culvert 59 9,200
CAPITAL IMPR0VEM~NT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.002
PROJECT N~{EZ DISTRICT NO, 6 (LELy) BASIN pLAN
DESCRIPTION: DETAILED ENG./ENV. STORMWATER BASIN pLANNING
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 & 5 EAST NAPLES; SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DI¥ISIONI J~NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 180
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~ g.9~t~d~l.g.~_9~ ~and Constr~otion O~h~r Total
Prior
1990-91 155 155
Forecast
1991-92 25 25
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
Future
Total 180 180
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
~irst Year of Inpact N/A
Cost per Unit $
N~m~er of Units .,,N/A_
Oross cost $ (years)
Less User Rovenue -
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMM~RY FOR~.
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT #. 291.101
PROJECT N~ME: bELY CANAL SPREADER SWALE
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 EAST NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THQUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 3,300
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior '
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93 224 224
· 1993-94 273 1,320 53 1,646
1994-95 57 1,320 53 1,430
1995-96
Future
Total 554 2,640 106 3,300
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit
Number of Units 25
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
_CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ~LEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMAR.Y. FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # ~91.107
PROJECT NAME: .LELY MAIN CANAL - LOWER
DESCRIPTION: CANALAND!OR STRUCTURE IMPROVeMenTS
PROJECT LOCATIONs 4 EAST NAPLES
($) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICE~ Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS.
DEPARTMENTs WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ ~/~
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: .. 550
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
.Xear Construction Land Construction other Tota%
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93. 92 440 18 550
1994-95
1995-96
]~uture
Total 92 440 18 550
I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impa=t 93/94
Cost per Unit $ $ iD Thousands
N~er of Units 25
Gross Cost $ 3,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 3,000
Net Impact $ 0
047 236.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Up4ate & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALSfSTRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.108
PROJECT NAME: LELY MAIN CANAL - MIDDL~
DESCRIPTION: CANAL.AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 EAST NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/%}'
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 156'
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS) ~
Pre- .
Year Construction Land Construction Other Total;
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93 31 3
1993-94 149 6 15
1994-95
1995-96
Future
.Total 31 149 6 18~
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATI~TG BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL~
LIFE OF FACILITYi
First Year of Impact 94/95
Cost per Unit $ $ in Thousands ~
Number of Units 25
~ross Cost $ 5,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - .5=0,00
Net Impact $ 0
2'37
CAPITAL ~PROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
P~ROJECT SUM/~.~Y FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CA~ALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.109
PROJECT NAME: DORAL CIRCLE BRIDGE/WEIR
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUTH NAPLES ,
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ ENVIR0~MENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENTz WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency= N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 660
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructio~ Land ~o~,str~ct~on Other Tota%
Prior
'~ 1990-91
i:i~,.:~ i'~. Forecast
1991-92
· ,.. Budget Year
1~92-93 106 106
~.~, ' ',1993-94 5 528 21 554'
ii~:}' ', 19'94-95
1995-96
Future
., , Total 111 528 21 660
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of ImPact
cost per Unit
Number of Units ,25
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
lB
.. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
" Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ROJEC~ SUMM~RY FOR/~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY~ DRAINAGE CANALS/STRVCTURES PROJECT
PROJECT NAME: LELY MAIN CANAL -.UPPER
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE. IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUT~..~APLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN T~0USANDS
DEPARTMENT: W~T.~R MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
ORGANIZATION: size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year Construction Land constructio~ Other Total
1990-91
Budget Year
1992-93 4 404 16 424
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 104 404 16 524
I~PACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of !mpact 9~[94
Cost ~er Unit $ $ in Thousands
Number of Units 25
Gross Cost $ 3,0Q0 (years)
Less User Revenue - 3,000
Net Impact $ 0
.. CA?ITAL IMPR0VEM~NT ZLEMENT..
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT
PROJZCT NAME: RATTLESNAKE-HAM~IOC~ NORTH SWALE - NAPLES
D,SCRIPTION, CANALAND,OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
ORGANIZATIONs Size of This Projects 159.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~ Construction Land Construc~o~ 9_~ ~
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93
,1~93-94 27 127 5 159
1994-95
1995-9'6
Future
Total 27 127 5 159
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impaot 94/95
Cost per Unit $ ~ in Thousands
Number of Units ~
Gross Cost $ 1,Q00 (years)
Less User Revenue - 1,000
Net Impact $ 0
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FQR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.112
PROJECT NAME: '~ATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK NORTH SWALE - RIVIERA GOLF
DESCRIPTION: CANAL ~ND~OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: ..~ SOUT~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)'
RZSPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs ~2~VIRONMENTAL SERVICES unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
OROANIZATION: Size of This Projects 54
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
,ear Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
.1991-92
1992-93
1993-94 9 9
2
45
Future
Total 9 4:3 2 54
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 95/9~
Cost per Unit $ S in Thousands
N,~m~er of Units 25
Gross Cost $ 1,000 (~ears)
Less User Revenue - ~,000
Net Impact $ 0
". CAPITRL_IMPROVE}{ENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUM~(ARY FORK
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS~ST~UCTURES PROJECT
PROJECT NAME: LELY BRANCH CANAL WEIR
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUT~ ~APLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DI¥ISION~ ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurements $ IN THQUSANDS
DEPARTMENT~ WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 401
FI1TANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93,
1993-94 64 64
1994-95 3 321 13 337
1995-96
Total 67 321 13 401
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/~
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units .,,25
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
.. CAPIT~L IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC'FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.114
PROJECT NAME: LELy BRANCH CANAL
DESCRIPTIOn{: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~NVIRQNMENT~L SERVICES unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 548
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ~o~structto~ Land .c. onstruction Other T__O t a_%
Prior
1990-91 15 72 118 205
Forecast
1991-92 100 100
Budget Year
1992-93 5 258 263
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 120 72 376 548
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 93/94
Cost per Unit $ $ in Thousands
Number of Units 25
~ross Cost $ . 2,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 2,000
Net Impact $ 0
-. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMEN~
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJE_~B UM~tRY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.115
PROJECT NAME: .LELY MANOR OUTFALL SPREADER SWALE
DESCRIPTION: ~ANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE ~PROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION~ ~ SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT z WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Projectz 476
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
year Construction .Lan, d construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93
1994__95 4 381 15 400
199'5-96
Future
Total 80 381 15 476
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit
N~m~er of Units 25
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
CAPI. TAL IMPrOVEMeNT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMKkRY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES ,. PROJECT # 291.116
PROJECT NAME: LELY MANOR OUTFALL CANAL - LOWER
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DI¥ISION= ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992--96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION= Size of This Project: 222
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year Construction Land Construction .Other Total
~ ? 1990-91
Forecast
~ .:,,.:. 1993-94 37 178 7 222
. Total 37 178 .7 222
" XMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
FXrst Year of Impaot 94/95
Cost per ~nlt $ $ in Thousands
~er of Units 25
(~ross Cost $ 1,000 (year~)
Less User Revenue - 1,000
]~et Impact $ 0
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT.
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT,,, SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: ~RAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.117
PROJECT NAME: LELy MANOR OUTFALL CANAL - MIDDLE
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Plannin~ District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVIC~,S Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION~ Size of This Project: 388
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ¢onstruct~o~ Lan~ construction Q~her Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93
1994-95 3 310 13 326
1995-96
Future
Total 65 310 13 388
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 95/96
Cost per Unit $ $ in Thousands
Number of Units 25
Gross Cost $ 1,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 1,000
Net Impact $ 0
,. CAPITAL IMPROVEMF~NT ELEMENT.
Third Annllal Update & Amendment (1991)
P. RoJ~cT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.118
PROJECT NAMEs LELY MANOR OUTFALL CANAL - UPPER
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR g__TRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOU%'H NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DI¥ISION~ ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICF~ Unit of Measurements $ IN THQUSANDS
DEPARTMENTs WATER MANAG~4ENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 714
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Co~$tru~tion Land ~onstr~ct~O~ Other Tota~
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
.. 1991-92
.. Budget Year
~,< i . i992.-93
'1993-94
"/ 1994-95 120 120
~.~ ' 1995-96 571 23 594
Future
Total 120 571 23 714
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact .96/97
Cost per Unit $ $ in Thousands
Number of Units 25
Gross Cost $ 4,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 4,000
Net Impact $ 0
.. CAPITAL I~PROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STrUCTURES PROJECT # 291.1~0
PROJECT NAME: LELY MANOR CANAL
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT .LOCATION: 5 SO~H NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION~ Size of This Project: 524
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ( $ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construct~o~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
' ~1994-95 88 88~
'1995-96 419 17 436
Future
Total 88 419 17 524
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact ..96~97
Cost per Unit $ $ in. Thousands
Number of Units 25
Gross Cost $ 2,0.00 (years)
Less User Revenue - 2,000
Net Impact $ 0
CAPI.TAL I~PROVEMENT ELEMENT_
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.121
PROJECT NAME: NAPLES MANOR/TREETOPS OUTLET
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUT~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENTs WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficienoys
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 76
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ iN THOUSA/qDS)
Pre-
Year , Constructio~ .Land Construction Other. Total
Prior
1990-91 ,
Forecast
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95 13 13
1995-96 61 · 2 63
Future
-Total 13 61 2 76
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 96/97
Cost per Unit ' $ $ in Thousands
Number of Units 25
Gross Cost $ 1,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - ~,000
Net Impaot $ 0
gm fl47 249
CA..PITAL IMPROVE~.E~ ELEMENT
" Third Annual Update & A~endment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DP~INA$~ CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 291.122.
PROJECT NAME: bAKEWOOD OUTLET, BEECHWOOD DRIVE & DUCHESS COURT CULVERTS
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
.PROJECT LOCATION: 4 EAST ~APLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS_
DEPARTMENTz WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Defioienoyz N/A
ORGANIZATIONs Size of This Project: 179.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ( $ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ~onstruction Land construction other Total.
Prior
~.;! :.i: 1990-91
· :;/,. Forecast
~.~i 199'
,, 1-92
~,i~ ,Budget Year
; 1992-93
...~i. 1993-94
1994-95 28 28
1995-96 146 5 151
Future
Total 28 146 5 179
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL .
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 96/97
Cost per Unit $ $ in ThoUsands
Number of Units ~5
Gross Cost $ ~,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 1,0O0
Net Impaot $ 0
,. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
pROJECT SUM)h%RY FORM
TYPE O~ PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STrUCTURES PROJECT $ ~91.123
PROJECT NAME: .ROCK CREEK/HAZEL ROAD CUINERT
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 EAST NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
REBPONSIBL~ AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOVS~NDS
DEPARTMENTs .... ~ATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/%
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: ~9
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
:, Year Construction Lan4 ¢0nstr~ctto~ Other Total
Prior
. · 1990-91
,.~. Forecast
~ .: 1991-92
~fi?:',''Budget Year
:':~: ' 1992-93
%i . 1993-94
., 1994-95 10 10
~,. 1995-96 47 2 49
"~ Future
:~ '5 ·
'"~ ' Total 10 47 2 59
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F£rst Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit " $
N-mher of Units 25
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User ReVenue -
Net Impact $
i~:.: '-. gu~ IMPROVEBENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~CONCILIATION OF PROJECTS TO !992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL $SRVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS AND/OR STRUCTURES
SERVICE
AR~I County-wido or Planning District or Special Area . X,,.
(x) (~) (x)
1992-96 DEFICIENCY: ~/A $ IN THOUSANDS'
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
Number ~ro~ect Name Pro4ect Total
292.002 Gordon River Extension Basin Plan 400 9,600
292.101 Gordon River Regional Detention 2,176 11,776
Facility No. 1
292.102 Gordon River Regional Detention 1,742 13,518
Facility No. 2
292.103 Gordon River Extension Main Channel 1,315 14,833
292.106 Gordon River Regional Detention 3,504 18,337
Facility No. 3
CAPITAL IMPBOVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS~STRUCTURES PROJECT # ?.92.002
PROJECT NAME: GORDON RIVER EXTENSION BASIN PLAN
DESCRIPTION: DETAILED ENG./ENVIRONMENTAL STOP, MATER BASIN PLANNING
PROJECT LOCATION: ~& 2 NORTH NAPLES; CENTRAL NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENTS WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
ORGANIZATION: size of This Project: 400
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Yea~ Construction Lan,4 Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
"~ ' Forecast
Li,,.. 1991-92 400 400
,~.~,, Budget Year
i~..; ! 1992-93
:i .' 1993-94
~.~. ,:-..~1995-96
~:' Future
'"' Total 400 400
'i, IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
:.i' LIFE OF FACILITY
~irst Year of Impact
i Cost per Unit $
N;,m~er of Units N/A
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
-. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
P~OJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 292.101
PROJECT NAME: GORDON RIVER REGIONAL DETENTION FACILITY No. 1
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE I~ROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ CENTRAL NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER M~NAGEMENT 1991-9~ Total Deficiency: N/A
OROANIZATION: Size of This Project: 2,176
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year Co~struct~o~ Land ~onstruct~og Other Tota~
Prior
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93
1~94-95 60 1,800 1,860
1995-96 3 301 12 316
~ture
Total 63 1,800 301 12 2,176
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TINO BUDOETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
3~rst Year of Impact 96/97
Cost per .Unit $ $ in Th°usands
~mher of Units 25
~ross Cost $ 6,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 6,00.0
]~et Impaot $ 0
CAPITRL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Thir~ Annual Up~ate & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 292.102
PROJECT NAME: GORDON RIVER' REGIONAL DETENTION FACILITY No. 2
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 2 CENTRAL NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~;IRONMENTAL SERVICE~ Unit of Measurement: ~ IN THOUSAND~
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency= N/~
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 1,742
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Xear constructio~ Land .Constructio~ otheF Tota~
Prior
1990--91
Forecast
'1991-92
· Budget Year
1994-95
1995-96 51 1,440 1,491
~.h/ture 241 10 251
Total 51 1,440 241 10 1,742
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact . 97/98
Cost per Unit $ $ in ThousaDds
Number of Units 25
Gross Cost $ 10,000 (years)
Less User Revenue -' 10,000
Net Impact $ 0
... CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~mendment (1991)
~ROJECT ~U~MAR¥ FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS~.STRUCTURES PROJECT # 292.103
PROJECT NAME: ~ORDON RIVER EXTENSION MAIN CHANNEL
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STB~CTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ CENTRAL NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORG]%NIZATION~ Size of This Project: 1,315
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year constructi. ~R Land c_~.~ns tru. ctio~ Othe~ Tota%
Prior
1990-91
'Forecast
i;.]i. 1991-92
. Budget' Year
i~.~.~.~ 1992-93
:-1993-94
: 'i ... 1994-95
· 1995-96 221 1,052 42 1,315
Total 221 1,052 42 1,315
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 96/97
Cost per Unit " $ $ in Thousands
Number of Units 25
~ross Cost $ 5,D00 (years)
Less User Revenue - 5,000
Net Impact $ 0
CAPITAL IMPROVeMeNT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 292.106
PROJECT NAME: GORDON RIVER REGIONAL DETENTION FACILITY No, 3
DESCRIPTION: C~NAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ NORTH,NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~NVIRONMENTAb SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WAT~ MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 3,504
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land, Construction Other. Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96 34 2,800 2~834
Future 84 563 23 670
'~ Total 118 2,800 563 23 3,504
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 97f98
Cost per Unit $ $ in Thousands
~,mher of Units 25
Gross Cost $ 2,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 2,000
Net Impact $ 0
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991}
~CONCILIATION OF PROJECTS lQ 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: WATER ~GEMENT DIVISION: ~NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS AND/OR STRUCTURES
SERVICE
AREA: County-wide or Planning District or 'Special Area K
(X) (#) (X)
1992-96 DEFICIEIICY: N/A $ IN THOUSAND~
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
Size of
'~ This Cumulative
~ Pro~4ec~ Name Pro4ect ~otal
293.001 District No. 7 (Phase 2) Aerial Mapping 82* 18,337
293.002 Cocohatchee River System Basin Plan 400 18,737
293.102 Cocohatchee Salinity Control Structure 995** 18,737
293.103 Cocohatchee Control Structure No. 2 975** 18,737
293.105 Cocohatchee Control Structure No. 3 975** 18,737
293.118 Palm River Weir 190.* 18,737
'i, * Project ComPleted
· * Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
CAPITAL IMPROV~ME.,NT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMM~RY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES . PROJECT # 293.001
PROJECT NAME= 'pISTRICT No. 7 (Phase 2} AERIAL MAPPING
DESCRIPTION: ~ERIAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ & 9 NORTH NAPLES; URBAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning DistrictName)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurements $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT:. W~TER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 82
FINANCIAL SUMMARY (~ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
. ~ Construction Lan~ f~ ~ T~
Prior 2 4 2 4
~7. 1990-91 58 58
.. ,,: Forecast
:",:/.] ,' 1991-92
~ ?. Budget Year
'~,, 1992-93
1993-94
~ ~ 1994-95
1995-96
· ~!~> .,., FutUre
Total 82 82
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact ~A
Cost per Unit
Number of Trnits ,
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
¢~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT ~UM~A~¥ FOR/~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 293.002
PROJECT NAME: EOCOHATCHEE RIVER SYST~ DA$IN PLAN
DESCRIPTION: DETAILED ENG./ENVIRQNMENTAb STORMWATER B~$IN ?LANNIFG
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ & 9 ,,, NORTH NAPLES; URBAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGE}~CY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION:'ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: ,$ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 400
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Con,.struct$on other Total.
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 400 400
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 400 400
IMPA(:T ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit
~_~ber of Units _N/A
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact
CAPITAL IMPROV~HENT ELEMENT
· i., ', Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PSOJ~CT SUMD4ARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 2,93.!02
PROJECT NAME: COCO~ATCHEE SALIN~T~ CONTROL STRUCTURE
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUQTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 }~ORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THQUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: BIG CYPRESS BASIN Size of This Project: 400
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
]~ .Construction L~ Construction 9_~ Total
Pr~or
Forecast
1991-92 20 930 45 995
Budget Year
1992-93
1993.94
Future
Total 20 930 45 995**
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING ~UDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit $
N~er of Units 25
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
** Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
· ~ ..... CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT S~Y FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 293.103
PROJECT NAME: COCOHATCHEE CONTROL STRUCTURE No. 2
DESCRIPTION: CA~AL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 NORTH ~APLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONt ENVIRONM~NTAb SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
ORGANIZATION: BIG' CYPRESS BASIN Size of This ProJect~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction La~ Construction Other Total
:~' ~" Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 930 45 975
r:i' '. Budget Year
~..- ..~ 1993-94
1'994-95
:~'~?.~ :' ~ 1995-96
]~i!. , Future
~L~ ....
;~ Tota .1 930 45 975**
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
,~ First Year of Impact N/A,,
Cost per Unit $
i, Number of Units' .25.,
:~ ~ross Cost $ (years)
~,:. Less User Revenue -
'-': Not Impact $
** Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
~'i"~ '-. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
'~'" Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
i.. PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 293.105
PROJECT NAME: COCOHATCHEE CONTROL STRUCTURE No. 3
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR'STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 9 URBAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/%
ORGANIZATION: j. BIG CYPRESS BASIN Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructio~ Land construction Other Total
Prior
Budget Year
· 1993-94 , 930 45 975
1995-96
Future
Total 930 45 975**
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL.
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact N/A
Cost per unit
N~mber of Units
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
** Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 293.118
PROJECT NAME: PALM RIVER WEIR
DESCRIPTION: 'CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ NORT}~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. Unit of Measurement: $ IN T~QUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
ORGANIZATION: BIG CYPRESS BASIN size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constr~ction Land Construction Other ~
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 175 15 19o
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 175 15 190.*
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 25
Gross Cost $ (years)
· ' Loss User Reven~e -
Not Impact $
· * Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
':; ,. CAPITAL IMPROVEME~ ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ECONOILIA.T. ION OF PR.OJ~TS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS AND/0R_STRUCTUR~$
SERVICE
AREA: County-wide or Planning District or Special Area X
(X)" (~) (X)
1992-96 DEFICIENCY: ~[A $ IN THOUSANDS
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
size of
Pro4eot This Cu~u~ative
Number Pro4ect Name Project Total
294.001 Main Golden Gate Aerial Mapping 250 18,987
294.002 Main Golden Gate Basin Plan 320 19,307
294.122 1-75 - i Structure (D2-7) 531.* 19,307
294.123 1-75 - 2 Structure (D2-8) 47+300*** 19,354
294.137 Golden Gate Weir No. 3 200** 19,354
294.138 Golden Gate Weir No. 4 200** 19,354
294.139 Harvey-1 Structure (D1-TA) 110.* 19,354
294.140 1-35 - 2 Structure Backpump Facility 85** 19,354
** Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
*** $300,000 Funding Provided by Developer
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 294.001
PROJECT NAME: ~AIN GOLDEN GATE AERIAL MAPPING
DESCRIPTION: AERIAL TOpOGRAP~tIC.MAPPING
PROJECT LOCATION: $ & 8 GOLDEN GATE; RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
ORGANIZATION= Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
year Construction Land Construction Other Total
'Prior
1990-91
Forecast
i. 1991-92 250 250
iBudget Year
~,!'~ 1992-93
i:;i/: ':' 1993-94
1994-95
' ~::'~I' :~ 1995-96
Future
:'~ Total 250 250
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact N/A .
Cost per Unit
Number of Units N/A
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
IB 266
· .. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
¥ Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUI~I~RY FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 294.002
PROJECT NAMZ~ MAIN GOLDEN GATE BASIN PLAN
DESCRIPTIONs DETAILED ENG./E}~IRONMENTAL STORMWATER BASIN PLANNING
PROJECT LOCATION: 2, 3, 8 & 9 CENTRAL NAPLES; GOLDEN GATE;
RURAL ESTATES; U~B~N
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
.!.i,. DIVISION~ ~VIRONMENTAL SERVI~$ Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSAND~
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT '1992-96 Total Deficiency~ N/A
· ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project=
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land CoDstructio~ Other Tota~
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
Budget Year
1992-93 320 320
1993-94
1994-95
'-'~'1995-96
~ture
Total 320 320
.... IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
h{,.. LIFE OF FACILITY
~. First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per unit
· Number of Units
'~:~ Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Not Impact $
Thir~ Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
_PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT #
PROJECT N;U~E~ 1-75-1 STRUCTURE ¢D2-7}
DESCRIPTION: ~ANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROV~MENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ GOLDEN GATE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~VIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN T~QUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WAT~ MANAGEMENT 199~.-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATIONI BIG CYPRESS BASIN Size of This ProJeotl ~/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
.Year Construct~o~ Land, construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 518 13 531
% Forecast ..
1991 92
~'~.?, ..' B~dget Year
1993-94
Total
~PACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
P~rst Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit
~er of Units" . ~5
Oross Coet $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
** Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 294.123
PROJECT NAME: ~--75-2 STRUCTURE (~-8)
DESCRIPTZON: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 9 URBAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT~ WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency~
ORGANIZATION: size of This Project: 47
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land ConstNuction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 12 12
Forecast
1991-92 325 10 335
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
Total 337 10 347***
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $
~er of Units 25
Gross Cost $ (years)
Lees User Revenue -
Net Impact $
*** $300,000 Funding Provided by Developer
C~PITAL I~PROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT S~MARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 294.137
PROJECT NAMEs gOLDEN GATE WEIR No, 3
· DESCRIPTION~ CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 8 RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL S~RVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
ORGANIZATIONs DIG CYPRESS BASIN Size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Con~tFuctio~ Land Construction 0t~er Tota~
Prior
'Forecast ·
', 1991-92 20 170 10 200
~'{;~ Budget Year
1995-96
Total 20 170 10 200**
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF ~A(:ILITY
F~rst Year of Impaot
Cost per Unit $
~er of Units' 25
Oross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact
· * Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
, ffi
;.. -. CAPITAL IMP~0V~ENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update ~ Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR34
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # ~.94.138
PROJECT NAME: GOLDEN GATE WEIR No. '4
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR ,STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 8 RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
· DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement~ $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A.
