Loading...
CCPC Agenda 02/17/2011 R & GMPCCPC MEETING AGENDA FEBRUARY 17, 2011 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 2011, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, THIRD FLOOR, 3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 20, 2011 6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS A. CP- 2010 -1, Petition requesting an Amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject portion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] B. CPSP- 2010 -2, Petition requesting Amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series (FLUE/FLUM), to: modify the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PUDA- PL2010 -388, Olde Cypress Development, LTD, represented by Chris Mitchell of Waldrop Engineering, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is requesting a PUD Amendment for the Olde Cypress PUD. The PUD Amendment request is to reduce the project density from 1100 dwelling units to 942 dwelling units and remove the requirements of trails and a park (3.9 acres minimum) within the Olde Cypress PUD/DRI. The subject property is located in the Olde Cypress subdivision, Sections 21 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP] B. DOA- PL2010 -1052, Olde Cypress Development, LTD and Vita Pima, LLC, represented by Chris Mitchell of Waldrop Engineering, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is requesting a change to the previously approved Olde Cypress Development of Regional Impact DRI, in accordance with Florida Statutes, Subsection 380.06(19). The proposed modifications will remove the 3.9 -acre park requirement, add 63.9 acres into the DRI boundary, and amend Map H to incorporate this change. The subject property consisting of 602± acres is located in Sections 21 and 22, Range 48 South, Township 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to PUDZ- PL2010 -1054) [Kay Deselem, AICP, Coordinator] C. PUDZ- PL2010 -1054: Vita Pima, LLC, represented by Christopher R. Mitchell, P.E. of Waldrop Engineering, P.A., and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is requesting a Rezone from the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district with a Special Treatment (ST) Overlay for a project that is known as the HD Development RPUD, and the Agricultural (A) zoning district, to the RPUD zoning district to allow for development of a maximum of 125 single - family residential units and 33 multi - family units, and associated accessory uses. The 65.29± acre subject property is located along the north side of Immokalee Road (CR 846) approximately 330 feet east of Olde Cypress Boulevard in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to DOA- PL2010 -1052) [Kay Deselem, AICP, Coordinator] D. PUDZ- 2009 -AR -14425 An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 2004 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district to allow for development of up to 135,000 square feet of commercial development and/or a retirement community/group housing at a FAR of .60 and/or a hotel /motel of an intensity of 26 units per acre for a 23.33 + /- acre parcel to be known as the Addie's Corner MPUD located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Kay Deselem, AICP, Principal Planner] E. Note: This item has been continued from the February 3.d meeting. CP- 2008 -5, Petition requesting amendments to the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map, to make revisions to the entire Master Plan to include: increases to commercial acreage, industrial acreage, and allowable residential density; elimination of some existing designations; creation of a new designation for the Immokalee Regional Airport site; and, redesignation of approximately 103 acres to Immokalee Urban Area from Agricultural/Rural within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area as identified on the countywide Future Land Use Map. Additionally, the petition requests an amendment to Policy 6.2.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to treat that portion of the Lake Trafford Camp Keais Strand System which is within the Immokalee Urban Area as Neutral Lands for vegetation retention, and to the Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Future Land Use Element to show the redesignation of the 103 acres to the Immokalee Urban Area. [Coordinator: Carolina Valera, Principal Planner] F. CPSP- 2010 -5, Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict by changing it from mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre — or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety; the subdistrict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 east, containing + 22.83 acres. [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN 2/7/2011 CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows /jmp 2010 GMP AMENDMENT CYCLE —TRANSMITTAL FEBRUARY 17, 2011 CCPC CONSENT AGENDA REVIEW ITEMS CP- 2010 -1 VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT CPSP- 2010 -2 BATCH AMENDMENTS INCLUDING WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS AND PROPOSED WELLFIELD & ASRs MAP PER CCPC MEETING HELD JANURAY 20, 2011 AGENDA ITEM 8A 2010 GMP Amendment Cycle - Transmittal February 17, 2011 CCPC Consent Agenda Review [Text in double underline format and/or shaded denote changes /recommendations made by CCPC at the January 20, 2011 hearings.] 1. January 20, 2011 CCPC Agenda Item #9.E: CP- 2010 -1, Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 16. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide primarily for neighborhood commercial development at a scale not typically found in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. The intent is to provide commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. Allowable uses shall be a variety of commercial uses as more particularly described below, and mixed use (commercial and residential). Prohibited uses shall be gas stations and convenience stores with gas pumps, and certain types of fast food restaurants. This Subdistrict consists of two parcels comprising approximately 17 acres, located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road and east of Livingston Road, as shown on the Subdistrict Map. For mixed -use development, residential density shall be limited to sixteen dwelling units per acre. Residential density shall be calculated based upon the gross acreage of the Subdistrict parcel on which it is located (Parcel 1 or Parcel 2). Rezoning of the parcels comprising this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD, Planned Unit Development. At the time of rezoning, the applicant must include architectural and landscape standards for each parcel. a. Parcel 1 This parcel is located at the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: retail, personal service, restaurant, office, and all other uses as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005); other comparable and /or compatible land uses not found specifically in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, limited to: general and medical offices, government offices, financial institutions, personal and business services, limited indoor recreational uses, and limited retail uses; mixed -use development (residential and commercial uses). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet, except for a Words underlined are added; words 6tF Gk +hre ,,.h are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. grocery/supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store, or department store use, which shall not exceed a maximum of 50,000 square feet. In addition to the prohibited uses applicable to both parcels. the following list of uses shall also be prohibited on Parcel 1. 0742 — Veterinary services for Animal Specialties — Horses are prohibited, other animals are allowed 0752 — Animal specialty services. except Veterinary (dog grooming is allowed) 5261 — Retail nurseries. lawn and garden supply stores 5499 — Poultry dealers — retail and egg dealers — retail 5531 — Auto and home supply store, except automobile accessory and parts dealers — retail (no on -site installation) 5813 — Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) 5921 - Liquor stores exceeding 5.000 square feet 5932 — Uses merchandise stores 5962 — Automatic merchandising machine operators 7211 — Power laundries, family and commercial 7215 — Coin - operated laundries and drvcleaning 7216 — Drvcleaning plants, except rug cleaning 7299 — Miscellaneous personal services, not elsewhere classified Coin operated service machine operations Comfort station operation Escort service Locker rental Massage parlors (except those employing licensed therapists) Rest room operation Tattoo parlors Turkish baths Wedding chapels. privately operated 7389 — Business services, not elsewhere classified. except Appraisers 7623 — Refrigeration and air - conditioning service and repair shops 7629 — Electrical and electronic repair shops, not elsewhere classified 7641 — Re- upholstery and furniture repair 7692 —Welding repair 7694 — Armature rewinding shops 7699 — Repair shops and related services, not elsewhere classified 7841 — Adult oriented video tape rental 7993 — Coin operated amusement devices 8641 — Civic, social and fraternal associations * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** Words underlined are added; words z+�;through are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CCPC Recommendation: Not part of the Subdistrict Text As a condition of approval, and prior to the adoption of this Growth Management Plan amendment, the owner shall record in the official land records restrictive covenants for the benefit of surrounding property owners, including the Orchards, Village Walk, Tiburon at Pelican Marsh and Wilshire Lakes, that will prohibit the prohibited uses contained within the Subdistrict. AGENDA ITEM 8B 2. January 20, 2011 CCPC Agenda Item #9.F: CPSP- 2010 -2 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 5.1: All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. or properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation Desc iption Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with the Future and Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the following provisions apply: a. For such commercially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity commercial zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of commercial land use allowed by the existing zoning district, except as allowed by Policy 5.11, is not exceeded in the new zoning district. The foregoing notwithstanding, such commercial properties may be approved for the addition of residential uses, in accordance with the Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, though an increase in overall intensity may result. A zoning change of such commercial -zoned properties to a residential zoning district is allowed as provided for in the Density Rating System of this Future Land Use Element. b. For such industrially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowec provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity industrial, or commercia , zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of industrial land use allowed by the existing zoning district is not exceeded in the new zoni g district. c. For such residentially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the authorized number of dwelling units in the new zoning district doe6 not exceed that authorized by the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of development allowed by the new zoning district does not exceed that allowed by the existing zoning district. d. For property deemed to be GORsistent with this Element pursuant to one or more of p0liGies 5.9 through 5.13, said property may be combined and developed with ot property, whether SUGh 9theF pFoperty is deemed GORSistent via these same pelides OF is deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Designation DeSGFiptieR SeGtion. For properties may be distributed thFeughout the prejeGt, as previded for in the Dens4y Rating System or the GOMMeFGffial Mixed Use SubdiStFiGt, as applicable. d. Any property deemed consistent may be combined and developed with other abutting property provided the density and intensity of development derived from the property deemed consistent is not increased. 3 Words underlined are added; words StFUGk threugh are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. e. Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district. * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** FUTURE LAND USE MAP — MAP SERIES Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Replace existing map with proposed map that reflects ':he latest hydrologic modeling, as required by Objective 1 of the Natural Groundwater Acuifer Recharge Sub- Element and subsequent policies, and Objective 3.3 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and subsequent policies. ADDED Marco Lakes to the Map CCPC Transmittal 2 -17 -2011 consent agenda review doc G:1ComprehensivelCOMP PLANNING GIMP DATMComp Plan Amend rnents12009 -2010 Combined Cycle Petitions\CCPC Transmittal dw &mm/2 -1 -11 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. AGENDA ITEM 9E PUBLIC VIEW COPY DO NOT REMOVE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ADOPTION CYCLE AMENDMENTS PETITION CP- 2008 -5 CCPC: February 17, 2011 BCC: March 22, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS CCPC — Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Adoption Amendments February 17, 2011 CCPC Agenda: 1) TAB: Table of Contents. 2) TAB: ORC Report. 3) TAB: CCPC Staff Report. 4) TAB: EAC Staff Report 5) TAB: CCPC Advertisement 6) TAB: Ordinance. 7) TAB: Exhibit `A' Text changes. 8) TAB: Exhibit `A' Maps changes. 9) TAB: CP- 2008 -5 Petition. 10) TAB: Data & Analysis Wilson/Miller DOCUMENT: Table of Contents DOCUMENT: DCA's Transmittal Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report DOCUMENT: CCPC Staff Report DOCUMENT: EAC Staff Report DOCUMENT: CCPC Advertisement & Affidavit DOCUMENT: Adoption Ordinance DOCUMENT: Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME) Exhibit `A' Text Changes DOCUMENT: CP- 2008 -5 Exhibit `A' Map Changes DOCUMENT: I.A.M.P. Amendment Petition DOCUMENT: Data and Analysis: Density Blending 0 STAT • •- . DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS "Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home" CHARLIE CRIST Govemor MEMORANDUM TO: Collier County Date: September 7, 2010 THOMAS G. PELHAM Secretary Subject: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review Objections, Recommendations and Comments Reports Enclosed are the Departments Objection, Recommendations and Comments Reports on the proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan(s) from the following local government(s): Collier County 10 -RAEC 1 These reports are provided for your information and agency files. Following the adoption of the amendments by the local governments and subsequent compliance review to be conducted by this agency, we will forward copies of the Notices of Intent published by each local government plan. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Ray Eubanks at Suncom 278 -4925 or (850) 4884925. RE /lp Enclosure 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD ♦ TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399 -2100 850 - 488 -8466 (p) • 850- 921 -0781 (f) • Website: www.dca.state.fl.us • COMMUNITY PLANNING 850-488-2356(p) 850-488-3309(1) • HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 850- 488 -7956 (p) 850- 922 -5623 (t) STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS "Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home" CHARLIE CRIST Governor September 3, 2010 The Honorable Fred W. Coyle, Chairman Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 Dear Chairman Coyle: THOMAS G. PELHAM Secretary The Department has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Collier County (DCA 10 -RAEC 1), which was received on July 6, 2010. Based on Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, we have prepared the attached report, which outlines our findings concerning the amendment. It is particularly important that the County address the objections set forth in our review report so that these issues can be successfully resolved prior to adoption. We have also included a copy of local, regional and state agency comments for your consideration. Within the next 60 days, the County should act by choosing to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment. For your assistance, our report outlines procedures for final adoption and transmittal. The proposed amendment revises the Immokalee Area Master Plan. The Department has identified issues with the amendment regarding: (1) lack of meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards in some of the proposed text language; and (2) the lack of supporting data and analysis demonstrating coordination of land use planning with public facility planning for the proposed revisions to the Future Land Use Map. These and all of the issues identified in the attached report should be addressed before adoption of the plan amendments. 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD ♦ TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399 -2100 850 -488 -8466 (p) • 850- 921 -0781 (f) ♦ Website: www.dca.state.fl.us • COMMUNITY PLANNING 850-4W2356 (p) 850488 -3309 (Q • FLORIDA COMMUNITIES TRUST 850-922-2207(p) 850 -921 -1747 (t) • • HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 850-488-7956(p) 8509225623 (f) • The Honorable Fred W. Coyle, Chairman September 3, 2010 Page 2 If you, or your staff, have any questions or if we may be of further assistance as you formulate your response to this Report, please contact Scott Rogers, Principal Planner, at (850) 922 -1758, or Brenda Winningham, Regional Planning Administrator, at (850) 487 -4545. Sincerely yours, C—a-rQles Gauthier, AICP Director, Division of Community Planning CG /sr Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report Review Agency Comments cc: Ken Heatherington, Executive Director, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator, Planning & Regulation, Growth Management Division, Collier County Government TRANSMITTAL PROCEDURES The process for adoption of local comprehensive plan amendments is outlined in Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.), and Rule 9J- 11.011, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). Within ten working days of the date of adoption, the County must submit the following to the Department: Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendment; A copy of the adoption ordinance; A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed; A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which were not included in the ordinance; and A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report. . The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent. In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendment, and pursuant to Rule 9J- 11.011(5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to Executive Director of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. Please be advised that the Florida legislature amended Section 163.3184(8)(b), F.S., requiring the Department to provide a courtesy information statement regarding the Department's Notice of Intent to citizens who furnish their names and addresses at the local government's plan amendment transmittal (proposed) or adoption hearings. In order to provide this courtesy information statement, local governments are required by the law to furnish to the Department the names and addresses of the citizens requesting this information. This list is to be submitted at the time of transmittal of the adopted plan amendment (a sample Information Sheet is attached for your use). INTRODUCTION The following objections, recommendations and comments are based upon the Department's review of the Collier County proposed comprehensive plan amendment, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.). The objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 9J- 5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. The objections include a recommendation of approaches that might be taken to address the cited objections. Other approaches may be more suitable in specific situations. Some of these objections may have initially been raised by one of the other external review agencies. If there is a difference between the Department's objection and the external agency advisory objection or comment, the Department's objection would take precedence. The County should address each of these objections when the amendment is resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections that are not addressed may result in a determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an objection regarding missing data and analysis items that the County considers not applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement, justifying its non - applicability, pursuant to Rule 9J- 5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will make a determination on the non - applicability of the requirement, and if the justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered addressed. The comments that follow the objections and recommendations are advisory in nature. Comments will not form the basis of a determination of non - compliance. They are included to call attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning planning principles, methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar, organization, mapping, and reader comprehension. Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other state review agencies and other agencies. These comments are advisory to the Department and may not form the basis of Departmental objections unless they appear under the "Objections" heading in this report. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS FOR COLLIER COUNTY AMENDMENT 10 -RAEC1 September 3, 2010 Division of Community Planning Office of Comprehensive Planning This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 91-1 1.010, F.A_C. OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS FOR COLLIER COUNTY AMENDMENT 10 -RAECI I. CONSISTENCY WITH CHAPTER 163, PART II, F.S., AND RULE 9J -5, F.A.C. The proposed Amendment 10 -RAEC 1 (CP- 2008 -5) revises the Immokalee Area Master Plan of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. A. Amendment CP- 2008 -5: The proposed amendment revises the goals, objectives, policies, Future Land Use Map (FLUM), data, and analysis of the Immokalee Area Master Plan (IAMP). The Department raises the following objections to the proposed Amendment 10 -RAEC1 (CP- 2008-5): 1. Obiection (Plan Policies): The proposed amendment (Land Use Designation Description Section) does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the intensity of nonresidential use for the following future land use categories: Industrial Subdistrict; Industrial -Mixed Use Subdistrict; Industrial - Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict; Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict; Recreational/Tourist Subdistrict; Low Residential Subdistrict; Medium Residential Subdistrict; and High Residential Subdistrict. The proposed amendment (Land Use Designation Description Section) does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the percentage distribution of mix among the mix of residential and nonresidential land uses allowed in the Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict and Recreational/Tourist Subdistrict. The proposed amendment (Land Use Designation Description Section) does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the land uses that are allowed in the "Industrial - Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict" because the text for this Subdistrict states "allowable uses include all other uses deemed to be compatible and consistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan, as may be amended." The proposed amendment does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the type of nonresidential land uses allowed within the Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict. Proposed amendment Policy 5.1.1 allows development to achieve density bonuses and other incentives in the Immokalee Urban Area if development exceeds the minimum required amounts of preservation already set forth in Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 6.1.1. Proposed Policy 5. 1.1 does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the amounts of preservation that would be required to receive the density bonuses or incentives. 2 Proposed amendment Policy 5.1.2 states, in part, that proposed development adjacent to Lake Trafford will conform to best management practices regarding water quality in order to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to the lake and its surrounding wetlands or natural habitat. Although the purpose of Policy 5.1.2 is to protect natural resources, Policy 5.1.2 does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the best management practices in order to guide the content of the Land Development Code. Proposed Policy 6.1.9 states that all rezonings must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, but Policy 6.1.9 allows zoning to be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan for properties that have zoning in place prior to a change in Land Use Designation where the prior zoning allows for a higher density or intensity than the new Land Use Designation. In addition, proposed Policy 6.1.9(5) states that "Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district. Proposed Policy 6.1.9(5) does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards for the intensity of land use that require the intensity of development to be determined consistent with the intensity standards of the applicable future land use category. Proposed Policy 7.1.5 states, in part, that Collier County will amend the Land Development Code to include a Central Business District in Immokalee, and the Central Business District will encourage high- intensity, multi -story, and pedestrian- oriented commercial and mixed -use development. Proposed Policy 7.1.5 does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the intensity of development. Rules 9J- 5.005(6); 9J- 5.003(3)(b)4.; 9J- 5.006(3)(c)1., 4., 5., 6., and 7.; 9J- 5.006(4)(c); 9J- 5.011(2)(c)5.; 9J- 5.013(2)(c)3., 6., and 9., Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.); and Section 163.3177(6)(a), (c), and (d), Florida Statutes (F.S.). Recommendation: Revise the Land Use Designation Description Section to establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining: (1) the intensity of nonresidential use for the following future land use categories: Industrial Subdistrict; Industrial -Mixed Use Subdistrict; Industrial - Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict; Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict; Recreational/Tourist Subdistrict; Low Residential Subdistrict; Medium Residential Subdistrict; and High Residential Subdistrict; (2) the percentage distribution of mix among the mix of residential and nonresidential land uses allowed in the Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict and Recreational/Tourist Subdistrict; (3) the land uses that are allowed in the "Industrial - Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict" because the text for this Subdistrict states "allowable uses include all other uses deemed to be compatible and consistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan, as may be amended." ; and (4) the type of nonresidential land uses allowed within the Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict. Revise proposed Policy 5.1.1 to establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the amounts of preservation that would be required when exceeding the amounts established in Policy 6.1.1. Revise Policy 5.1.2 to establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the best management practices in order to guide the content of the Land Development Code. Revise proposed Policy 6.1.9 to establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards that ensure rezonings are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Revise proposed Policy 6.1.9(5) to establish 3 meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards that require the intensity of development to be determined consistent with the intensity standards of the applicable future land use category. Revise proposed Policy 7.1.5 to establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the intensity of development intended by the policy. 