OR~ANIZATION~ BIG CYPRESS BASIN Size of This Projects
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constru~t~ Land .Construction 'Other Tota~
Forecast
1991-92 20 170 10 200
.,~' Budget Year
· "1992-93
~?'" 1994-95
Future
'.'~' ' Total 20 170 10 200**
'~ IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
~,,,. LIFE OF FACILITY
'i)' F~rst Year of Impact
· Cost per Unit $
· Number of Units 25
~ross Cost $ (years)
.,., Less User Revenue -
~;, .. Net Impact $
** Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT 8UI~-'~RY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 294.139
PROJECT NAME: HARVEY-1 STRUCTURE CD1-7A}
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 9 URBAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THQUSAND$
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: BIG CYPRESS BASIN Size of This Project: N/~
...~. FINANCIAL SUHMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
: Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
1991-92
Budget Year
~=: 19~3-94
.~,i.. :'.
· ~'~: ' · ' 1994-95
Total 97 13 110,*
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
~. LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/~
,. Cost per Unit $
! ~ Number of Units" 25
Cross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
'.~. Net Impact $
** Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAG~ CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 294.140
PROJECT NAME: I-7~-2 STRUCTUR~ BACKpUMP FACILITY
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 9 URBAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A.
ORG;tNIZATION: BIG CYPRESS BASI~ Size of This Project: ~/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
]~ear Construction Land construction Other. Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
~ Budget Year
:.. 1992-93 10 10
1 94-95
1995-96
Future
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per unit $
N%u~ber of Units 25
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
** Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
CAPITAL IMproveMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
RECONCILIATION OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVIC$$
TYPZ O~ PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS AND/OR STRUCTURES
S~-RVICE
AREA~ County-wide or Planning District or Special Area X
(x) (#) (x)
1992-96 DEFICIENCY: N/A $ IN THOUSANDS
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
Pro4 ect size of
This C,u~ulative
. N%unber Project Name Project Total.
295.00'2 Henderson Creek Basin Plan 235 19,589
~PITRL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Ugdate & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: QRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 295.002
PROJECT NAME: HENDERSON CREEK BASIN PLAN
DESCRIPTION: DETAILED ENG./ENVIRONMENTAL STORMWATER BASIN PLANN]iNG
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 ~Q~AL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning'District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGEHCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: EN~;IRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEP]tRTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 160
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land .Construct ~o~ Other Total
rior
.~.,?~ ~'. 1990-91 75 75
:. Forecast
~.~'< 1991-92
Budget Year ,
1992-93
19 3-94 160 160
1994-95
'11995-96
Total 235 235
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact N/A
Cost per unit $
~umber of Units
~roes COSt $ (years)
Lsss User Revenue -
~et Impact $
ffi 047 275
CA?ITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ;unendment (1991)
RECONCILIATION OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: WATER ~4ANAGEMENT DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS AND/OR STRUCTURES
SERVICE
AREAt County-wide or Planning District or Special Area ~
(x) (x)
1992-96 DEFICIEllCY~ ~/A $ IN THOUSANDS
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
~ This Cumulative
Number ~roJect Name Project Total
296.001 Faka Union Aerial Mapping 105 19,694
296.002 Faka Union Basin Plan 160 19,254
296.104 Faka Union Weir No. 4 600** 19,854
296.109 Miller Canal Weir No. 3 480** 19,854
Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
.CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Up4ate & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAG~ CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # ~95.001
PROJECT NAME: FAKA-UNION AERIAL MAPPING
DESCRIPTION: ~ERIAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 & 8 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK; RUP~%L ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 105
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ iN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ¢onstructio~ La~ Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
'1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93
i".1993-94 105 105
1994-95
1995-96
Future
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units N/A
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMEN~
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR/4.
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 296.00~
PROJECT NAMEs FAKA-UNION BASIN PLAN
· ~ESCRIPTIONs DETAILED ENG./ENVIRONmENTAL STORMWATER BASIN pLANNING
PROJECT LOCATIONs 7 & 8 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK; RURAL ESTATES (#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPI%RTMENT: W~TER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Projeot: 160
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ~onstruction Land ~onstruotion Other
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
'1991-92
i Budget
, i9~2-93
1994-95 160 160
5-9
~ture
Total 160 160
~MPA~T ON FUTURE OPE~TINO BUDOET8 ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impaot ~[~
Cost per Unit $
~her of Units , N/A
Oross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SU~4ARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANaLS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 296.104
PROJECT NAMEs ~AKA-UNION WEIR No. 4
DESCRIPTION: DETAILED ENG./ENVIRONMENTAL STORMWATER BASIN P,LANNING
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 & 8 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK;. RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERViCeS, Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: W~TER ~iANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: --DIG CYPRESS BASIN Size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction 9_~ Total
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95 45 530 25 600
Future
Total 45 530 25 600**
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact N/A .,
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 25
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
** Funded by Big Cypress Basin
047 279
~' ,. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTUrES PROJECT # 296.10[
PROJECT N~ME: MILLER CANAL WEIR NO. 3
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT LOCATION: S RURAL ESTATE!;
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT= W~TER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Defioienoy: N/~
ORG~,NI2ATION= Size of This Project= N/~
FIZ~ANCI~L SUMMARY ( $ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~ear CoDstruction Land ~o~st~uct~on Other Tota~
Prior
', 99o-,
1991-92
:.Budget:~ ., Year
1993-94
1994-95 40 425' 15 480
To~al 40 425 15
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $
~er of Units' 25
~ross' Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact
** Project Funded by Big Cypress Basin
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
RECONCILIATION OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DI~INAGE CANALS AND/OR STRUCTURES
[(!.< 8ER¥ICE
AREA~ 'County-wide or Planning District or Special Area X
(x) (#) (x)
· 1992-96 DEFICIENCY: N/A $ IN THOUSANDS
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
Size o~
' ~99_~ .This .~umulat ire
· ' IT~t~ber Project Name Project Total
'i!'.: 297.001 Southern Coastal Aerial Mapping 53 19,898
297.002 Southern Coastal Basin Plan 580 20,078
297.101 US-41 Outfall Swales 474 20,552
-. CRPIT~L IMPROVE}lENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 297.001
PROJECT NAME: SOUTHERN COASTAL BASIN AERIAL MAPPING
DESCRIPTION= AERIAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement= $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENTs WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
OR~ANISATIONI Size of This ProJeots 55
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ( $ IN THOUSANDS )
Pre-
~ear ' Construction Land. Construction Other Tctal
Prior
Forecast
.'J 1991-92
Budget Year
i992 93
1994-95 53 53
Fllture
Total 53 53
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATINO BUDOETS ESTIMATED
USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impaot
Cost per Unit $
~,~er of Units N/A
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impaot $
C;%PIT~L IMPROVEME~r~ ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAG~ CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 297.00~
PROJECT NAME% SOUTHERN COASTAL BASIN PLA~
DESCRIPTION% DETAILED ENG./ENVIRONMENTAL STORMWATER BASIN PLANNING
PROJECT LOCATION: '7 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(~) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRO.NMENTAL SERVICF=~ Unit of Measurement: $ IN T~OUSANDS
DEPARTMENTs WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficienoy~ N/~
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 180
'. FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructio~ Land Construction Other Total
.~: ~ Forecast
?~i"' Budget Year
· : Total 180 180
I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
Cost per Unit $
~er of Units N/A
~ross Cost $ (years)
'~' Less User Revenue -
Net Impaot
CAPITAL IMPRQV~M'~NT ELEMENT
Third Annual Upd&te &Amondmont (1991)
PROJECT SUM/~RY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE ¢~NALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 297.101
PROJECT NAME: US 4~ 0UTFALL SWALES
DESCRIPTION= CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IM?~0VEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 ROYAL ~KApALM CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
· RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT= WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION= Size of This Project: 474
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
:~:' ::' Pre-
::: ; ~ Co~structio~ ~an~ constructio~ Other Total
Prior
'/ . 1990-91 8 8
!~,'/! Forecast
~.,~ 1991-92 13 3 4 20
· ~'~ Budget Year
1992-93 48 48
:'.i", ~ 1993-94 4 394 398
. 1994-95
%u.~- Total 73 3 394 4 474
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTII~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
:~.::i. F~rs~ Year of Impaot 94/95
~.~,.,.. Cos~ per Unft $ $ in Thousagds
~:~:: ~,~her of Un~ts , 25
Gross Cost $ 3,000 (years)
Lees User Revenue - 3~000
Net Impact $ 0
CAPITAL I}~ROVEMF, NT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ECONCILI;%TION OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS AND/OR STRUCTURES
SERVICE
AREAl County-wide , or Planning District or Special Area ~
(x) (#) (x)
1992-96 DEFICIENCY: F[% $ IN THOUSANDS
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
size of
· ~ Th~S Cumulative
;/. ~'~ Number Pro4oct Name Pro~0~ Total
i~.' ~ 198.001 Barton River Aerial Mapping 53 20,605
,~. ... ._ ~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ~LEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 298.001
PROJECT NAME: BARRON RIVER AERIAL MAPPING
DES~RIPTION~ ~ERIAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING
PROJECT LOCATIONs 10 ~QRKS~REW
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
' DIVISIoN~ ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICE~ Unit of Measurement~ $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT= WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 53
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
~: Pre-
~...- ~ Construction Lmn~ Constructio~ Other Tote1
'" 1990-91
.... · ,.. Forecast
'~ i~.,'Budget Year
1993-94
~' 1994-95
i995-96 53 53
Future
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
. ~rst Year of ImPact N/A
· Cost per Unit $
Number of Units N/A
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
""' .. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. . ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ECONCILIATION OF PRoJEcTS...TO 1992-96 DEFICIeNCy
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAG~MENT DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS,AND/OR STRUCTURES
SERVICE
ARF~ County-wide. or Planning District .. or SPecial Area X
(X) (#) (X)
1992-96 DEFICIENCY~ N/A $ IN THOUSANDS
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
Size of
" ~ pro~ec~ Name Proiect Total
~':~:': "299.101 Naples Park Drainage 3,365 23,970
CAPITAL I~PROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT sUmtARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: DRAINAGE CANALS/STRUCTURES PROJECT # 299.101
PROJECT NAME: ~APLES PARK DRAINAGE
DESCRIPTION: CANAL AND/OR STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ NO~TH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $ IN THOUSANDS
DEPARTMENT: WATER MANAGEMENT 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project: 3,365
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
]~ constructio~ Land constructio~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91 130 78 208
i~. Forecast
Budget Year
1992-93. 3,157 3,157
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 130 3,157 78 3,365
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per unit
Number of Units 25
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
0'47 288
CAPITAL IMPROF~MENT ELEMENT
Third CIE Update & Amendment (1991)
RECONCILI;%TION.OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: EMERGENCY MEDICAL DIVISION: EMERGENCY SERViCeS
SERVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: EMS SUBSTATION
SERVICE
~REA~ County-wide X or Planning District or Special Area
(X) (~) (X)
1992-96 DEFICIENCY: ~,9 ALS UNIT
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
'..i~ Size of
,~'. ~ This Cumulative
Number ProJQ~t Name Pro~ect Total
302 Golden Gate Parkway and Airport Road i 1
303 System Status Float Unit i 2
304 Location to be determined i 3
.. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
pR.eJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= EMS SUBSTATION PROJECT # 30~
PROJECT NAME= GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY AND ~I~PORT ROAD
DESCRIPTION= EMS SUBSTATI0~ ~ND, VEHICLE
PROJECT LOCATION= 2 CENTRAL ~APLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DMSIONZ ~ERGENCY SERVICES Unit of Measurementz ~bS UNIT
DEPARTMENT~ EMERGENCY MEDICAL 1992-96 Total Defici~noy~ ~
~ERVICES
OROANIZATIO~ Size of This Project: ~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year' Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior.
1990-91 102 102
Forecast
:Budget Year
~.i.1992-93 10 75 179 264
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96 ' '
;:' F~ture '"
Total 10 75 179 102 366
II. ACT ON FIJ~ITRE OPER~TINO BUDGETS ESTIi~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 9~/93
Cost per Unit $' 196.100
L~,~er of Units 1 , 30,,
Cross cost $ 196.,.100 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ ~96~ 100
.. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
';" Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
TYP! OF PUBLIC FACILITY~ EMS SUBSTATION AND VEHICLE PROJECT.#'~0~
PROJECT NAME: SYSTEM STATUS FLOAT UNIT
DESCRIPTION: ~MS SUBSTATION AND VEHIOL~
PROJECT LOCATION: TO BE DETERMINED
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY ,..
' DMSION: EMERGENCY SERVICES Unit of Measurement: ALS UNIT
· DEPARTMENT: ~ERGENCY MEDICAL 1992-96 Total Deficiency: ).-
' ~,~VICES
' ' ORGANIZATION: Size of This Project:
:i!' FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS) ; .".
Pre-
':',' .]Lg..~,. Cgnstru~tion Lane ~onstru~tion Othe~ -Total ''
. Prior ,~ -
";:'~ Forecast " ' ' '-':-.
':~1991-92 ~..
Year . .
1992-93 . '-
1993-94 10 75 179 102 36~ .-.;
,~':, 19'94-95 " ' ' "'-".'.
'r 1995-96 , '
'Future .'
.: Total 10 75 179 102. ~ .=- 3~ "
~. LIFE'OF'FACILiTY'."'"
~';' F~rst Year of Impact 94/95 '-': ·
Cost per Unit $ 196,100 .
· ~m~er of Units 1 30.
~ross Cost $ 196,100 (years)· · .... .'
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 196,100 '
-.. .-
CAPITAL,, I~PROVEM~NT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
pROJECT SU}~ARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: ~MS SUBSTATION AND VEHICLE, PROJECT # 304
PROJECT NAME: EMS SUBSTATION AND VEHICLE .
DESCRIPTION: EMS SUBSTATION AND VEHICLE
PROJECT LOCATION: TO BE DETER~.INED
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE ~ENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: EMERGENCY SERVICES Unit of Measurement: ... ALS UNIT
DEPARTMENT~ EMERGENCY MEDICAL 1992-96 Total Deftcienoy: 3
SERVICES .
ORGANIZATIONs Size of This Project: 1
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~ Construction Lan~ con~truct~oq Other Total
ior
Forecast
~, ...- .
.,.
1994-95 10 75 179 102 366
1995-96
Total 10 75 179 102 366
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of I~pa=t 95/96
Cost per ~ni~ $ 196.[00
~er of Units 1 30
gross Cost $ 196, ~00 (~ears)
Less ~ser Revenue - 0
~et Impaot $ 196,~0~
.. CAPIT~L IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
RECONCILIATION OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCy
DEPARTMENT: CO~{TY MANAGER DIVISION: OFFICEOF CAPITAL PROJECTS
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COUNTY JAIL
,.,, SERVICE
ARE~% County-wide ~ or Planning District or Special Area
(X) (#) (X)
%992-96 DEFICIENCY= 978 BED~
~.~ii"' (quantity) (unit of measurement)
Number Pro4ect Name ProJec~ Total
[i~ ' 400 Collier County Jail 256 256
C;%PITAL IMPROVEMENT ~LEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPI OF PUBLIC FACILITY: JAIL PROJECT # 400
PROJECT NAME: COLLIER COUNTY JAIL CPH~$~ I)
DESCRIPTIONs 256 ADDITIONAL BEDS/ADMINISTRATION/SUPPORT FACILITIES
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 EAST NAPLES
(#) (Planni~.g District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONI COUNT¥ MANAGER Unit of Measurement: BEDS
DEPARTMENTI OFFICE OF CAPITAL 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 378
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
ORGANIZATIONs Size of This ProJoot~ 256
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Xear .~onstructio~ Lan~ construction Other ~otal
'! .::' Prior
· ~. 1990-91
Forecast
~'-~' 1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93 2,000 2,000
.~'..' 1993-94 20,000 3,000 23,000
.~' i~ 1994-95
.'~995-96
uture ·
"' Total 2,000 20,000 3,000 25,000
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY.
First Year of Impact 93/94
cost per unit $
Number of Units N/A 100
Gross Cost $ 1.60Q,QQ0 (years)
Less User Revenu~ -
Net Impact $ 1.600,000
-. C~PIT;%L I~PROyEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
RECONCILI~TION..OF.. PROJECT~ ...TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT~ LIBRARY DIVISION: PUBLIC SERVICES
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUBLIC LIBRAry
SERVICE
/%REA~ County-wide ~ or Planning District or Special Area
(X) (#) (X)
1992-96 DEFICIENCY: 23,4~6 SOUARE FEET
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
SiZ!~ of
· ~ Fhis cumulative
N~mber Progect Name Progect Total
502 Collier North Branch Library Addition 3,600 3,000
503 Marco Island Branch Library Addition 3,300 6,300'
505 Immokalee Branch Library Addition 3,000 9,300
506 Golden Gate Branch Library Addition 3,000 12,300
507 Vineyards Branch Library 10,000 22,300
· CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Up,ate & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT_SUMMARY FORM
'TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= LIBRARY PROJECT # 500
PROJECT NAME= LIBRARY HEADOUARTERS
DESCRIPTION= 26,000 SO. FT. ADDITION AT 650 CENTRAL AVENUE
PROJECT LOCATION= _ ~3 NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: SQ.FT
DEPARTMENTI LIBRARY 1992-96 Total Defioiencyl 23,426
ORfl~NI~ATION: H0. Size of This ProJeot:
FII~NCIJ~ S~Y ($ IN ~0US~S)
~ g0nstruct~on Land Construction Other Total
~ior 245 245
1990-91 38 3,407 487 3,932
Forecast
· ~99~-92 122 122
' I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TINO BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL'
LIFE OF F~CILITY
First Year of Im~a~t 91/92
Cost per Unit $
~er of Units 75
GNOSS COSt $ 181,290 (years)
Less ~ser Revenue - ,22 ~ 000
Net Impa~t ~ ~59,200.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUBLIC LIBRARY PROJECT # 502
PROJECT NAME: COLLIER NORTH BRANC~ LIBRARY
DESCRIPTIONs ADDITION TO BRANCH LIBRAB¥
~ROJECT LOCATION: I NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: SQ.FT
DEPARTMENT: LIBRARY 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 23m426
ORGANIZATION: COLLIER NORTH BRANCH Size of This Project: 3,000
FINANCIAL SUHMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construc~0~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91
~,' Forecast
%.'i991-92 32 32
i,':i[ (Budget' Year
1992-93 344 344
:!:'::.1994-95
i!:~ 1995-96
:,:' FUture
Total 32 344 376
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
P~rst Year of Impact 93/94
Cost per Unit $
N~m~er of Units 50
Gross Cost $ 4,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 1,000
Net Impact $ $,000
i~!..;~' ,. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
~: Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJEC. T SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUBLIC LIBRAry PROJECT # 503
PROJECT NAME: ~ARCO ISLAND BRANCH LIBRARY ADDITION
DESCRIPTIONS ~DDITION TO EXISTING BRANCH LIBRARY
PR~ECT LOCATIOn: 6 MARCO
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
· DIVISIONs PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurements ~Q.PT
,~.DEP~RTMENTs LIBRARY 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 23,426
'OROANIZATIONs ~XARC0 ISLAND BRANCH Size of This Project:. 3,300
FINANCIAL SUMMARY. ($ IN THOUSANDS)
~:~ear ¢~Dstruct~0n Land ~onstruc~o~ Other Total
~orecast
:~991-92
Budget Year
'~2.~3 40 40
40 40g 44g
~trst ~ear off mmpact ~4/D5
cost ~er ~nit
~er of Units
~ross Cost $ 4,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 1,000
Net Impact $ 3,000
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELZMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT, SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUBLIC LIBRARY PROJECT # 505
PROJECT NAME: IMMOKALEE BRANCH LIBRARY ADDITION
DESCRIPTION: ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BRANCH LIBRARY
PROJECT LOCATION: 11 IMMOKALEE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: SQ.FT
DEPARTMENT~ LIBRARY 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 23,426
ORGANIZATION: IMMOKALEE BP~N¢~ Size of This Project: 3,000
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
'Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
Forecast
'1991-92 2 2
30 30
4 284 288
'Total 36 284 35 355
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 95/96
Cost per Unit $
Number. of Units 50
Gross Cost $ 3~, 366 (years)
Less User Revenue - 4,000
Net Impact $ 29,366
.... . CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ROJECT SUMmArY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUBLIC LIBRARY PROJECT # 506
PROJECT NAME: GOLDEN GATE BRANCH LIBRARY ADDITION
DESCRIPTION: ~DDITION TO AN EXISTING BRANCH LIBRARY
PROJECT LOCATION: 3 GOLDEN GATE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: SQ. FT
DEPARTMENT: LIDRARY 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 23,426
ORGANIZATION: ~OLDEN GATE BRANCH Size. of This Project: 3,000
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
/ Year .~oDstruct~o~ ~and co~stuuction other Total
Prior
',.1990-91 25 25
~'Forecast
~1-92 17 305 40 362
Year
': 1992-93
h 1994-95
,.~. Total 42 305 40 387
.~ ~. IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
.-:' LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact ..93~94
'.. Cost per unit $
'""' Number of Units 50
Gross Cost $ 4,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 1,000
Net Impact $ 3,000
~"~ .,. CAPITAL IMPROVEM~N? ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
· PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= PUBLIC LIBRARY PROJECT # 507*
PROJECT NAME= VINEYARDS BRANCH LIBRARy
DESCRIPTIONs 10,000 SQ. FT. BRANCH LIBRARY
PROJECT LOCATION= 9 URBAN ESTATES
($) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DMSIONS PUBbIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement= $O.FT
DEPARTMENTs LIBRARY 1992-96 Total'Deficiency= 23.426
· ORGANIZATIONS VINEYARDS BRANCH Size of This Projects lQ,000
FINANCIAL SUMF~tRY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
·ear Cons~ructio~ Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
~Forecast
1991-92
'et Year
-93
.1993-94
i,~? ~ 1994-95 50 50
¥i.:1995-96 686 90 776
!'[,'Future
Total 50 686 90 826
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 96/97
' Cost per Unit
Number of Units 50
GROSS Cost $ 105,912 (years)
Less User Revenue * - 13.250
Net Impact $ 9~,662
· State Aid to Libraries
· This project may be eliminated if negotiations with Golden Gate
Estates Association regarding operation of a facility to be provided
to the County are successful.
~':' .. C~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
~:.: Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
RECONCILIATION OF PROJECTS TO 1992-96 DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT: LIBRARY DIVISION: pUBLIC SERVICES
TXPI OF PUBLIC FACILITY: bIBRARY BOOK COLL~CTION
~.?-- OERVICR
~'~ AIt~A~ County-wide _~_ or Planning District or Special Area
(X) (~) (X)
~' ~992-96 DEFICIENCY~ 40,561 BOOKS
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
size o~
· . ]l];]]ll~.q~ Pro4 eot Name Pro4ec~ Total
550 ' Library Book Collection 45,579 45,579
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: LIBRARy BOOK STOCK PROJECT # ~50
PROJECT NAME: LIBRARY BOOK COLLECTION
DESCRIPTIONS BUDGET FOR LIBRARY BOO~S
PROJECT LOCATION: COUNTY-WIDE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DI"VISION~ PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: BOOKS
DEP;%RTMENT~ LIBRAry 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 40,561
ORGANIZATION: HO AND ADMIN. size of This Project: 4~,579
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
..~ ~ Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 313 313
~i Forecast
i,. ~.1991-92 290 290
~<Budget Year
~. 1992-93 320 320
1993-94 340 340
IMPACT ON F~T~E OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED ~SEFUL
LIFE OF F~CILITY
P~rst Year of Impaot N/A
'~.' Less User Revenue -
:: . Net Impaot $
.. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
~ Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~EC0}ICILIATION OF PROJECT~ TO 1992-06 DEFICIENCy
DEPARTMENT: QFFICE OF CAPITAL DIVISION: cOUNTY MANAGER
PROJECTS MANAGEMENT
T~PB OP PUBLIC FACILITY: GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
]LREA: County-wide ~ .. or Planning District or Special Area
(x) (~) (x)
1992-96 DEFICiE~ICY: 81. 281 SO. FT,
(quantity) (unit of measurement)
s~ze of
~ Pro4ect Name Profiect Total
601 Health and Services Building 25,000 25,000
604 Building "W" Expansion 15,000 40,000
,.?,~:.~:.
,
I]'47,,,,?,'3U4
.. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
'~/ PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS PROJECT ~ 601
PROJECT NAHE~ HEALTH AND SERVICES BUILDING
DESCRIPTION: 75,000 SQ. FT. HEALTH AND PUBLIC SERVICES FACILITy
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 EAST NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~QUNTY MANAGER Unit of Measurement: SO.FT
'?i}i"' DEPARTMENT: OFFICE OF CAPITAL 1992-96 Total Deficiency: __~
, ORGANIZATION: Size of This Projects 25,000
~.~:., FINANCIAL ,S~Y ($ IN
'" Year Construction Lan~ Construct~og Other Total
.~ Prio~ 249 13 6,959 49 7,270
7 '1990~91 33 1,459 628 2,120
.~ FOrecast
1991-92 66 596 662
Budget Year
1993-94
1994-95
';. 1995-96
Total 348 1~ 9,014 677 10,052
. IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY.
First Year of Impact 90/91
Cost per Unit " $ 2,43
Nu/gber of Units 75.000 50
Gross Cost $ 182, g50 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
].:: '. Net Impact $ 182.2~0
·
' CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
" Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT S~~ FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS PROJECT # 604
PROJECT NAME= BUILDING W EXPANSION
DESCRIPTION= WAREHOUSE ADDITION INCLUDING DAY CARE FACILITY
PROJECT LOCATION= 4 ~:AST NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DI~ISION= CouNTY MANAGER Unit of Measurement: SQ.FT
DEPARTMENT= QFFICE OF CAPITAL 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 81.281
~ROJECTS MANAGEMENT
ORGANIZATION= Size of This Project: 15,000
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year Cgnstruction Land gonstruction Other Total
~t~e
.Total 100 2,000 2,100
I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING ~UD~ETS ESTI~TED ~SEFOL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 93~94
Cost per Unit $ ~.43
~er of Units 15,000 50
Gross Cost $ 36,450 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 36,4~0
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Ugdate & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS PROJECT # 605
PROJECT NAME: AGRICULTURE CENTER
DES~IPTION: NEW STRUCTURE TO HOUSE AGRICULTURE ACTIVITIES
PROJECT LOCATIONs ~ IMMOKALEE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: COUNTY MANAGER Unit of Measurement: SQ.FT
DEPARTMENT: OFFICE OF CAPITAL 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 81,281
PROJECTS MANAGEMENT
ORO~NIZATION~ ~DMIF, Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Lan~ Construct~o~ Other Total
~, Pr~or 62 35 3 100
1990-91 36 855 891
Forecast
1991-92 10 221 231
Budget Year
· 1994_95
.-1995-96
:Future
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ 2.43
Number of Units 12,000 50
Oross Cost $ 29.~6Q (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 29,160
0'47 307
PAJI~ AND I~l~l~?l~ll CAPITAL F~LZTZ~
~IT~
~TI~ F~ILITIES F~ILZTIES
~ ~ AT SI~ITA IN CIE
~ ~,~ ~ 1,19~,~
91-~ 1~,~ ~,611,~ ~,&~,~ 19,~,~ (2,~&,~) S107
~.~ 215,~ ~,~,6~ 2,21~, 1~ 35,~9,~ 9.~6,~
~-~ 245,~ ~,~,2~ 0 ~,~,3~ 7,~,~ s151 0
~-~ ~5,0~ 31,113,&16 0 ~,~,~ S,~,~ s1~5
~-~ 265,~7 ~,~,~ 0 ~,~,3~ ~,567,~ S139
~-01 2~,17& ~,5~,~ 0
F~ILITIES FACILITIES aVAI~
TI~ ~lm (~-VZDE ~) AT Sl~ IN CIE AVAZ~
0
I
~ ~9,~0 6,~,~ 18,~9,300 ~,~,3~
~. 5 ~ ~H Sl~
.
FAC~LZI'/ 1909-90 .19~91 1991-92 1I~2-tr3 ~993-9~
~ 'V~' - V~ V~ v~
~TI~C~ ~) 1~,~ 1~ 1~,~ 1~ ~,~ 215,~ ~,~ 0
:~ FI~ 2,1~,~ 2,1~,~ 2,~5,~
II~ ~1~ 1,~,~ 1,~9,~ 1,814,~ 1,~,~ 1~,~ 1,~,~ 1,~,~
. ~I~ ~~S 5~,5~ ~,~ 5~,5~ 6~,~ 6~,~ 6~,~
.
~ ~ 0 0 0 ~,~ ~,Z~ 6~,~ ~,~ O
FZ~ ~ILS 0 0 0
F~K~ FIE~S 1,~,~ 1,~,~ ~,~0,~ Z,~,~ ~,~,~ 3,~,000 ~,~,~
~TI-~ ~ER 0 0 1,4~,~ 1,453,~ 1,4~,~ 1,&53,~ 1,&~,~ 0
J~l~ T~I~ 59,~0 59,~0 ~,~ 1~,2~ I~,~0 1~,5~ ' 2~,~0
~ITI~ ~ 0 0 1,5~,~ 1,5~,~ 1,5~,~ 1,5~,~ 1,5~,~
~ ~TS 1,1~,~ 1,140,~ 1,1~,~ Z,~l,~ 2,~,~ 3,137,~ 3,5~,~ 0
T~ & FZ~ 0 0 0 0 ~1,~ ~1,~0 ~1,~
PER ~ITA V~ Sl~ S1~ SI~ S167
I
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELemENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SU~dAR¥ FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: AMPHITHEATER PROJECT # 700
PROJECT I~AME: AMPHITHEATER
DESCRIPTION: STAGE. BAND SHELL
PROJECT LOCATION: i NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~UBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement= AMPHITHEATER
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION 1991-96 Total Deficiency: 1
OROANIZATION= ADMINISTRATI0~ Size of This Project= 1
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 SO 20 100
FOrecast
1991-92
'et Year
Total so
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit -' $
l~,mher of Units 20
Gross Cost $ (years)'
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact
.. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: BICYCLE TRAILS PROJECT # 70~
-.', PROJECT NAME-' DIC¥CLB TRAILS
DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT PATHS TO SCHQOLS & PARKS WHERE APPROPRIATE
CONNECT BIKE TRAILS: (Funded in Roads Constvuct~o~
Budaet)
PROJECT LOCATION~ COUNTY-WIDE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY iMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: PUBLIC SSRVICE$ unit of Measurement: MILES
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATI0~ 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 0
ORGANIZATION~ ADMINISTRATIO~ Size of This Project: 7.8
~.' FINANCIAL SUM}~LRY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
.'~/ ~ear Construction Land Constructio2 Other Total
71991'92 ' 75 75
et Year
~ ~992193 75 75
'1993-94 75 75
~994-95
199S-96
· 'Total 225 225
{;i" IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
' First Year of Impact
,.:. Cos~ per Unit ' $
Number of Units __29__
~: ~ross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact
i".':'~ .. C~P~T~L IMPROVEmeNT ELEMENT-
~ _ Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: CQM~ITY PA~ PROJECT # 702
PROJECT NAME: ¢0MF//NITy PAR~ ~6
DESCl~IPTION: BALLFIELD$, COURTS. LANDSCAPE~ RESTROOMS. PLAY AREAS AND
PARKING LOTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 $OUT~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ]~UBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement~COF~I~NITY PARK
DEPARTMENT: ~ARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 2
'~'. ORGaNIZaTION: ADMINISTRATION S~ze of This Project:
~i~,,'. ' FI1TANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
i.< · Y.9~ Construction ~ CoDstruction Other Total
:/prior
~!:)}i1991-92 868 868
:~ ~.'~...[ Total 868 3,621 4,489
. ,~. ON FUT~E OP~TINO BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
~,~ LIFE OF FACILITY
'F~rst Year of Inpact , 93194
C~s~ per Unit $ '
~er of Units 20
Gross Cost $ 131. 600 (years)
Less User Revenue - 12 ~
Net Impact $ _ 119,600
~'~[.. . C~PIT~L IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
· ':~ ' Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT S~Y FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COMFUJNITY PARK PHASE II PROJECT # 703
' PROJECT 1TAME~ PHASE II FACILITIES INCLUDING BASEBALL & BASKETDALL
couRTs
DESCRIPTION~ C~ILDR~NS PLAYGROUNDS AND SHUFFLEBOARD .couRTS
PROJECT LOCATIO1;: 11. 1. 6. 4. & 3 IF/~OKALEE. NORTH NAPLES. MARCQ,.
EAST NAPbES, GOLDEN GATE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: $/C~pITA
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
· ORGANIZATION: ADMINISTRATION Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMH~Y ($ IN THOUSANDS)
.i'il)J~ [ ' Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
'"', Prior 32 967 999
., '. 1990--91 36 1,498 60 1,594
st
L991--92 96 1~264 90 1,450
:1992-93 284 2,269 112 2,665
J,:': 1993-94 106 1,206 84 1,396
1994--95
,~w 1995-96
Future
../, Total 554 7,204 346 8,104
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 90/91
. ~. Cost per unit $
Number of Un,ts 20
Gross Cost $ 301,~00 ' (years)
Less User Revenue' - 0,,.
'~' Net Impact $ 301,~00
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COMMUNITY SWIPING POOL PROJECT # 704
PROJECT NAME: ¢OM/4%TNITY SWIMMING pO0$
DESCRIPTIONS ~5 METER POOL. CHANGING ROOMS, KIDDY POOL
PROJECT LOCATION: 11 IMMOKALEE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AaENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: COM~Z3NITy POOL
DEPARTMENTs PARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ 1
ORQANIZATION: ADMINISTRATIO~ Size of This Project: i
FINANCIAL sure.mY ($ I~ TaOUS~NDS)
Pre-
~ Construct~o~ Land Constru=t~on 0t~er Toga1
"1990_91
Forecast
et Year
1992-93 26 643 27 696
1993-94
'~:'~FUture
Total 26 643 27 696
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDQETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 9~/94
Cost per Unit " $
Number o~ Units 20
~ross Cost $ 169.000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 10.~50
Net Impact $ 158.750
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ~LE~ENT
Third Allnual Update & A~endment (1991)
PROJECT SU~RY FoRM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: MULTI PURPOSE FACILITY PROJECT # 70~
PROJECT NAME: 'MULTI PURPOSE FACILITY
DESCRIPTION: 'BASKETBALL cOuRT. CLASS ROOMS. LOCKER ROOMS. STATE
AEROBICS. RESTROOMS
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 EAST NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
:!. : RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
'~:' DIVISION: PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: MULTI P~POSE
..:,:,. DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Deficienoy: 1
ORGANIZATION: ADMIN. Size of This Project:
~:. FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
~'~.~ ' Pre-
!:'. Year Construction Land COgStrUcti0~ Other
, Prior
.,.,'. 1990-91
)'~> Forecast
:i991-92 56 1,370 27 1,453
Year
'1'992-93
i~';:;':;~i 1993-94
'1994-95
:1995-96
!~': ~ Total 56 1,370 27 1,453
~::.. IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL'
;". LIFE OF FACILITY
%.: F~rst Year of Impa=t 92/93
:~:*~: Cost per Unit $
,..~(~ .... Number of Units 2'0
: · Gross Cost $ 94.900 (years)
Less User Revenue - 4, $00
Net Impa=t $ 90~400
:?
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ~LEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT suMMARY ¥0RM
TYPB OF PUBLIC FACILITY= JOGGING TRAILS PROJECT # 706
PROJECT NAME= JOGGING TRAILS
DESCl~IPTION: JOGGING TRAILS
PROJECT LOCATION=
(#) (Planning District Name)
REBPONSIBLE AaENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: ~ILES
DEPARTMENT= PARKS & RECREATIQ~ 1992-96 Total Deficiency= 3
ORaANIZATION: ADMINISTRATION Size of This Project: 3
· FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
i:.i~ ]. Year Construction Land gonstruot~o~ Other Total
Prior
· :.Forec~'st
:i991-92
Year
' 19'93-94 2 24 2 28
~1994-95
' 1995-96
'Future
~.?., Total 6 72 8 86
: IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
'" LIFE OF FACILITY
::'" First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit
Number of Units
~r6ss Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact
~PIT~L IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third ~nnual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COMPETITIVE SWIMMING POOL PROJECT # 708
PROJECT NME: _COMPETITIVE SWIMMING pOOL
DESCRIPTION: 25 METER POOL. DECK. DIVING AREA. LOCKER ROOM,
GRANDSTANDS. RESTROOMS. PLAY AREAS
PROJECT LOCATION: 3 GOLDEN GATE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: COMPETITIVE
POOL
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency~
ORGANIZATION: AD}[INISTRATION Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
"~ii:~':.i ~ ~ Year Construct~o2 Land construction Other Total
'1990-91
Forecast
'.:i 1991-92 32 1,368 100 1,500
'et Year
:~ '1992-93
11994-95
Total 32 1,368 100 1,500
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units
Gross Cost $ 3§~,500 (years)
Less User Revenue - 60,000
Net Impact $ 291. 500
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= TRACK AND FIELD FACILITY PROJECT # 709
PROJECT NAME: TRACK AND FIELD FACILITY
DESCRIPTION: FULL SIZE TRACK, BASIC TRACK AND FIELD FACILITY
PROJECT LOCATION: ) GOLDEN GATE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~UBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: TRAC~ AND
FIELD
DEPARTMENT: PARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 1
ORGANIZATION: ADMINISTRATION size of This Project: i
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructio~ Land construction .ot~er ~otal
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
~ 1991-92
'-..-'"'Budget Year
1993-94 18~ 15 204
1994-95
'1995-96
Future
Total 17 189 15 221
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of impact 94~95
Cost per Unit
Number of Units 20
~ross Cost $ 8000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 0
Net Impact $ 8000
ii~~ ... CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ~LEMENT
Third Annual Update & ]%~endment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= DO%T RAMPS PROJECT # 710
PROJECT NAME= BOAT LANES
DESCRIPTION= BOAT LANES. PARKING, FISH CLEANING TABLE, RESTROOM$.
PICNIC AREA. LANDSCAPING, TOT LOT
PROJECT LOCATION= VARIOUS
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION= PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement= LANES
DEP3%RTMENT= PARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Defiolenoy: 12
OROANIZATION= ADMI~, Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMKARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Xmar Construction Land Construction 93J Le~ Total
50 14 3 67
1990-91 196 10 206
' Forecast
[1991-92 51 748 799
~ "/Budget Year
'.1992-93 40 212 604 856
1993-94 40 106 310 456
1994-95 40 106 310 456
· Total 417 4 4 8 2,3 9 9 2, S 4 6
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 20
GROSS Cost $ (years)
Loss User Revenue -.
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVeMEnT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
..!~ TYPE OY PUBLIC FACILITY: COMMUNITY PARK PROJECT # 71!
PROJECT hAME: CQF/~JNITY PARK #7
DESCRIPTION: COMMUNITY PARK WITH BALLFIELDS. TOT LOTS.. COURTS.
LANDSCAPING. FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS, RACOUETBALL COURTS
PROJECT LOCATION: 9 ~DAN ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
ii.. RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
i!. DIVISIONs · PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: COMMUNITY PARK
~[,'~i DEPARTMENT. PARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
i'~ OROANIV. ATION: ADMINISTRATION Size of This Project: 1
mli,.!.) FINANCIAL SUMMARY ,$ IN THOUSANDS)
m,
I'~ Year Constructio~ Land Constructio2 Other ,Total
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
~'~?' LIFE OF FACILITY
~'[":' First Year of Impact 93/94
co.t per Unit $
· .: ~,--e= of units ~ __ 20
~ oross cost $ 131. 600 (years)
· Less User Revenue - 12,000
m: Net Impact $ 119,600
,.'~'. CRPITAL IMPROVEMEN~ ~LEMENT
"~' " Third Annual Update & ~mendment (1991)
R0 Ec? sUKMAuY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: COMMUNITY PA~ PROJECT # 71~
PROJECT N~ME: C0M/4~NITY PARK #8
DESCRIPTIONs INCLUDES BALLFIELDS. COURTS. LANDSCAPING. REST ROOMS
· ~ROJECT LOCATIONt TO BE DETERMINED
(#1 (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs PUBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: COM~u~ITY PARK
DEPARTMENTs PARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ 2
ORgaNIZATION: ADMINISTRATION Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
'Year ~onstruct~o~ Land Construction Other Total
..~!Forecast
.1991-92
Year
"1993-94 868 868
'1994-95 2,2a4 2,214
. Future
"Total 868 3,621 4,489
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY'
First Year of Impact 9~/94
Cost per Unit .'
Number of Units 20
~ross Cost $ 1~1, ~00 (years)
Less User Revenue - 1~,
Net Impact $ 119. 600
CAPITAl, IMPROVEMENT ~LEHENT
:~!))~ " Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~' ~RO~ZCT SUMMARy
TYPE OF PUBLIC F~%CILITY: REGIONAL PARKS FACILITIES PROJECT # 7%3
PROJECT NAME: BAREFOOT BEACH PARKING LOT AND NATURE TRAIL
DESCRIPTION: BAREFOOT BEACH PARKING LOT AND NATURE TRAIL
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs ~UBLIC SERVICES Unit of Measurement: PARKING LOT &
NATUR~ TRAIL,
DEPARTMENTs PARKS & RECREATION 1992-96 Total Defioiencys
OROANIZATION: ~DMINISTRATION Size of This Projects 1
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
~ . , Construction Lan~ construct$0n Other Total
Forecast
.:i/:: 1991-92 34 166 200
.'~:.Budget Year
..i!994'95
~5-96
FUture
Total 34 166 200
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATINO BUD~ETS ESTI~TED UBEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact N/A
Cost per Unit
~mr of Units- 20
~ross Cost $ (years)
Less Use= Revenue -
Net Impact $
POTAILE MMIIt Wt~Elf* .'
I.~ Of ~ltVlC~ WTAIOAI~: I~/~ITA ~ 21X ~ID~TI~
~TI~ ~ ~ ~ ~/ V~
FI~ ~ ~I~ ~ AVAI ~LE (DEFICI~) (~) AT
~*~ ~,~ 19.0 12.0 C?.O) (12,~,510)
0
~-91 ~,~ ~.3 4.3 16.3 (4.0)
91-~ ~,~6 21.6 13.2 ~.5 7.9
~-~ ~,~ ~.0 (2.5) 27.0 4.0
93-~ ~,~ - 24.3 1.5 2B.5 4.2 7,~,5~
~-~ _ 1~,6~ ~.6 4.0 32.5 6.9
~-~ ~10,~ 27.0 0.0 32.5 5.5 10,~,615
96-97 115,521 28.~ 0.0 ~2.5 4.2
97-~ 1~,~0 ~.6 0.0' 32.5 2.9
98-~ 1~,~ 31.0 0.0 32.5 1.5 2,~0,~
~-~ 1~I,~5 32.3 0.0 32.5 0.2
00-01 1~,2~ 33.6 0.0 ~2.5 (1.~) (2,017,~)
~ RE~IR~ ~ AVAI ~LE (OEFICIEH~) (~) AT 0
PRESENT TO
9/~0~ ~,~ ~.3 4.3 16.3 C4.0)
5 v~n
~0~-9~ ~, ~ 6.7 ~6.2 16.2' 9.5 ~,~,~5
~ 5-YR ~H ~,150 6.6 0.0 0.0 (~.~)
10~-9/00 1~,~ ~.6 20.5 32.5 C1.1) C2,017,3~)
~EFIHITI~
Trea~c pt~t ~i~ ~m avait~te thirty(30) ~y ~t~te ~ttr ~torag. pt~ ~ifer
A t~ra~ ~mit ~s ~i~ f~ ~e Flor~ O~r~ of ~tai R~iat~
to i~rea.e the ~t~ pi~ t~a~t ~i~ ~ ~ f~ a ~ri~ of ~ (2) ~ars.
Th~, in i~-~, a t~a ~ ~ait~te ~s ~ars ~ to ~e ~i~tim of the
t~ra~ ~mit.
~PITAL IMPROVE~EN~ ~LEMENT.
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~BOJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITYs WATER TRANSMISSIO~ SYSTEM PROJECT # ~
PROJECT NA)IE: CARICA ROAD STORAGE T~NKS AND PUMP STATION
DESCRIPTIONs RENOVATION OF EXISTING 5 MS TANK AND CONSTRUCTION OF 1
NEW 5 MGD TANK AND REpUMP STATION
PROJECT LOCATIONs 1 NQRTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
P~PON8IBLB AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: MGD
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficienc~: 10.7
ORGANIZATION: WATER Size .of Th~s Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year construct~o~ Land Construct~og other Total
. Prior 340 .1,700 2,040
1,700 1,700
Forecast
i~./... 1991-92
. ~
Total 340 3,400 3,740
LIFE OF FACILITY
FirSt Year of Impa~t 90[91
Cost p~r Unit $
~er of units 20
~ross cost $ 114,377 (years)
Less user Revenue - 114,377
Net Impa~t
CAPITAI, I~PROVEME~ ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~mendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
· TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 813.
PROJECT NAME: 12" WATER MAIN - RADIO B0~D - COUNTRYSIDE. TO F0XFIR~
DESCRIPTIONs ~, 430 L- F. OF ~" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: _.~ GOLDEN G~TE
(#) (Planning District Name)
~ RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
~ii~/''' ' DMSION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/~'
i/..~'~ . DEPARTMENT~ ADMINISTP~ATIO~ 1~9Z-~6 Total Deficienc~: N/A
~j~:i~...,. i':,OROj%)TiZATION: .WATER size of ~his Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS )
'~" Pre- '
,.!%.~Xmar Construction Lan4 g0~struct~6~ 0t~er Total
;'~or
,
',:! ;1993.-92 17 SS 202
Year
,.. :.
'~,~; 1'994-95
Future .',
TOtal 17 05 102%:!'
IMPACT ON FUTUR~ OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED ~EFUL?.
LIFE OF FACILITY.:.
First Year of Impact 9Q~9~ .~:
Cost per Unit " $ ,49~
~,mh.er of units ~,4~0 20
. ~ross cost $ 1,198 (years)
..,Less User Revenue - 1,198
Not Impact
ffi 326
C~PIT~L IMPROVEME~{T ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMI$S~0N SYSTEM . PROJECT # 819
PROJECT N~MEI 20" WATER MAIN. IMMOKALEE ROAD - AIRPORT ROAD TO
WILLOUGHBY ACRES
DESCRIPTION1 2.000 L.F, OF 12" WATER MAIN
PROJEC~ LOCATION= i NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DEPARTMENT~ ~%DMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency= N/A
OROANIZ~TION~ W~TER Size of This ProJsct~ N/A
FINANCIAL SU14NARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year ~onstruction L&nd Construction Other ]:ota:~
i~u~get Year
1992-93
Total 13 69 82
First Year cE Impact 90/91
Cost per Unit $ ,493
Number of Units 2,000 20
~ross Cost $ 986 (years)
Less User Revenue - 986
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 82Q
PROJECT N~ME: 20" WATER MAIN - IMMOKALEE ROAD - WILLOUGHBY ACRES
TO LIVINGSTON ~0~D E~TENSION
DESCRIPTION: '3,500 L.F, OF 16" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District. Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs ~TILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/~
i?,~:.i]..,~D~PARTMENT~ ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total D~ficiency= N/A.:
OR~ANIZATION~ WATER size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land co~structio~ ot~er Tote%
i!. Prior 34 169 203
~" 1990-91
?Forecast
1991-91
et Year
!'.' 1993-~4
~:~. ::1994_95
1995-96
. Future
~ ',~ ~' .Total 34 169 203
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 90~91
Cost per Unit $ ,493
Number of Units 3,500 20
~ross Cost $ 1,725 (years.) ,.