2. Objection (FLUM Amendments): Amendment 10 -RAEC1 proposes changes to land use designations on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The proposed amendment is not supported by an analysis (short-term five -year, and long -term planning timeframes) of the projected demand for and availability of potable water and sanitary sewer facilities and water supply based on clear assumptions regarding the combination of both residential land uses (at maximum density and population projections) and nonresidential land uses (based on intensity standards established in the IAMP) at the adopted level of service standards. The proposed amendment is not supported by data and analysis addressing the following: (1) the projected impact (short-terns five -year, and long -term planning timeframes) of the proposed FLUM amendments upon the adopted level of service standards of roadway facilities, including SR 29 and SR 82, based on clear assumptions regarding residential land uses (at maximum density and population projections), nonresidential land uses (based on intensity standards established in the IAMP), and background growth in trips; (2) identifying road improvements that are needed to maintain the adopted level of service standards; (3) demonstrating that any road improvements that are needed to maintain the adopted level of service standards are depicted on the Future Transportation Map (or map series) of the adopted portion of the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and included in the Capital Improvements Element Five -year Schedule of Capital Improvements; and (4) addressing coordination of any needed improvements with the plans and programs of the Florida Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program. The amendment does not coordinate the road improvements that are needed to maintain the adopted roadway level of service standards with the Future Transportation Map (by depicting such road improvements on the Map) and Capital Improvement Element (by including the road improvements that are needed in the 5 years within the Five -year Schedule, and by including the road improvements that are needed in the long -term in a policy in the Capital Improvement Element). Rules 9J- 5.005(2)(a), (5), and (6); 9J- 5.006(2)(a), and (3)(b)1.; 9J- 5.01l(1)(a), (c), (d), (e), and (f); 9J- 5.011(2)(b)2., and (2)(c) l .; 9J- 5.013(1)(c), (2)(b)2., and (2)(c)].; 9J- 5.016(1)(a), (2)(e), (3)(b) L, and (3)(b)3., and (4)(a) and (b); 9J- 5.019(2), (3), (4), and (5)(b)2, F.A.C.; and Sections 163.3177(6)(a), (6)(b), (6)(c), (6)(d), and (6)0); and 163.3177(2), (3), (4), (8), and (10)(e), F. S. Recommendation: Support the amendment with data and analysis demonstrating the availability of potable water and sanitary sewer facilities and adequate water supply to serve the projected demands for the short-term and long -term planning timeframes. Support the amendment with a transportation analysis based on the maximum development potential of the land use changes (and growth in background trips) that addresses the transportation facilities that are needed to achieve and maintain the adopted level of service standards of roads and demonstrates coordination of any needed transportation facility improvements with the 4 Transportation Element, Capital Improvements Element, plans and programs of the Florida Department of Transportation, and the Metropolitan Planning Organization Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program. Revise the amendment, Future Transportation Map, and Capital Improvement Element (Five -year Schedule of Capital Improvements, and policies if needed) to be supported by and consistent with the data and analysis. If public facilities or road improvements are needed to address deficiencies in the short-term (five -year) planning timeframe, the improvements should be included in the Capital Improvement Element Five -year Schedule of Capital Improvements. If public facilities are projected to be deficient in the long -term planning timeframe, the County should maintain in the adopted portion of the Capital Improvement Element a list of the improvements that are projected to be needed in the planning timeframe but beyond the five years covered by the adopted Capital Improvements Schedule. This list need not include any cost estimates for the improvements. The County must use this list when it adopts the mandatory annual update of the Capital Improvements Schedule. Improvements needed to achieve and maintain adopted level of service standards within the next five years should be moved from the list into the financially feasible five -year schedule, along with a cost estimate. Revise the amendment if necessary, to be supported by and consistent with the data and analysis. II. CONSISTENCY WITH STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Objection: The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments related to the objections raised above are not consistent with and do not further the following provisions of the State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, Florida Statutes) for the reasons noted in the objections raised above in Section I: (a) Goal 7.a (Water Resources); Policy 7.b.5; (the amendment related to Objection 2); (b) Goal 15.a (Land Use); Policies 15.b.1, 15.b.3, and 15.b.6; (the amendments related to Objections 1 and 2); (c) Goal 17.a (Public Facilities); Policy 17.b.7; (the amendments related to Objection 2); (d) Goal 19.a (Transportation); Policies 19.b.3, 19.b.9, and 19.b.13; (the amendments related to Objection 2); and (e) Goal 25.a (Plan Implementation); Policy 25.b.7; (the amendments related to Objections 1 and 2). Recommendation: Revise the plan amendments as recommended for the objections raised above. 5 "Massey, Lawrence" Lawrence . Massey @dot.stat e.fl.us> 08/20/2010 04:10 PM Dear Ray, To "' DCPextemalagencycomments @dca.state.fl.us'" <DCPexternalagencycomments @ dca.state.fl.us> cc "'scott.rogers @dca.state.fl.us'" <scott.rogers @dca.state.fl.us >, "Limbaugh, Johnny" < Johnny .Limbaugh @dot.state.fl.us >, "Cahill, Maria" bcc Subject Collier County 10RAEC1 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Revised FDOT Comments Thank you for giving FDOT the opportunity to review and comment on the above referenced proposed comprehensive plan amendment. We determined that there were formatting mistakes on the comments previously submitted on August 09, 2010. These mistakes have been corrected and FDOT Comment #10 has been revised in the attached letter. Please replace the department's previously submitted letter of comments with the attached. If you or your staff have any questions or would like to discuss the department's concerns, please let me know. Respectfully, Lawrence Massey Growth Management Coordinator Florida Department of Transportation District One, Southwest Area Urban Office at the Southwest Interagency Facility for Transportation 10041 Daniels Parkway Fort Myers, FL 33913 (239) 461-4300 Fax. (239) 33$-2353 R� 08201 0 Collier_County_10RAEC1 Proposed CPA_FDOT_Comments revised.pol Florida Department of Transportation CHARLIE CRIST (:OVF.RNOR Mr. Ray Eubanks Plan Review and Processing Administrator Department of Community Affairs (DCA) Division of Community Planning 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32399 10041 Daniels Parkway Fort Myers, FL 33913 August 20, 2010 STEPHANIE C. KOPEL.OUSOS SECRETARY RE: Collier County 10RAEC1 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — FDOT Comments Dear Mr. Eubanks: The Florida Department of Transportation, District 1, has reviewed the proposed version of the Collier County I ORAEC 1 comprehensive plan amendments. This letter offers comments on the proposed amendments. OVERALL AMENDMENT The proposed amendments reflect an effectively rewritten Immokalee Area Master Plan (IAMP). The IAMP area is within a Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern ( RACEC) and, therefore, has plan elements focused on community development and economic growth. In general, the proposed amendments include features that focus land use patterns to promote density and allow for increased opportunities for multimodal travel. However, while the submittal includes extensive documentation and explanation of the changes to the goals, policies, and objectives, the transportation analysis was insufficient to determine the extent of the impact that these changes may have on the roadway system, both internal and external to the IAMP area. FDOT's detailed comments and recommendations on the amendments that may potentially impact state roadway planning and operations can be found in the following sections. The revised IAMP includes eight new goals and corresponding policies and objectives. Therefore, the department's comments are organized based upon each of the eight new goals contained in the proposed LAMP. GOAL 1 The purpose of Goal 1 is to identify the priorities of the IAMP related to annual capital improvements. The department has no comments on Goal 1 or the corresponding objectives and policies. GOAL 2 The purpose of Goal 2 is to enhance and diversify the local economy. There are five objectives: (1) To actively pursue, attract, and retain businesses; (2) To create a business climate that will enhance and diversify the economy and increase employment opportunities and quality of life; (3) To promote and expand tourism, recreation, and entertainment within the economy; (4) To enhance and expand educational and cultural facilities and opportunities; Mr. Ray Eubanks Collier County IORAECI Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — FDOT Comments August 20, 2010 Page 2 of 7 (5) To promote and support development and re- development initiatives. The department has the following comments pertaining to the objectives and corresponding policies of Goal 2: FDOT Comment #1 Policy 2.1.3 discusses the use of wetland or habitat conservation banking to compensate for development within the Immokalee Urban Area. This policy identifies that incentives and regulatory requirements shall be included in the land development code (LDC) to direct mitigation to the targeted lands. Please elaborate on what incentives will he included in the LDC (such as transfer of development rights). FDOT Comment #2 Policy 2.2.3 directs Collier County to amend the LDC to create more flexibility for home -based businesses in the Immokalee Urban Area. While the LDC currently says that home -based businesses cannot create additional trips above the normal residential use, guidance should be provided in the comprehensive plan regarding allowed uses and limitations to ensure that the potential impacts of home -based businesses are predictable and are adequately accommodated by public infrastructure. FDOT Comment #3 Policy 2.3.3 states that Collier County will continue efforts to work with the Seminole Tribe to integrate future plans for a casino and address impacts of the casino, resort hotel, and other resort structures in the community. Policy 2.3.4 goes on to state that the county will encourage development of an entertainment area (outside Seminole lands) that is complementary to the casino and resort. Development of these uses is likely to have a significant impact on state Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) roadways in the area, and no documentation of the transportation impacts associated with these changes is provided in the submittal. The department recommends the following: a. Development of the casino and resort on tribal lands should be coordinated with the county and FDOT to ensure that state roadways in the area will meet adopted transportation Level of Service (LOS) standards. b. Planning related to the casino, resort, and surrounding entertainment uses should reflect land use and transportation strategies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions per HB 697. For example, the casino, resort, and surrounding entertainment uses should be designed with a high level of internal connectivity and walkability. GOAL 3 The purpose of Goal 3 is to provide diverse safe and sanitary housing for all residents of the Immokalee Urban Area. The department has no comments on Goal 3 or the corresponding objectives and policies. GOAL The purpose of Goal 4 is to provide adequate and efficient public infrastructure and facilities. Four objectives are proposed: (1) Provide a comprehensive system of parks and recreational facilities; (2) Provide a network of roads, sidewalks, and bike paths to support growth and provide for the safe and convenient movement of pedestrians, motorized, and non - motorized vehicles; (3) To improve stormwater management and surface drainage; (4) To provide an efficient and economical solid waste management system. The following is a summary of transportation- related policies of Goal 4: • Policy 4.2.1 discusses priorities for pathways connecting residential and employment areas as well as schools, libraries, and other services. The Collier County 5 -year pathway plan will depict existing and planned connections and priorities based upon community input. • Policy 4.2.2 discusses long -range transportation improvements. The policy states that Collier County will explore the possibility of accelerating the implementation of the MPO's Long Range Mr. Ray Eubanks Collier County 1 ORAEC l Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — FDOT Comments August 20, 2010 Page 3 of 7 Transportation Plan (LRTP) to support the stimulation of economic development. The policy specifically identifies support for accelerating; (1) the widening of S.R. 82 between I -75 and S.R. 29; (2) the construction of the S.R. 29 bypass; (3) FDOT improvements to state roadways; (4) the construction of new or expanded transportation corridors to Naples and coastal Collier County; (5) the construction of new collector roads. • Policy 4.2.3 discusses coordination between Collier County, FDOT, and landowners to identify preferred routes to connect the airport to the future S.R. 29 bypass. • Policy 4.2.4 discusses plans for safety improvements including pedestrian and bicycle improvements identified as part of a walkability study. • Policies 4.2.5 and 4.2.6 discuss consideration for expansion of public transit routes and encouragement of additional transit services such as bike - and -ride and medical transport. • Policy 4.2.7 discusses transportation concurrency alternatives for S.R. 29. The policy states that alternative methods shall be identified within two years to remove barriers to economic development. Consideration for establishment of a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) or Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA) is identified. The policy also; (1) identifies limitations on exceptions to concurrency for certain locations (e.g., the airport and the central business district corridor); (2) identifies a need for case -by -case evaluation of certain project types (e.g., transit- oriented developments and job creation projects); (3) requires ongoing reviews of the exception process. The department has the following comments pertaining to the objectives and corresponding policies of Goal 4: FDOT Comment #4 The department acknowledges that Policy 4.2.2 is a statement that the county will encourage the acceleration of projects, but it is unclear whether these projects are needed to support the land use pattern and densities and intensities shown on the proposed Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Further, per the county's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), there are currently no capacity improvements to S.R. 82 and S.R. 29 funded for construction (including the bypass referenced in Policy 4.2.3, which is currently in the PD&E phase). The department also notes that the county and the Immokalee community can play a significant role in furthering planned projects through mechanisms such as impact fees and developer contributions. FDOT Comment #S Regarding Policy 4.2.7, the department recommends that a TCEA or TCMA should be evaluated at least with each Evaluation & Appraisal Report (EAR). Therefore, it will be important for any proposed TCEA or TCMA to include performance measures, targets, and timelines so that the successes and any shortcomings of the TCEA or TCMA can be assessed. GOAL The purpose of Goal 5 is to protect important natural resources (including Lake Trafford) through development standards and policies. Policy 5. 1.1 discusses incentive programs and innovative land development regulations to preserve native vegetation. Identified incentives include transfer of development rights, density bonuses, development clustering, and flexible development standards within specified zoning areas. The department has the following comment pertaining to the objectives and corresponding policies of Goal 5: Mr. Ray Eubanks Collier County I ORAECI Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — FDOT Comments August 20, 2010 Page 4 of 7 FDOT Comment #6 Additional information is needed on the proposed transfer of developments rights program and the density bonuses. In particular, upper limits on the amount of density that can be transferred and the density bonuses should be identified to allow for quantification of potential transportation impacts and to provide guidance for land development regulations. GOAL 6 The purpose of Goal 6 is to allow and encourage a mixture of land uses that are appropriate for Immokalee. Objectives and policies address mobile homes, zoning, compact development, and agricultural activities. Substantial revisions to the future land use designations are proposed. The department has no comments on Goal 6 or the corresponding objectives and policies. (Comments on the revisions to future land use designations are provided later in this review.) GOAL 7 Goal 7 is intended to establish development design standards that are appropriate for Immokalee. This includes establishing Immokalee - specific land development code regulations related to allowed land uses, densities and intensities, landscaping, and signage, as well as promoting bicycling and walking through the land use pattern and pedestrian amenities. The department has no comments on Goal 7 or the corresponding objectives and policies. GOAL 8 The purpose of Goal 8 is the coordination of information between other governmental agencies. This includes coordination regarding economic development initiatives, redevelopment implementation, and government services. The department has no comments on Goal 8 or the corresponding objectives and policies, FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS This section provides descriptions of the IAMP future land use designations, including revisions to current designations and introduction of new designations. The following table lists the adopted and proposed future land use designations. Revisions to the future land use designations include the following: Adopted Future Land Use Designations Proposed Future Land Use Designations Urban -Mixed Use District Urban -Mixed Use District LR Low Residential LR Low Residential MR Mixed Residential MR Medium Residential HR High Residential HR High Residential NC Neighborhood Center CMU Commercial -Mixed Use CC -MU Commerce Center -Mixed -Use RT Recreational/Tourist PUD Planned Unit Development Commercial RT Recreational Tourist Urban - Commercial District C Commercial -S.R. 29 and Jefferson Ave. Urban - Industrial District Urban - Industrial District ID Industrial ID Industrial CC -1 Commerce Center - Industrial IMU Industrial Mixed Use BP Business Park APO Immokalee Regional Airport Revisions to the future land use designations include the following: Mr. Ray Eubanks Collier County 1 ORAECI Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — FDOT Comments August 20, 2010 Page 5 of 7 • Deleted future land use designations are Neighborhood Center, Commercial -S.R. 29 and Jefferson Avenue, Commerce Center - Industrial, and Business Park. Some of these designations are reflected in the new designations and revised designations. • The residential future land use descriptions are proposed to have only minor changes, such as Mixed Residential being renamed Medium Residential. The largest change is the addition of a maximum density that is inclusive of all density bonuses. Density bonuses were allowed in the adopted version of comprehensive plan but the various bonuses were not tallied and stated for each future land use designation. For some future land use designations, these new thresholds actually result in a decrease in maximum trip generation potential. For instance, under Low Residential, the proposed text allows 4 units /acre as the base density and 8 units /acre if bonuses are used, whereas the adopted text allows 4 units/acre as the base density and up to 12 units/acre if bonuses are used. • Low Residential, Medium Residential, and High Residential allow new commercial development, if developed as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). A table specifies the maximum amount of commercial development and the minimum residential density allowed for different PUD sizes. A similar table was previously provided under the adopted PUD Commercial future land use designation. • For Commercial -Mixed Use, the proposed future land use designation allows a maximum density of 20 units per acre with bonuses, whereas under the adopted future land use designation, a density bonus of up to 8 additional dwelling units makes it possible to-achieve up to 20 dwelling units per acre. The proposed and adopted future land use designations are therefore consistent. • For Commercial -Mixed Use, no maximum intensity for nonresidential uses and no land use mix guidance are provided. • For Recreational/Tourist, the base residential densities stay the same at 4 dwelling units per acre; however, transient lodging densities are proposed to increase from 10 to 26 units per acre. • Certain Low Residential lands are proposed to be eligible for density blending. • For Industrial, no maximum intensity for nonresidential uses and no land use mix guidance are provided. • Industrial -Mixed Use is a new future land use designation. Allowed uses are described, but no maximum intensity for nonresidential uses is provided. Commercial uses cannot exceed 30% of total site acreage. • Industrial- Immokalee Regional Airport is a new future land use designation, which allows "all uses permitted in the Industrial sub - district' as well as "all other uses deemed to be compatible and consistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan ". No maximum intensity for nonresidential uses and no land use mix guidance are provided. • The Lake Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System Overlay is proposed. The Seminole Reservation Overlay is proposed. The Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area boundary is proposed. The densities of underlying future land use designations are applicable, although lands with the overlay are not eligible for density bonuses. The data and analysis section of the comprehensive plan includes an assessment of the revisions to the future land use designations. Highlights of the data and analysis are as follows: • The proposed FLUM differs significantly from the adopted FLUM due to the revisions to the future land use designation and an effort to focus density along major roadways (i.e., S.R. 29). • Tables 5 -2 and 5 -3 show acreages for the proposed and adopted future land use designations. Tables 54 and 5 -5 group the future land use designations into categories and provide acreages for the proposed and adopted scenarios. Acreages for the various Future Land Use designations vary widely between the adopted and proposed FLUM. As shown in Table 5 -4 and 5 -5 of the data and analysis, the residential designations have been reduced by about 636 acres ( -5 %), with a corresponding increase in industrial uses ( +462 acres, —17 %) and smaller increases in commercial ( +80 acres, —8 %) and tourist ( +201 acres, —80 %) acreages. The proposed FLUM includes approximately 100.6 acres of land added to the Immokalee Urban Area as part of an expansion of the airport. Mr. Ray Eubanks Collier County IORAECI Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — FDOT Comments August 20, 2010 Page 6 of 7 • Tables 5 -7 and 5 -8 show the potential change in residential units in the IAMP considering the base densities for the adopted and proposed future land use designations. These tables indicate an increase of 6,731 potential residential units ( -10 %). Tables 5 -9 and 5 -10 also show the potential change in residential units in the IAMP, but with consideration of density bonuses. In Tables 5 -9 and 5 -10, the proposed future land use designations result in a decrease of 30,853 dwelling units (-18%). • With regard to public facilities (including transportation), the data and analysis performed for the LAMP states that the proposed IAMP amendments "reflect an ideological change in how growth should occur in the Immokalee Urban Area" and "will not have an impact on the demand for public facilities ". • The transportation data and analysis states that all state roads in Immokalee meet adopted LOS standards under existing conditions. This is consistent with the department's planning -level data. • Table 6 -9 identifies bicycle and pedestrian project priorities. • Section 7 of the data and analysis discusses HB 697 and identifies proposed goals, objectives, and policies that comply with HB 697. The identified goals, objectives, and policies address: (1) reductions in vehicle -miles traveled (VMT) through diversification of the community's economy (i.e., shorter trips), expanded public transit, encouragement of compact development, and consideration of a TCEA; (2) promotion of non -auto modes through the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan and expanded public transit; (3) compact, energy - efficient, mixed -use development; (4) provision of higher - density development. • Attachment A to the data and analysis is a statement of how the submitted data and analysis complies with the Chapter 163, F. S., and Rules 9J -5 and 9J -11, F.A.C. Transportation LOS in the near and long term is not evaluated. The department has the following comments pertaining to the revisions to the future land use designations and the data and analysis: FDOT Comment #7 Maximum intensities (such as floor area ratios) are not stated for future land use designations that allow non - residential development. Some future land use designations that allow a mix of uses do not provide guidance on the allowed land use mix (e.g., maximum percentage of residential allowed). 9J- 5.005(6), F.A.C., requires "meaningful and predictable standards for the use and development of land". Please provide specific guidance about allowed land uses, densities, and intensities per 9J- 5.005(6), F.A.C. FDOT Comment #8 Regarding the proposed description of the Industrial - Immokalee Regional Airport future land use designation, allowing "all other uses deemed to be compatible and consistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan" is not a meaningful and predictable standard for development under the future land use designation. Please provide specific guidance about allowed land uses, densities, and intensities per 9J- 5.005(6), F.A.C. FDOT Comment #9 The data and analysis focuses on changes in residential units (density) and does not address changes in non - residential square footage (intensity). The latter may have a significant impact on roadways. The assessment of the changes to the future land use designations must therefore be revised to account for changes in non - residential square footage. At minimum, please provide a table analogous to Tables 5 -7 and 5 -8 to enable an assessment of changes in non - residential development potential. FDOT Comment #10 Near -term and long -term analyses of impacts to public facilities are required to support comprehensive plan amendments per 9J- 5.005(4), F.A.C., which states, "Each local government comprehensive plan shall include at least two planning periods: one for at least the first five year period subsequent to the plan's adoption and one for at least an overall ten -year period." Please provide near- and long -term analyses of the impacts of the revised future land use designations on the segments of S.R. 29 (Emerging SIS) in the community and on S.R. 82 (Emerging SIS) just north of the community. Mr. Ray Eubanks Collier County I ORAECI Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — FDOT Comments August 20, 2010 Page 7 of 7 If the segments are shown not to meet the adopted LOS standard in the near term with programmed capacity improvements in place, mitigation projects should be identified and added to the county's five -year schedule of capital improvements. If the segments are shown not to meet the adopted LOS standard in the long term, mitigation projects and/or detailed mitigation strategies should be identified, added to the Transportation Element and Capital Improvements Element, and coordinated with the LRTP. The department's planning -level data indicates that the section of S.R. 29 from downtown Immokalee at Heritage Blvd. to S.R. 82 does not currently meet the adopted LOS standard. Additionally, multiple segments of S.R. 29 and S.R. 82 that are likely within the impact area of the proposed amendment are projected to not meet the adopted LOS standard in the near and/or long term as shown in the following table: S.R. 29 Exist. Exist. FDOT Daily Exist. Exist. 