Less User Revenue - 1,725
Net Impact $
3'28
C~PITAL IMPR0VEME~T ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 823
PROJECT NAME: .12" WATER MAIN - ON C~-951 FROM MANATEE ROAD TO CR-952
DESCRIPTIONs 23.700 L.F. OF 12" WATER MAIN ,
PROJECT LOCATIONs 6 M%~CO
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DEP~I~TMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Defioiency~ N/A
ORG~NIZATION~ WATER Size of This Project:
~ Const~ction Land Constructio~ Other Tota~ ~:.
~.~
1990-91 ~:.
Forecast
~99~-92
~::' 1992-93
'. 'A,.
I~CT ON FUT~E OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF F~CILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 90~91
Cost per Unit .' $ .493
~er of Units 23,700 20
~rOSS Cost $ 11,684 (years)
Less User Revenue - 11 ~ 684
Ne~ Impact
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 824
PROJECT NAME: 12" WATER MAIN - CR-951 TO CAPRI STORAGE TANK
DESCRIPTION: ~, 500 L-F- OF 1~" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: 6 MARCO
(#) (Planning District Name)
REBPONSIBLE ]%GENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DXVIBION~ UTILITIES Unit of. Measurements N/A
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A~
ORGANIZATION: WATER Size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SUM24ARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructio~ Lan~ construction Other Total.
Prior 17 187 204
1990-91
Forecast
'Budget Year
1993-94
1994-95
Total 17 187 204
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 90/91
Cost per Unit $ .86
~rmher of units 5,500 20
Gross Cost $ 4,730 (~ears)
Less User Revenue - 4~730
Net Impact $
'' CAPITRL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
'?"" " Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
pROJECT S~MMARy FOR~
T~PZ OF PUBLIC FACILITY= WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 826
PROJECT 1TAME: 12" WATER MAIN. 6th STREET - 91st AVENUE TO l~%th AVENUE
DESCRZPTIONz G,GO0 L.F. OF 12" WATER
PROJECT LOCATION: I NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIEI~CY
DIVISION, UTILITIES Unit of Measurement:
DEPARTMENT~ ADMINISTRATIQN 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: WATER Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIALpre_ SUHMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year construction Lan4 Construction ..Othe~ Tota%
: Pr.'l. or 20 225. 245
~, 1991-92
~': ' Budget Year
if~:i:~ .
I~!i' 1992-93
1993-94
Total 20 225 245
I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF F~CILITY
F~S~ Year of Impact 9Q/9~
Cost per Unit " $ ,493
~er of Units 6,600 20
~ross Cost $ 3.254 (years)
Less User Revenue - 3.2~4
Net Impact $
C~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~mendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 827
PROJECT NAME= 16" WATER MAIN. GULFSHORE DRIVE - VANDERBILT B~ACH ROAD
AND U.$, 41 TO 111th STREET IN NAPLES PARK
D~S~RIPTION= 13.200 L,F. OF 16" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
P~SPONSIBLE /%OENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DMSlON= UTILITIES Unit of Measurement:
DEPARTMENT= ~DMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiencyl N/A
OR(.~kNIZATION= WATER Size of This Project=
FINANCIAL SUKMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
·ear ~ogstructto~ Lan4 Constructio .n Other Tota~
Prior 54 595 649
?~ .Forecast
et Year
1'94-95
995.-9&
Total 328 1,447 1,775 .';/'
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 9~/92 .
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 13, ~O0 20
Gross Cost $ ~, ~08 (years)
Less User Revenue - 6,508
Net Impa~t $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT EnEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT # 829
PROJECT NAME: ~ORTH COUNTY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
DESCRIPTION: 20 MGD MEMBRANE SOFTENING PLANT DESIGNED,. BUILT 12 MGD
AT PRESENT + 0.2 ADDITIONAL STORAGE
PROJECT LOCATION: 8 RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name) ,
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION= %7~ILITIES Unit of Measurement: MGD
DEPARTMENT: ~DMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 10.7.
ORGANIZATION= WATER size of This Project: ~.~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ¢o~struction Lan~ .Construct~o~ OtheK Tota~
Prior 757 8,328 9,085
1990-91 2,200 6,600 8,800
Forecast
1992-93
.'.~:1994-95 ·
'?.Future
}i:'. Total 2,957 14,928 17,885
:-:. ·
· II~ACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTII, h~TED USEFUL:
~irst Year of Impa~t 9~/92
Cost per Unit $
~,mher of Units 20
Gross Cost $ 732,900 (years)
Less User Revenue - 732,900
Not Impact
ffi 0'47 3'33
C;%PIT]%L IMPROVEME~7~ ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amenament (1991)
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 831
PROJECT NIiMEI 24" WATER MAIN - VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD TO IMMOKALEE ROAD
(MAST~q{ PLAN PROJECT No. 216)
DESCRIPTIONI 10.560 L.F. OF 24" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: $ RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIE~ Unit of Measurement:
DEP~iRTMENTI ADMINISTRATIO~ 1992-96 Total Defioienoyl N/A
ORGItNI=ATION: WATER Size of This ProJeot: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ¢$ IN Tt{0USANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructio~ Land Construct~0B Other To,al
'.·
..,1991-92
,~.~;,:' 19~2-93 ..
1993-94
-1995 96
~tura
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED ~SEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
P~rat Year of Impact ., 9~/92
Cost ~or Unit $ ,4~
~her of Units 10.$~O 20
~ross Cost $ ~,206 (years)
Less User Revenue - 5.206
Net Impaot
3'34
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~mendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM . PROJECT # 832
PROJECT NAME: 24" WATER MAIN - IMMOKALEE ROAD - cR-951 TO WOQD~AND$
pUD (MASTER PLAN PROJECT NO. 214)
DESCRIPTION: 7.920 L.F. OF 24" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: $ RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/~
-'DZPARTMENTz ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORaANIZATION: WATER Size of This Project= N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
'Year Constru0tio~ Land Constructio~ 0then Total
i;..1990-91 112 558 670
~; Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
.!.::' 11992-93
1993-94
'~'. Tot 1 112 558 670
.
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ .493
~er of Units 7,920 20
Gross Cost $ $,905 (years)
Less User Revenue - 3
Net Impact
fl47 335
CRPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TY~E OF PUBLIC FACILITY: W~TER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 833
PROJECT ITAME~ ~O" WATER MAIN. IMMOKAL~ ~0~D - WOODLANDS PUD TO OUAIL
CREEK PUD (MASTER PLAN PROJECT NO.
DESCRIPTION: 5.280 L.F. OF ~0" WATER MAIN
pROJEcT LOCATION: $ RURA~ ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DMSION~ ~ILITIES Unit of Measurement~ N/A
DEP~RTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Defi=ienoy: N/A
OR~IZATION: WAT~ Size of This Project:
~ Con,t~ction Land Construction Other Total
Forecas~
:!993-94
'~;~:~..'.":' -
~:..~'.
Tota 1 6 2 3 0 8 3 7 0
I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of 'Impact 9~/92
Cost per Unit $ .493
~er of Units ~,~80 . ~0
Gross Cost $ 2,603 (years)
Less User Revenue - ~,~03
Net Impact $
l~-,., '-. Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT StDD~RY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 834
PROJECT I~AME: ~6" WATER MAIN - OUAIL CREE~ pUD - IF2~OKALEE ROAD TO
WATER TANK [MASTER PLAN PROJECT NO. 211)
DESCRIPTION: ~.920 L.F. OF 16" WATER MAIN ..
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITI~ . Unit of Measurement:
4:,~: .~..'.DEPARTMENTI ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORQ]tNI~.~TIONI WATER Size of This Project: N/A
Pre-
~::~'~r: ' ~ ggnst~ction ~ Constructio~ ~
.%.. '.
: ... ;
~'?":'~, 1990-91~ 75 375 450 "
:.
,~, 1993-94
Total 75 375 450
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
F~rst Year of Impact 91/9~ LIFE OF FACILITY
Cost par Unit $ ,493
~er of Units 7,920
~=oss Cost $ 3,905 (years)
Less User Revenue - 3.90~
Net Impact
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ..ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~mendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= WATER TRAN$~I$$ION...S¥ST~M PROJECT # 835
PROJECT NAME= 20" WATER MAIN. IMMOKALEE ROAD - QUAIL CREEK PUD TO OAKS
BLVD. (MASTER PLAN PROJECT NO. 202}
DESCRIPTION= 2f640 L.F. OF 20" WATER MAIN.
PROJECT LOCATION= 8.& 10 RURAL EST~TES~ CORKSCREW (#) $ (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
'~ DIVISION= UTILITIES Unit of Measurement=
· DEPARTMENT= ADMINISTRATION 19~2-96 Total D~ficiency~
OR~ANIZATION~ WATER Size of This Project=
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constru~t~o~ Lan4 C0~struct~0~ other To ~a~
Forecast
1994-95
~95-96
Total 25 158 183
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE O~ FACILITY
First Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ .493
Number of Units 2,640 20
~ross Cost $ ~,302 (years)
Less User Revenue - ~,302
Net Impact $
· ,. _ .. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third ;tnnual Update & Amendment (1991)
pROJEC~ SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 836
PROJECT NAME: ~0" WATER MAIN. IMMOKALEE ROAD - OAKS BLVD, TO
LIVINGSTON ROAD EXTENSION (MASTER PLAN PROJECT NO. 184)
DESCRIPTION= ~.280 L.F, OF 20" WATER MAIN
.PROJECT LOCATION= $ RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
· DIVISION= UTILITIES Unit of Measurement= ~/A
· ~;':i'.: ' D~P]%RTMENT= ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
:}~;i OR~%NIZATION= .WATER Size of This. Project: N/A
~? :. FINANCIAL SU](MARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
'''" 3r..~ CO~str~ct~o~ Land Constructiog Othe~ Tota~
~.Prior
.990-91 46 317 363
'ecast ':',
1991-92
Year
'"i'.i992_93
1993-94
· ~" ~ Future
Total 46 317 363
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED ~SEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 91/92
· Cost per Unit $ · 493
~,~her of Units 5, ~0 20
Gross Cost · $ ' 2,603 (years)
Less User Revenue - 2,603
Net Impact
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~mendment (1991)
PROJECT S~Y FORI~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 837.
PROJECT N~ME: 16" WATER MAIN. LIVINGSTON ROAD EXTENSION - IMMOKALEE
ROAD TO OLD 41 (MASTER pLAN PROJECT NO. 169,170,171,255)
DES(IRIPTION~ 23,600 L-F. OF 16" WATER MA~N
PRO~ECT LOCATION: 1 ~QBT~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT: ~DMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Defioiency~ N/%
ORGANIZATION= WATER size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~ Construction Land Construct~o~ Other T0ta%
'Prior '
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impaot 91/9~
Cost per Unit " $ ,493
]~-~her of Units 23,600 ~0
~ross Cost $ 11,635 (years)
Less User Revenue - 1%, 635
Net Impaot $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third ~nnual Update & Amendment (1991)
pROJECT SUMMARY FO~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 839
PROJECT N~ME: ~6" WATER FLAIN. OLD 41 - bIVINGSTON ROAD TO US 41/OLD 41
ELEVATED STORAGE TANK CMASTER PLAN PROJECT NO, ~67)
DESCRIPTION: 1.800 L,F. OF ~6" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: I NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~TILITIES Unit of Measurement:
DEP~RTMENT~ ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORG]LNI~ATION~ WATER Size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SU~Y ($ IN THOUS~.NDS)
Pre-
]~ Co~struction Land C0~St~Uction Ot:~:~ Total
~CT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL.
LIFE OF F~CILITY
First Year of Impact 91/9~
Cost per unit $
~er of Units 1.$00
Gross Cost $ $87 (years)
Less User Revenue - 887
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER T~U%NSMISSION FACILITY PROJECT # 84Q
PROJECT Nl%ME: 16" WATER MAIN, pINE RIDGE ROAD - LIVINGSTON ROAD TO
VINEYARDS PUD (MASTER PLAN PROJECT NOS. 302,303)
DESCRIPTION= 7,920 L.F. OF 16" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ & 8 C~NTRAL NAPLES; RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DMSION= ~ILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/~ .
DEPARTMENT: ~DMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
ORG]tNIZATION= W~TER Size of This Project: N/A /f
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN TH6USANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other ~ota~
1990-91 70 70
Forecast
'1991-92 640 640
Budget Year
1992-93 '~'
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 70 640 710
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL.,.:'
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $ .493
Number of Units 7,920 20
Gross Cost $ 3,905 (years)
Less User Revenue - ~,905
Net Impact $
C~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~mendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 842
PROJECT N]~ME= 5 MG GROUND STORAGE TANKS AND PU~PING FACILITIES AT
GOLLIER DRI (MASTER PLAN PROJECT NO. GTS-4. PS-5}
DESCRIPTION:
PROJECT LOCATION: 4 EAST NAPLES
(#) (Planning Distric'= Name)
./,.~i. RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
:" DI"~ZSION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement=
i,[!: DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 10.7
~ ORGANIZ]%TION: WATER Size of This Project=
· FINANCIAL SUMMARY ( $ IN THOUSANDS)
:,'ii. Pre-
· ~ f... ~ear Construction Lan~ .Co~st~uct~O~ Other Total
'~' '~ Prior
~?~:1991 92 32.5 325
'
~,~, . 1992-93
~ ~".;:
i~;:' "1994__95
i~,.~ -.
.....'~;:, ~' ~otal 325 3,000 3,325
' Zirst Year o~ Impact 92/93
cost par ~nit
. ~er of units 20
G=oss Cost $ ~7,~77 (years)
Less User Revenue - $7 ~ 377
Nit Impact $
343'
,~.t~
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third ~nnual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 843
PROJECT I~AME= 16" WATER MAIN. PINE RIDGE ROAD - J & C INDUSTRIAL PAP~K
TO AIRPORT ROAD
DESCRIPTION= 8.000 L,F. OF 16" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION= 1 ~ORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DMSION~ UTILITIES Unit of Measurement= N/A
DEP~RTMENT: ~DMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
OR~LNZ~ATION~ ~ATER Si~e of This ProJsotl
N/A
FIN~tNCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUBANDB)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior 105 655 760
Forecast
1991 92
1992-93
1993-94
:~.
1995_96
~t~e
LIFE OF F~CILITY
F~rSt Year of Impact 9Q/9~
Cost per unit $ ,49~
~er of Units $,000 20
~ross Cost $ ~, 944 (years)
Less ~.er Revenue - 3,~44
Net Impact
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT sUHMAR~ FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSIQN SYSTEM PROJECT # 846
PROJECT NAME= ~2" WATER MAIN. US 4~ - VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD TO
PELICAN BAY ENTRANCE (MASTER PLAN PROJECT NO. 161)
DESCRIPTION: 6,000 L,F. OF 12" WATER MA~ ,
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit Of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT= ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency= N/A
ORGANIZATION= WATER Size of This Project= N/A
FIN~CI~ S~Y ($ IN THOUS~S)
Pre-
~ Construc~o~ Lan~ Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
;:~ Forecast
' 1991-92
.Budget Year
1992-93 · 19 19
1993-94 205 205
~ 1994-95
~ture
Total 19 205 224
I~ACT ON FUTURE OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
Pirst Year of Impact 94/95
Cost per Unit $ ~493
~er of Units . 6,000 20
Gross Cost $ 2,958 (years)
Less User Revenue - 2,958
Net Impact
.. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 347
PROJECT NAME: 20" WATER MAIN, IMMOKALEE ROAD - AIRPORT ROAD TO US 41
(MASTER PLAN PROJECT NO, 175~
DESCRIPTION: 10,560 L.F. OF 20" WATER ~(AIN
~ROJECT LOCATION= 1 NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION= 'UTILITIES Unit of Measurement= N;A
DEPARTMENT= ADMINISTRATIQ~ 1992-96 Total Deficiency= N/A
ORGANIZATION= WATER Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUHMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Lan4 Constructio~ Other Total
Prior
1990--91 74 633 707
=..". Forecast
"'1991-92
Budget Year
19.92-93
1993-94
./ 1994-95
~: 2995-96
~t~ce
Total ?4 633 707
~.~ IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY:.
F~rst Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per unit
Number of Units 1O,~0
Gross COSt $ ~,~06 (years)
Less ~ser Revenue - ~,206
Net Impa~t
CAPIT~t. IMPR0VE~ENT ~-LEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~en~ent (1991)
PROJECT S~~ FO~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # .848
PROJECT NAME: ~" WATER MAIN. US 41 - PELICAN ,DAY ENTRANCE TO PINE
RIDGE ROAD (WATER MASTER PLAN NO. 191}
DEBCI~ZPTIONI 8.300 L.F. OF 12" WATE~ ~AIN
PROJECT LOCATION= I NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DI~ISION~ UTILITIES Unit of Measurement= N/A
~'~ t~ ~' i~ ' DEPARTMENT I ADMINISTRATION 1~92-96 Total
OR~J~NIZATION= WATER Size of This
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ iN THOUSANDS)
Constructi~ Land ~0~struct~o~ Other Tctal
Forecast
]~udget Year
~993-94 26 26
Total 26 2 ~ 3
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TINO BUDGET~ EBTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF F~CILITY
F~rS~ Year o~ Impact 95/96
Cost par ~nit $ .493
~er of Units 8,300 20
O=oss cost S 4. 092
Less User Revenue - 4,092
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORI~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= RAW WATER W~LLFIELD PROJECT # ~50
PROJECT 1TAME= GOLDEN GATE WELLFIE~D ~XPANSION. PHASE III (MASTER PLAN
PROJECT NO.
DESCRIPTIONz ADDITION OF 8 TO 12 NEW WELLS
PROJECT LOCATION= 8 RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
~ RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
'ii' DIVISION~ UTILITIES Unit of Measurement.-.
.~.
~'.~'~ 'D~P/~RTMENT~ ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficienc]fz N/A
:.~,', ORG~TI=ATION~ WATER Size of This Project:
';' FINANCIAL S~Y ($ I~! THOUSANDS)
..lb).::: . Year. ¢o~structio2 Dan~ .Constructio~ Other Tota~
.... ':.: Prior 140 1,535 1,675
,1990-~1 100 100
~'~:"~ ', ~ Forecast
:': i(, 1991-92 800 800
' Budget Year
,(.: 1992-93 THIS PROJECT ACCELERATED IH PLACE OF $828
(CORAL REEF)
1993--94
!.,,.~: 1994-95
~:-'~" 1995-96
.,i:~ ·
'i,. ~.i~~ Future
,,~:"'~', Total 240 2,3~5 2,575
(..... IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
~ , LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact ~/~
Cost per Unit $
.~ Number of Units 20
- Gross COSt $ (~ears)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $
CRPIT~L IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amen4ment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 852
PROJECT NAME: ~0" WATER MAIN,.GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD EXTENSION
DESCRIPTION: 10,560 L,F.
PROJECT LOCATION~ I NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DZVISION~ UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT~ ~DMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficienoy: N/A
ORGANIZATION~ WATER ~ize of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
.~., Pre-
. Year ~o~stru. ct~o~ Land C~ns~Fuctio~ OtheF Tota~
·: Prior
., 1990-91 116 580 696
'Forecast
.~i/.ii 1991-92
~:? Budget Year
".'."' 1992-93
1995-96
~ture
~c,,, Total 116 580 696
~.~ ·
IMP~T ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED ~SEFUL
LIFE OF F~OILITY
Flrm~ Year-of Impaot
Cost per Unit $ .493
~er of Units ~0,560 20
~ross Cost $ $, ~06 (years)
Less User Revenue - 5,206
Net Impaot
· : 3'49 ..
C~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ROJECT SUM~¥ FOR~
TY~E OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 853
PROJECT NAME: 16" LOOP WATER MAIN, PALM DRIVE
DESCRIPTION: 11,450' L.F. OF 16" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION= 4 ' EAST NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DMSION~ UTILITIES Unit of Measurement:
DBP~RTMENT~ ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORG]tNIZATION~ WATER Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Xear Construction Land Constr~ct~oB Other Total
Prior
Forecast
Total 112 575 687
I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TINO BUDOET8 ESTI~TED USEF~
-- LIFE OF' FACILITY·
F~NS2 Year of Impact 91/9~
Cost per Unit $
~er of units 11,45Q 20
OrOSS COSt S ~,~4~ (~ear~)
Leis UiiN Revenue - 5,645
Net Impact
';i' CAPITAL I}(PROVEMENT ELEMENT
.... _ " Third ~nnual Update ~ Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMt. fJ[RY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 854
PROJECT N]tME= 20" WATER MAIN. us 41 NORTH - IMMOKALEE ROAD TO WIGGINS
~ASS ROAD
'DESCItIPTION= 8.000 L.F. OF 20" WATER KAIN
PR(kTECT LOCATION= i NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION= ~ILITIES Unit of Measurement=
DEPARTMENT= ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency= N/A
ORG~NIZATION= WATER Size of This Project=
FI1TANCIAL SUMM~RY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~9gstruction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
,99o- ,
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93 "
1993-94
1994-95 "
1995-96
I~CT ON FUT~E OPE~TI}~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
FirSt Year o~ Impac~
Cost per ~nit $
~er of ~nits S.00O
G~O~S Cos~ $ 3, ~4 (~ears)
Less User Revenue - 3.944
Not Xmpaot $
..' CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ~L~MENT
' Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # ~55
' PROJECT I~AME~ 12" WATER MAIN. RADIO ROAD - COMMERCIAL DRIVE TO DAVIS
BOULEVARD
DESCRIPTIONS 21,120 L.F. OF 12" WATER MAIN IN CONJUNCTION WITH
CIE 15 & 16
PRO~TECT LOCATION~ $ GOLDEN GATE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVIBIONS ~TILITIES Unit of Measurement= ~/~
DEPARTMENTI ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency= N/A
ORG]tNISATION= WATER Size of This ProJect~
FII~ANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year ¢0~Struction Land ¢0nstructio~ ot~er Total
Prior
1990-91 160 822 982
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
Total 160 822 9~2
I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rs~ Xear of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ ,493
~er of Units 21.~20 20
Oross Cost $ 10.4~0 (years)
Less User Revenue - 10,4~0
No~ Impact
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUI.IJ,~.RY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITYI WATER TRANSMISSION MAIN PROJECT # 856
PROJECT NAME: ~6" WATER MAIN. LIVINGSTON ROAD - PINE RIDGE ROAD TO
WYNDEMERE
DESCRIPTION: ~,000 L.F. OF 16" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATIONS~ ~ GOLDEN GATE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N;A
DEPARTMENTs ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Defioiency: N/A
ORGANIZATIONs WATER Size of This Projects
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year constructio~ Land construction Other Total
~ Prior
:?.Future
Total 80 400 480
I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impaot 91/92
Cost per Unit $ .493
~,-her of Units 8,000 20
Gross Cost $ 3,944 (years)
Less User Revenue - 3 ~ 944
Net Impaot $
~C~PITAL ~MPROVE~ENT ELEMENT
Third Annual U~)date & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TI:?E OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM , PROJECT # 857,
P!%OJECT NAME: 16" WATER MAIN. SANTA BARBARA MAIN - DAVIS BOULEVARD TO
RADIO ROAD
DI:SCRIPTION= 5.280 L.F. OF WATER MA~N
~OJECT LOCATION= 3 GOLDEN GATE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ ~TILITIES Unit of Measurement= N/A
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION _ 1992-96 Total Deficiency=
C:~GANIZATION: WATER size of This Project: , N/~
FINANCIAL SD]~4ARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
'o~ ~nstruction Land ¢o~struct~o~ Other To~a~
Prior
1990-91 57 57
Forecast
~991-92 264 264
Total 57 264 321
I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY'
F~rst Year of Impact 9~/93
cost per Unit
N~er of ~nits 5,280 20
~roas Cost $ 2,603 (years)
Less ~ser Revenue - 2.603
Na~ Impact $
C~PITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SITMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 85~
PROJECT NAME: ~6" WATER MAIN. CR-951 - DAVIS BOULEVARD TO RATTLESNAKE-
[L%MMOCK .ROAD
DESCRIPTION: 15,840 L.F. OF WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: .UTILITIES Unit of Measurement:'
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION . 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
ORGANIZATION: WATER Size of This Project:
FIN;tNCIAL S UMI~%R Y
Pre-
Year CoDstruct~OB Lan4 Construction other Total
Prior
1990-91 380 380
Forecast
~'1991-92 2,196 2,196
~ ~Budget .Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
~ture
Total 380 2,196 2,576
IMPACT ON FUT~E OPE~TI)[G BUDGETS ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ .. .947
~er of Units 15.840 20
Gross Cost $ 15. 000 (years)
Less User Revenue - iS.Q00
Net Impact
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT ~ 859
PROJECT NAME: .~ORT~ COUNTy REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION
DESCRIPTION: ADD 4 MGD CAPACITY
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ ~UP4%L ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)'
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: MGD
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ 10.7.