2030 2030 2030 From To Thru Daily LOS Service Daily % of Thru Model Model Lanes Vol. Std. Vol. LOS LOS Lanes Daily Daily Vol. LOS New Harvest C.R. 846 2 7200 C 15855 B 45.4% 2 14130 C Rd C.R. 846 C.R. 846 (V St 4 7200 - C 36915 B 19.5% 4 19878 B New Harvest C.R. 846 (11` St 4 7200 C 36915 B 19.5% 4 17036 B Rd. C.R. 846 (1" St ) 9th St. 4 11900 C 36915 B 32.2% 4 24651 B 9th St. Immokalee Dr. 2 11900 C 17026 C 69.9% 2 18953 F C.R. 846 (1" St ) Immokalee Dr. 2 11900 C 17026 j C 69.9% 2 21039 F Immokalee Dr. C.R. 890 (Lake 2 14100 C 17026 C 82.8% 2 18412 F Trafford) C.R. 890 (Lake C.R. 29A 2 10900 C 15855 C 68.7% 2 18620 D Trafford) C.R. 29A Heritage Blvd. 2 14629 C 15855 C 1 92.3°x6 2 18124 D Immokalee Dr. Heritage Blvd. 2 12335 C 17026 C 72.5% 2 18524 F Heritage Blvd. S.R. 82 2 14629 C 14200 D 103% 2 29741 F Ref. Source: 2009 FDOT Quality /Level of Service Traffic Couni Data and the FDOT Disiriciwide Financially Feasible Model If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (239) 461 -4300 or lawrence.massey@dot.state.fl.us. Sincerely, ' Lawrence Massey District 1 Growth Management Coordinator LLM/llm/ka V "Massey, Lawrence" To "'DCPexternalagencycomments@dca.state.fl.us < DCPexternalagencycomments @dca.state.fl.us> e.fl.us> cc "'scott.rogers @dca.state.fl.us" 08/09/2010 04:21 PM <scott.rogers @dca.state.fl.us >, "Limbaugh, Johnny" <Johnny. Limbaug h@dot.state.fl.us>, "Cahill, Maria" bcc Subject Collier County 10RAEC1 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments - FDOT Comments Dear Ray, Thank you for giving FDOT the opportunity to review and comment on the above referenced proposed comprehensive plan amendment. Please find our comments attached. If you or your staff have any questions or would like to discuss the department's concerns, please let me know. Respectfully, Lawrence Massey Growth Management Coordinator Florida Department of Transportation District One, Southwest Area Urban Office at the Southwest Interagency Facility for Transportation 10041 Daniels Parkway Fort Myers, FL 33913 (239) 461 -4300 Fax: (239) 33$-2353 08091 0 Copier _County_1DRAECI_Ptoposed_CPA FDOT_Comments.pdf f. CHARLIE CR1ST GOVERNOR 0 d as Florida Department of Transportation Mr. Ray Eubanks Plan Review and Processing Administrator Department of Community Affairs (DCA) Division of Community Planning 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32399 10041 Daniels Parkway Fort Myers, FL 33913 August 9, 2010 STEPHANIE C. KOPELOGSOS SECRETARY RE: Collier County 10RAEC.1 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — FDOT Comments Dear Mr. Eubanks: The Florida Department of Transportation, District 1, has reviewed the proposed version of the Collier County I ORAEC 1 comprehensive plan amendments. This letter offers comments on the proposed amendments. OVERALL ANIENDIIIENT The proposed amendments reflect an effectively rewritten Immokalee Area Master Plan (IAMP). The LAMP area is within a Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern (RACEC) and, therefore, has plan elements focused on community development and economic growth. In general, the proposed amendments include features that focus land use patterns to promote density and allow for increased opportunities for multimodal travel. However, while the submittal includes extensive documentation and explanation of the changes to the goals, policies, and objectives, the transportation analysis was insufficient to determine the extent of the impact that these changes may have on the roadway system, both internal and external to the IAMP area. FDOT's detailed comments and recommendations on the amendments that may potentially impact state roadway planning and operations can be found in the following sections. The revised IAMP includes eight new goals and corresponding policies and objectives. Therefore, the department's comments are organized based upon each of the eight new goals contained in the proposed LAMP. GOAL The purpose of Goal 1 is to identify the priorities of the LAMP related to annual capital improvements. The department has no comments on Goal 1 or the corresponding objectives and policies. GOAL 2 The purpose of Goal 2 is to enhance and diversify the local economy. There are five objectives: (1) To actively pursue, attract, and retain businesses; (2) To create a business climate that will enhance and diversify the economy and increase employment opportunities and quality of life; (3) To promote and expand tourism, recreation, and entertainment within the economy; (4) To enhance and expand educational and cultural facilities and opportunities; Tresco# Florida Gulf Coast Technology and Research Park DRI - FDOT 5'h Sufficiency Review Comments August 6, 2010 Page 2 of 7 (5) To promote and support development and re- development initiatives. The department has the following comments pertaining to the objectives and corresponding policies of Goal 2: FDOT Comment #1 Policy 2.1.3 discusses the use of wetland or habitat conservation banking to compensate for development within the Immokalee Urban Area. This policy identifies that incentives and regulatory requirements shall be included in the land development code (LDC) to direct mitigation to the targeted lands. Please elaborate on what incentives will be included in the LDC (such as transfer of development rights). FDOT Comment #2 Policy 2.2.3 directs Collier County to amend the LDC to create more flexibility for home - based businesses in the Immokalee Urban Area. While the LDC currently says that home -based businesses cannot create additional trips above the normal residential use, guidance should be provided in the comprehensive plan regarding allowed uses and limitations to ensure that the potential impacts of home -based businesses are predictable and are adequately accommodated by public infrastructure. FDOT Contntent #3 Policy 2.3.3 states that Collier County will continue efforts to work with the Seminole Tribe to inteerate future plans for a casino and address impacts of the casino, resort hotel, and other resort structures in the community. Policy 2.3.4 goes on to state that the county will encourage development of an entertainment area (outside Seminole lands) that is complementary to the casino and resort. Development of these uses is likely to have a significant impact on state Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) roadways in the area, and no documentation of the transportation impacts associated with these changes is provided in the submittal. The department recommends the following: a. Development of the casino and resort on tribal lands should be coordinated with the county and FDOT to ensure that state roadways in the area will meet adopted transportation Level of Service (LOS) standards. b. Planning related to the casino, resort, and surrounding entertainment uses should reflect land use and transportation strategics that reduce greenhouse gas emissions per HB 697. For example, the casino, resort, and surrounding entertainment uses should be designed with a high level of internal connectivity and walkability. GOAL The purpose of Goal 3 is to provide diverse safe and sanitary housing for all residents of the Immokalee Urban Area. The department has no comments on Goal 3 or the corresponding objectives and policies. GOAL The purpose of Goal 4 is to provide adequate and efficient public infrastructure and facilities. Four objectives are proposed: (1) Provide a comprehensive system of parks and recreational facilities; (2) Provide a network of roads, sidewalks, and bike paths to support growth and provide for the safe and convenient movement of pedestrians, motorized, and non - motorized vehicles; (3) To improve stormwater management and surface drainage; (4) To provide an efficient and economical solid waste management system. The following is a summary of transportation- related policies of Goal 4: • Policy 4.2.1 discusses priorities for pathways connecting residential and employment areas as well as schools, libraries, and other services. The Collier County 5 -year pathway plan will depict existing and planned connections and priorities based upon community input. • Police 4.2.2 discusses long -range transportation improvements. The policy states that Collier County will explore the possibility of accelerating the implementation of tlf,, MPO's Long Range i • Mr.. Dan Trescott Florida Gulf Coast Technology and Research Park DRl - FDOT -3 Sufficiency Review Comments August 6, 2010 Page 3 of 7 Transportation Plan (LRTP) to support the stimulation of economic development. The policy specifically identifies support for accelerating; (1) the widening of S.R. 82 between I -75 and S.R. 29; (2) the construction of the S.R. 29 bypass; (3) FDOT improvements to state roadways; (4) the construction of new or expanded transportation corridors to Naples and coastal Collier County; (5) the construction of new collector roads. • Policy 4.2.3 discusses coordination between Collier County, FDOT, and landowners to identify preferred routes to connect the airport to the future S.R. 29 bypass. • Policy 4.2.4 discusses plans for safety improvements including pedestrian and bicycle improvements identified as part of a walkability study. • Policies 4.2.5 and 4.2.6 discuss consideration for expansion of public transit routes and encouragement of additional transit services such as bike - and -ride and medical transport. • Policy 4.2.7 discusses transportation concurrency alternatives for S.R. 29. The policy states that alternative methods shall be identified within two years to remove barriers to economic development. Consideration for establishment of a Transportation Concurrcncy Exception Area (TCEA) or Transportation Concurrcncy Management Area (TCMA) is identified. The policy also; (1) identifies limitations on exceptions to concurrency for certain locations (e.g., the airport and the central business district corridor); (2) identifies a need for case -by -case evaluation of certain project types (e.g., transit- oriented developments and job creation projects); (3) requires ongoing reviews of the exception process. The department has the following comments pertaining to the objectives and corresponding policies of Goal 4: FDOT Comment #4 The department acknowledges that Policy 4.2.2 is a statement that the county will encourage the acceleration of projects, but it is unclear whether these projects are needed to support the land use pattern and densities and intensities shown on the proposed Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Further, per the county's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), there are currently no capacity improvements to S.R. 82 and S.R. 29 funded for construction (including the bypass referenced in Policy 4.2.3, which is currently in the PD &E phase). The department also notes that the county and the Immokalee community can play a significant role in furthering planned projects through mechanisms such as impact fees and developer contributions. FDOT Comment #S Regarding Policy 4.2.7, the department recommends that a TCEA or TCMA should be evaluated at least with each Evaluation & Appraisal Report (EAR). Therefore, it will be important for any proposed TCEA or TCMA to include performance measures, targets, and timelines so that the successes and any shortcomings of the TCEA or TCMA can be assessed. GOAL 5 The purpose of Goal. 5 is to protect important natural resources (including Lake Trafford) through development standards and policies. Policy 5.1.1 discusses incentive programs and innovative land development regulations to preserve native vegetation. Identified incentives include transfer of development rights, density bonuses, development clustering, and flexible development standards within specified zoning areas. The department has the following comment pertaining to the objectives and corresponding policies of Goal 5: Mr-.Dan-Tres tt - -- — Florida Gulf Coast Technology and Research Park DRI - FDOT 51h Sufficiency Review Comments August 6, 2010 Page 4 of 7 FDOT Comment #tS Additional information is needed on the proposed transfer of developments rights program and the density bonuses. In particular, upper limits on the amount of density that can be transferred and the density bonuses should be identified to allow for quantification of potential transportation impacts and to provide guidance for land development regulations. GOAL 6 The purpose of Goal 6 is to allow and encourage a mixture of land uses that are appropriate for Immokalee. Objectives and policies address mobile homes, zoning, compact development, and agricultural activities. Substantial revisions to the future land use designations are proposed. The department has no comments on Goal 6 or the corresponding objectives and policies. (Comments on the revisions to future land i(se designations are provided later in this review.) GOAL Goal 7 is intended to establish development design standards that are appropriate for Immokalce. This includes establishing lmtnokalee- specific land development code regulations related to allowed land uses, densities and intensities, landscaping, and signage, as well as promoting bicycling and walking through the land use pattern and pedestrian amenities. The department has no comments on Goal 7 or the corresponding objectives and policies. GOAL The purpose of Goal 8 is the coordination of information between other govcmmental agencies. This includes coordination regarding economic development initiatives, redevelopment implementation, and government services. The department has no comments on Coal 8 or the corresponding objectives and policies. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS This section provides descriptions of the IAMP future land use designations, including revisions to current designations and introduction of new designations. The following table lists the adopted and proposed future land use designations. Revisions to the future land use designations include the following: Adopted Future Land Use Designations Proposed Future Land Use Designations Urban -Mixed Use District Urban -Mixed Use District LR Low Residential LR Low Residential MR Mixed Residential MR Medium Residential HR High Residential HR High Residential NC Neighborhood Center CMU Commercial -Mixed Use CC -MU Commerce Center - Mixed -Use RT Recreational/Tourist PUD Planned Unit Development Commercial RT Recreational Tourist Urban - Commercial District C Commercial -S.R. 29 and Jefferson Ave. Urban - Industrial District Urban- Industrial District ID Industrial ID Industrial CC -I Commerce Center - Industrial IMU Industrial Mixed Use BP Business Park APO Immokalee Regional Airport Revisions to the future land use designations include the following: - '— — — ------- — Mr_anTrese�� Florida Gulf Coast Technology and Research Park DRI - FDOT 5d' Sufficiency Review Comments August 6, 2010 Page 5 of 7 • Deleted future land use designations are Neighborhood Center, Commercial -S.R. 29 and Jefferson Avenue, Commerce Center - Industrial,. and Business Park. Some of these designations are reflected in the new designations and revised designations. • The residential future land use descriptions are proposed to have only minor changes, such as Mixed Residential being renamed Medium Residential. The largest change is the addition of a maximum density that is inclusive of all density bonuses. Density bonuses were allowed in the adopted version of comprehensive plan but the various bonuses were not tallied and stated for each future land use designation. For some future land use designations, these new thresholds actually result in a decrease in maximum trip generation potential. For instance, under Low Residential, the proposed text allows 4 units /acre as the base density and 8 units /acre if bonuses are used, whereas the adopted text allows 4 units /acre as the base density and up to 12 units/acre if bonuses are used. • Low Residential, Medium Residential, and High Residential allow new commercial development, if developed as a Planned unit Development (PUD). A table specifies the maximum amount of commercial development and the minimum residential density allowed for different PUD sizes. A similar table was previously provided under the adopted PUD Commercial future land use designation. • For Commercial -Mixed Use, the proposed future land use designation allows a maximum density of 20 units per acre Nvith bonuses, whereas under the adopted future land use designation, a density bonus of up to 8 additional dwelling units makes it possible to achieve up to 20 dwelling units per acre. The proposed and adopted future land use designations are therefore consistent. • For Commercial -Mixed Use, no maximum intensity for nonresidential uses and no land use mix guidance are provided. • For Recreational- Tourist, the base residential densities stay the same at 4 dwelling units per acre; however, transient lodging densities are proposed to increase from 10 to 26 units per acre. • Certain Low Residential lands are proposed to be eligible for density blending. • For Industrial. no maximum intensity for nonresidential uses and no land use tnix guidance arc provided. • Industrial -Mixed Use is a new future land use designation. Allowed uses arc described, but no maximum intensity for nonresidential uses is provided. Commercial uses cannot exceed 30% of total site acreage. • Industrial- Immokalee Regional Airport is a new future land use designation, which allows "all uses permitted in the Indusmial sub - district" as well as "all other uses deemed to be compatible and consistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan ". No maximum intensity for nonresidential uses and no land use mix guidance are provided. • The Lake Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System Overlay is proposed. The Seminole Reservation Overlay is proposed. The Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area boundary is proposed. The densities of underlying future land use designations are applicable, although lands with the overlay are not eligible for density bonuses. The data and analysis section of the comprehensive plan includes an assessment of the revisions to the future land use designations. Highlights of the data and analysis are as follows: • The proposed FLUM differs significantly from the adopted FLUM due to the revisions to the future land use designation and an effort to focus density along major roadways (i.e., S.R. 29). • Tables 5 -2 and 5 -3 show acreages for the proposed and adopted future land use designations. Tables 5-4 and 5 -5 group the future land use designations into categories and provide acreages for the proposed and adopted scenarios. Acreages for the various Future Land Use designations vary widely between the adopted and proposed FLUM. As shown in Table 5-4 and 5 -5 of the data and analysis, the residential designations have been reduced by about 636 acres ( -5 %), with a corresponding increase in industrial uses ( +462 acres, —17 %) and smaller increases in commercial ( +80 acres, —8 %) and tourist ( +201 acres, --80 %) acreages. The proposed FLUM includes approximately 100.6 acres of land added to the Immokalee Urban Area as part of an expansion of the airport. • i Mr. Dan Tre scott Florida Gulf Coast Technology and Research Park DRI - FDOT 5" Sufficiency Review Comments August 6, 2010 Page 6 of 7 • Tables 5 -7 and 5 -8 show the potential change in residential units in the IAMP considering the base densities for the adopted and proposed future land use designations. These tables indicate an increase of 6,731 potential residential units (- -10 %). Tables 5 -9 and 5 -10 also show the potential change in residential units in the LAMP, but with consideration of density bonuses. In Tables 5 -9 and 5 -10, the proposed future land use designations result in a decrease of 30,853 dwelling units (-18 %). • With regard to public facilities (including transportation), the data and analysis performed for the L-kMP states that the proposed IAMP amendments "reflect an ideological change in how growth should occur in the Immokalee Urban Area" and "will not have an impact on the demand for public facilities ". r�r'���- G� • The transportation data and analysis states that all state roads in Immokalee meet adopted LOS standards under existing conditions. This is consistent with the department's planning -level data. ■ . Table 6 -9 identifies bicycle and pedestrian project priorities. ■ Section 7 of the data and analysis discusses HB 697 and identifies proposed goals, objectives, and policies that comply with HB 697. The identified goals, objectives, and policies address: (1) reductions in vehicle -miles traveled (VMT) through diversification of the community's economy (i.e., shorter trips), expanded public transit, encouragement of compact development, and consideration of a TCEA; (2) promotion of non -auto modes through the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan and expanded public transit: (3) compact, energy - efficient, mixed -use development; (4) provision of higher - density development. ■ Attachment A to the data and analysis is a statement of how the submitted data and analysis complies with the Chapter 163, F.S., and Rules 9J -5 and 9J -1 1, F.A.C. Transportation LOS in the near and long term is not evaluated. The department has the following comments pertaining to the revisions to the future land use designations and the data and analysis: FDOT Comment #7 Maximum intensities (such as floor area ratios) are not stated for future land use designations that allow non - residential development. Some future land use designations that allow a mix of uses do not provide guidance on the allowed land use mix (e.g., maximum percentage of residential allowed). 9J- 5.005(6), F.A.C., requires "meaningful and predictable standards for the use and development of land". Please provide specific guidance about allowed land uses, densities, and intensities per 9J- 5.005(6), F.A.C. FDOT Comment #8 Regarding the proposed description of the Industrial - Immokalee Regional Airport future land use designation, allowing "all other uses deemed to be compatible and consistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan" is not a meaningful and predictable standard for development under the future land use designation. Please provide specific guidance about allowed land uses, densities, and intensities per 9J- 5.005(6), F.A.C. FDOT Comment #9 The data and analysis focuses on changes in residential units (density) and does not address changes in non - residential square footage (intensity). The latter may have a significant impact on roadways. The assessment of the changes to the future land use designations must therefore be revised to account for changes in non- residential square footage. At minimum, please provide a table analogous to Tables 5 -7 and 5 -8 to enable an assessment of changes in non - residential development potential. FDOT Comment #10 Near -term and long -term analyses of impacts to public facilities are required to support comprehensive plan amendments per 9J- 5.005(4), F.A.C., which states, "Each local government comprehensive plan shall include at least two planning periods: one for at least the first five year period subsequent to the plan's adoption and one for of least an overall ten-year period." Please provide near- and long -term analyses of the impacts of the revised future land use designations on the segments of S.R. 29 (Emerging SIS) in the community and on S.R. 82 (Emerging SIS) just north of the community. If the segments are shown not to meet the adopted LOS standard in the near term with programmed capacity improvements in ;0- —Mr -Dan Trescott — - -- - - -- - - - Florida Gulf Coast Technology and Research Park DRI - FDOT 5i° Sufficiency Review Comments August 6, 2010 Page 7 of 7 place, mitigation projects should be identified and added to the county's five -year schedule of capital improvements. If the segments are shown not to meet the adopted LOS standard in the long term, mitigation projects and/or detailed mitigation strategies must be identified, added to the Transportation Element and __ . Capital Improvements Element, and coordinated with the LRTP. The department's planning -level data indicate �ce�ec that multiple segments of S.R. 29 and S.R. 82 in the impact area are projected to not meet the adopted LOS standard in the near and/or long term. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (239) 461 -4300 or la %�,rence.massey @dot.state.fl.us. LLM 11m/ka Sincerely, Lawrence Massey District 1 Growth Management Coordinator m vJ�jER ��9�9 P � y SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT August 6, 2010 Ray Eubanks, Administrator Plan Review and DRI Processing Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399 -2100 Dear Mr. Eubanks: OUR%, A G 112010 01107810jV OF COMMUNI7Y PLOWNI NG Subject: Collier County DCA #10RAEC1 Comments on Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Package The South Florida Water Management District (District) has completed its review of the proposed amendment from Collier County (County). The amendment proposes to revise and replace the existing adopted Immokalee Area Master Plan Element of the Growth Management Plan. The Immokalee Area Master Plan Element includes the Goals, Objectives, Policies, land use designations, and the Future Land Use Map revisions needed to implement the Immokalee Area Master Plan. The potable water supplier for the Immokalee area is the Immokalee Water and Sewer District. The District supports Collier County's commitment, expressed in Goal 5 of the Immokalee Area Master Plan Element, to Lake Trafford restoration and the protection of natural resources. We have the following recommendations which we request you incorporate into your response to the County. Ecosystem Restoration • Include a Policy addressing reduction of nutrient loading from stormwater outfalls that directly discharge into the Corkscrew Marsh, Lake Trafford, and Camp Keais Strand areas. Water Supply • Identify intensity standards for non - residential uses in the land use designations. It appears these intensity standards are proposed to be defined in subsequent Planned Unit Development or rezoning ordinances. Without intensity standards for non - residential uses, potential water demand cannot be fully determined. Include in the Data and Analysis section how the Immokalee Water and Sewer District plans to address any increase in water demand generated by the increase in density and intensity proposed by the Immokalee Area Master Plan. 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 • (561) 686 -8800 • FL WATS 1- 800 - 432 -2045 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 24680, West Palm Beach, FL 33416 -4680 • wwwsfwmd.gov 'Scott, W Ray' To < DCPextemalagencycomments @dca.state.fl.us> <scottra @doacs.state.fl.us> cc 07/23/201010:30 AM bcc Subject FDACS LGCP Amendment Review FDACS has reviewed the following LGCP amendments and has no objections, recommendations, or comments: Hernando County 14-2 Putnam County 10-2ER Pasco County 10D2 Lee County 10D-1 Lee County 10-2 Lee County 10D-2 Hardee County 10-1 Hardee County 10-2ER _Collier Count�jtAGRAEC -I Citrus County 10-1 Volusia County 10-2 Manatee County 10-2 Please call if you have any questions or comments: W. Ray Scott Conservation & Water Policy Federal Programs Coordinator Office of Agricultural Water Policy Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services The Capitol (PL -10) Tallahassee, FL 32399 -0810 (office) 850 - 410 -6714 (mobile) 850 -544 -9871 (fax) 850 - 922 -4936 Southwest Florida Regional Planniniz Council 0 1926 Victoria Avenue, Fort Myers, Florida 33901 -3414 (239)338 -255() FAX (239)338 -2560 SUNCOM (23748 -2.550 August 6, 2010 vm t;N %100 Mr. Ray Eubanks Plan Review and Processing Administrator Department of Community Affairs Bureau of State Planning Plan Processing Section 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -2100 Re: Collier County / DCA 10RAEC -1 Dear Mr. Eubanks: V. 0 �xo l t icw Agge 0MµU Staff of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council reviewed the proposed amendments (DCA IORAEC -1) to the Collier County Comprehensive Plan. These reviews were performed according to the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. The Council will review the proposed amendment at its September 16, 2010 meeting. Council staff has recommended that Council find the proposed amendments to be regionally significant and consistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan. A copy of the official staff report explaining the Council staffs recommendation is attached. if Council action differs from the staff recommendation, we will notify you. Sincerely, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (A Ken eth Hea �rington Exe live Director DYB /DEC Attachment Cc: Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator, Planning and Regulation, Growth Management Division, Collier County LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS COLLIER COUNTY The Council staff has reviewed proposed amendments to the Collier County Comprehensive Plan (DCA 10RAEC -1). These amendments were developed under the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. A synopsis of the requirements of the Act and Council responsibilities is provided as Attachment I. Comments are provided in Attachment II. Site location maps can be reviewed in Attachment III. Staff review of the proposed amendments was based on whether they were likely to be of regional concern. This was determined through assessment of the following factors: 1. Location - -in or near a regional resource or regional activity center, such that it impacts the regional resource or facility; on or within one mile of a county boundary; generally applied to sites of five acres or more; size alone is not necessarily a determinant of regional significance; 2. Magnitude- -equal to or greater than the threshold for a Development of Regional Impact of the same type (a DRI- related amendment is considered regionally significant); and 3. Character - -of a unique type or use, a use of regional significance, or a change in the local comprehensive plan that could be applied throughout the local jurisdiction; updates, editorial revisions, etc. are not regionally significant. A summary of the results of the review follows: Proposed Factors of Regional Significance Amendment Location Magnitude Character Consistent CP- 2008 -5 yes yes yes (1) regionally Immokalee Area significant; and Master Plan (2) consistent with SRPP RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve staff comments. Authorize staff to forward comments to the Department of Community Affairs and Collier County. 