OR~ANIZATION~ WATER Size of This Projects
FINANCIAL SUM/4ARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
year constructio~ Land Construction Other Tota~
Prior
' Forecast
Budget Year
1992-93 800 800
199'3-94 4,000 4,000
~':~'~ ~ i995-96
Future
Total 800 4,000 4,800
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 94/9~
Cost per Unit ' $ 90,000
Number of Units 4 20
Gross Cost $ 360,000 (years)
Less User Revenue - 360,000
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IKPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: POTABLE WATER SYSTEM PROJECT $ 860
PROJECT NAMEs ~OUIFER STORAGE & RECOVERY
DESCRIPTION= ~QUIFER STORAGE OF UP TO 4 MGD FOR PEAK SEASON, AS
POSSIBLE - NORTB COUNTY WATER TREATMENT PLANT. EXISTING
WTP, AND/OR MANATEE RD.
PROJECT LOCATION~
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ ~%V~ILITIES Unit of Measurement~ MGD
DEPARTMENTS ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficienoy~ 10.7
ORGANIZATIONs WATER Size of This Projects
FINANCIAL SUKHARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ConStruction Land construction other' Total
Prior 150 350 500
1990-91 100 500 600
Forecast .
,!i. 1991-92 50 350 400
.i/!Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 300 1,200 1,500
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL.
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 91~9~
Cost per Unit $ UNKNOWN
~her of units 4,0 20
~ross'cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue - UNKNOWN
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third ~nnual Update & ~men4ment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM . PROJECT # 861
PROJECT NAME: 16"WATER MAIN. US 41 SOUTH - RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD
TO CR-951
DESCRIPTION: 31.600 L.F, OF 16" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SO~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ ~TILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT~ ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency:. N/A
ORGANIZATION~ WATER Size of This ProJect~ N/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ¢$ IN THOU.~ANDS)
Pre-
Year ~on..structio~ Land cons~Fuctio~ .Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
mt Year
1992-93 1,.580 1,580
1993_94
~ 1994-95
~ture
Total 300 1,580 1,880
IMPACT ON FUT~E OP~TIN~ BUDGETS ESTI~TED ~SEFUL
LI~E OF FACILITY
First Year of Impaot 92;93
Cost per unit $ . ,493
N~er of Units 31.600 20
~oss Cost $ . 15,$$0 (years)
Less User Revenue - 15,~80
Net Impact $ 0
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Ugdate & ~mendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: ~T~R TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 862.
PROJECT NAME: US 4% SOUTH, 16" WATER MAIN - EAST FROM CR-95~ ON US 41
SOUTH
DZSCRIPTION: ~5,000 L.F. OF ~6" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N;A
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
ORGANIZATION: WATER Size of This Project: N/A/
FINANCIAL SUMMARY (~ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
year construct~o~ Land construction Other Tota~
· Prior
1990-91
Forecast
""~ . ' 1991-92 150 150
~': · -. Budget Year
"'"' ' 1992-93 750 750
1993-94
.;~ ,: 1995-96
= ,: .~ Future
Total 150 750 900
IMP]%CT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 9~/93
Cost per Unit $ ,493
N,~mher of Units 15.000 20
Gross Cost $ 7,395 (years)
Less User Revenue - 7,395
Net Impact $ 0
I 047
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Upd&te & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SU~X~R¥ FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 863
PROJECT N~ME: 30" WATER MAIN THROUGH PINE RIDGE SUBDIVISION
DESCRIPTIONS 6.000 L.F. OF 30" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ~ILITIES Unit of Measurements N/A
DEP~RTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORO~NIZATIONs WATER Size of This ProJect~ N/A
FINANCIAL S UM~4ARY
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
Forecast
1991-92 200 1,000 1,200
Budget Year
1992 -93
1994-95
1995-96
~ture
Total 200 1,000 1,200
I~CT ON F~E OP~TIN~ B~GETS ESTI~TED ~SEFUL
LIFE OF F~CILITY
First Year of Impact 91/9~
Cost p~r ~nit
~er of Units 6,000 20
~ross Cost $ 5,68~ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $ 0
CAPITAL IH~ROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & A~endment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PROJECT # 864
PROJECT NAME: 16" WATER MAIN. PINE ~IDGE ROAD, PHASE 5 - VINEYARDS TO
CR-95~
DESCRIPTION: %5,000 L.F. OF 16" WATER MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: 8 RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DI¥ISION: .UTILITIES Unit of Measurement~ N/A
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATIONs WATER Size of This Projects N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ ~N T~OUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constru0tio~ Lan4 Construction othe~ Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 120 120
Budget Year
1992-93 1,000 1,000
199: -94
1994-95
1995-96
~ture
To~al 120 1,000 1,120
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 93/94
Cost per Unit $ .493
~,~er of Units 15,000 20
Gross Cost $ 7,395 (~ears)
Less User Revenue - 7,395
Net Impact $ 0
$EgER TREATgEIIT PLANT: $OJl'll CI:X~TY "
LE'~L OF $ERVII~ TI'/UIDARO: 100/GPO/CAPITA PLUS 2~ IK~-It~$1DE~TIAL
POPULATION gC;D NCO I~O SURPLUS/ VALUE
FISCAL COJNTY REQUIRED ' PLA~#ED AVAIL.ABLE (DEFICIEg~) (~T)
y~ ~RVI~ ~ 0.~1~1 lg CIP ~,~,1~
89-~ ~,~ 7.6 3.3 (~.3) (11,~2,819)
~-91 67,~1 8.1 4.7 8.0 (0.1) (2~, 414)
91-~ Z1,1~ 8.6 8.0 (~.6} (I.~2,~)
9~-~ ~,158 9.1 8.0 16.0 ~.9 19,~,5~.
93-~ ~,~ 9.6 16.0 6.& 1~,~6,5~
9~-~ ~,~6 10.1 16.0 ~.9 16,2~9,&50
~-~ 87~ 10.6 16.0 S.& 1&.8~,3~
96-9~ 91,27& 11.0 ~6.0 ~.0 13.~,~-
9Z-98 ~,~ 11.5 16.0 ~.5 12,3~,~
98-~ ~,~ 12.0 16.0 ~.0 11.016,576
~-~ 1~,~ 12.5 16.0 3.~ 9.~9,~
00-01 107,322 13.0 16.0 3.0 8,2~.~32
TZHE PER]~ SERVI~ ~ 121/~PlTA [~ CZP ~.~.1~
PRESENT TO
9/30/91 67,~1 8.1 4.7 3.3 C~.3) (13,~19,~1)
10/91-9/~ ~ Z,5 8.0 8.0 5.5 15.1~7,~
~-y~ ~TOTAL 87,~ 10,~ 1Z.7 11.3 0.7 I.~7,~t
~O 5-YR ~ff 20,027 2,~ O.O 4.7 2.3 7,~1,~
10 Y~R TOTAL
10/91-9/01 107,322 13,0 12.7 16.0 3. ~ 9. ~9,5~
SEUEI~ TRF~ATNEIrr P~UIT= IIORTN O~__~TY '
LE'~EL ~ ~ ~ I~/~/~;TA ~ 21.1~
~TI~ ~ ~ ~ ~PL~/ V~
FI~ ~_~ ~I~ ~ AVAI ~ (DEFICI~) (~) AT
y~ ~I~ ~ 0.~121 I~ ClP- ~,~,1~
89-~ ~,~ 3.~ ' 2.5 (1.0) (2,~,1~)
0
9~-~ ~,~1 ~.S 3.0 7.5 3.0
93-9~ ~,~ ~.8 7.5 Z.7
~.~ ~,I~ S.1 7.S Z.~ 6,~,~
~-~ ~,~ ~-~ 7.5 ~.I
~-97 ~,617 ~.6 7.~ 1.9
9~-~ ~,8~ ~.9 7.5 1.6 ~,~.~0 0
98-~ ~1,1~ 6.2 7.S 1.3 3,~,~7
~.~ ~,~ 6.S 7.5 1.0
00-01 ~5,~3 6.7 7.5 0.8 2.~,315 0
TINE PERI~ SE~I~ ~ 1Z1/~TA Z~ ~P
0
PRESENT TO
9/30/91 ~,020 ~.0 Z.O ~.5 0.5 1 ,~,0~
~ YEAR GR~H
10/91-9~ 11 ,~0 1 .~ 3.0 3.0 I .~ ~,~,~0 0
5-Y~R ~TOTAL ~,~ S.& 5.0 7.5 ~. I
~ 5-YR ~g 11,~ 1.3 0.0 ~.0 J~.3) (3.~,~7)
I
10 YEAR TOTAL
10/91-9/01 55,~3 ' 6.~ S.O 7.5 0.5
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FoRM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM PROJECT # 902
PROJECT NAME: pAST AND SOUTH NAPLES - SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION:
PROJECT LOCATIONs 2. 4. 5 CENTRAL NAPLES: EAST NAPLES: SCUT}{ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE A~ENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONs UTILITIES Unit of Measurements N/~
· DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiencyz. N/A
ORGANIZATION: WASTEWATER Size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construct~o~ Lan4 Construction Other Total
Prior 1,764 20,522 22,286
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 1,764 20,522 22,286
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 90/91
Cost per Unit $ 1.68 L.F.
Number of Units 369.0Q0 20
Gross Cost $ 620,650 (years)
Less User Revenue - 620,650
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SEWER TREATMENT PLANT AND PROJECT # 907
SEWER COLLECTION S¥ST~
PROJECT NAME: SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WAST~WATER.PUMP. STATION TRANSMISSION
~AIN$ AND EFFLUENT DISPOSAL SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION:
PROJECT LOCATION: 2. 4 & 5 CENTRAL NAPbES; EAST NAPbES; SOUT~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENTs ~DMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION~ ~ASTEWATER Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Y~ar construct!o~ Lan~ ~onstruction Other Total
Prior 1,133 500 18,116 19,749
1990-91
Forecast
Budget Year
1992-93
Future
Total 1,133 500 18,116 19,749
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 90/91
Cost per Unit $ 1.68~FT. PIPE
Number of Units 89,040 20
Gross Cost $ i~0,0Q0 (years)
Less User Revenue - 15Q,000
Net Impact $
CRPITAL INPROVEHENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM PROJECT # 908
PROJECT NAME: 8" FORCE MAIN - PUMP STATION #3.15 TO PUMP STATION ~3.20
DESCRIPTiONs 10,800 L.F. OF 8" FORC$ M~IN
PROJECT LOCATIONs 5 SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement:
DEPARTMENTS A~MINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: _ N/A.
ORGANI~ATION~ WASTEWATER Size of This ProJeot~
FINANCIAL SUM24ARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construct%oB Land constructioB Other Total
Prior
1990-91 140 140
Forecast
1991-92 700 700
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 140 700 840
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL.
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ 1.68 per
~,mher of units 10,800
~ross cost $ 18,~44 (years)
Less User Revenue - 18. 144
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM PROJECT # 909
PROJECT NAME: ~2" FORCE MAIN - pUMP STATION ~3.19 TO PUMP STATION f3.20
DESCRIPTION: ~1,300 L.F. OF FORCE MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: _5 SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENTs ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION~ WASTEWATER Size of This Projects N/~
FINANCIAL SUHMARY ($ IN THOUS~,NDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Constru~t~o~ Other ~ota~
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
i~,.~,.' 1991-92 220 220
i·: Budget Year
~';.i" 1992-93 1,100 1,100
'! .' 1993-94
'1994-95
~. .... 1995-96
:"' Future ..
~:.'~. Total 220 1,100 1,320
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ 1.68 pe~ L.F.
Number of Units 11,300 ~0
Gross Cost $ 18,984 (years)
Less User Revenue - 18,984
Net Impact $
367
CAPITRL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUMP STATION PROJECT'# 911
PROJECT NAME: DAVIS BOULEVARD - PUMP STATION ~3.11
DESCRIPTIONs ~AST~R PUMP STATION
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUT~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONS UTILITIES Unit of Measurements N/A
DEPARTMENTs ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
OROANIZATION: WASTEWATER Size of This Project:
FINAI~CIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ConstructioB Land ConstrBct~o~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91 100 100
Forecast
1991-92 700 700
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994_95
1995-96
Future
Total 100 700 800
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATINO BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ 7,72~
Number of Units I 20
cross Cost $ 7,721 (years)
Les's User Revenue - 7,721
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: ~UMP STATION PROJECT # 913
PROJECT NAME: DAVIS BOULEVARD - PuMp STATION ~3.14
DESCRIPTION: MASTER PUMP STATION
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUT~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement:
DEPARTMENT: ~%DMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: W~STEWATER size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUM]4ARY ($ IN THOUSANDS )
Pre-
Year COnstruction Lan4 Construct%on other Total
Prior
1990-91 100 100
Forecast
1991-92 700 700
Budget Year
Future
Total 100 700 800
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPER3%TING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ 7,721
~,m~er of Units ~ 20
Oross cost $ 7,721 (years)
Less User Revenue - 7,721
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMR~tRY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SEWER C0~L~CTION SYSTEM PROJECT # 914
PROJECT NAME: 20,, FORCE MAIN. CR-951/us 4~ - PUMP STATION #3.18 TO
PUMP STATION #3,0~
DESCRIPTION: 11,400 L.F. OF ~0" FORC~ MAIN
PROJECT LO~ATION~ 5 souT~ VALLE#
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONS ~TILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT~ ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION= WASTEWATER Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ iN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year ~9~s~ruction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 100 100
Forecast
1991-92 700 700
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 100 700 800
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ ~.68 per L.F.
Number of Units 1~,400 20
Gross Cost $ 19,152 (years)
Less User Revenue - 19~152
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROV~ME~T ~LEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUMP STATION PROJECT # 915
PROJECT NAME: DAVIS BOULEVARD - PUMP STATION ~3.18
DESCRIPTION: MASTER PUMP STATION
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ SOUTH NAPLES .
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
OROANIZATION~ WASTEWATER Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year C0~#tructio~ Land .Constru~.t ~o~ Other ,Tota%
Prior
1990-91 100 100
Forecast
1991-92 700 700
'.Budget Year
1993-94 ' '
1994-95 ,
Future ' '
Total 100 700 800
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATI}~G BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ ,,, 7,72~
~mher of Units i 20
oross Cost $ 7,721 (years)
Less User Revenue - 7,72~
Net Impact
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & A~endment (1991)
PROJECT S~RY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT # 91~
PROJECT NAME: SOUTH COUNTY R~GIONA~ WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
~XPANSION (8 MGD)
DESCRIPTION: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION FROM 8 MGD TO 16 MG~
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: MGD
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 2.6
ORGANIZATION: ~ASTEWATER Size of This Projeot: 8,0
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Ye4~ construction ~an~ construction .Other. Total.
Prior
1990-91 1,800 1,800
Forecast
1991-92 9,000 9,000
Budget Year COMPLETE 93/94
1992-93
1993-94
1995-96
Future
Total 1,800 9,000 10,800
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impaot 93/94 .
Cost.per unit $
N,,mher of Units 20
Gross Cost $ 22.050 (years)
Less User Revenue - .22,050
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT # 917
PROJECT NAME: NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
EXPANSION (3 MGD) AND CONVERSION
DESCRIPTION: DESIGN SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION (COSTS FROM 20~
FACILITIES PLAN~
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION= UTILITIES Unit of Measurement= MGD
DEPARTMENT= ADMINISTRATIO~ 1992-96 Total Deficiency:
ORGItNI~ATION~ WASTEWATER Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
"' Y~ Constructio~ Lan~ Construc~ion Other Tota~
Prior
Forecast
1991-92 3,600 3,600
1992-93 2,500 2,500
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Total 500 6,100 6,600
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY'
First Year of Impact 93/94
Cost per Unit
Number of Units .. 20
~ross Cost $ 1~.0~ (years)
Leis User Revenue - ll.O~
Net Impact $
-. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amen4ment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOP4{
TYP'E OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SEWER COLLECTION LINE PROJECT # 918
PROJECT NAME: 20" FORCE MAIN, RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD - CR-951 TO
POLLY AVENUE
DESCRIP~ION: 11,400 L.F. OF 20" FORCE MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ SOUTH NAPL~
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement, N/A
DEPARTMENTs ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORaANISATION: W~STEWATER Size of This ProJeot~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ I}[ THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Ymar ~gnstruction Lan~ g~ ~_~ Other Total
1990-91 100 100
..
1991-92 600 600
Budget Year
Total ~.oo ~oo 7oo
I~CT ON FUT~E OP~TINO B~GET8 ESTI~TED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
P~rst Year of Impact 92/93
Cost per Unit $ 1.68 Der L.F,
~mher of Units li.400 20
'~=°ss cos~ $ ~9. ~ (years)
Less User Revenue - 19.152
Net Impact $ __ ____
CAPIT~L IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
~ROJ~CT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY~ PUMP STATION PROJECT
PROJECT NAME: RATTLESNAKE-HA~0CK ROAD - PUMP STATION f3.20
DESCRIPTIONs ~ASTER PUMP STATION
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUT~ NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
~ZVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/~
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: WASTEWATER Size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructto~ Land gon~tru, ctio~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91 100 100
~ Forecast
'.Budget Year
.- 1992-93 '700 700
~i~ 1993-94
· Total 100 700 800
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 9~/93
Cost per Unit $ 7,721
Number of Units 1 20
~ross cost $ 7,721 (years)
Less User Revenue - ... 7~21
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUMP STATION PROJECT
PROJECT N~ME: CR-951 PUMP STATION ~3.16 - C~-951
DESCRIPTION: MASTER PUMP STATION CMANATEE ROAD}
PROJECT LOCATION: 5 SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DI¥ISION~ UTILITI~ Unit of Measurements
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRAT~Q~ 1992-96 Total Deficiency~ N/A
O~GANIZATION~ WASTEWATER Size of This ProJsot~ N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year consgruct~o~ Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91 100 100
'-1991-92 700 700
Budget Year
Total 100 700 800
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED U~EFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY.
First Year of Impact 92~93
Cost per Unit .' $ 7,721
Number of Units ~ 20
Gross Cost $ 7,721 (years)
Less User Revenue - 7,721
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ~mendment (1991)
~ROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SEWER COLLECTION LINE PROJECT
PROJECT NAME: ~2" FORCE MAIN. CR-95% - PUMP STATION f3.16 TO PUMP
STATION #3.~8
DESCRIPTIONs 10.800 L,F. OF 12" FORCE MAIN
PROJECT LOCATIONs ~ SOUTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONS UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
OR.~ANIZATION: WA~TEWATER . Size of This ProJsot~ N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ( $ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructio~ Land construction Othe~ Total
Prior
1990-91 321 321
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1993~94
1995-96
Total 321 321
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ 1.68 per L.F.
Number of Units 10,800 20
~ross Cost $ 18,144 (years)
Less User Revenue - 18,144
Net Impaot
-. CA?ITAL IM?ROVEM~T ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
' PROJECT SUMMARY FOR~
'TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: ~U~P STATION PROJECT ~ 924
PROJECT NAMEI ~ORTH COUNTY MASTER PUMP STATION #1.02
DESCRIPTIONs
PROJECT LOCATION~ I NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVIBIONI .~TILITIES Unit of Measurement~ N/~
DEPARTMENT~ ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORgaNIZATIONs WASTEWATER Size of This Projects N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Year Construction Lan~ Construction Other Total
1991-92
i Budget Year
1993-94
1995-96
Future
Total 98 760 858
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 90/~
:Cost per Unit " $ 7.721
Number of Units ~ ,, 20
~ross Cost $ 7,72~ (years)
Less User Revenue 7,721
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IM~R0V~NT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991}
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: WASTEW~TER FACILI.TIES PROJECT # 925
PROJECT NAME~ PELICAN BAY IMPROV~M~NT DISTRICT
DESCRIPTION~ 20" FQ~C$ MAIN. 2 PUMP STATIONS - 1.04 &..~.09, ~0"
EFFLUENT LIN~
PROJECT LOCATION: I NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEP/%RTMENT~ ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: WASTEWATER Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
]~ Co~struction La~ construction ot~e~ Tota~
Prior
1990-91 450 2,270 2,270
Forecast
1991-92
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
Future
Total 450 2,270 2,720
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 9~/92
Cost per Unit $ ~.68 per foot
Number of Units 47,~20 20
Gross Cost $ 9~,276 (years)
Less User Revenue - 95,.~76
Nat Impact $
3'79
CAPITAL IHPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment {1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY. FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SEWER TRANSMISSION..$YSTEM PROJECT # 926
PROJECT NAME= IMMOKAL~E ROAD SEWER/EFFLUENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION= FORCE MAIN AND EEFLUENT LINE FROM REGIONAL WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT TO QUAIL CREEK PUD
PROJECT LOCATION= ~ NORTH ~APLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE A~ENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION= UTILITIES ._ Unit o£ Measurement= N/A
DEPARTMENT=' ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency= N~A
ORGANIZATION= ~STEWATER Size of This Project= ~/~
FINANCIAL SUI4]4J%RY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year CO~Str~ct~o~ Lan4 ¢onstruct~o~ Other Total
· "i 1990-91 200 3,750 3,950
Forecast
et Year
1993-~4
.... ~994-95
~'1995-96 ~.-:~
~: Total 200 3,750 3,950
· IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATIN~ BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 9~/92
'. Cos~: per Unit $ 1.68 Der L.F.
Number of Units 3~,680 . 20
~ross Cost $ ~3, ~0 (years)
Less User Revenue - 53,220
Net Impact $
ffi 047 3'80
CAPITAL IMPROVEMEN~....ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUMP STATIONS PROJECT # g27
PROJECT NAME: ~STER PUMP STATIONS 1.03 & 1.07
DESCRIPTION: TWO MASTER. PUMP STATIONS ON IMMOKALEE ROAD
PROJECT LOCATION: 1 NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AG~.NCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/%
DEPARTMENTs ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/~
· ' ORGANIZATION: WASTEWATER Size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construct~o~ Land C..onstructio~ Other Total
': Prior
~:'~'..,,.: .1990-91 200 1,136 1,336
Forecast
1.1991-92
Budget Year
'1992-93.
1993-94
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact 91/92
Cost per Unit $ 7,721
Number of Units 2 20
~ross Cost $ ~5,442 (years)
Less User Revenue - 15,442
Net Impact $
.. CAPITAL I}~ROVEMENT ELemENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUKHAR¥ FORM
TYPE'OF PUBLIC FACILITY= SEWER TRANSMISSION PROJECT #
PROJECT NAMEs '~4" FORCE MAIN. PUMP STATION #1.06. TO PUMP STATION
#1,07
DESCRIPTIONs AIRPORT ROAD/ORAI~GE BLOSSOM DRIVE FORCE MAI~$ - 20,000
L,F. AND VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD. 20.000 L,F. ..