08/10 Attachment I LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ACT Local Government Comprehensive Plans The Act requires each municipal and county government to prepare a comprehensive plan that must include at least the following nine elements: I . Future Land Use Element; 2. Traffic Circulation Element; A local government with all or part of its jurisdiction within the urbanized area of a Metropolitan Planning Organization shall prepare and adopt a transportation element to replace the traffic circulation; mass transit; and ports, aviation, and related facilities elements. [9J- 5.019(1), FAC] 3. General Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, and Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element; 4. Conservation Element; 5. Recreation and Open Space Element; 6. Housing Element; 7. Coastal Management Element for coastal jurisdictions; 8. Intergovernmental Coordination Element; and 9. Capital Improvements Element. The local government may add optional elements (e. g., community design, redevelopment, safety, historical and scenic preservation, and economic). All local governments in Southwest Florida have adopted revised plans: Charlotte County, Punta Gorda Collier County, Everglades City, Marco Island, Naples Glades County, Moore Haven Hendry County, Clewiston, LaBelle Lee County, Bonita Springs, Cape Coral, Fort Myers, Fort Myers Beach. Sanibel Sarasota County, Longboat Key, North Port, Sarasota, Venice Page 1 Attachment I Comprehensive Plan Amendments A local government may amend its plan twice a year. (Amendments related to developments of regional impact, certain small developments, compliance agreements, and the Job Siting Act are not restricted by this limitation.) Six copies of the amendment are sent to the Department of Community Affairs for review. A copy is also sent to the regional planning council, the water management district, the Florida Department of Transportation, and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. [s. 163.3184(3)(a)] The proposed amendment will be reviewed by DCA in two situations. In the first, there must be a written request to DCA. The request for review must be received within forty - five days after transmittal of the proposed amendment. [s. 163.3184(6)(a)] Review can be requested by one of the following: the local government that transmits the amendment, the regional planning council, or an affected person. In the second situation, DCA can decide to review the proposed amendment without a request. In that case, DCA must give notice within thirty days of transmittal. [(s. 163.3184(6)(b)] Within five working days after deciding to conduct a review, DCA must forward copies to various reviewing agencies, including the regional planning council. [s. 163.3184(4)] Regional Planning Council Review The regional planning council must submit its comments in writing within thirty days of receipt of the proposed amendment from DCA. It must specify any objections and may make recommendations for changes. The review of the proposed amendment by the regional planning council must be limited to "effects on regional resources or facilities identified in the strategic regional policy plan and extra- jurisdictional impacts which would be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan of the affected local government." [s. 163.3184(5)] After receipt of comments from the regional planning council and other reviewing agencies, DCA has thirty days to conduct its own review and determine compliance with state law. Within that thirty -day period, DCA transmits its written comments to the local government. NOTE: THE ABOVE IS A SIMPLIFIED VERSION OF THE LAW. REFER TO THE STATUTE (CH. 163, FS) AND THE RULE (9J -11, FAC) FOR DETAILS. Page 2 Attachment 11 SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW 1. Local Government Name: Collier County 2. Amendment Number: DCA l 0RAEC -1 3. Did the RPC prepare the Plan Amendment: (YES) (NO) No 4. Date DCA Notified RPC that Amendment Package was Complete, if Applicable: July 8, 2010 5. Date Amendment Review must be Completed and Transmitted to DCA: August 6, 2010 6. Date the Review was Transmitted to DCA: August 6, 2010 7. Description of the Amendment: CP- 2008 -5 This amendment is a Collier County initiated change to the County's Comprehensive Plan that will provide for the Immokalee Area Master plan (IAMP) and the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The revisions to the entire Master Plan that includes: 1) increases to the commercial acreages, the industrial acreage, and the allowable residential development in the planning area; 2) elimination of some of the existing land use designations; 3) creation of a new land use designation for the Immokalee Regional Airport site; and 4) addition of approximately 103 acres presently designated Agricultural /Rural within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area as identified on the countywide FLUM. 1 8. Is the Amendment consistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan: CP- 2008 -5 The proposed Immokalee Area Master Plan (IAMP) intends to implement the Immokalee community's vision, as approved by the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Visioning Committee (IAMPVC) by encouraging economic development and efficient delivery of services through greater densities and intensities in the planning area. The revised IAMP promotes dense, clustered development along major thoroughfares that then transition into lower densities and intensities in land uses away from the thoroughfares. The proposed plan amendment utilizes smart growth principals and provides greater flexibility through mixed use Subdistricts. The revised Immokalee Area FLUM identifies to the geographic planning area. Specifically, the proposed amendments to the IAMP element of the County's Growth Management Plan (GMP) propose eight new goals, each with respective objectives and policies. The new goals are then followed by the revised Land Use Designation Description Section. This Section describes the proposed land use designations that will guide patterns of development within the Immokalee urbanized area and will further the proposed goals through standards set forth within each. land use designation and through explanations of the types of allowed land uses that can be requested within the planning area. The following are some of the major changes proposed by the amendment request: • Re- configuration of the wetland boundary that connects to Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay. This revision was requested by County staff, • Re- designation of the lands within the boundary of the Immokalee Regional Airport from Industrial (ID) to Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO); • Addition of±103 acres of land that are proposed to be removed from the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RSLA) and be included within the boundary of the Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO); • Addition of the "Loop Road," which is proposed to allow access from the Immokalee Regional Airport and Florida Tradeport Areas, to SR 82 to SR 29; and • Revisions to the land use designations in the IAMP FLUM that include: 1) An increase in base density allowed within the mixed use designated areas. No change in base density (dwelling units /acre - DU /A) is proposed within the Low, Medium, High or RT designated areas; 2) An increase of about 10 percent in the number of potential dwelling units that could be developed through the base density; 3) Changes in the maximum density allowed within the low residential designation (reduction) and the mixed use designation (increase); 4) An 18 percent reduction in the maximum number of potential dwelling units that would be allowed in the IAMP; 5) An increase of ±201 acres of Recreational Tourist (RT) designated lands; 6) An increase on the cap of allowed density that can be requested within the Immokalee Urban Area, via density bonus, from a maximum of 16 DU /A to a cap of 20 DU /A; 7) A 5 percent reduction of residential designated lands. This change of over ±636 acres of residential designated lands are proposed to be re- designated to allow commercial and industrial development, as well as uses that are allowed under the RT designation; 8) An increase of ±80 acres of commercial designated lands; and 9) An increase of ±462 acres of industrial designated lands. This increase includes the re- designation from Industrial (ID) to Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO) of 1,484 acres of land that are part of the Immokalee Regional Airport boundary. The County staff report states that the amendments would have a fiscal impact on Collier County. The commitments included in the proposed plan, which translates into operational impacts, fiscal impacts, as well as a set timeframe to fulfill such programmatic and fiscal commitment, will require funding and allocation of County staff that may not be readily available. County staff believes that the proposed IAMP may not have an immediate impact on the demand for public facilities, but will impact future demand for public facilities. In addition, the propose plan may shift prioritization of some Countywide efforts to the Immokalee Urban Area in the future. To address this issue, the proposed amendment Goal I would allow the County to prioritize capital projects, programs and studies and any other commitments with the proposed plan that are necessary to further the proposed Goals, Objectives and Policies of the IAMP on an annual basis. Objective 1.1 requires the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to develop a list of priorities of commitments, as well as identifying potential alternative funding sources to fulfill such commitments. In addition, Policy 1.1.1 allows for the extension by the Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) of the timeframes allocated to fulfill the commitments with the proposed IAMP, subject to the consideration of available funding and /or operational constraints. 9. Applicable Strategic Regional Policy Plan Goals, Strategies and Actions: CP- 2008 -5 Livable Communities Goal 2: Southwest Florida will develop (or redevelop) communities that are Livable and offer residents a wide range of housing and employment opportunities. Strategy: Develop livable, integrated communities that offer residents a high quality of life. Action 1: Encourage programs that promote infill development in urban areas to maximize the efficient use of existing infrastructure. Action 2: Work with local governments to promote structures and developments that combine commercial and residential uses as a means of providing housing that is affordable and near employment opportunities. Goal 4: Livable communities designed to improve quality of life and to provide for the sustainability of our natural resources. Strategy: Promote through the Council's review roles community design and development principles that protect the Region's natural resources and provide for an improved quality of life. Action 8: Working with all levels of government within Southwest Florida actively plan for lands that have been acquired for natural resource purposes to be maintained and managed to preserve their environmental integrity. Action 9: Insure that opportunities for governmental partnerships and public /private partnerships in preserving wildlife habitats are maximized. Economic Infrastructure Goal 1: A well - maintained social, health, and educational infrastructure to support business and industry. Strategy: Ensure the adequacy of lands for commercial and industrial centers, with suitable services provided. Action 2: Identify existing urban lands and transportation corridors for development or redevelopment, and ensure adequate access and services are provided. Action 3: Include in planning efforts the recognition of lands with natural capacity, accessibility, previous preparation for urban purposes, and adequate public facilities. Action 5: Review proposed development for increased densities and infill in suitable urban areas. Regional Cooperation Goal 5: Effective resource management is maintained across the borders of sovereign public agencies. Strategy: All plans concerning the same resource shall have as objectives the same effective results. Action 4: The SWFRPC will promote state, regional and local agencies to consider lands identified as priority one habitat south of the Caloosahatchee River and areas formally designated as critical habitat for the Florida Panther to be incorporated in the agency's natural resource management programs and provide intergovernmental coordination for the implementation of management practices that, based on existing data, would be expected to result in maintaining habitat conditions for the panther. 10. The effects of the Proposed Amendment on Regional Resources or Facilities Identified in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan: CP- 2008 -5 The proposed IAMP impacts a variety of regional resources and facilities that are identified in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan and include: 4 1) Changing the configuration of the wetland boundary that connects the Lake TraffordlCamp Keais Strand, both regional resources, and providing an overlay to address development levels and conservation efforts allowed in the wetland area; 2) Re- designating lands within the boundary of the Immokalee Regional Airport from industrial land uses to an airport specific land use identified as the Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO), which addressed specific airport issues. This airport redesignated lands resulted in ±103 acres of land to be removed from the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA) and included within the boundary of the airport; . 3) Adding the concept of a "Loop Road," which is proposes to allow access from the Inunokalee Regional Airport and Florida Tradeport areas to SR 82 and SR 29. both of which are regional roadways; and 4) Changing the land use designations that included: a) an increase in the base density allowed in the mixed use designated areas: b) an increase of about 10 percent in the number of potential dwelling units that could be developed through the base density. According to the County staff analyses, these changes represent an additional 6,730 dwelling units allowed in the IMAP. c) a change in the maximum density allowed within the low residential (reduction) and the mixed use designated areas (increase); d) an 18 percent reduction in the maximum number of potential dwelling units that would be allowed in the IAMP. According to the County staff analyses, these changes would represent a reduction of 30,583.4 dwelling units from what is currently allowed to develop in the IAMP. 11. Extra - Jurisdictional Impacts that would be Inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the Affected Local Government: CP- 2008 -5 Council staff has reviewed the proposed changes to the County's Comprehensive Plan with respect to the IAMP and find no specific extra- jurisdictional impacts that would he inconsistent with the affected local government. Analysis of the effects on the proposed amendments on the following issues to the extent they are addressed in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan on: 12. Compatibility among local plans including, but not limited to, land use and compatibility with military bases: CP- 2008 -5 Council staff has reviewed the proposed land use changes being proposed in this request and agrees and supports the County staff that the proposed changes provides smart growth concepts and provides for a more sustainable community given the reduction in dwelling units and the more appropriate location of the mixed use development pattern along the major roadway systems in the planning area while placing lowing densities behind and away from those increased densities. Given the future population projects for the planning area, Council staff agrees with the proposed changes in the number of dwelling units provided in the Immokalee urban area and the arrangement of residential, commercial and industrial land uses. Based on the Plan presented in this amendment request, Council staff finds that the proposed changes to the County's Plan is compatible with local planning efforts. While there will be a future military presence at the Immokalee Regional Airport in the future, southwest Florida has no military bases in the region to be considered. 13. Impacts to significant regional resources and facilities identified in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan, including, but not limited to, impacts on groundwater recharge and the availability of water supply: CP- 2008 -5 The proposed amendments do no substantially impact the regional water recharge and water supply situations in the Immokalee area. The subject changes proposes to improve the wetland slough that flows into Lake Trafford by reducing the dwelling units that can be built in that natural feature and the proposed amendments reduce and increase the densities of the areas dwelling units. The increased densities in the urban area of Immokalee should provide increased open space areas and thereby improve groundwater recharge. The proposed Comprehensive Plan changes will not change the County's 10 -Year Water Supply Plan. 14. Affordable housing issues and designation of adequate sites for affordable housing: CP- 2008 -5 Due to the existing economy and the housing characteristics of Collier, the affordable housing issue in the County is complex and has not been completely addressed. While, the affordable housing issue along the coastal urban areas have been somewhat reduced due to the economic downturn, it is still a problematic as it relates to housing for service providers for the more affluent residential areas. The affordable housing issue in Immokalee is somewhat different in that the Immokalee areas is predominately an agricultural community that depends on a supply of less expensive farm worker housing units in contrast to the urbanized areas along the coast. At the present time, there are fewer agricultural workers in the County and therefore the demand for farm worker housing is somewhat reduced. When fully developed, the proposed Plan amendments will improve the housing stock in the Immokalee area and provide housing for the service workers in the urbanized area of Immokalee. Council staff agrees with the smart growth concepts found in the proposed changes and believes that the service workers that will live in the future urbanized area of the community will be satisfied. The farm worker housing that is often located outside of the urbanize Immokalee area may need additional analysis in the plan as demand increases as the economy improves in the future. 15. Protection of natural resources of regionally significance identified in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan including, but limited to, protection of spring and groundwater resources, and recharge potential: CP- 2008 -5 The proposed plan amendments will improve the natural resources around Lake Trafford and the wetland systems that flow into that regional resource. All the environmental Goals, Objectives and Policies found in the Collier County Comprehensive Plan are still enforce to provide protection and conservation of the regionally significant natural resources found in the Immokalee planning area, including groundwater resources and recharge potential. in addition, the proposed changes recommend that dwelling densities in the wetland slough that flows into Lake Trafford be reduced, which will increase the potential for recharge and water quality improvements. There are no springs in the area that will be impacted by the proposed amendments. 16. Compatibility with regional transportation corridors and facilities including, but not limited to, roadways, seaports, airports, public transportation systems, high speed rail facilities, and intermodal facilities: CP- 2008 -5 The proposed amendments provide a significant change to the proposed transportation facilities in the subject planning area. The plan proposed a loop road that will according to the County staff report provide access from the Immokalee Regional Airport and Florida Tradeport areas to SR 82 and SR 29, both of which are regional roadways. Council staff agrees with the County's proposed transportation system improvement. but have severe concerns how these facilities will be funded. The proposed amendments will improve and enlarge the Immokalee Regional Airport. Council staff agrees and supports the County's efforts to improve this regional facility and believes that it is an important public facility that will aid future economic development in the region. The proposed changes do address the intermodal facilities in the Immokalee area and improve the future walking and bicycling system in the area. The subject Plan will provide improvements through the use of smart growth and compact development principals. Council staff agrees and supports the improvements the Plan makes related to intermodal development in Immokalee. The proposed amendments do not substantial address public transportation systems or high speed rail facilities. 17. Adequacy and compatibility with emergency preparedness plans and local mitigation strategies including, but not limited to, the impacts on and availability of hurricane shelters, maintenance of county hurricane clearance times, and hazard mitigation: CP- 2008 -5 The proposed plan does not change the County's emergency preparedness plans, local mitigation strategies, availability of hurricane shelters, maintenance of count) hurricane clearance times, or hazard mitigation. All of the County's existing Goals, Objectives and Policies that relate to these items are still in effect in the subject planning area. Because the proposed plans result in an overall reduction in dwelling units and improve the location and densities of future development in the planning area, the issues related to hurricane shelter space and clearance time should actually be improved over time due to reduced demands in the Immokalee community. 18. Analysis of the effects of extra - jurisdiction impacts which may be created by the amendment: CP- 2008 -5 Council staff has reviewed the proposed Plan and believe that it will not have substantial extra jurisdictional impacts on surrounding Counties or Cities. The Plan will improve the Immokalee area and will provide an improved development model for that part of Collier County. Council staff supports the changes proposed by the County in the subject Plan and believes that it will benefit the region. Council staff does have concerns about the future funding of the changes proposed in the plan with respect to infrastructure costs that will be necessary to support the new development pattern. The Plan suggests that the Board of County Commissions have a yearly review of the proposed projects that will implement the Plan and that these projects are provided as financially feasible. Council staff believes that the Plan needs to be more specific as to how future funding will be achieved and what the timeframes for actual implementation of the future improvements will be maintained. Council staff finds the proposed amendments requested to allow for the future improvement of the Immokalee area to be regional due to its impacts on regionally significant nature resources, roadway system development, and airport improvements and that the Plan is consistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan. Attachment III Maps Collier County DCA 1ORAEC -1 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments Site Locations Ut ATTACHMENT TO EXHIBIT 'A" R 28 G R 29 E EXISTING FLUM MAP PROPOSED TO BE DELETED IMMOKALEE FUTURE LAN13 USE MAP -7 41• MARKET WIT I ;; PFTITION CP•2008-5 R 30 E USIND AM ml .. TxxR L O II x ATTACHMENT TO EXHIBIT "A" PROPOSED FLUM MAP IMMOKALEE FUTURE LAND USE MAP PETITION CP- 2006 -5 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment Agenda Item #9E y STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION — PLANNING AND REGULATION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: Februar,2011 RE: PETITION CP- 2008 -5, IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (ADOPTION HEARING) Coordinator: Carolina Valera, Principal Planner AGENT /APPLICANT: Agent: Robert Mulhere RWA, Inc. 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 Applicant/Owner: Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Collier County Government 310 Alachua Street Immokalee, FL 34142 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The Immokalee urban area is a region of about 30 square miles containing ±17,116 acres of land, and is located in northeast Collier County, approximately 27 miles from the intersection of Immokalee Road (C.R. 846) and Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) in Naples to the intersection of South First Street and Main Street in Immokalee. The Immokalee urban area comprises the Immokalee planning community. REQUESTED ACTION: The subject area of this amendment request is designated Urban on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Immokalee Area Master Plan (IAMP) element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). This petition seeks to revise and replace in its entirety the existing adopted Immokalee Area Master Plan Element of the GMP, including the existing Implementation Strategy, which encompass the Goals, Objectives, and Policies; the Land Use Designation Description Section, which generally indicate the types of land uses for which zoning may be requested; and the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Additionally, approximate 103 acres designated Agricultural /Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay are proposed to be added to the IAMP and those lands re- designated as Urban. This petition also proposes changes to Policy 6.2.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) to add language to address the vegetation retention requirements that would apply to lands within the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System; and revisions to the Future Land Use Map Series of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to reflect the additional 103 acres to the Immokalee Urban area. CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment Agenda Item #9E SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Area: More than half of the land use type within the Immokalee Urban area is presently agricultural. The remainder is a mixture of residential, commercial and industrial uses. Immokalee is accessed from the south and east by its major roadway, Immokalee Road (CR 846). State Road 29 provides access into the Community from the northern counties of Lee and Hendry and to the southeast areas of Collier County. PROPOSE) FLUM MAP t� L"Swd OypUJ1t: MfO:KCU4.R /T_11C: Es ............_... C _ Draft Future Land r AL n. -Eq"o E)wsr I.a- IMMOKALEE FUTURE LAND USE MAP W iR �R Use Map (FLUM) FFM Lk ' a 7- y � spa LR L! Surrounding Lands: North: Lands designated Agricultural /Rural Mixed Use District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA) on the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The vast majority of these lands are zoned Rural Agricultural District (A). South: Lands designated Agricultural /Rural Mixed Use District, RLSA on the countywide FLUM. Most of these lands are undeveloped and are zoned Rural Agricultural District (A). East: Lands designated Agricultural /Rural Mixed Use District, RLSA on the countywide FLUM. Lands to the east are within the Area of Critical State Concern on the countywide FLUM and which are within the Okaloacoochee Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA) and the Okaloacoochee Slough Flowway Stewardship Area (FSA). These lands are undeveloped and most are zoned Rural Agricultural District (A). r Existing Immokalee Area Master Plan ([AMP) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment West: Lands designated Agricultural /Rural Mixed Use District, RLSA on the countywide FLUM; as well as Lake Trafford and lands within the Camp Keais Strand FSA. Most of these lands are undeveloped. CONSIDERATIONS: The proposed Immokalee Area Master Plan ([AMP) intends to implement the Immokalee community's vision, as approved by the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Visioning Committee (IMPVC), by promoting economic development and efficient delivery of services through greater density and intensity that encourage dense, clustered development along major thoroughfares that transition to lower densities; incorporating smart growth principles; and by providing greater development flexibility through mixed -use Subdistricts. The revised Immokalee Future Land Use map provides integrity to the geographic region. In general, the amendment to the [AMP element of the GMP proposes eight new goals, each with respective objectives and policies; followed by the revised Land Use Designation Description Section which includes and describes the proposed land use designations that will guide patterns of development within the Immokalee urban area and further the proposed goals through standards set forth within such land used designations, and the types of allowed land uses that could be requested. The following are some of the major changes proposed in this petition: CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment • Re- configuration of the wetland boundary that connects to Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay. This revision was requested by staff. • Re- designation of the lands within the boundary of the Immokalee Regional Airport from Industrial (ID) to Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO). • Addition of ±103 acres of land that are proposed to be removed from the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA) and be included within the boundary of the Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO). • Addition of the "Loop Road," which is proposed to allow access from the Immokalee Regional Airport and Florida Tradeport areas, to SR82 and SR29. • Revisions to the land use designations in the IAMP FLUM include: o An increase in the base density allowed within the mixed use designated areas. However, no change in base density (DU /A — dwelling units per acre) is proposed within the Low, Medium and High Residential and Residential Tourist designated areas. o An increase of about 10 percent in the number of potential dwelling units that could be developed through base density. • Changes in the maximum density allowed within the Low Residential (reduction) and mixed use designated areas (increase). • An 18 percent reduction in the maximum number of potential dwelling units that would be allowed in the TAMP. o An increase of ±201 acres of Recreational Tourist (RT) designated lands. o An increase on the cap of allowed density that can be requested within the Immokalee Urban Area, via density bonus, from a maximum of 16 DU /A to a cap of 20 DU /A. o A five percent reduction of residential designated lands. This change of over ±636 acres of residential designated lands are proposed to be re- designated to allow commercial and industrial development, as well as uses that are allowed under the RT designation. o An increase of ±80 acres of commercial designated lands. o An increase of ±462 acres of industrial designated lands. This increase includes the re- designation from Industrial (ID) to Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO) of 1484.3 acres of land that are part of the Immokalee Regional Airport boundary. • New "Existing Zoning Consistent with IAMP FLUM by Policy 6.1.9" map. TRANSMITTAL HEARINGS: Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) Recommendation: The EAC heard this petition at their January 6, 2010 meeting and unanimously recommended (3 -0) to forward the subject amendment, CP- 2008 -5, Immokalee Area Master Plan, to the BCC with a recommendation to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) subject to the following conditions: 4 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment Standardize the Lake Trafford Camp Keais Strand System (LTCKSS) Overlay terminology throughout the document. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document.] 2. Allow any lands within the LTCKSS to qualify for density and intensity blending. [Staff note: This condition was incorporated into the document per the BCC conditions of approval to transmit to DCA. Please refer to BCC condition number 3 discussions, under the BCC recommendation on page 7.] 3. Prohibit density increases within 'the LTCKSS Overlay. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document through the exemption of any bonuses to lands within the LT/CKSSO. Additionally, the density and intensity blending provisions that apply to lands within the LT/CKSSO are intended to encourage shifting development from Urban designated lands to lands within the RLSA.] 4. Allow wetlands within the LTCKSS that are restored to high quality wetlands to qualify for density intensity blending. [Staff note: As noted above, this condition has been addressed in the revised document.] 5. Prohibit retroactive LTCKSS development applications. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document.] 6. Remove the Greenfield Designation. [Staff note: Greenfield designation has been removed from the document.] 7. Policy 4.1.1 - Postpone the TDR adoption process for a period of 2 years to determine its feasibility and if a Growth Management Plan amendment is required. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document. Please note that Policy 4. 1.1 has been re- numbered to Policy 5. 1.1 in the revised IAMP.] 8. Clarify Policies on how lands will be designated for "Conservation." [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document. Please note that a Conservation designation is not being proposed at this time. However, the revised document includes requirements to evaluate the need of such for the inclusion of a Conservation designation through the Evaluation and Appraisal Report process.] 9. Separate the Mitigation Bank Policy into Public and Private designations. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document.] 10. Policy 6.1.7 to read — "Within two (2) years of adoption of the Policy, Collier County shall amend the Land Development Code to provide for a deviation process from the current native vegetation retention standards set forth in the CCME Policy 6. 1.1 for developments within the Immokalee Urban Area. This deviation process shall be consistent with provisions set forth in CCME Policy 6.1.1(10).7 [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document.] 11. Goal 4 — expand language to include listed species for upland and scrub jay habitat within the Immokalee Urban Area [Staff note: This condition was included by the agent for the petitioner, but later revised by the CCPC. However, the revised language is intended to be general and therefore to include listed species, including scrub jay habitat. Please note that Goal 4 has been re- numbered to Goal 5 in the revised IAMP.] CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment 12. Provide a data analysis on how the the demands of future development in the revised data and analysis.] Immokalee Sewer and Water District intends to meet . [Staff note: This condition has been addressed 13. Policy 4.1.2 line 1 — from Recognizing the importance of Lake Trafford to potential ecotourism..." To "Recognizing the importance of Lake Trafford and the surrounding wetlands and natural habitat to the ecosystem, economy and ecotourism... " [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document. Please note that. Policy 4.1.2 has been re- numbered to Policy 5.1.2 in the revised IAMP.] 14. Policy 4.1.2 - line 4 -5 from - "Within 2 years of the adoption of the Policy, the County in conjunction with the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency will amend the ..." to "Within 2 years of the adoption of this Policy, the County in conjunction with the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency and any applicable State or Federal Agencies will amend the ... " [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document. Please note that Policy 4.1.2 has been re- numbered to Policy 5.1.2 in the revised IAMP.] 15. Policy 4.1.3 line 1 — from Collier County will continue to cooperate with agencies on remediation efforts at Lake Trafford..." to "Collier County will continue to cooperate with agencies on remediation, restoration and continuing long term management efforts at Lake Trafford... " [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document. Please note that Policy 4.1.3 has been re- numbered to Policy 5.1.3 in the revised IAMP.] Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) Recommendation: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) heard this petition on February 16, February 18, March 3, and May 20, 2010, and unanimously recommended (6 -0) to forward the subject petition to the BCC with a recommendation to transmit to DCA, subject to numerous changes throughout the document which the petitioner has made (except where not endorsed by the BCC), and subject to map revisions to identify the proposed ±103 acres expansion of the Immokalee Regional Airport. In addition, the CCPC recommended the addition of language to Policy 6.1.7 to allow Mobile Home use for a specific existing mobile home park located within the Industrial subdistrict. The CCPC requested the removal of language that would allow density and intensity blending for properties which are contiguous to Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand which straddle the Immokalee Urban area and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA). The CCPC expressed concern that the proposed IAMP did not include data and analysis that assessed the impact that the shifting of density and intensity could have on the RLSA program. Additionally, a new Goal (Goal 1) was included that would allow the County to prioritize capital projects, programs, studies, and any other commitments within the proposed plan that are necessary to further the Goals, objectives, and Policies in the [AMP; identifies potential alternative funding sources; and allows for the extension of timeframes allocated to fulfill commitments. A OP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment Board of County Commissioners (BCC) Action: The BCC heard this petition at their June 23, 2010 meeting and unanimously approved (5 -0) the subject amendment for transmittal to DCA, subject to the following conditions: 1. Deletion of the CCPC's recommended language to Policy 6.1.7. to allow Mobile Home use for a specific existing mobile home park within the Industrial subdistrict. 2. Inclusion (at Adoption) of companion amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Map to reflect the removal of the ±103 acres proposed to be added to the Immokalee Regional Airport. 3. Re- inclusion of language that would allow density and intensity blending for properties contiguous to Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand and which straddle the Immokalee Urban area and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA). This decision was in response to a request from a public speaker representing a client that owns lands that could potentially benefit from this provision. In addition, the BCC requested the public speaker to provide staff data and analysis that would assess the impact of such provision on the RLSA program with the intention that, during adoption hearings, the EAC and CCPC be able to provide the BCC a recommendation of the merits of such provisions based on the supplied data and analysis. (See attached data and analysis provided by Wilson Miller Stantec Inc.) Staff maintains that the submitted data and analysis does not address the effect that the shifting of density and intensity may have on the acreage caps in the RLSA. EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) CCPC COMMENTS: The wetland boundary that connects to Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay (LT /CKSSO) was adopted as part of the 2007 GMP amendments based on the 2004 EAR. As part of this change, policies were added to the CCME to increase the native vegetation retention requirements. Subsequent analysis by staff yields a different, more accurate boundary of this wetland. At staff request, the petitioner agreed to include the revised boundary as part of this amendment petition. As part of the EAR hearings, the CCPC commented that the proposed standards contained under the "Wetlands Connected to Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay" of the Land Use Designation portion of the plan, references the wetland protection standards set forth in Policy 6.2.5 of the CCME. However, such CCME Policy does not specify the native vegetation retention requirements thresholds and standards that would apply to the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System. The CCPC requested staff to evaluate what native vegetation retention requirements would be appropriate for said system. One CCPC member stated that perhaps the 90 percent requirement of the RLSA lands would be appropriate. Staff evaluated the request for applying a 90 percent native vegetation retention requirement and which is intended for properties located within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Sending lands. Major differences are the development parameters for these lands (density; intensity; and allowed uses) which are intentionally restricted compared to those that apply to properties within the LTCKSS Overlay. Properties within the LTCKSS are allowed to develop at much higher density and intensity than the Sending lands within the RFMUD. Such a high native vegetation retention requirement is incompatible with the development parameters for properties within the LTCKSS. 7 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment The CCME requires properties within the Urban area to retain a minimum of 25 percent of native vegetation. Lands within the LTCKSS are within the Immokalee Urban Area. However, because of the high natural value of these lands, staff is of the opinion that the Urban native vegetation retention requirements would not further the intent of protecting these lands. Staff concludes that a mid -point range of native vegetation retention, such as the requirements for Neutral lands, is the most appropriate for properties within the LTCKSS. Therefore, native vegetation retention of 60 percent (not to exceed 45 percent of the site) is being proposed as the appropriate requirement for properties within the LTCKSS. Amendments to Policy 6.2.5 of the CCME are necessary in order to implement these requirements (see attached Exhibit A text.) DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS (DCA) OBJECTION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS (ORC) REPORT: The Objections Recommendations and Comment (ORC) Report is included as part of this amendment packet, as well as a response letter prepared by the petitioner's consultant (RWA) with the assistance and input of County staff. If an Objection set forth in the ORC Report is not adequately addressed when adopted, then the DCA may find the amendment to be "Not in Compliance" with Florida Statutes, and issue a Notice of Intent (NOI) to indicate such noncompliance. The County may respond to the ORC Report in one of four ways at Adoption: 1. not modify the amendment, but provide additional explanation of what the amendment is about, its purpose, what it will achieve [appropriate if we believe DCA simply does not understand /has misunderstood the amendment] and /or provide additional data and analysis to support the amendment; or 2. modify the amendment, so as to address the ORC issue; or, 3. modify the amendment, and provide additional explanation and /or provide additional data and analysis; or, 4. not adopt the amendment. Most notably within the ORC Report are objections due to DCA's contention that the proposed IAMP does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the intensity of non - residential use for the different future land use categories. The land use categories within the current IAMP do not include specific limitations for the development of allowed intensity for the Immokalee Urban Area. Historically, the specifics on the amount and the manner of non - residential development has been coordinated through established limitations specified in the County's Land Development Code (LDC), and which vary depending upon the type of zoning district where development is to occur, as well as the zoning and the types of land use of surrounding properties. In addition, the County's Capital Improvement Element of the GMP coordinates the demand on public facilities (sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, traffic circulation, schools, and parks and recreation) based on projected population growth. In order to satisfy DCA's objections in regard to limitation of intensity within the GMP, County staff compiled and evaluated land use category data in the Immokalee urban area in order to CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment determine the amount of existing square footage of commercial, industrial, governmental, and institutional development utilizing Collier County's Property Appraiser data, Collier County's Geographic Information System (GIS) data, data from updated Commercial and Industrial inventory. The petitioner then utilized the compiled data to compare the development potential of the proposed IAMP with the County's population projection to prepare the resulting development intensity in five year increments, out to 2025. Based on an analysis of existing conditions and growth projections through the 2025 planning horizon, the revised IAMP proposes a maximum square footage of 8.45 million square feet for non - residential development for the entire Immokalee Urban Area, an increase of 3 million square feet above the existing 5 million square feet of non - residential development. Accordingly, the IAMP has been revised to include maximum square footage for non - residential development through the added Policy 6.1.10; make revisions to the land use description section; and add the data and analysis. The ORC Report also contends that the proposed Policy 6.1.9 would allow zoning in Immokalee to be inconsistent with the GMP for those existing properties that have a zoning designation that permits a higher density or intensity than the maximums allowed within the proposed Plan. The proposed Policy 6.1.9 is derived from FLUE Policy 5.1, is largely verbatim, and is a replacement for FLUE Policy 5.1 to apply to the Immokalee area. Proposed Policy 6.1.9 has been included in the Immokalee Area Master Plan to provide greater clarity. The Collier County GMP was adopted in January 1989. Policy 5.1 originally simply required all rezonings to be consistent with the GMP; there was no allowance in that policy for properties that were zoned inconsistent with the FLUM designation on those properties. Original Policy 5.9 recognized developed properties that were zoned inconsistent with the FLUM designation on those properties but did not provide for rezoning; essentially, it was a vesting policy — those properties could develop in accordance with their existing zoning. Viewed in tandem, these policies provided that properties zoned inconsistent with their FLUM designation could develop per their existing zoning but if were rezoned, could only rezone to a zoning district consistent with their FLUM designation — a down - zoning. For inconsistently zoned properties with a commercial zoning, one incentive was provided for rezoning to a residential zoning district, the Conversion of Commercial Zoning density bonus. Subsequent amendments to Policy 5.1 were adopted to allow these consistent by policy properties to rezone to the same or lower density or intensity. The above clarification in regard to proposed Policy 6.1.9 has been coordinated with DCA staff. In addition, a review of the existing zoning districts in the Immokalee urban area was conducted to determine the impact that the changes of the proposed subdistrict designations would have on the existing properties. The review concludes that a total of 26 parcels would become inconsistent with the proposed TAMP FLUM, or 74.9 acres. However, the Immokalee urban area encompasses an approximate of 17,116 acres of land. Therefore, less than one half of a percent ( <1/2 %) of the Immokalee urban area would become inconsistent with the proposed Plan FLUM designations. The Garden Lake Apartments PUD, adopted by Ordinance 89 -09, and which is a build -out development per Ordinance 10 -88 that comprises 7.40 acres of the 79.9 acres. This development allows 9 units per acre, while the proposed LR subdistrict allows a maximum of 8 units per acre. In addition, two commercially zoned (C -3) properties would become inconsistent with the proposed LR subdistrict. The remaining parcels are zoned Village Residential (VR), a zoning district that allows up to 14 dwelling units per acre; Residential Multi - Family -6 (RMF -6); and a portion (11.12 acres) of the Collier Village PUD, adopted by Ordinance 87 -06, that allows 9 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment up to 5.37 dwelling units per acre. All of these remaining properties are within the LT /CKSSO for which density is proposed to be restricted to a maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre with no allowance for density bonuses. Other revisions to the [AMP because of the ORC Report include: the establishment of a maximum of 70 percent of non - residential development within the Commercial -Mixed Use subdistrict; inclusion of the specific uses allowed within the Immokalee Regional Airport subdistrict; clarification that the proposed Central Business District is meant to be a zoning district as opposed to a land use designation; a revised transportation analysis to address short term and long term transportation concerns and needs. The ORC Report notes the need to establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the amounts of preservation that would be required to receive the density bonuses and incentives as outlined in Policy 5.1.1 when a development exceeds the minimum amount of preservation already set forth in Policy 6.1.1. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME). The revised language proposes that on -site or off -site preservation exceed the minimum applicable amounts set forth in the CCME Policy 6.1.1 by at least ten percent, in order to qualify for incentives. In addition, greater levels of incentives may be provided for greater amounts of preservation through criteria that is to be specified in the Land Development Code (LDC). In addition, the ORC Report comments on the need for meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the best management practices regarding water quality as a result of development adjacent to Lake Trafford and its surrounding wetlands or natural habitat. The revised TAMP specifies that best management practices are to conform to those established by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to address Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and nutrient loading. Lastly, the ORC Report is concerned with the projected demand for and availability of potable water and sanitary sewer facilities and water supply, based on clear assumptions regarding the combination of residential and non - residential land uses at the adopted level of service standards. The revised Plan includes additional data and analysis in the short term and long term of supply and demand of water and sewer facilities. The analysis also includes demand analysis from maximum potential build -out to account for maximum non - residential build -out potential. Revisions to the IAMP to address the ORC Report include the following: • Additional text to Policy 5.1 .1 •' Additional text to Policy 5.1.2 • A new Policy 6.1 .10 • Additional text to the Urban — Mixed Use District • Additional text to the Urban — Industrial District • Additional text to the Commercial — Mixed Use Subdistrict • Additional text to the Industrial — Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict • Additional data and analysis: o Future Land Use and Nonresidential Potential Analysis • Zoning and FLUM inconsistencies • Five and Ten — Year Water and Sewer Availability • Demand Analysis from Maximum Potential Build -Out 10 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment V ,J ' G74 ■ COMMERCI L ZO?,EO PW)PER -Y 0 I yR 4 -4 Fi4f- 1 I PLM] ` •%rr —� RBF-3 ;E I EuT1.4L ZONED 3r +ODEQ7Y 11Mr �1 l tfimr -oa -� TV u�l#F -iR _.. •.. __ _ � 48F--4 A-WO I t+l b - I-itd o .___� C-4 r- - - - --_ IF � I R►IF-6 MH Rllr F (� • � -rice; is ' VIR- g RMF 14-Nt fii� E__ Excerpt from the proposed "Existing Zoning Consistent with TAMP FLUM by Policy 6.1.9" map ADOPTION HEARINGS: Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) Recommendation: The EAC heard this petition at their January 5, 2011 meeting and unanimously recommended (5 -0) to forward the subject amendment, CP- 2008 -5, Immokalee Area Master Plan, to the BCC with a recommendation to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) subject to the following conditions: 1. Policy 5.1.2: Lake Trafford Development — inclusion of language at the end of the policy "The Lake Trafford Drainage Basin shall be the geographic area intended for implementation of these BMP" (or similar language). 2. To affirm the BCC decision for inclusion of language that would allow density and intensity blending for properties contiguous to Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand and which straddle the Immokalee Urban Area and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA). 11 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment 3. To support the Staff recommendation of a 60 percent neutral lands native preservation requirement for the CCME (as discussed herein), with the understanding that given the ecological and /or environmental value of the lands affected, the amount of preservation required will be further evaluated and may be increased pending the results of said evaluation. In addition, the EAC recommended the following text changes to Data and Analysis section of the IAMP document: Section 4.7, Listed Species (page 41) — paragraph 2/3: • Paragraph 2, line 3 - from "...the majority along the western boundary." to "...the majority along the estern boundary." • Paragraph 3, line 1 — from "Other listed species that have been observed within the Immokalee Urban Area are the bald eagle..." to "Other listed species that have been observed within the Immokalee Urban Area including but not limited to, are the bald eagle..." Staff also notes that the EAC recommendation to include language that would allow density and intensity blending for properties contiguous to Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand and which straddle the Immokalee Urban area and the RLSA, was based on the assumption that the agent for the property owner that would be affected by this language, would provide the requisite data and analysis. Only minimal data and analysis was received from that property owner's agent and was provided to the EAC; it was considered inadequate by the EAC (and staff). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP- 2008 -5 to the Board of Collier County Commissioners with a recommendation to adopt and transmit to DCA, subject to the inclusion of the requisite data and analysis that support language that would allow density and intensity blending for properties contiguous to Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand and which straddle the Immokalee Urban area and the RLSA. 12 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment PREPARED BY: CAROL A VALERA, PRINCIPAL PLANNER 4mpre ensive Planning Section Land Development Services Department Growth Management Division, Planning & Regulation APPROVED BY: DAVID WEEKS, AICP, GMP MANAGER Comprehensive Planning Section Land Development Services Department Growth Management Division, Planning & Regulation APPROVED BY: DATE: .2-4-11 DATE. . l( DATE: 2 - `1 MIKE BOSI, AICP, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING MANAGER Comprehensive Planning Section Land Development Services Department Growth Management Division, Planning & Regulation APPjIRPVED BY: AfLLIAM LORENZ, E, DIOECTOR Land Development Services Department Growth Management Division, Planning & Regulation APPROVED BY: CASA N DA, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR Growth Management Division, Planning & Regulation COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE: OZ-0'6 ' Ct DATE: DATE: 2-9-// 13 cpe008-5 Immokalee Area Master Plan uwpAmondmem STAFF REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL TO: ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION — PLANNING AND REGULATION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: January 5.2O11 � RE: PETITION CP-2008-5'|K4MOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (ADOPTION HEARING) Coordinator: Carolina Valera, Principal Planner Agent: Applicant/Owner: RobedyWulher8 |0moka|ee Community Redevelopment Agency /CRA\ HVVA.|nc. Collier County Government O81U Willow Park Drive, Suite 2OD 310 Alachua Street Naples, FL341O0 |mmoka|ee,FL34142 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The |mmohale* urban area is region of about 30 square miles containing ±17.11b acres uf land, and |9 located in northeast Collier C0VDtV, Gpp[UXi[n8t8|y 27 miles from the intersection of |nnrnokale8 Road /C.Fl. 840\ and Collier Boulevard (C.R. 851} in N@p|8S to the intersection of South First Street and Main Street in |rnnlOkmee. The |rnno0kB88 urban area comprises the Immokalee planning community, REQUESTED ACTION: The subject area of this amendment request is designated Urban on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the |mmokaleeArea Master Plan (|AMP) element ofthe Growth Management Plan (GK8P). This oobdon seeks to revise and replace in its entirety the existing adopted |mmDkalee Area Master Plan Element of the GMP' including the existing |nnp|ern8n1Gd0n Strategy, which encompass the Goals, Objectives, and Policies; the Land Use Designation Description SeodOn, which generally indicate the types of land um9S for which zoning may be requested; and the Future Land Use Map (FLUK8). Additionally, approximate 103 acres designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lando Stewardship Area Overlay are proposed to be added to the |AK8P and those lands re-designated as Urban. This petition also proposes changes to Policy 6.2.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) to add language to address the vegetation retention requirements that would apply to lands within the LQk8TraffUrd/Ca0p Ke@isSt[@Dd SyShgrD; and revisions to the Future L8OU Use Map Series 0f the Future Land Use Element /FLUE\b] reflect the additional 108 acres 10 the |mnnnka|eeUrban 8nS8. CP-2008-5 Immokalee Area Master Plar. GMP Amendment SURROUNDING LAND USE ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subliect Area: More than half of the land use type within the Immokalee Urban area is presently agricultural. The remainder is a mixture of residential, commercial and industrial uses. Immokalee is accessed from the south and east by its major roadway, Immokalee Road (CR 846). State Road 29 provides access into the Community from the northern counties of Lee and Hendry and to the southeast areas of Collier County. uratt t-uture Lana use map Q-SLIM) Surrounding Lands: North: Lands designated Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA) on the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The vast majority of these lands are zoned Rural Agricultural District (A). South: Lands designated Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, RLSA on the countywide FLUM. Most of these lands are undeveloped and are zoned Rural Agricultural District (A). East: Lands designated Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, RLSA on the countywide FLUM. Lands to the east are within the Area of Critical State Concern on the countywide FLUM and which are within the Okaloacoochee Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA) and the Okaloacoochee Slough Flowway Stewardship Area (FSA). These lands are undeveloped and most are zoned Rural Agricultural District (A). 