PROJECT LOCATION~ i NORTH NAPLES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ ~JTILITIES Unit of Measurements N~A
DEPARTMENT~ ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Defioienoys N/A
OROANIZATIONs WASTEWATER Size of This ProJect~ ~/A
FINANCIAL SUMHARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Land Construction Other
1990-91 240 1,200 1,4
i Forecast ,
Budget Year
* 1992~93
~o~a2 240 2~ 200 2~44(
IMPACT ON FUTURE'OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED
LIFE OF
Y~et Year of Impaot 91/9~
Cost per Unit $ 1.68 Der L.F.
Number of Units 20,000 20
Gross Cost $ 33.6QQ (years)
Less User Revenue - 33.600
Net Impact $
CAPITRL IMPROVEMENT E~EMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991}
PROJECT SUMMARy FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: PUMP. STATION. PROJECT # 929
PROJECT NAME~ 'PUMP STATION f3.~7
DESCRIPTIONs US 41 SOUTH
PROJECT LOCATION= 7 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ UTILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENTs ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency= N/A
ORGANIZATION= WASTEWATER Size of This Project: N/A
.. FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
:" Year Construction Land construction Other Total
· Prior
Forecast
, 1991-92 100 100
Budget Year
,~' . 1992-93 700 700
1993-94
1994-95
] IMP/%CT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
" First Year of Impact 9~/94
.' Cost: per Unit
Number of Units 1
Gross Cost $ 7,721 (years)
Less User Revenue - 7,7~1
Net Impact $ 0
CAPITAL IMPROVEME]~T ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMmAry FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SEWER TRANSMISSION FACILITY PROJECT # 930
PROJECT NAME: ~" FORCE MAIN, US 41 SOUTH, PUMP STATION No. S.17 TO
PUMP STATION No. 3.18
DESCRIPTION= 20,000 L.F.
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION; ~TILITIES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-95 'Total Defioienoy;
ORGANIZATION: W~STEWATER Size of This Project;
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUS~NDS)
Pre-
]~ ~onstrucgio~ Lan~ Cggstructlog other Total
1990-91
Forecast
1091-92 100 100
1992-93 600 600
1995-~4
1995-96
Total 100 600 700
~A~T ON F~E OPEgTIN~ B~DOET8 ESTIgTED ~SEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rs~ Year of Impa~t 93/94
Cost pot Unit $ 1.68 9er, L.F.
~er of Units g0,000 . ,20
Gross Cost $ ~, ~O0 (years)
Lemm ~ser Revenue - ~3 600
Net Impa~t $ 0
Il 047
C. APITAL IM~ROVENENT ZLEMENT
Third Annual Ugdate & Amen4ment (1991)
PROJECT SUHHARY FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY~ SEWER TRANSMISSION FACILITY PROJECT # 931
PROJECT NAME: '1~"/16" FORCE MAIN. IMMOKALEE ROAD EAST - QUAIL CREEK TO
cR-951
DESCRIPTION: 15,000 L.F. OF 12"/16" FORCE MAIN
PROJECT LOCATION: $ RURAL ESTATES
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AOENOY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION= _UTILITIES Unit of Measurement=
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: ~AJT~WATER Size of This Project: N/~
FINANCIAL SIFHMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction Lan4 Constru. ction .0~her Total..
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
=~? 1991-92 100 100
~/. Budget Year
~', ' 1992-93 1,000 1,000
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
... Future
ii.'. Total .100 1,000 1,100 '
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATZ~G BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact 9,3/94
Cost per Unit $ ~.68 per L.F.
Number of Units .. 15,000 20
Oross Cost $ 25,200 (years)
Loss User Revenue - 25,2.00
Not Impact $ 0
SOLID llLSTE
LEVEL Of S~RV'Zes S'T.4JI)AAD: 1.55
1'1a) ~ LlllED CELL CAPACTI'Y (M~q:)Lu md
KmtA.ATIO. B~GImlHG CAPM:ITY 2Jr) YEAR CAPACITY ~m~Lt~l YALI~/ r. APA~I TY ACTt,W.
' FISCAL CO..~IDE CAPACITY R_J~Jlft[D CAPACI'TY Pr. AtonED (DEFICIEROr) COST AT ACTUALLY ~ LOS
YEAR t~IGHTED AV~. AVAILAfd.[ 1.55 RE~tJIItED IX CIP 2M} YEAR LOSS Sll.00 PtOVIi~D
89*90 18~,763 1o159,0~5 2~?,933 30'~,009 1,036,551 1 ,~.,A6;, 17,629,307 396,9'~ 2.1
~-~1 196,7~0 1,9~',673 30~,009 3Z2,090 1,2~.57& 1&,OM,317 2~.3.~0 ~ 1.2 0
91-92 ZOT,Z~oO 1,6~2 ,,d.d./, 322,090 3~,0, 7T)9 1,182,213 Z, 1ZZ.079 ~3,3/,2o BM, 0.0
92-93 219,812 2,4.~2.787' 3/.0,709 357,796 3,/,.8/., ~00 5,2/.9,083 57,739,912 0.0
93-~ 230,8.36 5.606.879 357.796 37~..8/.~ /.,37/., Z39 53.616,62~ 0.0
94.-9'J 2~,1,~.35 5.Z/.9.0~3 37/.,8/.~ 391.~51 /,,~,~?.,~ /.9,~,06,265 0.00.0 t-.
93-96 2~2,~07 /.,eT&.Z39 391.851 /,.0~. 8M /., 07'J.52/,
96-97' 263,7~3 &,;,82,~ ~08,8&~ &2~,B78 3,~7,~ ~0,12&,106 0.0
97-9~ 27;,,7~ &,O73~SZ& ~,87B ~,2,899 3,20~,7&7 35,2~2o221 0.0
98-99 285o7;,1 3,M?,6~ ~2,899 ~)0,065 Z, 7~,,6~3 30o191o509 0.0 0
99-00 296,816 3,2GG,T&7 ~0,C)65 &7],~67 2,270,816 2/,,971S,97& 0.0
00'01 307,'~"'~ Z, 71,4.,683 &77,381 &91,703 1,7~,598 19,531,582 0.0
POPUI. AT I C~ 8EGIIMI#G CAPACITY ~ YEAR CAPACITY SURPLUS/ VALUE/
CD'~iDE CAPACITY REOUIRED CAPAC~ TY PLANNED (DEFI CIENCT) COST AT
Tilde PERICO T,,~IGXTED AVG. AVAZL.A~LE 1.5500 R£OUI~J~ iX C:IP ZNO 'rF.~t LOSS $11.00/T'~'~
~ PRESENT TO
~-"" 9/~0/~1 196,780 I,~:)7,673 ~05,009 322,090 1,0.36,551 :,280,57& I&,086,317
~- S YEAR
~ I0/91-9/96 56.O27 2.96~,~5 8~,~2 ~. TT/, /,,~67,015 2,~;',~o :30,722,~? 0
S-YEAR St~TOTAL 7.52,807 1~,87~oZ39 391,851 &C)8, ,~:,~ S, 703,56~ t. , 07'S, ~2/. /~, 808,76~
ZNO 5-YIt GROUTN 55,181 (2,1~9,556) 85,531 82,839 O (Z,297,926) (Z5,277,182) i~)
I
10 YEAR TOTAL ~'~
10/91-9/01 307, 9~8 2,74J0,683 &77,381 &91,703 &,667,013 1 77~,595 19,531,582
'
NOTES:
'Fort~ (/.(~) percen~ red~ction clue to mtertaL$ processing.
I-I
L.EV~L OF SERVII:~ STANOJUI:O: 1,55 TQNS/CAJ)ZTA
TEll YEARS OF P,J~4 LAND: .4~:~5 CN&pLes Ind
POPULATZ[~J POI~I.~TI(:]i ACRES RAg LMID RAV ~ ACRES SURPLUS/ VALUE/
FISCAL CO-VIDE TEll YEAR REgUIRED ACRES ACRES PLANNED (DEFICIENCY) AVerAGE COST AT
YEAR gI~IGHTED AVG. TOTAl. JUMUALL¥ AVAILABLE REQUIRED IN CZP (10-YEARS LAND) $10,000
89-90 185 76~ :),359,917 27.1 35/*.2 ]/.~. 2 0 10.0 100,269
90-91 196 780 2,&70,9'/0 28.7 ]27.1 ~)O.& $0 16..7 167,~89
91-9~Z 207 800 ~.,582,178 '~0.3 34.8./, 376.& 190 161.8 1,618,216
92-93 219 812 2,69'5,539 32.1 508.1 ]92.8 0 I
93-9~* E$O ~36 2,80&,065 33.7 /,76.0 ~.08.9 0 67.1 67a,9~
9/*-95 2~,1 835 2,91&,7/,7 35.~3 ~2./* ~.ZS. 1 0 17.3 :72.905
95-96 252 807 3,025,870 36.9 &O?.1 ~J. 1.3 0
96-97 263 7~3 3o1137,722 38.5 370.2 ~.57.6 0 (87.'~) (ST3,D76)
97-98 27/* 760 3,250,303 z,O.1 331.8 '~7/.. 0 ~)
98-99 285 7/.1 3,363,61/* ~.1.7 291.7 ~90.6 ~ (198.9) (1,988,~37)
99-00 296 816 3,/.77,65/* /,3.13 250.0 .~07.2 9
00-01 ~07 9B8 3,392,711 ~./*. 9 206..' .;2~,. 0 9
01-02 319 161
02-0~ 330 338
03-0~ 3/,I 318
0~-05 352 958
05-O6 36A 659
06-07 37~ z~
07-08 38~ 071
08-09 399 781
09-10 &11 8T3
POPULAT[C~ I;)CIPULAT[C~ AC~£~ RAU LAgO ~AI4 LAND ACRES SURPLUS VALUe!
C~-VZDE TEll YE. AJ~ REQUIRED ACRES ACRES ~LAH#ED
TZldE~ PER~OD I~ZGHTED AVG. TOTAL ANI~UALL¥ AVAILABLE :1ECU[RED !il CZP
PRESENT TO
9/~0/91 196,7~0 2,&70,970 28.7 327.1 ~0. ~, ~
S YEAR GROgl'H
10/91-9/96 S6,027 ~5&,900 8.2 80.0 50.9 190 189. I 1, ~]K], .'~8
5-YEAR SUBTOTAL 252,807 3,1~5,87'0 36.9 &0?. 1 ~,I.3 $0
~ 5-YR GROgT# 55,181 566,8~,1 8.0 (200.&) 82.7 0 (28~.0) (2..~30,~101
10 YEAR TOTAL
10/91-9/01 307°988 3,592,~11 ~.9 Z06.? 52/..0 190
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & ;%~endment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMaR¥.,,,FOR~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY= SOLID WASTE PROJECT # 100O
PROJECT NAME: LAND ACQUISITION ADJACENT TO. N6PLES LANDFILL
DESCRIPTION: ~90 ACRES (approximately) TOWARDS EVENTU6L 300 ACRES
TOTAL LAND ACQUISITION ·
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 .ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning DiStrict Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: ACRES
DEPARTMENT: SOLID WASTE 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 224.2
ORGANIZATION: NAPLES LANDFILL Size of This Project= 190 ACRES
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year .~oDstruction Land Construction Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 950 950
Budget Year .
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
Future
Total 950 950
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $
Number of Un,ts To be .determined
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $ None
CAPITAL I}~P~OVEMENT,, ELEMENT
Thira Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SQLID WASTE , PROJECT # ~00%
PROJECT NAME: I~EACHATE TREATM.ENT
DESCRIPTION: BUN-OFF MANAGE,MENT AND PROCESSING PLANT AND RETENTION
POND
PROJECT LOCATION.. 7 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT: SObID WASTE ...... 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION.' ~PLES LANDFILL Size of This Project.. N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Construction LaDd. Const. r%l=~o~ Other, Total
1991-92 750 :~.;' 750
Bu et Year
Future
Total 750 750
IMPACT ON FUTURZ OPERATING BUDGETS ~.STIMATZD USEFUL
LIFE O~ FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units To be determined
Gross Cost $ (years_)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $ None
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PRO~ZCT sum~a~X, FOm~
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SOLID WASTE PROJECT # 1003
PROJECT NAME: ~APLES ..LANDFILL CELL 6. ~HASE..III
DESCRIPTION~ CONSTRUCT LINED CELL AREA
PROJECT LocATION: 7 . ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION~ ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: TONS
DEPARTMENT: SOLID WASTE 1992-96 Total Deficiency: . 593,489
ORGANIZATION: NAPLES LANDFILL Size of This Project:
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
.Year. .~onstruction Land Constructio~ Othe= Total
Prior
1990-91 3,382 ,3~ 382
Forecast
'~ 1991-92 100 100
Budget Year
~9'94-95
1995-96
Future
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units 4
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & A~endment (1991)
PROJECT_SUMMARY_FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SOLID WASTE PROJECT
PROJECT NAME: ~APLES LANDFILL CELLS 3 & 4 CLOSURE
DESCRIPTION= COVER AND CLOSE LANDFILL AS PER OER SPEC,
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 . ROYAL FAKA?ALH CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement= N/A
DIVISION=
DEPARTMENT~ .~.QLID WASTE 1992-96 Total Deficiency: _ N/A
ORGANI~ATION~ ~APLES LANDFILL Size of This Projects N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Y~ar ~ .onstructio~ Land .constructio~ Othe~ Tota~
Prior
:Forecast
Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94
.('1994-95 ~ .
1995-96
Total 1,800 1,800
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
'First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit
Number of Units N/%
~=oss Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
N~t Impact $ N/~
C~PITAL I~PROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SOLID ~ASTE PROJECT # 1005 :
PROJECT NAME: NAPLES LANDFILL CLOSURE CELL 6, PHASE
DESCRIPTIONs COVER/CLOSE LANDFILL AS P~R DER SPECS.
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISIONI ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement:
DEPARTMENT: SOLID WASTE 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATIONS ~APLES LANDFILL Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ( $ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year construct~o~ Land Co~structio~ Other Tota~
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 1,280 1,280
](i' Budget Year
1992-93
1994-95
.... 1995-96
Future.
Total 1,280 1,28(
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
' LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units N/A
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue
Net Impa~t $ ~[~
0'47
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT ~
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991}
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TY~E OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SOLID WASTE PROJECT # 1006
PROJECT NAME: ~ApLES LANDFILL
DESCRIPTION: DEVELOP 300 ACRES OF LAND - ~9006 Fin P.N.
PROJECT LOCATION: 7 ROYAL FAKAPALM CREEK
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: TONS
DEPARTMENT: SOLID WASTE 1992-96 Total Deficiency: 593,489
ORGANIZATION: ~%PLES LANDFILL Size of This Project: 045 ~.~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
Year Constructio~ Land construction Other Total.~
Prior
~- · 1990-91 100 270 370
~,i~ ,, Forecast
'"~.~.~1991-92 783 470 1,253
· :Budget Year
1992-93
1993-94 253 253
· 1994-95 3 11,066 11,069
~i'~ · 1995-96 250 250
Total 1,639 38,770 40,409
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per unit $ i~~
NumBer o£ Units ~0
.Cross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $ N/A
-. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ~LEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: SOLID WASTE PROJECT # 100__7!
PROJECT NAMEs I~0KALEE. 10 ACRE LINED CELL - 59002
DESCRIPTION: NEW CELL CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT LOCATION: 11 IMMOKALEE
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY ~
DIVISION: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES , Unit of Measurement: ~
'B
DEPARTMENTs SOLID WASTE 1992-96 Total Defioiencys 593,489i
ORGANIZATIONs Size of This Projects N/A ~
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS)
Pre-
~'~ XgA~ construotion ~ Construot~on O~her Total
1991-92 25 25
':..~ Budget Year
~+~,. ~ ,.~'~'i992'-93 2,180 2,18
:" 1993-94'
:~:~' ~ 1994-95
. 1995-96
/~,:
~ture
":~'~' ~ ~' Total 25 2,180 2,20
.:" I~ACT ON FUT~E OPE~TING BUDGETS ESTI~TED UI~EFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
F~rst Year of ImPact
cost per Unit $
N~er of Units 10
' Oross Cost $ (~ears)
Less User Revenue - approximately
Net Impact $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Third Annual Update & Amendment (1991)
PROJECT SUMMARY FORM e
TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY: LANDFILL CAPACITY/CLOSURE PROJECT # 1008
PROJECT NAME: CLOSURE LANDFILL CELL I. IMMOKALEE
DESCRIPTION: 'CELL I CLOSURE
PROJECT LOCATION: ~ '~MMOKALEE .........
(#) (Planning District Name)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY IMPACT ON DEFICIENCY
DIVISION: E~IRONMENTAL SERVICES Unit of Measurement: N/A
DEPARTMENT: SOLID WASTE 1992-96 Total Deficiency: N/A
ORGANIZATION: ~MOKALEE LANDFILL Size of This Project: N/A
FINANCIAL SUMMARY ($ IN THOUSANDS) ~
Pre-
Year Construction, Land Constructio~ Other Total
Prior
1990-91
Forecast
1991-92 675 672
Budget Year
1992-93
1995-96
Future
Total 675 675
IMPACT ON FUTURE OPERATING BUDGETS ESTIMATED USEFUL
LIFE OF FACILITY
First Year of Impact
Cost per Unit $
Number of Units N/A
Gross Cost $ (years)
Less User Revenue -
Net Impact $ N/A
COLLIER COU}~Y
· CAPITJ~ IMPRO~.,MEI~ FII~..NCIN{I CAPJllCITY
THIRD ~~, CIE ~D~TE ~ ~ME~
FY 92-96
~repare~ b~
Orowth Management Department
~:~ LIST OF T~BLES
,~ Table ~ Title ~aqe ·
:':' 1 General G°vornmental Revenues by Source 7
2 GeneralFunctionGOVernmental Expenditures by 8 ~
3 Bond Issuance, Debt Service & Direct 9
capital Outlay Capacity
4 Ratio of General Bonded Debt to Assessed 10
Values and General Bonded Debt Per Capita
Schedule of Water & Sewer Funds Revenue 11
Bond Coveraga
Forecast Models Statistical Measures 12
·
047 .397
COLLIER COUNTY
capital Improvement Financing Capacity
FY 92-96
~ntroductfon
This forecast of Collier County's'capacity to finance growth and
existing deficits related.capital improvement through 1996 has been
prepared as a component of the Capital Improvement Element (CIE) of
the Collier County Growth Management Plan in compliance with Rule
9J-5 of the Florida Administrative Code.
The forecasts, projections and estimates presented in this section
have been prepared as tools to aid County officials and staff in
planning for the period 1992-1996. None of the figures appearing
in this report are to be construed as absolute in terms of
reliability or as reflecting the intent of Collier County elected
or appointed officials. These projections present some possible
alternatives given a set of assumptions and variables. The
variables are subject to change by action of the Board of County
Commissioners or their appointed County Manager or in some cases
may be affected by changes in the level of economic activity.
The forecasts and analyses presented in this section are based on
established
and tested statistical methods which predict future
trends based on past economic and demographic records. Significantw
changes in the variables affecting these trends, i.e., the economic
climate, the propensity of people to migrate.to Collier County, and
the willingness of the electorate to finance government initiatives
would impact the viability of the forecasts presented in this'
section.
This analysis and the Third Annual CIE Update and Amendment has
been prepared subsequent to the November 1990 defeat of the 7th
Cent Sales Tax Referendum. As a result, in June, 1991 the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners reiterated their intention to
utilize a County-wide Road Improvement Assessment District to
maintain adopted roads Levels of Service (Concurrency). Current
and projected revenues are anticipated to be adequate to maintain
all other adopted LOS for public facilities.
Summary of Findings
The narrative, analysis and tables in this report establish that
Collier County has the financial capacity during the period
1992-1996 to provide the infrastructure and capital improvements
needed by its citizens. Applying a set of conservative assumptions
and variables the County, through prudent management of its
resources, could comfortably assume additional general obligation
debt, revenue bonds, and "pay as you go" capital improvements.
The goals and levels of service standards in the Capital
Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan are attainable
within the financing capacity of Collier County through FY95/96.
- 1 -
* $155,980,000 in additional debt capacity with revenues
currently in place at 13% of bondable revenues limit
* Capital Revenue millage levy at a stable 1.0 mill through
1996 will generate $87,850,000
* Maintenance of a maximum bonded debt to taxable value ratio
of less than 0.8% if all capacity was utilized at 13% of
bondable revenues limit
* $146,824,000 in additional utility revenue bonding capacity
with no significant rate increases
Approximately 5 Mills of unused revenue raising capacity
available to the Board of County Commissioners against the
constitutional 10 Mill cap.
- 2 -
COLLIER COUNTY
capital Improvement Finanoing Capaoity
Demographi~ & Fiscal Forecasts
FY 92-96
I. POPULATION AND TAXABLE I'RO?ERTY
Collier County population grew at an exponential rate during the
period 1976-91 for a total increase of 170%. This pattern of
rapid'growth is forecast to continue at the same or a slightly
higher periodic rate to 225,200 in 1996, an increase of-28% over
1991 (Table 4, Column 2).
As population has grown, so has the taxable property base. This
is due to the combined impact of a rapid increase in the County's
real property inventory due to new construction and the
appreciation of existing real property which is a reflection of
demand for housing by the influx of new residents.
Since the 198.1 re-evaluation, assessed property values have
increased by 226%. Assessed property values are forecast to
increase to $21,191,000,000 in 1996 (Table 4, Column 3). This
will provide an ample ad valorem tax base to fund both "pay as
you go" and bond financing of infrastructure expansion and
capital improvements in the CIE to meet the needs of the rapidly
growing population in Collier County.
II. GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
Tax collections and intergovernmental transfers, consisting
predominantly of ad valorem, sale's, and gas taxes, are the
primary source of revenue for government operations. These
revenues are also the most bondable revenues available to the
County, resulting in favorable terms and interest rates from
lenders. These revenues will continue to grow from 78% of total
revenues in 1990 to 81% in 1996 (Table 1, Columns 2 and 4).
Due to the Florida constitutional prohibition against a State
income tax and the improbability of a change in public or
political attitudes opposing this revenue source during the
forecast period FY92-96, the State will experience continued
difficulties eliminating deficits in capital facilities for which
it is responsible. Most notably, State Roads improvements will
have to be funded by Collier County taxpayers during the period
FY92-96 in order to maintain FDOT mandated levels of service. An
additional 4 cent per gallon gas tax passed in the 1990
Legislative session will help but not eliminate the State Roads
deficit in Collier County.
With the defeat of the 7th Cent Sales Tax, the major portion of
the burden for infrastructure and capital improvements during the
period FY92-96 will fall on the real property owners of Collier
047 4O0
,i', '~., PACE ~.
County. The County is currently preparing the initial technical
and nexus studies to establish a County-wide Road Improvement
Assessment District as the deficit revenue source per CIE Policy
1.2.9.
If current revenues are inadequate Collier County also has more
latitude to levy additional ad valorem taxes to finance CIE
infrastructure capital projects than numerous Florida counties
which are currently at or approaching the constitutional 10 mill
cap. the Collier county-wide millage for FY 90/91 is 4.4489
which includes the 1 mill levy for a Capital Revenue Fund for
both CIE and non-CIE capital projects. The projections in this
report are based on the conservative assumption that the Capital
Revenue Fund millage levy will remain constant at 1 mill for the
forecast period 1992-1996.
III. GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL EXPENSES
Revenues are forecast to grow from FY 92-96 in step with the
County's rapid population growth and economic expansion.
Expenses are projected to grow at a slightly slower rate with the
costs for Public Safety contributing the most alarming increases.
Collier's growing population has supported significant annual
increases to the Sheriff's budget over recent fiscal years. If
this trend continues, additional Ad Valorem tax increases may be
necessary during the period FY92-96. However, the County has
significant unused revenue raising capacity to finance the
infrastructure and facilities capital improvements necessary to
maintain the quality of life for Collier County residents
identified in the adopted Levels of Service in the Capital
Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan. With a
prudent balance between bond issues and "pay-as-you-go" funding
from the I mill Capital Revenue Fund, the County should have the
financial ability to meet the demands of its citizens and
maintain concurrency in the 1990's.
IF, DEBT CAPACITY
The ability to finance additional bond issues may be of critical
importance if Collier County is to adequately meet the needs of
its citizens in the 1990's. Table 3 presents an estimate of
maximum additional bond issues and "pay as you go" capital
improvement funds available to the County based on forecast
revenues for the period FY92-96. Maximum comfortable debt
service as a percentage of current bondable revenues is assumed
to be 13%. This is in keeping with recent decisions by the
electorate and the Board of County Commissioners as reflected in
CIE Policy 1.2.12. For example, Debt Service Expenses in 1986
were 13.2% of bondable revenues. Under this assumption, the
County could incrementally assume an additional $155,980,000 in
bonds through 1996 (Table 3, Column 6). An additional
$87,850,000 will be available from the I Mill Capital Revenue
Fund for "pay as you go" capital improvements, contingencies, and
as a buffer against forecast variances (Table 3, Column 8).
- 4 -
The projections on additional debt capacity are carried forward
and added to existing general bonded debt to produce.the
forecasts on Table 4, Columns 4-6 for 1992-1996. Under the
previously described assumption of a 13% comfort zone, Table 4,
Column 4, shows the resulting total general bonded debt if all
additional capacity from current revenues were used for g,~neral
obligation bonds. The maximum ratio of general bonded debt to
taxable value would still be less than 0.80% in 1996.
V, WATER & SEWER FUNDS BONDED.DEBT CAPACITY
Net revenue available to fund new bond issues in the utility
funds and to maintain the required 1.25 coverage ratio would
allow the issuance of an additional $146,824,000 in utility bonds
through 1996. Gross revenue (Table 5, Column 2) is projected to
grow at an annual rate of 8% based on new customer connections.
VI. IMPACT FEE REVENUES
Impact fees, which shift a proportionate share of the cost for
new facilities to support a growing population from property
owners to new arrivals, have become a cornerstone of the Collier
County CIE Financing Plan. The addition of impact fees for
Emergency Medical Services and Law Enforcement in FY92 to the
current roads, libraries, parks, water and sewer impact fees will
generate $1,365,000 during the period FY92-96. Additionally, a
nexus study is currently underway which may result in the road
impact fee being doubled or possibly tripled. This study is part
of the technical preparation for establishment of the County-wide
Road Improvement Assessment District.
Forecasttnq Methodolo~y~.
'The projections and estimates appearing in Tables 1-5 for the
forecast fiscal years 1992-1996 were prepared using standardized
time series forecasting and analysis techniques. Historical
financial data for the fourteen year period 1976-1990 (1981-1990
for Taxable Value) appearing in "Collier County, Florida
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report," for.the year ended
September 30, 1990 were used to prepare estimates for the fiscal
years 1992-1996.
Statistical measurement models of various types were tested for
all time series on Tables 1-5 and various other relevant series
not appearing in the final report. A five step process was
applied to each series to select the model and resulting forecast
which produced the most realistic estimates as follows:
AnalYtical Steps
1. Basic statistical tests of all time series data for
randomness and autocorrelation to determine the most
suitable analytical model.
2. Prepare regression trend models and forecasts types:
linear trend, exponential trend, and polynomial trend
for all time series.
3. Compare statistical measures generated for each model
and resulting .forecast to select the model which best
fits each time series.
4. Prepare Box-Jenkins models for historical series that
did not fit well into regression trend analysis. Se__e
~Qte below.
5. Consolidate historical time series models and forecasts
into projections of Collier County financial strength
through 1995.
Note:
Box-Jenkins Modeling
Calculation Method - Marquard non-linear least squares with
background stepwise elimination of non-
significant coefficients.
Logged Models - Automatically selected for time series
when appropriate.
Automatic Differencing, autoregressive and moving
Identification - average conversions applied via auto-
correlation function when appropriate.
$ (ooo) .'
(an~udJ. ted)
i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
F~IcI~ L~Ceelel Inter- Chet~es foT ~nes & ~
Tear Taxes* & Permits Covern~enta~* Services Forfeiture~ Hlscellan~us Totals
1976 $ 9,164 $ 372 ~ 3,094 ~ 755 $ 323 ~ 1,460 $ 15,168
1977 9,830 601 4,088 1,406 359 ~ 1,134 17,41~
1978 10,973 975 6,783 1,276 567 1,586 22,160
1979 11,341 1,389 3,064 1,055 757 1,226 18,832
1980 12,468 .1,077 6,139 1,966 626 1,923 24,199
1981 13,481 1,942 6,748 792 736 2,163 25,862
19~2 17,324 1,373 6,437 739 863 2,370 29,016
~83 17,539 1,522 10,794 2,122 770 2,053 34~800
1984 22,074 2,025 11,116 2,2~7 897 2,438 40,807
~985 25,383 2,143 11,240 2,541 1,735 2,374 45,416
1986 30,555 2,210 11,779 3,357 1,392 2,548 51,841
~-1987. 32,470 2,887 12,415 4,471 1,860 2,613 56,716
1988 45,463 4,228 15,100 4,882 2,414 2,915. 75,002
~1989 51,584 6,346 16,181 5,145 2,97~ 4,344 86,575
~1990 57,992 6,468 19,606 5,734 3,213 6,359 99,372
~1991 65,531 7,198 22,547 6,090 3,671 5,736 110,773
1992 74,050 8,266 25,929' 6,445 4,175 6,462 125,327
1993 83,676 9,417 29,818 6,801 4,717 7,246 141,67~
1994 94,554 10,650 34,291 7,156 5,295 8,087 160,033
1995 106,847 11,964 39,435 7,512 5,909 8,984 180,651
1996 120,736 13,361 45,350 7,867 6,560 9,938 203,812
Noteaz
(1) ' Includes General, Special Revenue and Debt Service Funds
* Bondable Revenues
I'
$¢ooo)
I 2 3 & 5 6 7 8 9 I0
~scal '~ ~l~c Physical Tranl- gcon~i~ H~ ~ltu~ ~ Debt
~a~ ~v~en~ safety ~nvi~ent w~atiou ~nvi~eat Se~ices Recreatioq Se~ice ~otals
1976 ~ 3,373 ~ 3,259 ~ 1,674 ~1,757 $ 411 $ 980 $ 516 ~822 512,792
877 934 641 898 14,696
1977 3,541 4~020 1~502 2~283 -.
1978 5,051 4,411 1,186 2,579 2,145 1,236 777 948 18,333
1979 4,433 6,237 904 3,449 2,010 866 948 1,120 19,967
1980 5,145 7,327 1,359 4,516 1,741 1,091 1,117 973 23,269
1981 5,914 8,347 1,}56 4,214 1,795 '1,336 1,277 1,319 25,558
1982 7,579 10,440 1,677 4,767 726 1,857 1,570 2,284 30,~
1983 8,326 10,809 870 5,~20 2,002 2,003 1,563 3,708 34,401
1984 8,213 12,388 995 5,120 1,396 2,017 1,703 5,677 37,5~
1985 9,715 15,197 1,261 5,377 739 2,203 1,858 5,934 42,2~
1986 11,546 18,443 2,290 5,613 413 2,507 2,285 5,599 48,6~6
7,433 57,61~
1987' 13,207 22,184 2,313 5,753 695 3,202 2,824
1988 15,636 25~344 2,092 6,242 871 3,830 3,558 6,~09 64,282
1989 18,952 33,223 2,908 6,620 1,390 3,~30 4,388 6,84~ 78,058
1990 22,072 39,915 4,373 6,51~ 1,143 4,153 4,989 7,656 90,818
1991 23,075 44,828 4,566 6,857 1,224 4,380 5,867 7,618 98,415
1992 26,309 53,241 4,759 7,197 1,353 4,606 6,899 7,531 111,895
1993 29,996 63,234 4,951 7,537 1,497 4,831 8,113 8,042 128,201
1994 34,200 75,101 5,144 7,87~ 1,656 5,060 9,540 8,029 146,60T
1995 38,993 89,196 5,337 8,217 1,831 5,286 11,218 7,991 168,069
1996 44,458 105,936 5,529 8,557 2,026 5,5~3 13,192 8,292 193,503
Note~
(1) Includes General, Special Revenue and Debt Service Funds
%
I 2 3 &'' 5 6 7 8
~ ~dd~t~ona~ Incremental Revenue
Pro4ected ~3% of Current Revenue Bond Non-Utility Fun~.(!96}
Fisca~ B°~dable . ~ Outstsnd~nq ~vai~able ~or Issuance Impact Fees ~ 1 Mill
Year Revenues (~) Revenue Debt Serw~ce Debt Service Capacity (2) Revenue (3) county-wide
1992 $. 99,979,000 $ '12,997,000 $ 7,531,000 $ 5,466,000 $ 64,104,000 $ 9,325,000 $ !4,411,000
1993 113,494,000 14,754,000 8,042,000 6,712,000 14,613,000 9,115,000 15,648,000
1994 128,845,000 16,750,000 8,029,000 8,721,000 23,573,000 9,415,000 17,376,000
1995 146,282,000 19,016,000 7,991,000 11,025,000 27,021,000 9,724,000 19,224,000
1996 166,086,000 21,591,000 8,292,000 13,299,000 26,6691000 ~0,043,000 71 ~91,000
TOTALS $ 155,980,000 $47,622,000 $ 87,850,000
G~ ~ ~291,452,000
(Colu~s 6-8)
Notes=
(1) The sum of Column 2 and 4, Table 1
(2) The average interest rate on Collier County bond issues is assumed to remain stable at 7% with a 25-year
amortization.
(3) Projected annual revenue from roads, library, parks, EMS and law enforcement impact fees.
1976 - 1991 IL~stor~c&Z
1992 -~ 1996 Pz'o~ec~ed
(Unaudited)
1 2 3 4 5 6
~ax~um Potentia~ Ratio of General
F~aca~ Taxable Value General Bonded Bonded Debt to Debt Per
Year population [in Millions) Debt (q) ~ Capita
1976 64,800 $ 1,675 $ 1,627,529 0.10% $ 25.12
0.09 21.85
1977 68,900 1,726 1,505,308 -.
1978 74,600 1,856 1,396,511 0.08 18.72
1979 82,000 1,998 1,276,615 0.06 15.57
1980 86,000 2,154 1,138,953 0.05 13.25
1981 91,100 3,926 1,048,457 0.03 11.51
1982 98,100 4,108 954,261 0.02 9.73
1983 100,900 5,443 8,501,709 0.16 84.26
1984 109,400 5,859 8,799,135 0.15 80.43
1985 118,900 6,427 8,524,855 0.13 71.70
1986 126,000 7,142 9,352,000 0.14 74.22
0.12 63.28
1987 130,600 7,735 8,915,000
1988 139,000 8,435 8,633,000 0.10 62.11
1989 152,600 9,253 8,212,000 0.09 53.81
1990 165,400 10,893 7,735,000 0.07 46.77
1991 175,400 12,799 7,792,000 '0.07 44.42
1992 185,400 14,411 71,400,000 0.50 385.11
1993 195,300 15,648 85,581,000 0.55 438.20
1994 205,300 17,376 108,686,000 0.63 529.40
1995 215,300 19,224 135,208,000 0.71 627.99
1996 225,200 21,191 161,340,000 0.77 716.11
Notes:
(1) Haximum potential general bonded debt for forecast years 1992-1996 is the sum of current issues and
Column 6, Table 3. Fo= demonstration, the assumption is that 13% of current revenues would be used to
fund G.O.B. debt.
TABLE 4
1979 - 19~0 ~t~tor~cal
1 2 3 & 5 6 7 8
Ne~ Revenue
Available ~o~ Exis~in~ ~ ~ncremen~al
~iacal G~aa Ne~ ~h~ ~h~ ~vera~e ~vera~ ~nd Xssuance
~ Revenue (2) E~ea,ea (~) Se~ice Se~ice (5) ~a~o (4) ~a~lo 1.25 C~paci~y (6)
1980 1,699,207 1,067,645 631,562 209,732 3.01 N/A N/A
1981 2,435,973 1,299,388 1,136,585 274,384 4.14 N/A N/A
1982 5,225,163 1,841,494 3,383,699 1,122,859 3.0~ N/A N/A
1983 6,121,650 2,024,768 4,096,882 2,389,893 1.71 N/A N/A
1984 6,138,269 2,616,489 3,521,780 2,827,433 1.25 N/A N/A
1985 7,200,588 3,319,489 3,880,708 2,621,693 1.48 N/A N/A
1986 7,980,000 3,903,000 4,077,000 2,161,000 1.89 N/A N/A
~987 10,748,000 5,048,000 5,700,000 2,484,000 2.29 N/A N/A
~988 14,534,000 5,960,000 8,574,000 3,997,000 2.~4 N/A N/A
1989' Z8,394~000 5,529,000 ~2~866,000 6~078~000 2.~2
1990 21,986,000 8,723,000 13,263,000 7,036,000 1.89 N/A N/A
1991 23,745,000 9,420,000 14,325.000 8,323,000 1.72 4,802,000 59,892,000
1992 25,644,000 10,175,000 15,469.000 8,0~3,000 1.92 2,075,000 25,768,000
1993 27,696,000 10,988,000 16,708.000 8,340,000 2.00 1,193,000 14,867,000
1994 29,91~,000 11,867,000 ~8,044=000 ~,~42,000 ~.9~ 666,000 8,307,000
1995 32,305,000 12,817,000 19,488.000 8,965,000 2.17 1,430,000 17,835,000
1996 34,889,000 13,842,000 21,047.000 8,860,000 2.38 1,617,000
~ 146,824,000
NOteS~
(1) NO bonds outstanding prior to 197~ - cov~ragu appliom to tha County Water-Sews= District, Marco Water and Sewer
District, G~land Water District, and Pelican Say Improv~nt District beqi0ni~~ 1~0.
(2) ~ra=lng revenues plus other income exclusive of extraordina~ gains. Projections based on annual
customers se~ed.
(3) Total ex~nsee excluding depreciation, ~nd interes=, ~ization, and extrao~ina~
(~) Ne= revenue divided by 2otal debt semite re~ir~nts. Bond covenants re,ire that the ratio not fall ~low 1.25.
(5) Debt Se~lce on current ~nd issues through 1996.
(6) Bonds are aes~ t~ ~ issued at a 30 year maturity with ~ 7% average interest rate.
~nr,~ B
FOItF~.AS~ MODEL8 STITXSTXCAL MEOwingS
Table Column ~orec~t Model R-s~uare ~his~ f4) ~SK ~.pg ~robabilitv
2 2 Exponential Trend (log) 0.9819 4.74 794.4 6.4% 31.4%
2 3 Exponential Trend (log) 0.9936 5.81 995.6 5.4% 21.3%
2 4 Simple Average (differenced) N/A 3.79 598.3 26.8% 43.6%
2 5 Box-Jenkins (differenced) N/A 3.14 361.3 5.6% 53.6%
2 6 Box-Jenkins (x 106% FY91-95) N/A 2.23 601.0 59,8% 69.7%
2 ? Box-Jenkins (differenced) N/A 1.19 291.9 12.0% 88.0%
2 8 Box-Jenkins (log differenced) N/A 5.82 109.8 5.1% 21.2%
i 2 See Note 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
1 3 Polynomial Trend 0.9073 8.68 622.3 31.6% 6.9%
1 4 See Note 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
1 5 Box-Jenkine (differenced) N/A 5.41 646.4 32.6% 24.7%
1 6 Polynomial Trend 0.9569 2.83 210.0 19.3% 58.9%
1 7 Polynomial Trend 0.8102 7.00 623.3 18.2% 13.4%
4 3 Polynomial Trend (FY81-89) 0.9859
9.87
434.6
5.1%
4.2%
'
Notes='
~ 1. Tax receipts are forecast to increase 13% annually through FY96 as a reeult of an average 6% increase p~= year
~ in new construction, a 6% increase in market value of existing property and a 1% increase in millage rate.
(~ 2. Collier County has experienced increases in intergovernmental revenues ranging from 10% to 20% in recent years.
~ An average increase of 15% per year is forecast through FY96.
Statistical models, and resulting forecasts were developed by the Collier County Growth Management Department using
personal computers and the statistical forecasting software, pRO*CAST, from Fleming Software, Oakton, Virginia.
COLLI~ CO~Y SCHOOL BO~D
CAPIT~ I~RO~E~ PROG~
FISC~ Y~ 1991-92 TO 1995-96
... COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
FISCAL. YEAR 1991-92 to 1995-96
~NTRODUCTION
The Collier County School Board provides for public education
within the County including incorporated and unincorporated
areas. The five-member School Board has no regulatory authorit'
over land use, however, it does influence land use and public
facility decisions through required expansion of education
facilities on existing sites, its exchange of. predetermined
school sites, and its selection of addftional school sites for
future development.
The responsibility of Collier County under the Growth Management
Act has been to review the School Board's Capital Improvement
Program to determine consistency with the comprehensive 91an,
corresponding land development regulations, and any impact on
., County's public facilities.
In addition, Rule 9J-5.016(1)(b), Florida Administrative Code
(F.A.C.), requires "The geographic service area and location of
major system components for the public education and public
health systems within the local government's jurisdiction shall
be identified" (in the Growth Management Plan's Capital
Improvements Element). Also, Rule 9J-5.016(2)(d) requires the
County to analyze "the impact of new or improved public
educational and public health care systems and facilities on the
provision of infrastructure."
In 1990, the Florida State Legislature (HB 3709) voted to requir
that local school boards submit a notice of intent to construct
school facility 90 days prior to submitting an application to a
city or county; and the city or county must% once a complete
application is received, determine within 90 days whether the
proposal is consistent with the local Growth Management Plan
land development regulations.
The purpose of this appendix is to analyze the School Board's
Capital Improvements Plan and its potential impact upon the
County's public facilities, including Roads, Sanitary Sewers,
Potable Water, Solid Waste, Drainage, and Parks and Recreation.
~? NOTE~ This analysis only includes public education facilitie
:iF there are no local public health facilities within
i~ Collier County.
~tudent population
School Board population projections reflect an 63% increase in
the total number of students attending the County's public
schools, grades K-12, over the next ten ~'ears -- 1991 through
2001.
~tqden~ population 1991 2001 ~ Increase
Elementary School 11,942 17,042 43%
High School 5.322 ~ 90%
TOTAL 22,364 36,467 63%
~ew ProGram Requirements
Additional classrooms dedicated to new or expanded educational
programs mandated by the State for the exceptional child
(mentally or physically handicapped) also impact the number of
student stations required over the next decade. An increasing
percentage of public school funding is required to support
special education facilities and programs.
CaD~ta~.ImDrovement Plan (1991-1996)
With an increasing student population and new program demands,
the School Board estimates that $112,200,000 will be needed for
the planning, site work, construction and equipment of five (5)
new Elementary Schools, three (3) new Middle Schools, and one (1)
new High School between 1991 and 1996. In addition to
$37,784,766 in prior year projects brought forward, $50,355,000
will be required for site work, upgrade and expansion of existing
public school facilities, and approximately $800,000 will be
needed to prepare a Preschool site at the vacated Immokalee
Middle School upon completion of the new Middle School facility.
An estimated $5,350,000 will be required to remodel and upgrade
the County's adult and vocational educational facilities.
Capital Improvement Plan Fundin~ Sources
The CoLlier County School Board has adopted a new five-year
Capital Improvements Plan (CIP), 1992-1996, and funding plan.
The CIP reflects a capital outlay based on the following funding
programs:
i year @ 1.5 Mills
5 years @ 2.0 Mills
C.O.P. $60,555 million
Certificates of Participation (C.O.P.) is a funding program used
to liquidate principal and interest in the form of rent payments
on specific school facilities. Since the Florida Supreme Court
upheld the legality of C.O.P.'s as a capital funding'source, the
School Board has restored all projects to its long-range capital
plan.
The Collier County School Board's CIP projects are not included
in the County's Growth Management Plan Capital Improvement
Element (CIE). However, approximately 90% of the revenues
required to support the school's capital programs is dependent
upon local revenue sources.
~ource. Percent
Federal 0 %
State 10 %
Local 90 %
Zxistina school and Support Facilities
Collier County is divided into three (3) geographic school
service areas: Naples/Marco Island, Immokalee, and Everglades
City. At present, over one thousand (1,000) acres have been
identified by the School Board for educational facilities in
Collier County and the City of Naples. The following schools and
support facilities can be located on the map on page 6 of this
appendix. (The Public Fac!.lities Map 2 of the Growth Management
Plan's Future Land Use Element will be amended to reflect the
School Board's current land holdings and site acquisitions.)
~APLES/MARC0 AREA FACILITIES
Elementary Schpol~
~aD ~ Acres
2 Avalon Elementary 11.25
4 Big Cypress Elementary 20.30
6 Golden Gate Elementary 15.56
8 Golden Terrace Elementary 14.91
10 Lake Park Elementary 9.91
11 Lely Elementary 22.00
15 Naples Elementary 20.92
17 Poinciana Elementary 18.49
19 Sea Gate Elementary 15 00
20 Shadowlawn Elementary 11.88
21 Tommie Barfield Elementary 21.29
22 Vineyards Elementary 18.00
Middle Schpo~s
16 Pine Ridge Middle 36.88
9 Gulfview Middle 10.62
7 G01den Gate Middle 26.94
5 East Naples Middle 17.09
- 3 -
~qh School~
3 Barton G. Collier High 80.00
12 Lely High 50.57
14 Naples High (includes Troy Property) 23.89
i .., ,.~upport Facilities
i 1 Administrative Center 3.00
i .' 13 Ma intenance/Transport~tion 20.00
12 Pr oduct ion/Warehouse 3.00
AdUlt % ~ocational Facilities
':'' 23 J. Lorenzo Walker Vocational Technical 22.60
Center
~VERGLADES
· 24 Everglades School (K-12) 3.69
Elementary Schools
26 Highlands 13.27
29 Lake Trafford 15.00
30 Pinecrest 9.50
31 Village Oaks 20.00
.Middle schools
27 I~uaokalee Middle 7.33
-'~ ~igh School
/',' 28 Immokalee High 43.41
'(,' Educat. io~ Facilities
~.,' 25 Bethune Education Center 15.00
TOTAL ACRES OF EXISTING FACILITIES 621.30
lind ~oldinc~s ant 8~e hcauisittons
Future planning and commit~ments have been made to secure
additional sites for expansion and construction of new
growth school facilities. At present, sixteen (16) vacant and
proposed sites have been identified for future educational
..- facilities.
VACkNT & P~OPOSED SITES '
MaD ~ Acres
32 North Pine Ridge Road Site/Barton Collier 79.09
'-' 33 Golden Gate Estates Site 64.~
34 The Southwest ~ of the Southwest % of the
Northwest % of the Southeast ~ of Section
27, Township 51 South, Range 29 East 2.50
'.~ 35 Hendry Property 0.65
~ 36 Heath-Roberts Property 23.60
~.:~,
~:. (New Immokalee Middle School)
.. 37 The Southwest % of the Northeast ~ Of the
Southeast ~ of the Southwest ~, Section 4,
: Township 47 South, Range 29 East 4.74
· .~. 38 Henderson Property 1.00
,~. 39' Gran Property 92.04
40 Deltona Settlement 11.60
~.':i- 41 Deltona Settlement 13.20
:.~., 42 Deltona Settlement 12.00
i~"," 44 Golden Gate East of Golf' Course 19.86
I~,~". 45 Pelican Bay Exchange 20.00
46 Pelican Bay Exchange 39.03
?:'~' 47 Parklands PUD $0.00
TOTAL ACRES VACANT & PROPOSED SITES: 428.29
COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD
TOTAL ACREAGE: 1,049.59
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT SUMMARY FOR 1991-1996
~V~GLADES ~REA
Renovation and improvements of the Everglades school (K-12) will
be completed in 199'1.