2 oP-2008 5 Immokame Area Muse Plan uMpAmendmam West: Lands designated Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District. RL8A on the countywide ~ FLUM; as well as Lake Trafford and lands within the Camp Keaio Strand F8A. Most of these lands are undeveloped. Existing |[nrnok8ee Area Master Plan UAMP1 Future Land Use Map (FLUM) The proposed |nmmokae8 Area Master Plan (IAK8P) intends to implement the |rnmokame community's vision, as approved by the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Visioning Committee (|MPVC),bv promoting economic development and efficient delivery Ofservices through greater density and intensity that encourage dgns8, clustered dGwe|VpnneO1 along major thoroughfares that transition to lower densities; incorporating smart growth principles; and by providing greater development flexibility through mixed-use Subdistricts. The revised Immokalee Future Land Use map provides integrity to the geographic region. In general, the amendment 1n the |AK8P element of the GMP proposes eight new ooaa, each with uaapeoUvo objectives and policies; followed by the revised Land Use Designation Description SeCb0D YvUiCk includes and describes the proposed land use designations that will guide patterns of development within the Immokalee urban area and further the proposed goals through standards set forth within such land used designations, and the types of 8UOYv8d land uses that could berequested. The following are some of the major changes proposed in this : 3 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment • Re- configuration of the wetland boundary that connects to Lake Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System Overlay. This revision was requested by staff. • Re- designation of the lands within the boundary of the Immokalee Regional Airport from Industrial (ID) to Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO). • Addition of ±103 acres of land that are proposed to be removed from the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA) and be included within the boundary of the Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO). • Addition of the "Loop Road," which is proposed to allow access from the Immokalee Regional Airport and Florida Tradeport areas, to SR82 and SR29. • Revisions to the land use designations in the IAMP FLU include: • An increase in the base density allowed within the mixed use designated areas. However, no change in base density (DU /A — dwelling units per acre) is proposed within the Low, Medium, High and RT designated areas. • An increase of about 10 percent in the number of potential dwelling units that could be developed through base density. • Changes in the maximum density allowed within the low residential (reduction) and mixed use designated areas (increase). • An 18 percent reduction in the maximum number of potential dwelling units that would be allowed in the IAMP. • An increase of *201 acres of Recreational Tourist (RT) designated lands. • An increase on the cap of allowed density that can be requested within the Immokalee Urban Area, via density bonus, from a maximum of 16 DU /A to a cap of 20 DU /A. • A five percent reduction of residential designated lands. This change of over ±636 acres of residential designated lands are proposed to be re- designated to allow commercial and industrial development, as well as uses that are allowed under the RT designation. • An increase of ±80 acres of commercial designated lands. • An increase of ±462 acres of industrial designated lands. This increase includes the re- designation from Industrial (ID) to Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict (APO) of 1484.3 acres of land that are part of the Immokalee Regional Airport boundary. TRANSMITTAL HEARINGS: Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) Recommendation: The EAC heard this petition at their January 6, 2010 meeting and unanimously recommended (3 -0) to forward the subject amendment, CP- 2008 -5, Immokalee Area Master Plan, to the BCC with a recommendation to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) subject to the following conditions: Standardize the Lake Trafford Camp Keais Strand System (LTCKSS) Overlay terminology throughout the document. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document.] 4 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment 2. Allow any lands within the LTCKSS to qualify for density and intensity blending. [Staff note. This condition was incorporated into the document per the BCC conditions of approval to transmit to DCA. Please refer to BCC condition number 3 discussions, under the BCC recommendation in the following page.] 3. Prohibit density increases within the LTCKSS Overlay. [Staff note. This condition has been addressed in the revised document through the exemption of any bonuses to lands within the LT/CKSSO. Additionally, the density and intensity blending provisions that apply to lands within the LT/CKSSO are intended to encourage shifting development from Urban designated lands to lands within the RLSA.] 4. Allow wetlands within the LTCKSS that are restored to high quality wetlands to qualify for density intensity blending. [Staff note. As noted above, this condition has been addressed in the revised document.] 5. Prohibit retroactive LTCKSS development applications. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document.] 6. Remove the Greenfield Designation. [Staff note: Greenfield designation has been removed from the document.] 7. Policy 4.1.1 - Postpone the TDR adoption process for a period of 2 years to determine its feasibility and if a Growth Management Plan amendment is required. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document. Please note that Policy 4. 1.1 has been re- numbered to Policy 5. 1.1 in the revised IAMP.] 8. Clarify Policies on how lands will be designated for "Conservation." [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document. Please note that a Conservation designation is not being proposed at this time. However, the revised document includes requirements to evaluate the need of such for the inclusion of a Conservation designation through the Evaluation and Appraisal Report process.] 9. Separate the Mitigation Bank Policy into Public and Private designations. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document.] 10. Policy 6.1.7 to read - "Within two (2) years of adoption of the Policy, Collier County shall amend the Land Development Code to provide for a deviation process from the current native vegetation retention standards set forth in the CCME Policy 6.1.1 for developments within the Immokafee Urban Area. This deviation process shall be consistent with provisions set forth in CCME Policy 6.1.1(10).'7 [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document Please note that Policy 4. 1.1 has been re- numbered to Policy 5. 1.1 in the revised /AMP.] 11. Goal 4 - expand language to include listed species for upland and scrub jay habitat within the Immokalee Urban Area [Staff note: This condition was included by the agent for the petitioner, but later revised by the CCPC. However, the revised language is intended to be general and therefore to include listed species, including scrub jay habitat. Please note that Goal 4 has been re- numbered to Goal 5 in the revised IAMP.] 5 CP- 2006 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment 12. Provide a data analysis on how the Immokalee Sewer and Water District intends to meet the demands of future development. [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised data and analysis.] 13. Policy 4.1.2 line 1 — from "Recognizing the importance of Lake Trafford to potential ecotourism..." To "Recognizing the importance of Lake Trafford and the surrounding wetlands and natural habitat to the ecosystem, economy and ecotourism... " [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document. Please note that: Policy 4.1.2 has been re- numbered to Policy 5.1.2 in the revised /AMP.] 14. Policy 4.1.2 - line 4 -5 from - "Within 2 years of the adoption of the Policy, the County in conjunction with the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency will amend the ..." to "Within 2 years of the adoption of this Policy, the County in conjunction with the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency and any applicable State or Federal Agencies will amend the ... " [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document Please note that Policy 4.1.2 has been re- numbered to Policy 5. 1.2 in the revised TAMP.] 15. Policy 4.1.3 line 1 — from "Collier County will continue to cooperate with agencies on remediation efforts at Lake Trafford..." to "Collier County will continue to cooperate with agencies on remediation, restoration and continuing long term management efforts at Lake Trafford... " [Staff note: This condition has been addressed in the revised document. Please note that Policy 4.1.3 has been re- numbered to Policy 5.1.3 in the revised TAMP.] Collier Countv Planning Commission (CCPC) Recommendation: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) heard this petition on February 16, February 18, March 3, and May 20, 2010, and unanimously recommended (6 -0) to forward the subject petition to the BCC with a recommendation to transmit to DCA, subject to numerous changes throughout the document which the petitioner has made, and subject to map revisions to identify the proposed ±103 acres expansion of the Immokalee Regional Airport. In addition, the CCPC recommended the addition of language to Policy 6.1.7 to allow Mobile Home use for a specific existing mobile home park located within the Industrial subdistrict. Of relevance to the EAC is the request from the CCPC to remove language that would allow density and intensity blending for properties which are contiguous to Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand which straddle the Immokalee Urban area and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA). The CCPC expressed concern that the proposed TAMP did not include data and analysis that assessed the impact that the shifting of density and intensity could have on the RLSA program. Additionally, a new Goal was included that would allow the County to prioritize capital projects, programs, studies, and any other commitments within the proposed plan that are necessary to further the Goals, objectives, and Policies in the IAMP; identifies potential alternative funding sources; and allows for the extension of timeframes allocated to fulfill commitments. Board of County Commissioners (BCC) Recommendation: The BCC heard this petition at their June 23, 2010 meeting and unanimously approved (5 -0) the subject amendment for transmittal to DCA subject to the following conditions: 2 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment 1. Deletion of the CCPC's recommended language to Policy 6.1.7. to allow Mobile Home use for a specific existing mobile home park within the Industrial subdistrict. 2. Inclusion (at Adoption) of companion amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Map to reflect the removal of the ±103 acres proposed to be added to the Immokalee Regional Airport. 3. Re- inclusion of language that would allow density and intensity blending for properties contiguous to Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand and which straddle the Immokalee Urban area and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA). This decision was in response to a request from a public speaker representing a client that owns lands that could potentially benefit from this provision. In addition, the BCC requested the public speaker to provide staff data and analysis that would assess the impact of such provision on the RLSA program with the intention that, during adoption hearings, the EAC and CCPC be able to provide the BCC a recommendation of the merits of such provisions based on the supplied data and analysis. (See attached data and analysis provided by Wilson Miller Stantec Inc.) Staff maintains that the submitted data and analysis does not address the effect that the shifting of density and intensity may have on the acreage caps in the RLSA. Evaluation and Aonraisal Resort (EAR) CCPC comments: The wetland boundary that connects to Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay (LT /CKSSO) was adopted as part of the 2007 GMP amendments based on the 2004 EAR. As part of this change, policies were added to the CCME to increase the native vegetation retention requirements. Subsequent analysis by staff yields a different, more accurate boundary of this wetland. At staff request, the petitioner agreed to include the revised boundary as part of this amendment petition. As part of the EAR hearings, the CCPC commented that the proposed standards contained under the 'Wetlands Connected to Lake Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System Overlay" of the Land Use Designation portion of the plan, references the wetland protection standards set forth in Policy 6.2.5 of the CCME. However, such CCME Policy does not specify the vegetation retention requirements thresholds and standards that would apply to the Lake Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System. The CCPC requested staff to evaluate what vegetation retention requirements would be appropriate for said system. A CCPC member stated that perhaps the 90 percent requirement of the RLSA lands would be appropriate. Staff evaluated the request for applying a 90 percent vegetation retention requirement and which is intended for properties located within the RLSA. A point of contention is the fact that the development parameters for these lands (density; intensity; and allowed uses) are intentionally restricted compared to those that apply to properties within the LTCKSS Overlay. Properties within the LTCKSS are allowed to develop at much higher density and intensity than the lands within the RLSA. Therefore, such high vegetation retention requirement is illogical when compared with the allowed development standards for properties within the LTCKSS. The CCME requires properties within the Urban area to retain a minimum of 25 percent of vegetation. Lands within the LTCKSS are within the Immokalee Urban Area. However, because of the high natural value of these lands, staff is of the opinion that the Urban vegetation retention requirements would not further the intent of protecting these lands. Staff concludes that a mid -point range of vegetation retention, such as the requirements for Neutral lands, is the most appropriate for properties within the LTCKSS. Therefore, vegetation 7 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment retention of 60 percent (not to exceed 45 percent of the site) is the appropriate requirement for properties within the LTCKSS. Amendments to Policy 6.2.5 of the CCME are necessary in order to implement these requirements (see attached Exhibit A text.) DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS (DCA) OBJECTION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS (ORC) REPORT: The Objections Recommendations and Comment (ORC) Report is included as part of this amendment packet, as well as a response letter prepared by the petitioner's consultant (RWA) with the assistance and input of County staff. Most notable for the deliberations of the EAC are the following comments: The ORC Report notes the need to establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the amounts of preservation that would be required to receive the density bonuses and incentives as outlined in Policy 5.1.1 when a development exceeds the minimum amount of preservation already set forth in Policy 6.1.1. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (COME). The revised language proposes that on -site or off -site preservation exceed the minimum applicable amounts set forth in the COME Policy 6.1.1 by at least ten percent, in order to qualify for incentives. In addition, greater levels of incentives may be provided for greater amounts of preservation through criteria that is to be specified in the Land Development Code (LDC). In addition, the ORC comments on the need of meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the best management practices regarding water quality as a result of development adjacent to Lake Trafford and its surrounding wetlands or natural habitat. The revised IAMP specifies that best management practices are to conform to those established by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to address Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and nutrient loading. Lastly, the ORO is concerned with the projected demand for and availability of potable water and sanitary sewer facilities and water supply, based on clear assumptions regarding the combination of residential and non - residential land uses at the adopted level of service standards. The revised plan includes additional data and analysis in the short term and long term of supply and demand of water and sewer facilities. The analysis also includes demand analysis from maximum potential build -out to account for maximum non - residential build -out potential. Land use related comments within the ORC include recommendations to establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the intensity of non - residential use for the different future land use categories. Based on an analysis of existing conditions and growth projections through the 2025 planning horizon, the revised TAMP proposes a maximum square footage of 8.45 million square feet for non - residential development for the entire Immokalee Urban Area, an increase of 3 million square feet above the existing 5 million square feet of non- residential development. Other revisions to the IAMP because of the ORC include: the establishment of a maximum of 70 percent of non - residential development within the Commercial -Mixed Use subdistrict; inclusion of the specific uses allowed within the Immokalee Regional Airport subdistrict; clarification that the proposed Central Business District is meant to be a zoning district as opposed to a land use 8 CP- 2008 -5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment designation; a revised transportation analysis to address short term and long term transportation concerns and needs. Revisions to the IAMP to address the ORC include the following: • Additional text to Policy 5.1.1 • Additional text to Policy 5.1.2 • A new Policy 6.1.10 • Additional text to the Urban — Mixed Use District • Additional text to the Urban — Industrial District • Additional text to the Commercial — Mixed Use Subdistrict • Additional text to the Industrial — Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict • Additional data and analysis: • Future Land Use and Nonresidential Potential Analysis • Zoning and FLUM inconsistencies • Five and Ten — Year Water and Sewer Availability • Demand Analysis from Maximum Potential Build -Out If an Objection set forth in the ORC Report is not adequately addressed when adopted, then the DCA may find the amendment to be "Not in Compliance" with Florida Statutes, and issue a Notice of Intent (NOI) to indicate such noncompliance. The County may respond to the ORC Report in one of four ways at Adoption: 1. not modify the amendment, but provide additional explanation of what the amendment is about, its purpose, what it will achieve [appropriate if we believe DCA simply does not understand /has misunderstood the amendment] and /or provide additional data and analysis to support the amendment; or 2. modify the amendment, so as to address the ORC issue; or, 3. modify the amendment, and provide additional explanation and /or provide additional data and analysis; or, 4. not adopt the amendment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Environmental Advisory Council forward Petition CP- 2008 -5 to the Board of Collier County Commissioners with a recommendation to adopt and transmit to DCA. CP-2008-5 Immokalee Area Master Plan GMP Amendment PREPARED BY: CARbLINA LERA, PRINCIPAL PLANNER C6mprehensive Planning Section Land Development Services Department Planning & Regulation, Growth Management Division N39TIT.-W MIKE BOSI, AICP, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING MANAGER Comprehensive Planning Section Land Development Services Department Planning & Regulation, Growth Management Division AP ,7VED BY WILLIAM LORENZ-, E, DIRtCT0_R Land Development Services Department Planning & Regulation, Growth Management Division APPRPVED BY:. NICK CASALAN6_016A, TyA6MAISTRATOR Planning & Regulation, Growth Management Division DATE: /oZ-17-,(o DATE: DATE: U­ jr-1 0 DATE: / 1 '2C —1 IN I 4 • NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Kim Pokarncv, who on oath says that she serves as the Accounting Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County; Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 tithe in the issue on January 13, 2011 Affiamt furffiw says that the avid Naples Daily News is a newspaW published atNaplm. in said Collie Cotmty, Florida, and that the said newspaper has More bem cootmiwusly published in said Collier Caumy. Florida; disiabuW in Collie' Sod L e comuce of Florida, eaeb day and has been etuasd as sco and ohm mail matter at the past office in Naples, m said Collier Co=y, Fkmda, for a period of l yell next procading the first publication of the attached copy of advarusment: and affamt krifier says that he bas neidter paid nor Mmusod goty person, fine or corpornum any dmoma, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of socurmg this advertiarsncat fiar P> n9--'d • ( Signature of affiant) that as long as RiveALIC HEAR'NG ,all continue to endors. OF INTENT .odors ed him daring th. ORDINANCE -y Without fully vettin;�/ - will hold a public hearing on Thursday, illy inform readers of a 4�rrx,asaionera �,ar„far tf,;rd door, cow" co�arn- ican, Paul Crespa icians and the Status qu(M to nwBoard of County Corr Missbnars to trarnrrM Se summer? tt quo. He is bon of Petition MV. 11" Ord � 1O i proudly promoted thaf° Land Use )n't 'Tread On Me' an5.11- st the Machine." MMtSSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY. �T 1v is not a career politteR COUNTY GROWTH MANAGE limit his time,in offiC AMENDING THE IMMOKAL EE AREA ►aasTER ER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP; THE COW THE FUTURE WD USE ELEMENT AND sign, he — appropriate LAND COMMENDING ADOPTION resign as pre Bident NT OF COMMUNTrY AFFAIR& pLtbli can Party Instea ., "t,` � en_d_ llnnQt lea we�_�affiac his ramttai¢tl o$ice er Plan to Include. increases to commercial ding as his party's hies r alirnlr�ow of some ax1s11 V "; ore - aces were entered us i site; and, redealg -"- of Opp— irnateh' 403 Marhn lai Rural terns an to �y . 2s 5 the Republican Parttne retx a„sa' on of the Lars - rmftord camp Keels endorsed Rivera oveo treat >r,at " rte, and t o the ican candidates .in th! as H-'ral Lands to for ve9 n of the 103 d use Eiernant to stw^n'the 'ades gr'aT)°" Planner] should have denottnce�° �� ader -hip. Instead, yol your editorial purport, c12,200 -s e left do not understate emertt. We will not si Gall1w couli>tty r the press or aparty tel Florida ould take long before w re negative infarmatho circumstances of his ris ow holds have given m to your Paper holdin to the highest ethic: Sworn to and subscribed before me — i� Ken This 19th of January, 20 L 1 Ave Mara :,pies of the Mop-ad amendments are avaAeble for these L 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples. Florida between 9s: hday, My 4—ttoro pertaining to these doc+snen (Signature of notary public) y hard to become po0epenmant c w "a "re Planning 6oc"Of pa KCraOrdlnarily we i�'t $wvk es DaPamn1ent' comprehensive Pl�rdn9 KAROL E KAMrt,$ a middle -class benefi!'d°' eCl at the public hearYlg _+ Notary Public - State of Florida �� County P y,g and for r000rd s +Ate My Corms Expires hi 12 2013 " �7 �" th" "dings is made. which record IIcM� tie SuCh Gommissbn N OD 912237 Nitp1Eseed. Ise De Forest won an s 1920 invention that with author, potable. L — nutaber of Hald 3d at Ntuemberg for war Id War IL rd bath blessed his nrnodaliM in order to pertidpate in ttia proceeding, Rain sssatarrce. p"aa contact the Caller County iaml Trod Ent Su to 101, NaPIM FL 34112 -5355, 1.1 for the tmng knpeired are ev®labb In doe C NAPLES DAILY NEws Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publican State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the autl apps Khp Pokarnev who on oath says i the Accounting Manager of the Naples Daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier( distributed in Collier and Ice counties of Flo: attached copy of the advertising, being a in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper l time in on Jam iary 13, 2011 AfHant fvsther says that the said Naples Daily News is published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida. and newspaper has bcatofom been coatimiOUly Published it County. Florida, distributed in Collier and L= counties c each day and has bas critaed as second class mail matt, office in Napks, in said Collies County. Florida, for a Yar nett preceding the first publication oftheatucix adv and affiaut fwt w says that he bas neithe pr°rnized My Pte, firm or corporation any dis m cammisaio b or re4tad for the ptapose of =using this a& public atiod in the sai:t„e r„a.,.r,T ( Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before me This 19th da of January, 2011 (Signature of notary public) KAROL E KAiiFAS a. ? Notary Public ' State of Florida My Comm. Expires Jul 29, 2013 Commission * DO 912237 WW NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE +rouse Is hereby grvan met the CoWw couch Pf m*W Commits ion will rsotd it pub&—, hem*g on Tfairedy, February 0% WI'I at 6:30 A.K in the Hoard of County Commissioners chamber, third door, County Govern mart Center, 52M East Tamiami TrW, Naples. The purpom of use hear^g is to consider recommendation to the Board of Courtly Commissioners to transmit to the Florida Department of Commmity Affairs Vie Adoption of Petition OP-200". Growth Management Plan amendments to the krvrnkelee Area Master Plan and Future Land Use Map. The Ordmmoe title is as follows: ORDIW NCE NO. 11 AN ORDWANCE OF THE BOARD OF COLNM COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORI- ' DA PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANA 12MENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 69-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE MAMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN, INCLUDING THE IMMOKALEE AREk MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP; THE CON - SE RVATiON AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT; THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUMJRE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES; AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDBNG ADOPTION OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. CP-211 A Petition rsgjes" was dm ants to ,the Plant Im Low Use Men M make revisions to the errttre Master Puri to InckKK, Increases to commercial acreage. irrdusMal acreage, and abowabis reskkntial density; elimination of some existfng designations; we- ation of a new designation for the Imarx*AIee Regional Airport site; and, redeatgrmtbn of apprmckrnley 103 arias to Immokaise Urban Area from Agricuttund/Fit ral within the Rural lands Stewardship Area as identified on the countywide F-uhxa Land Use Map. Addtticna0y. the petition requests 'an amendment to Policy .62.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Maragamera 9ement to treat mat portion of the Lake Tra ftM Camp Keeis Shand System which is within the Irmntekslee Urban Area as Neutral Lands for vegetation Beta ion, and to the Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Future Land Use Eierrient to slow the redmignatioh of the 103 acres to the Irnmok elea Urban Mora. [Cowdksr6or: Carolina Valem. Prkroipad Planwi CP- 2006.5 Coilkr County Flarids All knem:rtod parties are Invited to appear and bt, heard. Copies of the proposed amendments are available for inipecticn at the Land Development Services Departrnent. 2800 N. Hasashoe.Drive, Naples, Florida between the hours of a= am and 5'00 p -m., Monday trough Friday. Any questions perta ring to these documents should be directed to the Land Development Services Depertrnent, Comprehensive Planning Section 939- 252- 23871. Written corn nxm Wed with the Lard UevelopmeM Services Department, Comprehensive Ptarxdng Section prior to February 03.2tMi, will be need and considered at the public hewing_ If a pennon decides to appeal any decision made by the CoMw County Piennkrg Conursimon with respect to any iTwA er considered at such meeting or twanng, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such ' purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the to st nwriy and evideme upon which the appeal is to be based. ff you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to pitittipate to this proceeding, you are mended, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain rwstatance. Please contact t1w Collier County Fac83t w Managamant Department, located at :3335 Twniami Ttaii East, Suits 101, Napier, FL 34112 -53%, a39) 252 -6360, prior td the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board W County Commissioners Office. Collier Couray Planning ComxNssion Mark P. Sirsir , Chai n an PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Thursday, February 03, 2011 at 8:30 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, third floor, County Govern- ment Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples. The purpose of the hearing is to consider recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs the Adoption of Petition CP- 2008 -5, Growth Management Plan amendments to the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Future Land Use Map. The Ordinance title is as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 11- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORI- DA PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN, INCLUDING THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP; THE CON- SERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT, THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SEIRIES; AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. CP- 2008 -5, Petition requesting amendments to the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Man, to make revisions to the entire Master Plan to include: increases to commercial acreage, industrial acreage, and allowable residential density; elimination of some existing designations; cre- ation of a new designation for the Immokalee Regional Airport site; and, redesignation of approximately 103 acres to Immokalee Urban Area from Agricdttural /Rural within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area as identified on the countywide Future Land Use Map. Additionally, the petition requests an amendment to Policy 6.2.