IMMOK;kLEE ~REA
Pinecrest Elementary School will be expanded in 1991-1992 at an
estimated cost of $400,000.
An expansion of Highlands Elementary School is scheduled to begin
in 1991-1992 at a cost of $2,600,000.
A new growth Elementary School is scheduled for completion in
1995-1996 at an estimated cost of $11,800,000 for planning,
construction and equipment.
A new Middle School, funded from prior year projects brought
forward, is scheduled for completion in 1991-1992. An additional
$800,000 will be needed for Preschool site preparation at the
vacated Middle School facility. ~
An expansion of Immokalee H].gh School is scheduled to beg~l~iin
1991-1992 at a cost of $2,950,000.
NAPLESIMARCO AREA
Elementary Schools
Renovation of Seagate Elementary School will be completed in
1991.
Golden Gate Elementary, Poinciana Elementary, Shadowlawn
Elementary, Tommie Barfield Elementary and Naples Park Elementary
Schools are scheduled for physical education/recreation
facilities and other site development work in 1991-1992 at a
total estimated cost of approximately $1,200,000.
Big Cypress Elementary School will require an upgrade to its ~
potable water facilities at an estimated cost of $175,000 in
1991-1992.
To accommodate growth, four (4) new Elementary Schools are
planned for construction between 1990 and 1996 at a total cost of
$46,950,000 for planning, construction and equipment.
N~PLES/MARCO ~REA
Middle Scho01s
At Pine Ridge Middle School, construction of a second school
building, and remodeling of the existing facility, are scheduled
for completion by 1993 at an estimated cost of $10,875,000.
Construction of two (2) new growth Middle Schools and planning
for a third new Middle School in the Naples/Marco area will begin
in 1990-91 at a cost of $33,000,000.
Hiah Schools .~
In 1990-1991, Barron Collier High School is scheduled for
expansion and renovation from 1350 student stations to 1850
student stations at a cost of $5,200,000.
By 1993, Naples High School and Lely High School are scheduled to
be expanded to provide a total of 3,700 student stations at an
estimated cost of $26,955,000.
To.accommodate growth, a new High School in the Naples/Marco
area, built in two phases and providing 2,300 new student
stations, is scheduled to begin construction in 1994-1995 at an
estimated cost of $20,450,000.
I
~dult & Vpc~tional School
The Collier County Vocational Center will require expansion and
upgrade during the next five (5) years at a cost of $5,350,000.
Level o~ seFViCe S~andargs
At this time there is no indication that the expansion,
renovation and new construction of educational facilities over
the next five (5) years will negatively impact the County's level
of service standards on public facilities. All planning for
expansion and construction of new facilities on new and existing
sites within the unincorporated area of Collier County will be
reviewed by the County for compliance with the adopted level of
service standards in its Growth Management Plan and corresponding
land use regulations.
APPENDIX E
TIMING AND LOCATION OF
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
CURRENT LOCAL PRACTICES
Third Annual CiE Update & Amendment
~Prepared by
Growth Management Department
1991
TIMING AND LOCATION OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
9J-5.01612) (a) requires an analysis of the current local
practices that guide the timing and location of construction,
extension or increases in capacity of each public facility.
9J-5.016(2)(e) requires an analysis of the use of timing and
location ct capital improvements to public facilities to support
efficien%~ land development and goals, objectives and policies in
the futu~:e land use element. This analysis must take into
consider~':tion plans of state agencies and water management
districts that provide public facilities within the local
government's jurisdiction. By definition, public facilities
includes transportation, sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable
water, education, parks and recreational, and public health
systems or facilities.
TRANSPOETAg?ION SYSTEMS OR FACILITIF~
The Coll~.~r County Transportation Services Division and the
Naples/ collier County MPO coordinate to provide the planning and
design of transportation systems and facilities within the
County. The primary system of transportation within Collier
County is an extensive network of roadways, including federal,
state, and county roads. This network must be considered as a
single working unit when any type of analysis is performed to
evaluate current or projected needs and proposed improvements.
The initial planning processes rely on the projected land use
types and time of development along with any ongoing federal,
state, or county roadway improvement projects or programs. Using
these projections, anticipated traffic volumes and patterns are
developed and analyzed for their effects on the existing roadway
network improvements, or new roadway corridors, are proposed to
adequately handle the anticipated traffic. The planning window
for this process is currently held to 5-year and 10-year time
frames. For the general municipal area, some very long range
planning is also performed using a 25-year time frame window.
Once the long range planning identifies a need within the 10-year
window, a design and construction timeline is prepared. This
timeline includes the various phases of engineering design,
right-of-way identification and acquisition, permitting, and
construction. Due to the numerous variables that must be
considered for each roadway, each timeline will be different, but
most highway construction projects can typically be completed
within a three to four year period.
In addition to the long range planning process, monitoring
programs are'utilized to determine the actual traffic patterns
and volumes. Data from these programs are analyzed to determine
the effectiveness of the planning process and identify specific
problem areas. By comparing the data collected through the
projection mechanisms can be amended to reflect actual
years,
operating conditions. Monitoring programs are also used to
provide an indication of when a section of roadway is operating
insufficiently or is approaching this condition.
Both the 10ng range planning and monitoring procedures are
utilized to prepare a prioritized transportation capital
improvement projects list. This list is updated annually to
reflect the most up-to-.~ate needs, show the anticipated project
timelines, and determina when funding must be incorporated into
the County budget to undertake these projects. While sudden
growth spurts in individual areas can create localized problems,
the general procedures described above are usually adequate to
handle the transportation needs in a timely manner.
S~NIT]tRY SEWER 5YSTEMS ]~ND FACILITIES
The Collier County Utility Services Division hired a consultant
to prepare a sanitary sewer facilities development master plan in
1978. This master plan was updated in 1986 in a report entitled
"Coastal Collier County 201 Facilities Plan Update." This
updated 201 Plan was approved as a planning guide by the Board of
County Commissioners and provides the Utilities Services Division
with the current and projected facilities and populations within
the identified sewer service area and a schedule of faciIity
expansions necessary to meet the service needs.
The Utility Services Division is currently using the recommended
capital improvement program in the 201 Facilities Plan Update to
schedule the design and construction of sanitary sewer treatment
plants.. Collection systems have been analyzed for projected
demands based on population projections within the various
planning communities of the Future Land Use Element. The
corresponding schedule of necessary capital improvements can be
followed'as long as the observed development remains consistent
with the projections. The 201 Facilities Plan Update identifies
when an improvement is needed to be put into service, but does
not include any scheduling for design, permitting, or
construction. Based on the size and type of facility and the
need to obtain state and/or federal funding.assistance, the lead
time can vary from one year for a small collection pipeline
project to five years for a treatment plant or major collection .
system project.
As projects are completed and the development and expansion of
the County sanitary sewer system continues, the Utility Services
Division will continue to monitor actual growth patterns and, if
necessary, adjust the facilitiesscheduling so that the sanitary
sewer facility capacity will be available concurrent with future
development.
80~IDWASTB SYSTBHS ]~HD FACILITIES
The Collier County Solid Waste Department is responsible for the
design and operational supervision of the solid waste system and
facilities within the County. These facilities include a county-
operated sanitary landfill and a contract hauler collection
system.
The present method of facility sizing utilizes the extensive
records keeping that has been developed by the Solid Waste
Department. The relationship between observed population growth
and solid waste disposal requirements allows this department to
project the anticipated solid waste disposal needs for projected
populations. Incorporating this information into a long range
facility site plan allows the department to design, locate, and
construct environmentally sound disposal facilities, with the
capacity for several years of disposal, at an economical savings.
Due to the extensive permitting process and time necessary to
construct the larger facility sites, a lead time of approximately
two years is necessary for landfill disposal sites.
The Solid Waste Department has prepared a master plan which
identifies other methods of solid waste disposal. These methods
vary from recycling to resource recovery through thermal
reduction. The timing of construction and implementation of
these various methods of solid waste disposal are a part of the
master plan.
~I~II~E SYST~S ~ F~CILITIES
The Collier County Water Management Department is responsible for
the scheduling of construction and maintenance projects and
programs for the public drainage systems and facilities
throughout the unincorporated portions of the County. Past
practice has generally been to coordinate the construction of any
new canals with the Collier County Transportation Department's
road construction program.
The Water Management Department had a consultant prepare a Water
Management Master Plan for the entire County which was completed
in 1990. 'This plan will identifies and established the
boundaries for the various watersheds or basins, analyzed the
condition and capacity of the existing drainage/water management
facilities within each basin, identifies needed improvements to
the various facilities to achieve desired level of service
standards, and suggested a program for the phased improvement of
the entire County's water management system to produce an
environmentally sound network of facilities that can be achieved
through an established capital improvement program.
Subsequent to the completion of the Water Management Master Plan,
a series of individual basin plans will be completed to
specifically analyze and design the facilities or improvements
needed for each basin where necessary major improvements have
been identified by the Master Plan. These basin plans will
incorporate any proposed improvements by other state or local
agencies and the South Florida Water Management District.
Current regulatory and fiscal implication practices for
- 3 -
constructing or modifying drainage/water management facilities
require a lead time of approximately one year for design and
permitting and six months to two years for construction.
POTABLE WATER SYSTEMS AND FACILITIES
· The Collier County Utility Services Division hired a consultant
to prepare a potable water facilities development master plan in
1985 and 1986. This document is contained in two volumes
entitled "Phase I Water Master Plan for Western Collier County"
and "Phase II Water master Plan for Western Collier County."
This Water Master Plan was approved as a planning guide by the
Board of County Commissioners and provides the Utility Services
Division with the projected growth within the identified water
service area and a schedule of facility expansions necessary to
meet the service needs.
The Utility Services Division is currently using the scheduled
capital improvement program in the Water Master Plan. Since both
the existing and proposed water treatment and distribution system
have been analyzed for projected demands based on population
projections within the various planning communities of the Future
Land Use Element, the corresponding schedule of necessary capital
improvements can be followed as long as the observed development
remains consistent with the projections. The Water Master Plan
lists when an improvement is needed to be put into service, but
does not include any scheduling for design, permitting, or
construction. Based on the size and type of facility, the lead
time can vary from one year for a small pipeline project to five
years for a treatment plant or wellfield construction project.
As projects are completed and the development and expansion of
the County potable water system continues, the Utility Services
Division will continue to monitor actual growth patterns and, if
necessary, adjust the facilities scheduling so that the potable
water supply will be available concurrent with future
development.
EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS AND FACILITIES
The District School Board of Collier County is responsible for
the planning, operation, and expansion of the educational systems
and facilities. This Board utilizes a five-year Comprehensive
Educational Plan which is updated annually to identify the
projected needs and anticipated funding requirements. In
addition to providing adequate school facilities, this plan also
includes the necessary support facilities such as transportation,
administration, warehouse, and maintenance.
The process for developing this five-year Comprehensive
Educational Plan incorporates several continual planning and
evaluation programs. The Florida Department of Education has
established some guidelines for determining when new or expanded
facilities are needed. These include a five-year survey of
- 4 -
existing facilities to evaluate their adequacy. If a rapid
increase in student loading creates an over-crowded condition and
projections indicate that there is not enough time to institute a
five-year survey, there are provisions for conducting a spot
survey. Proper planning is essential in this phase of
development since a school facility design and construction
program requires a lead time ranging from 1.5 to 2.5 years,
depending on the type of facility needed.
In addition to examining the condition of the facilities, the
School Board conducts a continual land evaluation and acquisition
program. This program uses the population projections for the
County to determine which areas will develop a sufficient student
base to justify the construction of schools. Once the projected
need is identified, potential land sites are identified and
procedures implemented to obtain title to the land either by
purchase, trade agreements, or receipt of contributions.
Potential sites are usually identified and obtained a minimum of
three years before the construction of facilities is proposed.
PARKS AND R~CREATIONAL SYSTEMS AND FACILITIES
The Collier County Parks and Recreation Department of the Public
Services Division is responsible for the planning, operation, and
expansion of the County's recreational facilities. A broad based
recreation plan has been prepared whereby the County can meet
many of the recreational needs of the citizens through the
development of community parks located near various population
centers. At present, there is no formal method for evaluating
capital improvements. Projects are suggested by staff, the
general public, the Parks and Recreation Citizen Advisory Board,
the County Manager, or even the individual Commissioners of the
Board of County Commissioners. This informal method of
recommendation has proven to be very useful in providing the
desired recreational facilities within the overall guidelines of
the County's recreational plan.
PUBLIC ~EALT~ SYSTEMS ~ FACILITIES
The Collier County Health Department is responsible for the
public health facilities operated by the County. The planning
and development of the facilities and programs is generally
conducted in response to legislated requirements and directions
from the State Health Department. Planning projections are used
to predict potential health problem areas, but the department is
usually not able to obtain funding assistance until the problems
actually develop. While this method of operation is reactive
rather than pro-active, the usually rapid response for funding
assistance allows the department to operate effectively in
meeting the health needs of the County.
- 5 -
';"' ' L---,, ,,'
f '~": ;'
.. ;~ . .
APPENDIX F
COLLIER COUNTY
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT FINANCING PLAN
Third Annual CIE Update and Amendment
1991
Prepared by
Growth Management Department
425
COLLIER COUNTY
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
Pinanoing Plan
Third ~nnual Update & Amendment
1991
I. OBJECTIVE~
Between January, 1987 and August, 1988 the citizens of Collier
County Joined the County staff and Board of County Commissioners
in 197 public meetings, workshops, and hearings. As a result of
this community effort, standards of service were set for thirteen
(13) types of public facilities. These Level of Service
Standards identified in Policy 1.1.5 of the Capital Improvement
Element define the quality of life and environment that the
citizens of Collier County want to maintain as the Growth
Management Plan is implemented through the coming years.
In order to maintain the Level of Servic~ Standards, eliminate
deficiencies and provide new facilities for future growth, the
County will need to improve or construct $295,338,900 of
infrastructure during the period FY91/92 - FY95/96. To make this
capital Improvement Program financially feasible in accordance
with the requirements of Rule 9J-5 F.A.C., the Board of County
Commissioners must approve a balanced funding plan from existing
and available revenue sources.
The existing situation at the outset of this financing plan if
all capital revenues currently in place were committed to the CIE
to the exclusion of non-CIE projects, during the period covered
by the CIE can be summarized as follows:
Recommended CIE Projects FY92-96 $295,338,900
LESS Existing Revenue Sources:
FDOT Pay-backs $ 10,5~0,000
Developer Contributions 300,000
Gas Taxes 7,341,000
Impact Fees 91,368,200
User Fees 20,585,000
Grants 3,025,000
Carry Forward 7,636,100
* Capital Revenue Fund FY92-96 87,850,000
MSTD (Livingston Road) 16,000,000
Big Cypress Basin 4 685 000 249 290.300
Minimum Additional Revenues Needed $ 46,048,600
Assumption of an average I Mill annual levy through FY96
-- I
This financing plan for generating additional needed revenues is
predicated on the adoption of several policies by the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners. The policies reflect the
spirit and intent of the 1985 Growth Management Act, equitable
distribution of costs among taxpayers, and sound fiscal policy:
Policy #~
Existing facility deficiencies measured against the established
Level of Service Standards for the Collier County population at
the time of adoption of the Growth Management Plan, January 10,
1989, will be eliminated with revenues generated by ad valorem
taxes and intergovernmental revenues received based on economic
activity.
Where the need for a new facility is identified with the
projected influx of new residents during the planning period
FY92-96, the revenues to build that facility will be generated by
impact fees to the extent practical. These impact fees will be
set at the maximum level justified by the County's current cost
of each facility type, a level which is legally defensible in
case of court challenge.
Certain.large scale projects of significant County-wide impact
and cost would, if funded with current ad valorem 'taxes in the
year of construction, result in an unacceptable millage rate.
These projects may be proposed for General Obligation Bonding.
The electorate may be asked through referendum to approve the
borrowing of funds for the projects and the levy of ad valorem
taxes to pay the resulting debt service. The defeat of a
referendum on any or all of the projects will result in a
lowering of the Level of Service Standard for related facilities.
The Enterprise funds, i.e. Water, Sewer and Solid Waste are
operated on the "service business" concept that the user pays for
the service. Therefore, no general or intergovernmental tax
revenues will be used for capital projects within these funds.
CIE Projects within these funds will be financed by water and
sewer impact fees and user fees, Clean Water Act grants and/or
loans, landfill fees, and revenue bonds supported by the
appropriate levels of user fees.
- 2 -
During the implementation period of the CIE of the Growth
Management Plan, the assessment ratio for property valuation for
the levy of ad valorem taxes will remain at 100% of "just value"
in accordance with Chapter 193.011 F.S.
' Collier County will not exceed a maximum ratio of total general
governmental debt service ~o bondable revenues from current
sources of 13%. Whereas Florida Statutes place no limitation on
the application of revenues to debt service by local taxing
authorities, prudent fiscal management dictates a self-imposed
level of restraint. Current bondable revenues are ad valorem
taxes and State shared revenues, specifically, gas taxes and the
half-cent sales tax. The Enterprise funds operate under utility
bonding ratios set by the financial markets and existing debt and
are, therefore, excluded from this debt policy.
Prior to fiscal year 1992-93 the County shall adopt a Stormwater
Run-off Utility Fee System or alternative revenue source in order
to fund drainage facility improvements.
Policy #8
The County will establish and implement a County-wide Road
Improvement Assessment District in FY91/92 to fund the deficit
for County and State road improvements identified in the Schedule
of Capital Improvements of the CIE.
The primary source of funding for CIE Project #400, County Jail,
will be a General Obligation Bond referendum for approval of a
bond issue to be financed by a new ad valorem tax.
- 3 -
~,::,, .. III. FINANCIN~ PLAN D~TAIL
county Arterial & Collector Roads
Requested Road Construction Projects $117,705,000
FY92-96
LESS Existing Revenue Sources:
Gas Taxes 7,341,000
Impact Fees 34,251,000
MSTD (Livingston Road) 16,000,000
Carry Forward 851.500
Additional Revenues Needed 59,261,500
BCC directed Additional Revenue
I i Source:
.' ~ County-wide Road Improvement
Assessment District . 59,261,500
~'~ Net $ 0
'" §~.'.'.%~ Roads Network
Requested State Road Improvements $ 25,600,000
FY92-96
LESS Existing Revenue Sources:
FDOT Pay-backs (State/Federal ~0,500,Q06
Gas Taxes)
Additional Revenue Needed 15,100,000
BCC directed Additional Revenue
Source:
County-wide Road Improvement 15.100.000
Assessment District
Net $ 0
Water and Sewer System
Reqa/ested Water and Sewer Projects $ 44,560,000
FY92-96
LESS Existing Revenue Source:
System Development Fees 44,560,000
Net $ 0
Solid waste
Requested Landfill Projects $ 20,585,000
FY92-96
LESS Existing Revenue Source:
Landfill Tipping Fees ~
~..~ Net $ 0
.-- 4
47_9
Emerqency Medical Service
Requested EMS Unit Construction $ 996,000
Projects FY92-96
LESS Existing Revenue Sources:
Ad Valorem Taxes (Capital $ 443,600
Revenue Fund)
EMS Impact Fees. 552,400 996,000
Net $ 0
Jail Facility
Requested Jail Expansion Projects
FY92-96 $ 25,000,000
LESS Existing Revenue Source:
None Identified 0
Additional Revenue Needed 25,000,000
BCC directed Revenue Source:
General Obligation Bond 25.000,000
Referendum
Net $ 0
Libraries
Requested Library Construction $ 4,140,000
and Book Collection FY92-96
Reserve for Impact. Fee Eligible 527,900
Projects
4,667,900
LESS Existing Revenue Sources:
Library Impact Fee $ 3,646,300
Ad Valorem Taxes (Capital 738,000
Revenue F~. nd)
Carry Forward 283,600 4,667.900
Net $ 0
Government Buildings
Requested Construction of Facilities $ 2,993,000
FY92-96
LESS Existing Revenue Source:
Ad Valorem Taxes (Capital Revenue 2,993,000
Fund)
Net $ 0
430
Parks and Recrgation
Requested Parks Construction & $ 25,176,000
Land Acquisition FY92-96
LESS Existing Revenue Sources:
Parks Impact Fees $ 8,358,500
Boating Improvement Program 3,025,000
Ad Valorem Taxes (Capital 7,291,500
Revenue Fund)
Carry Forward 6,501,00Q ~
Net 0
Drainage
Requested Drainage & Water Management $ 28,056 000
Projects FY92-96 '
LESS Existing Revenue Sources:
Big Cypress Basin $ 4,685,000
Developer Contribution
Additional Reveh~e-~-~Q ~ · 985,0QQ
Needed $ 23,071,000
BCC Directed Revenue Sources:
Stormwater Utility $ 15,246,000
Drainage Assessment Districts 7,825,000_
Net 0
II 0'47 431
- 6 -
IF. FINANCING PLAN SUMMARY
Projects Projects Total
CIE Pro4ects FY92-96 Funded Unfunded ~rojects
County Arterial & $ 58,443,500 $ 59,261,500 $117,705,000
Collector Roads
State Roads Network 10,500,000 ]5,100,000 25,600,000
Water & Sewer System 44,560,000 0 44,560,000
Solid Waste 20,585,000 0 20,585,000
Emergency Medical 996,000 0 996,000
Service
Jail Expansion 0 25,000,000 25,000,000
Libraries 4,667,900 0 4,667,900
Government Buildings 2,993,000 0 2,993,000
Parks and Recreation 25,176,000 0 25,176,000
Drainage and Water _4.98§.000 23.071.00Q ~8.05~.Q00
Management
Totals $172,906,400 122,432,500 $295,338,900
·
ReVenue SOurces FY92-96 ~xistin~ ?roposed Reve:~ues
Gas T~xes $ 7,341,000 $ 0 $ 7,341,000
FDOT Pay-backs 10,500,000 0 10,500,000
Carry Forward 7,636,100 0 7,636,100
State/Federal Grants 3,025,000 0 3,025,000
User Fees 20,585,000 0 20,585,000
Ad Valorem Taxes 11,466,100 0 11,466,100
(Capital Revenue
Fund )
Stormwater Utility 0 15,246,000 15,246,000
Impact Fees 91,368,200 0 91,368,200
MSTD (Livingston Road) 16,000,000 0 16,000,000
Drainage Assessment 0 7,825,000 7,825,000
Districts
County-wide Road 0 74,361,500 74,361,500'
Assessment District
G.O.B. Referendum (Jail) 0 25,000,000' 25,000,000
Big Cypress Basin 4,685,000 0 4,685,000
Developer Contribution 300.000 0 300,000
Totals $172,906,400 122,432,500 $295,338,900
- 7 -
Summary
This proposed financing plan for the FY92-96 CIE of the Growth
Management Plan is based on the application of revenues from
fourteen (14) current and proposed sources to accomplish the
$295M plan within the nine (9) policies outlined. It represents
a prudent, achievable, and equitable approach to secure the
revenues needed for a financially feasible CIE.
The first priority of the Collier County Capital Improvement
Program over the next five (5) years must be to complete projects
in the Capital Improvement Element. Additionally, there are
numerous capital projects of vital importance to the maintenance
of high standards of service to Collier citizens which are under
construction, planned, or yet to be developed that will need to
be funded.
A key component of this CIE Financing Plan, as iterated in Policy
~2, is the imposition of impact fees at the highest level which
is legally defensible to attain and maintain Level of Service
Standards. Impact Fees currently in place will provide 31% of
the funds to complete the projects in this plan.
433
STATE OF FLORIDA )
COUNTY OF COLLIER )
I, JAMES C. GILES, Clerk of Courts in and for the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do
hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of:
Ordinance No. 91-94
which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners 'on
the 1st day of October, 19901 durin9 Special Session.
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this Srd
day of October, 1991.
JAMES C. GILES
Clerk of Courts and Clerk .-
Ex-officio to Board of
%" ' .
( ' ' Deput~ Clerk "~,:] 1 ""~