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to treat that portion of the Lake Trafford Camp Keais Strand System which is within the Immokalee Urban Area as Neutral Lands for vegetation retention, and to the Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Future Land Use Element to show the redesignation of the 103 acres to the Immokalee Urban Area. [Coordinator: Carolina Valera, Principal Planner] MENpRr (bUUWIr CP- 2008 -5 `R ". ColliEr County Florida g cR esa 'mroi+r cauxri i a S.R- Bi i -r5 SR- 84 I-�5 All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed amendments are available for inspection at the Land Development Services Department, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Any questions pertaining to these documents should be directed to the Land Development Services Department, Comprehensive Planning Section (239- 252- 2387). Written comments filed with the Land Development Services Department, Comprehensive Planning Section prior to February 03, 2011, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Mark P. Strain, Chairman No. 231188475 January 13 2011 ORDINANCE NO. 11- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY PROVIDING FOR: AMENDMENTS TO THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN AND INCLUDING THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT, AND THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE .MAP AND MAP SERIES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. sea., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163..3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared plan amendments to the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendments to the Department of Community Affairs for preliminary review on June 29, 2010 after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs reviewed the amendments to the Immokalee Area Master Plan Element and Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its findings in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, further amendments resulted in necessary changes to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series, and the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and; IAMP Adoption Amendments 1 of 3 Rev. 2/02/11 words underlined are added; words struck - through are deleted; row of asterisks ( * * *) denotes break in text WHEREAS, Collier County has 60 days from receipt of the Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report from the Department of Community Affairs to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and held public hearings concerning the adoption of the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map to the Growth Management Plan on June 23, 2010; and WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of these amendments, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendments, and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on February 17, 2011 and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO TIME GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts these amendments to the Immokalee Area Master Plan and Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map, the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series, in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text and maps of the amendments are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated hereon by reference. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of these amendments shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the amendments in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on these amendments may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, these amendments may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent IAMP Adoption Amendments 2 of 3 Rev. 2/02/11 words underlined are added; words struck - through are deleted; row of asterisks ( * * *) denotes break in text to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3`a Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -2100. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of _ , 2011. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk , iiepuiy t_iem Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Heidi Ashton- Cicko'► Assistant County Attorney Section Chief, Land Use /Transportation Attachment: Exhibit A - CP \1 I -CMP- 00790 \16 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA r rvzm w. %,v x i.r_, %— nairman TAMP Adoption Amendments Rev. 2/02/11 words underlined are added; words struck - through are deleted; row of asterisks ( * * *) denotes break in text 3 of 3 Exhibit A CP- 2008 -5 Conservation and Coastal Management Element: GOAL 6: THE COUNTY SHALL IDENTIFY, PROTECT, CONSERVE AND APPROPRIATELY USE ITS NATIVE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AND WILDLIFE HABITAT. OBJECTIVE 6.2: The County shall protect and conserve wetlands and the natural functions of wetlands pursuant to the appropriate policies under Goal 6. The following policies provide criteria to make this objective measurable. The County's wetland protection policies and strategies shall be coordinated with the Watershed Management Plans as required by Objective 2.1 of this Element. ********************************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** [page 29] Policy 6.2.5: Within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, and that portion of the Lake Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System which is contained within the Immokalee Urban Designated Area, Collier County shall direct land uses away from higher functioning wetlands by limiting direct impacts within wetlands based upon the vegetation requirements of Policy 6.1.2 of this element, the wetland functionality assessment described in paragraph (2) below, and the final permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management District. A direct impact is hereby defined as the dredging or filling of a wetland or adversely changing the hydroperiod of a wetland. This policy shall be implemented as follows: (1) The County shall apply the vegetation retention requirements of Policy 6.1.2 of this element for the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, and Policy 6.1.2.b. of this element for the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System, in order to preserve an appropriate amount of native vegetation on site. That portion of the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System which is contained within the Immokalee Urban Area will be treated as Neutral Lands under Policy 6.1.2.b of this element. Wetlands shall be preserved as part of this vegetation requirement according to the following criteria: a. The acreage requirements of Policy 6.1.2 of this element shall be met be preserving wetlands with the highest wetland functionality scores. Wetland functionality assessment scores shall be those described in paragraph (2) of this policy. Wetlands having a WRAP score of at least 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7 shall be preserved on site. This policy is not intended in all cases to require preservation of wetlands exceeding the acreage required by Policy 6.1.2 of this element. Within one year, the County shall develop specific criteria to be used to determine when wetlands having a WRAP score greater than 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method score of greater than 0.7 shall be required to be retained exceeding the acreage required by Policy 6.1.2 of this element. Words underlined are added; words tFUGk th Peugh. are deleted; row of asterisks (***) denotes break in text. ATTACHMENT TO EXHIBIT "A" PROPOSED FLUM MAP IMMOKALEE FUTURE LAND USE MAP PETITION CP- 2008 -5 u SERMCes oMWN rc E:. IT "A" PETITION , '008 -5 R 25 E R 28 E R 27 E R 28 E R 29 E R 30 E R 31 E R 32 E R 33 E R 34 E 2006 - 2016 FUTURE LAND USE MAP �y Collier County Florida m DETAILS OF THE RLSA OVERLAY AREA ARE SHOWN Ia ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TITLED: F- "COLLIER COUNTY RURAL &AGRICULTURAL AREA ASSESSMENT STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY MAP" t� b ORKSCR W y SANC'USWAMP.? RY � a O� CREW N P"rPC00icx` K r�rz'v � ut wP m Ay CAM' � s BAY :I NRPA y15Yk I��K 1, FLORIDA PANTHER NORTH BELLE NATIONAL WILDLIFE MEADE REFUGE NRPA � wm i4 V w � N M1 BELLE H 41 A''E \R; FAKAHATCHEE STRAND STATE p PRESERVE r O — v � sTaYC \ _, w On, cov[uxo N u OF so MARCO g+ 1 CAPE RONANo - w Yf SCP12 o�i'n1�Aae¢�o.PVOlola /o %RAxw t'o 8CJ'a,.a. J R 25 E R 20 E R 27 E R 28 E BIG CYPRESS NAT70NAL PRESERVE EVERGLADLS NATKWPL PARK R 29 E R 30 E R 31 E R 321E R 33 E R 34 E N 1 w t w -4 HRUS wm we ws A w _ w � ANEx AvmL 9 9i< O O FNRD [ECF114N� lux w awc 1 t- xo �w'o`z'32) —ED xo. :°Gaome-%2z. 2= Au . (od. v >�oo�ixsn v.:ow j Punmw - —22=1 Io, zaos w lo,e. xa zoor ) AN xx� 2. (om. xo xw-nj e. woP — AxExo� A) Auexom �AxwAr a znoi �J H w -i m EXHIBIT "A" PETITION CP- 2008 -5 c'( R28E R29E I R30E R [ ` MAP FLUE -14 EXISTING ZONING CONSISTENT WITH FLUE BY POLICY 5.9, 5.10, 5.11, S.12 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA IMMOKALEE AREA A 22 23 20 21 22 N N t0 F N n F EXHIBIT "A" PETITION CP- 2008 -5 R 28 E R 29 E R 30 E EXISTING ZONING CONSISTENT WITH TAMP FLUE BY POLICY 6.1.9 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA IMMOKALEE, AREA A tD o� a L n i i ,.e 34 i 35 ,.•..+ebb u .-»e •.- o-. a.- v. l 4 J �1 11 12 t y r 4. I ,w Y1 N SG3E �i I— 0 t/2 Y! 1 YL ■ wi.ovn m rimun suvu m wemr °^ , R 28 E R 29 E R 30 E I* (a o l EXHIBIT "A' COLLIER COUNTY RURAL. & AGRICULTURAL AREA ASSESSMENT PETITION CP- 2008 -5 legend AMENDED - JANUARY 25, 2007 Ord N. 2007 -18 O Open SO08 Restaration Zone ANFNDEO- OCTOBER 14, 2008 OCTOBER 14 Water Retention Area(WRA) Bi Cypress National Forests Ord N. 4 YPres F1, —,ay Stewardship Area (FSA) Area of Cri8oa1 State Concern O - Habitat S—N,Iahlp Area (HSA) Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) PRFPAREO BY: GIS /CAD MAPPING %C'IICN GRC-I MANAGEMENT DINSION / PLANNING AND REWI -ATION - - -� - -� ® Sta -,&hip Sending Area (SSA) DATE: 9/2010 — =AAASON -2010— EXHIBIT 'A' PETITION CP -200 8-5 DD% 0 ORS Kilt K� EXHIBIT 'A' Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Map Series Northeast Stud i Y Area Vill PETITION CP -2008-5 E tae. f� r N ' I M PETITION CP -2008-5 K�E Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Map Series East Central Stud Area mW In " PETITION CP-2008-5 February, 2011 Charles Gauthier, AICP Director, Division of Community Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399 Subject: Immokalee Area Master Plan Collier County 10 -RAEC1 Dear Mr. Gauthier: The following is provided in response to your Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report provided to Collier County on September 7, 2010. Pursuant to the ORC report, a conference call was held to discuss measures to address Objections raised in the report. The following Individuals participated in that call: Scott Roger — Principal planner, DCA David Weeks, AICP - Collier County Planning, Growth Management Manager Mike Bosi, AICP - Collier County Planning, Comprehensive Planning Manager Carolina Valera, Principal Planner, Collier County Mike Greene , Transportation Planning Manager John Podczerwinsky, Development Review Project Manager Penny Phillippi, Executive Director, Immokalee CRA Brad Muckel, Immokalee CRA, Project Manager Bob Mulhere, FAICP, Mulhere & Associates, Consultant to CRA Patrick Vanasse, AICP, RWA, Inc. Consultant to CRA Chris Scott, AICP, LEED AP The responses below are consistent with the response strategies discussed during the conference call. We are confident that upon further review you will that we satisfactorily addressed the Objections identified in the report as well as related Recommendations or Comments. Obiection #1 A) Meaningful and Predictable Guidelines & Standards for Intensity 1. 4higgtion (Plan Policies): The proposed amendment (Land Use Designation Description Section) does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the intensity of nonresidential use for the following future land use categories: Industrial Subdistrict; Industrial -Mixed Use Subdistrict; Industrial -Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict, Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict; RecreationalfTourist Subdistrict; Low Residential Subdistrict, Medium Residential Subdistrict; and High Residential Subdistrict. Response: Several Residential subdistricts were included in the Objection (LR, MR, and HR). These subdistricts primarily allow residential uses; however, several non - residential uses are also allowed in the transmitted TAMP. It should be noted that these non - residential uses are customarily allowed in residential subdistricts within the existing Collier County FLUE and the existing TAMP. These are identified in the transmitted TAMP as follows: A. URBAN — MIXED USE DISTRICT .... Nonresidential uses allowed in the Residential subdistricts include, but are not limited to: agriculture, home -based businesses, recreation and open space, churches, libraries, cemeteries, public and private schools, day -care centers, and essential services, as defined in the Land Development Code, except as may be limited within a specific subdistrict or overlay. We do not believe that most of these non - residential uses require a specific "intensity limit" as they are not, for the most part, out -right commercial or industrial uses, but rather use typically allowed in most /all residential land use subdistricts within Collier County. The agricultural use is permitted because a fairly large portion of the Immokalee Urban area is still zoned "A" Agriculture and agricultures is a significant economic driver in Immokalee. All other uses either require a Conditional Use approved through a super majority at public hearing, or are regulated by existing design standards in the Collier County Land Development Code. It should also be noted that the existing IAMP and Collier County Growth Management Plan do not include intensity standards for non - residential subdistricts. In order to meet the statutory requirements, the proposed IAMP has established a maximum amount of non - residential development that can occur during the planning timeframe (2025). Because the existing IAMP does not provide nonresidential intensity standards, the proposed IAMP has elected to provide a maximum square footage for the entire Immokalee Urban Area.. This maximum non - residential development threshold was established based on an analysis of existing conditions and growth projections, and will apply to all non - residential development regardless of subdistrict. Section 5.1.6 of the Data & Analysis (attached) has been updated to show the methodology establishing the threshold of 8.45 million square feet. The IAMP has incorporated the following language (new text is shown in underline and deleted text is shown as Policy 6.1.10: Non - Residential Development Non - residential development in the Immokalee Urban Area will be limited to no more than 8.45 million square feet through the 2025 Planning Horizon. Non - residential development includes commercial, retail, office, industrial, institutional and governmental uses, but excludes hotels; motels; government subsidized, affordable or farmworker housing; and any development within the Seminole Reservation. Collier County staff shall maintain records on the amount of non - residential development in Immokalee and shall review, and update as necessary, the non - residential development limit as part of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report process. A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT The purpose of this District is to allow residential and nonresidential land uses, including mixed uses. Nonresidential uses are subject to the intensity limitations in Policy 6.1.10. Mixed uses can be located within individual buildings and /or projects in areas deemed appropriate and identified on the FLUM. Nonresidential uses allowed in the Residential subdistricts include, but are not limited to: agriculture, home -based businesses, recreation and open space, churches, libraries, cemeteries, public and private schools, day -care centers, and essential services, as defined in the Land Development Code, except as may be limited within a specific subdistrict or overlay. B. URBAN — INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT The purpose of this District is to function as a major employment center and is intended to accommodate industrial, distribution, trade, agriculture, and manufacturing uses, essential services, as well as office and commercial uses as limited within each Subdistrict. Nonresidential uses are subject to the intensity limitations in Policy 6.1.10. B) Meaningful and Predictable Guidelines & Standards for Mix of Uses The proposed amendment (Land Use Designation Description Section) does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the percentage distribution of mix among the mix of residential and nonresidential land uses allowed in the Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict and Recreational/Tourist Subdistrict, Response: To insure a mix of uses in the Commercial- Mixed Use Subdistrict, projects equal to or greater than 10 acres will be encouraged to provide both residential and non - residential uses. In no case shall more than 70% of the C -MU Subdistrict, in aggregate, be developed as single -use, non - residential projects. This revised language will promote mixed -use infill and redevelopment, while maintaining a certain level of flexibility for private development entities. This approach promotes a mix of uses but allows smaller infill projects to be single use. It recognizes that all projects do not need to be mixed but that the intent is to develop a diversified and mixed -use district over time. The proposed changes to the Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict are as follows: 4. Commercial - Mixed Use Subdistrict (C -MU): The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for pedestrian- scaled, higher density residential and mixed -use development, employment and recreational opportunities, cultural and civic activities, and public places to serve residents of, and visitors to, the Immokalee Urban Area. All types of residential uses are allowed within this Subdistrict, except that mobile homes are only allowed as provided by Policy 6.1.6., and 6.1.7. Residential densities are allowed as provided below, except for properties within the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay. Nonresidential uses allowed within this Subdistrict include those uses allowed in the C -1 through C -4 zoning districts in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ord. No. 04 -41, as amended. Base Density: Sixteen (16) dwelling units per gross acre. Maximum Density. Twenty (20) dwelling units per gross acre, inclusive of all density bonuses. Densities above the base density can only be achieved through available density bonuses. Transient lodging is allowed at a maximum density of thirty -two (32) units per acre. Mix of Uses: Proiects equal to or -greater than 10 acres will be encouraged to provide both residential and non - residential uses. In no case shall more than 70% of the C -MU Subdistrict, in aggregate, be developed as sin -gle -use, non - residential projects. As for the Recreational /Tourist Subdistrict (RT), we do not believe that provisions are needed to insure a certain mix of uses. The RT Subdistrict is not identified as "mixed -use" subdistrict. As many other subdistricts within the IAMP and the Collier County FLUE, the RT Subdistrict allows for a variety of uses but it is not the intent of this subdistrict to mandate the vertical or horizontal integration of uses. C) Meaningful and Predictable Guidelines & Standards for Allowed Uses in the Industrial - Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict The proposed amendment (Land Use Designation Description Section) does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the land uses that are allowed in the "Industrial- immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict" because the text for this Subdistrict states "allowable uses include all other uses deemed to be compatible and consistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan, as may be amended." The proposed amendment does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the type of nonresidential land uses allowed within the Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict. Response: The Industrial — Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict has been amended as follows to provide meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards that define the land uses allow in that subdistrict. The uses that are referenced are consistent with those allowed by the existing PUD zoning for the airport, and will allow the types of economic development opportunities that are desired for this Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern. The Subdistrict will be subject to the nonresidential intensity limitations of Policy 6.1.10, as referenced in the response to Objection #1.A.1. 3. Industrial — Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow the Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA) and leaseholders to develop the Immokalee Regional Airport and surrounding lands for the economic health and development of the greater Immokalee area and Collier County as a whole. Because the CCAA needs to retain flexibility to provide various general aviation and revenue - generating opportunities via land leases as the Airport grows and changes over time, a broad range of uses shall be allowed in this Subdistrict. In addition to all uses permitted in the Industrial Subdistrict, allowed uses include: airport facility and related accessory uses; commercial, industrial, institutional and agricultural uses; freight and warehousing; trade; and ancillary recreational, vehicular racing, communications and essential service uses. all other- uses deenged to be GOMPaUble and Gonsistent the adopted /lipod MasteF P4an, as may he amended The Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict provides meaningful guidelines and standards defining the allowed types of nonresidential land uses through it's stated purpose "to provide for pedestrian - scaled, higher density residential and mixed -use development, employment and recreational opportunities, cultural and civic activities, and public places to serve residents of, and visitors to, the Immokalee Urban Area" and that "Nonresidential uses allowed within this Subdistrict include those uses allowed in the C- 1 through C -4 zoning districts in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ord. No. 04 -41, as amended." D) Meaningful and Predictable Guidelines & Standards Define Amounts of Preservation Needed to Obtain Bonuses or Incentives Proposed amendment Policy 5.1.1 allows development to achieve density bonuses and other incentives in the Immokalee Urban Area if development exceeds the minimum required amounts of preservation already set forth in Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 6.1.1. Proposed Policy 5. 1.1 does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the amounts of preservation that would be required to receive the density bonuses or incentives. Response: We have revised Policy 5.1.1 as follows to address the Department's Objection: Policy 5.1.1: Incentives and Innovative Land Development Regulations Collier County will promote the preservation of native vegetation in the Immokalee Urban Area exceeding the minimum required amounts set forth in CCME Policy 6.1.1, and pursuant to IAMP Policy 2.1.3. This may be accomplished by utilizing incentives and innovative land development regulations, including but not limited to: cluster development, transferable development rights, density bonuses, and flexible development standards to incentivize infill development and redevelopment within targeted MR, HR, C -MU and I -MU designated lands. In order to qualify for any such incentives, on -site or off -site preservation, if allowed in specifically targeted areas within the Immokalee Urban designated area, shall exceed the minimum applicable amounts set forth in Policy 6.1.1. of the CCME by at least 10 percent. Incentives may be provided based upon a sliding scale, providing greater levels of incentive for greater amounts of preservation above the applicable minimum amounts set forth in Policy 6.1.1 of the CCME. Within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy [effective , 2011], subject to Policy 1.1.1, the County will explore the feasibility of adopting a TDR program in the Immokalee Urban Area to further this Objective and Policy 2.1.3. Within two years of the effective date of this Policy [effective , 2011 ] the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) subject to Policy 1.1.1, shall be amended to provide for other incentives and innovative land development regulations, including but not limited to cluster development and flexible development standards, that do not require an amendment to the TAMP. E) Meaningful and Predictable Guidelines & Standards Defining BMPs for Lake Trafford Area Proposed amendment Policy 5.1.2 states, in part, that proposed development adjacent to Lake Trafford will conform to best management practices regarding water quality in order to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to the lake and its surrounding wetlands or natural habitat. Although the purpose of Policy 5.1.2 is to protect natural resources, Policy 5.1.2 does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards defining the best management practices in order to guide the content of the Land Development Code. Response: Policy 5.1.2 has been modified to add more specificity regarding the Land Development Regulations that will be drafted within two years of adopting the Immokalee Area Master Plan. The Best Management Practices will be focused on increased or enhance treatment of storm water runoff and measures to address Total Maximum Daily Loads and nutrient loading. These guidelines will be consistent with requirements currently being developed by state and federal agencies. Policy 5.1.2 has been modified as follows: Policy 5.1.2 Lake Trafford Development Recognizing the importance of Lake Trafford, and the surrounding wetlands and natural habitat to the ecosystem, economy and ecotourism activities in Immokalee, proposed development adjacent to Lake Trafford will conform to best management practices BMPs regarding water quality in order to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to the lake and its surrounding wetlands or natural habitat. These BMPs will primarily include measures or design standards by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that address increased or enhanced on -site treatment of storm water runoff, and measures to address Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and nutrient loading. Within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy [effective , 20111, subject to Policy 1.1.1, the County in conjunction with any applicable state or federal agencies, will amend the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) to establish specific best management practices and will identify the specific locations where such best management practices shall be required. F) Internal Consistency within Policy 6.1.9 Proposed Policy 6.1.9 states that all rezonings must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, but Policy 6.1.9 allows zoning to be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan for properties that have zoning in place prior to a change in Land Use Designation where the prior zoning allows for a higher density or intensity than the new Land Use Designation. In addition, proposed Policy 6.1.9(5) states that "Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district. Proposed Policy 6.1.9(5) does not establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and standards for the intensity of land use that require the intensity of development to be determined consistent with the intensity standards of the applicable future land use category. Response: The provision outlined in proposed Policy 6.1.9 already exists in Collier County's Growth Management Plan. It has been part of the Collier County FLUE (Objective 5, Policy 5.1) since its inception in 1989, and has been applicable to the entire County, including Immokalee. Proposed Policy 6.1.9 has been included in the Immokalee Area Master Plan, to provide greater clarity, and to make the Master Plan more user - friendly. Even if the proposed policy were removed, Collier County FLUE Policy 5.1 would still apply. The Data & Analysis has been amended to include an analysis of where existing zoning is inconsistent with the TAMP FLUM in Section 5.3.1 and Map 5 -5. There are 7 areas where existing zoning is inconsistent with the proposed FLUM, totaling 26 parcels and 74.9 acres. G) Meaningful and Predictable Guidelines & Standards Regarding Intensity in Central Business District Response: Policy 7.1.5 of the transmitted IAMP calls for the development of the Central Business District (CBD). The CBD will be a zoning overlay that will fall within the Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict. The CBD will be located along S.R. 29 in the area commonly referred to as downtown Immokalee. The intent of the CBD zoning overlay is to encourage high- intensity, multi -story, and pedestrian- oriented commercial and mixed -use development. Properties in the CBD will be subject to the density standards for whichever FLU Subdistrict in which it is located and the nonresidential development standards in Policy 6.1.10 (as identified in response to Objection #1.A. above). Obiection #2 A) Data and Analysis to Address Residential and Commercial Water and Sewer Needs 2. Objection (FLUM Amendments); Amendment IO -RAEC1 proposes changes to land use designations on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The proposed amendment is not supported by an analysis (short -term five -year, and long -term planning timeframes) of the projected demand for and availability of potable water and sanitary sewer facilities and water supply based on clear assumptions regarding the combination of both residential land uses (at maximum density and population projections) and nonresidential land uses (based on intensity standards established in the IAMP") at the adopted level of service standards. Response: The Data & Analysis has been revised to provide an analysis of the short -term and long -term water and sewer facilities and water supply impacts resulting from the proposed amendments. This analysis is based on population growth, nonresidential development, adopted LOS standards and water and sewer demands and is provided in the attached D &A Supplement as Section 6.4.3, Five- and Ten -Year Water and Sewer Availability. The analysis shows that water demand will increase from 5.37 MGD to 5.95 MGD over the next five years and sewer demand will increase from 3.80 to 4.35 MGD. The increased demand can be met by the projected 2014 capacity for water (14.20 MGD) and sewer (10.00 MGD). The 10 -year projections show water and sewer demand increasing to 6.17 MGD and 4.56 MGD, respectively, which can be met by the projected 2019 capacity for water (14.20 MGD) and sewer (10.00 MGD). Additionally, the D &A includes an amended Section 6.9, Demand Analysis from Maximum Potential Build -Out to account for maximum nonresidential buildout potential resulting from the TAMP amendments to the FLUM. This analysis calculates the maximum nonresidential development by multiplying the intensity standards, as expressed in Floor Area Ratio (FAR), by the acreage for each Future Land Use subdistrict. Based on these projections, the maximum buildout potential of the Immokalee Urban Area could include 80.8 million square feet of nonresidential uses, which would account for an additional 8.1 MGD of water and sewer demand. It is important to realize that it is extremely unlikely that the maximum buildout will ever be realized, as actual development rarely occurs at the maximum intensities and mixed use development projects rarely maximize both the residential and non - residential potential. Also, because the adopted IAMP and Collier County Future Land Use Element do not provide intensity standards for nonresidential uses, the maximum nonresidential development potential from the proposed TAMP should be considered a reduction from the existing plan. B) Data and Analysis to Address Residential and Commercial The proposed amendment is not supported by data and analysis addressing the following: (1) the projected impact (short-term five -year, and long -term planning timeframes) of the proposed FLUM amendments upon the adopted level of service standards of roadway facilities, including SR 29 and SR 82, based on clear assumptions regarding residential land uses (at maximum density and population projections), nonresidential land uses (based on intensity standards established in the IAMP), and background growth in trips; (2) identifying road improvements that are needed to maintain the adopted level of service standards; (3) demonstrating that any road improvements that are needed to maintain the adopted level of service standards are depicted on the Future Transportation Map (or map series) of the adopted portion of the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and included in the Capital Improvements Element Five -year Schedule of Capital Improvements; and (4) addressing coordination of any needed improvements with the plans and programs of the Florida Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program. The amendment does not coordinate the road improvements that are needed to maintain the adopted roadway level of service standards with the Future Transportation Map (by depicting such road improvements on the Map) and Capital Improvement Element (by including the road improvements that are needed in the 5 years within the Five -year Schedule, and by including the road improvements that are needed in the long -term in a policy in the Capital Improvement Element). Response: A transportation analysis ( "Immokalee CRA Future Land Use Plan Amendment Transportation Analysis ", Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc., November 20, 2009) was prepared which evaluated existing (2008) conditions, short-term future (2016), and long -term future (2030) transportation conditions and needs. The land uses evaluated are clearly described in this report, and reflect an increase from the growth projections of the MPO's adopted Cost - Feasible Plan. The long -term analysis, based on the MPO's transportation systems planning model, identified that the currently adopted Cost - Feasible Plan provides levels of service that meet adopted standards on all area roads except for three segments. It further indicates that the proposed increased development intensities cause one additional road segment to become deficient, but that is the result of a relatively small (approximately 50 p.m. peak hour trips) change in traffic volumes. The short -term analysis, based on the 2008 counts and trend growth rates, indicated that only one road segment (SR 29 north of Lake Trafford Road, an emerging SIS road) was estimated to fail the adopted LOS standard of C, operating at LOS D — which is the standard applied to most roads in Collier County. Since the TOA transportation analysis was undertaken, Collier County updated its Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) making use of 2009 traffic count data. An excerpt from that report is provided below, indicating that traffic volumes have decreased since 2008, and even more capacity is available on SR 29 than was reported in the TOA traffic analysis. For example, on SR 29 north of Lake Trafford Road, the more recent AUIR reports a 100th highest hour peak direction traffic volume of 539, as opposed to the 608 estimated in 2008. COLLIER COUNTY 2010 ANNUAL UPDATE INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) Collier County Transportation Database (Based on LOSPLAN and current haffic volumes) 2010 Peak Hour Peak Peak Dir Hour 2010 L Exist Cut. Min Peak Service Peak Dir Trip Total Remain. O RoadN Link From To Road Sta. Std Dir Volume Volume Bank Volume Capacity S SR29 ISR29 I CR29ASouth IN 15th St 14D I 6641C W 1 1,8601 642 941 736 1124 B SR29 SR 29 N 15th St CR 29A North 2U 6631C S 875 539 112 651 224 C SR29 SR 29 CR 29A North SR 82 2U 6631C S 875 539 64 603 272 C Rather than modify the adopted Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element and Capital Element, County staff has determined it would reduce needed work and possible confusion if the adopted plans are not amended at the present time, but in the late spring, 2011. The reason for this is that the Collier County MPO has recently updated the socio- economic data that drives their long -range transportation planning process to reduce the estimates of future population and employment. They have initiated a transportation plan update study, which is scheduled for completion in the spring of 2011. This study will take into consideration the proposed land use plan, to ensure it has been closely integrated into the MPO planning process. As a result of the lower growth estimates, the future year travel demands are expected to be lower than those of the current adopted long -range transportation plan, reducing the need for road improvements by 2030. The land use plan amendment could be approved based on the County's and MPO's commitments to update their transportation plans. In the event that process gets delayed, then the appropriate adjustments to the Transportation Element, the CIE, and the MPO plans could be made based on the transportation analysis prepared in support of this amendment application. Should you have any questions regarding this amendment, please contact me at (239) 597 -0575 or rjmAconsult- rwa.com. Sincerely, Patrick Vanasse, AICP Director of Planning I. INTRODUCTION Immokalee has long been recognized as a distinct community within Collier County. Immokalee's economy, geography, and demographic make -up are different than the rest of Collier County. Approximately one -half of the land within the Immokalee Urban Area is presently zoned and actively used for agriculture. The urban area is surrounded by productive crop lands and environmentally significant habitat. Most Immokalee residents work within the agricultural industry, and the majority of agricultural laborers originate from Mexico and Central America. Statistics from the 2000 Census (the most comprehensive data for Immokalee currently available), comparing Immokalee to the County as a whole, reflect some of the key socio- economic differences, including age distribution, race and ethnicity, income, education and housing. The Immokalee Area Planning Commission was formed in 1965, and Immokalee was governed under separate Zoning and Subdivision Regulations until 1982. While it is now included under the county -wide Land Development Code, in 1991 the County again acknowledged the need for Immokalee- specific land use regulation with the adoption of the first Immokalee Area Master Plan as an element in the County's overall comprehensive plan. Collier County first established the Immokalee Area as a Planning Community in its 1983 Comprehensive Plan. In 1989, the County adopted revisions to the comprehensive plan, now called the Growth Management Plan (GMP), which included a requirement to develop an area master plan for Immokalee. In 1991, the County adopted the first Immokalee Area Master Plan (TAMP), as referenced in Policy 4.2 of the Future Land Use Element: A detailed Master Plan for the Immokalee Urban designated area has been developed and was incorporated into this Growth Management Plan in February, 1991. Major revisions were adopted in 1997 following the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report. The Immokalee Area Master Plan addresses conservation, future land use, population, recreation, transportation, housing, and the local economy. Major purposes of the Master Plan are coordination of land uses and transportation planning, redevelopment or renewal of blighted areas, and the promotion of economic development. The IAMP is in addition to and supplements the goals, objectives, and policies, of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Due to the unique geographic, social, and economic characteristics of the Immokalee Urban Designated Area as compared with urban Naples, Coastal Collier County, and the State of Florida as a whole, the Board of County Commissioners deemed it necessary to restudy the Immokalee Urban Designated Area. On May 27, 2003, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Resolution 2003 -192, which established the Immokalee Area Master Plan Restudy Committee as an ad hoc advisory committee to the board. The Committee was to serve for a period of one year. On September 28, 2004, the Board adopted Ordinance 2004 -62, extending the timeframe for the advisory committee and renaming it the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee ( IMPVC). On November 13, 2007, the Board adopted Ordinance 2007 -69, which extended the timeframe again, providing for dissolution of the committee no later than December 31, 2009. The purpose and duties of the Committee remain the same: A. Assist in the development of any necessary Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for consulting services. B. Assist County staff with the review of general planning matters related to the Immokalee Community. These could include housing, zoning, economic and /or other issues as may be brought before the Committee. C. Identify and provide the Board of County Commissioners the Committee recommendations relative to: 1. road improvements; 2. economic incentives; 3. increasing the quality and quantity of affordable housing; 4. land uses and improvements relative to the Immokalee Regional Airport; 5. density increases in mixed -use districts; 6. restructuring of future land use designations and designation boundaries within the Immokalee community; 7. the facilitation of construction of commercial development in commercial districts; 8. the preparation of revisions to current zoning districts and the development of associated LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) standards; and 9. the review of the 5 -year Schedule of Capital Improvements relative to the Immokalee community. D. Assist in the development of revised goals, objectives, and policies, and land use designation descriptions for the Immokalee Area Master Plan. E. Assist in the review and updating of the Immokalee Area Master Plan in order to establish consistency between the Master Plan and the County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay provisions. The IMPVC has been working steadily towards achieving these goals over the last five years. The adoption of the revised IAMP and revised Immokalee Master Plan Future Land Use Map represents the first step in completing the objectives of the Committee. The Collier County LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) will be updated next to implement the Goal, Objectives, and Policies of the IAMP, followed closely by an update to the Capital Improvements Plan, and the creation of a long -term transportation plan. II. NEW DIRECTIONS The residents of Immokalee see new possibilities for their community with the development of this Master Plan. With the development of this new Master Plan, Immokalee has chosen to focus on opportunities rather than challenges. Immokalee is committed to redefining its future, 2 revitalizing its community, and developing a new mission that focuses on strengthening and diversifying its economy, embracing cultural diversity, and welcoming visitors to "this place we call home." Economic opportunity lies in Immokalee's diverse community. Many residents have roots in Mexico, Central America, Haiti, and various other Caribbean nations. This multicultural heritage should be embraced and used to develop a local marketing strategy. This diversity should guide the redevelopment and design of downtown in order to create a distinct area that will attract new business and visitors. Revitalization of the Main Street commercial corridor will be designed to embrace this cultural diversity; take advantage of the traffic generated by the Immokalee Seminole Casino and the growing Stewardship Receiving Areas, including the Town of Ave Maria; and create new public plazas and gathering spaces. These public plazas and spaces will be designed within an appropriate streetscape to foster walkability and a mixture of uses, including entertainment and cultural events, and will position Immokalee to attract new residents and visitors to the downtown area. The diversity of Immokalee extends to its unique natural surroundings, which can also be a great benefit to the local economy. Lake Trafford, at Immokalee's western boundary, as well as other adjacent vast natural areas, which include historic working ranches, provide an excellent opportunity to market Immokalee as an ecotourist destination. Immokalee provides a gateway to the Everglades, a world- renowned ecotourist destination. Ecotourists come to an area to experience the natural, rather than the built, environment. Lake Trafford and its environs offer opportunities for boating, fishing, camping, and hiking, and the chance to experience natural Florida and this freshwater frontier. Agriculture continues to be the major local industry and Immokalee residents recognize emerging opportunities for new agricultural - related businesses. Increasing fuel costs, apprehension related to food security, and environmental concerns have increased the demand for safe, sustainable, and domestically produced foods and energy sources. Immokalee has an opportunity to create a new farmers' market or expand the existing state farmers' market to serve the regional demand for fresh produce. Additionally, residents see opportunities emerging from the regional economy and the strategic location of Immokalee in the region. Immokalee will not remain isolated in the future. One state arterial (SR 29) runs through the downtown, while another ends just three miles north of downtown (SR 82). A major county road (CR 846, Immokalee Road), connects Immokalee to I- 75. Planned capacity improvements to SR 82 and SR 29 will open up the area to more travel, and planned roadway expansions, including a SR 29 Loop, will further improve the accessibility to and from Immokalee, helping it to become a tourist destination and a distribution center for goods and services. Improvements to the roadway system, both regionally and within the Immokalee Urban Area, are just one part of how the overall transportation will improve in the future. The Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) is designated as an official U.S. Port of Entry, with its own full - service Customs Office, supporting both international and domestic trade opportunities, and is a 3 growing cargo service airport. The Florida Tradeport operates within a Foreign Trade Zone ( #213), State Enterprise Zone, Federal Enterprise Community, and Hub Zone. It provides direct access to over 2,000 acres of industrial -zoned property and two paved 5,000 x 150 foot runways equipped for Global Position Satellite (GPS) and instrument approaches. The opportunities available through development of the Tradeport are particularly significant given that the Economic Development Council of Collier County (EDC) estimates the County will need an additional 3,685 acres of new business park lands by 2030. The EDC has been working to attract research clusters to Collier County to diversify the economy, which is currently highly dependant on only three industries: agriculture, construction, and tourism and services. The three targeted industry clusters are: health and life science; computer software and services; and distribution. Given its location, access to major roads, connectivity with other parts of the state, availability of developable land, and the airport, Immokalee is a prime location for the new distribution industry that the EDC has identified as being vital to the growth and diversification of Collier County's economy. Another potential for economic growth lies in anticipated development in areas surrounding Immokalee. As new towns in eastern Collier County develop, needed government services and departments could be centrally located in Immokalee to serve the eastern portion of the County. III. IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN PRIORITIES The Immokalee Area Master Plan has been developed to emphasize these identified opportunities and strengths. The first goal requires the development of an Immokalee specific prioritized list of capital improvements and other activities desired to be funded each year. Overall, each of the eight goals support economic development and diversity, but Goal Two, specifically makes economic development a priority, and the objectives and policies set forth specific ways to promote and diversify the local economy and create a positive business climate. The third goal, and its objective and policies, deal with housing. Mobile homes have historically provided a significant percentage of the housing in Immokalee, and have provided affordable homes. Adequate housing for farmworkers must continue to be addressed. Gap housing and other "market- rate" housing, which provides housing for middle -class families, has been historically underrepresented in the Immokalee market. Affordable- workforce housing will continue to be needed in the community. Note that the terms Gap and Affordable Workforce Housing are defined in the Collier County LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended). The fourth goal and set of objectives address infrastructure and public services. Parks and recreational opportunities to serve the young families in Immokalee are the first public infrastructure item discussed. Transportation is a major component of any community's public infrastructure needs, and while county -wide issues are still dealt with in the county Transportation Element, this portion addresses Immokalee's local roads and needed public safety improvements to protect 4 pedestrians and bicyclists. Other important public services include stormwater management and solid waste, which are addressed as well. The fifth goal and related objective deals with natural resource protection and how to promote eco- tourism within Immokalee. While the Conservation and Coastal Management Element still applies, significant natural resources within the Immokalee Urban Area and ecotourism opportunities are addressed here. Land use is an integral component of any master plan, and the sixth goal and its objective and policies deal with this issue. Mixed -use, pedestrian - scaled development is important, as is allowing development in appropriate locations, at densities and intensities that will attract new development. Urban form and design are addressed in the seventh goal. These objectives and policies are generally concerned with how to create a theme or brand for Immokalee, provide safe multi - modal transportation, and develop site design and development standards appropriate for Immokalee, rather than continuing to apply standards developed for coastal Collier. The eighth and last goal, objective, and related policies are concerned with interlocal and intergovernmental coordination, to address current service issues and to continue collaboration with appropriate organizations in the future. 5 GOAL 1: TO ANNUALLY IDENTIFY THE PRIORITIES OF THE IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY AND THE IMMOKALEE PORTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RELATED TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT WILL FURTHER THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICES OF THE TAMP, IN RECOGNITION OF LIMITED FUNDING AND STAFF RESOURCES. OBJECTIVE 1.1: The Immokalee Portion of the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) shall, on an annual basis, develop a prioritized list of Immokalee specific capital projects and other activities, programs, studies, and so forth that further the Goals, Objectives, and Polices of this Master Plan. The CRA shall also indentify any potential funding sources, for all or a portion of the projected cost, associated with these projects and activities. This list shall be provided to the BCC during its annual budgeting process in order to allow the BCC to consider the Community's priorities in relation to available funding and staffing resources. Policy 1.1.1 Fiscal and Operation Constraints A number of Objectives and Policies set forth in the IAMP provide for optimal timeframes within which the Objective or Policy is intended to be accomplished. Given limited funding and staff resources, and in consideration of the prioritized list submitted to the BCC annually by the CRA, the BCC may extend these optimal timeframes pursuant to available funding and /or operational constraints. Any Objectives and Policies that have not been accomplished may be reviewed and reconsidered as part of the County's Evaluation and Appraisal (EAR) process. GOAL 2: ENHANCE AND DIVERSIFY THE LOCAL ECONOMY OF THE IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY OBJECTIVE 2.1: To actively pursue, attract, and retain business enterprise in the Immokalee Area. Policy 2.1.1: Commercial and Trade Hub In recognition of Immokalee's strategic location within Collier County and southwest Florida, and the Foreign Trade Zone, Community Redevelopment Area, Enterprise Zone, Federal Enterprise Community, Historically Underdeveloped Building (HUB) Zone, and Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern designations, and the economic or funding opportunities resulting from those designations, Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1, will: • Support the CRA and other economic development entities in actively promoting and positioning Immokalee as a regional commercial and trade hub for businesses seeking to locate or expand into Southwest Florida; • Encourage the CRA and other economic development entities in the marketing of commercial and industrial opportunities in Immokalee; • Support the CRA in pursuing grants and funding from government, non - governmental organizations, or private sector partnerships. Policy 2.1.2: Florida Tradeport/Immokalee Regional Airport Collier County will encourage the promotion of economic development opportunities at the Immokalee Regional Airport/Florida Tradeport and the surrounding commercial and industrial areas. Policy 2.1.3: Mitigation Banking and /or Targeted Acquisition Lands Within two (2) years of the effective date of this policy [effective , 2011], and subject to Policy 1.1.1, Collier County will explore the feasibility of utilizing privately owned undeveloped parcels with significant wetland, upland, or listed species habitat value, as a listed species habitat conservation bank or wetland mitigation bank to compensate for wetland or listed species impacts associated with development within the Immokalee Urban Area, for mitigation required by state and federal agencies, or for off -site preservation when allowed. The purpose of such a mitigation bank and /or identification of lands targeted for acquisition within the Immokalee Urban Area, in addition to the ecological benefits, is to facilitate and expedite permitting of development and redevelopment on other more appropriate lands within the Immokalee Urban Area. During this period, the County shall develop a map depicting the preferred lands to be targeted for mitigation or acquisition by public or private parties. Incentives and regulatory requirements shall be included in the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) to direct mitigation to or acquisition of these targeted lands and to direct development away from such lands. 7 OBJECTIVE 2.2: To create a business climate that will enhance and diversify the Immokalee Area economy and increase employment opportunities, to improve the quality of life for Immokalee residents. Policy 2.2.1: Expedited Review Within two (2) years of the effective date of this policy [effective 2011], subject to Policy 1.1.1, Collier County will review and amend or expand, as necessary, the fast -track and expedited review program for projects that provide a positive economic benefit to the Immokalee economy, specifically including affordable, gap, and farmworker housing and targeted industries. During this period, criteria will be developed to be used as a guide for determining what will qualify a project for this expedited review program. Policy 2.2.2: Pre - Certified Commercial /Industrial Sites Collier County will encourage the development of targeted manufacturing, light industrial, and other similar uses by identifying appropriate locations for those uses, and by streamlining the permitting and approval process for commercial and industrial development within the Immokalee Urban Area. Collier County will review the existing Certified Sites Program, presently administered by the Economic Development Council of Collier County (EDC), and propose improvements to the program within two (2) years of the effective date of this policy [effective , 2011] and subject to Policy 1.1.1. Policy 2.2.3: Home Occupations Collier County will amend the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended), subject to Policy 1.1.1, to create more flexibility for home -based businesses in the Immokalee Urban Area, thereby allowing additional opportunities for home -based occupations. Policy 2.2.4: Financial Incentives Collier County will develop a comprehensive financial incentive strategy to promote economic development in the Immokalee area and identify funding sources to maintain adequate funding of such incentive programs. Policy 2.2.5: Agriculture - Related Business Uses In recognition of the economic importance of agriculture, the County will amend the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) to allow agriculture - related business uses, such as fruit and vegetable stands, farmers markets, and agritourism related uses, within certain, to be determined, non - agricultural zoning districts, within two (2) years of the of the effective date of this Policy [effective , 2011], subject to Policy 1.1.1. OBJECTIVE 2.3: To promote and expand tourism, recreation, entertainment, and cultural opportunities in Immokalee in order to diversify the Immokalee economy, and improve quality of life. 0 Policy 2.3.1: Recreational,,Entertainment and Cultural Opportunities Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1, will encourage the expansion of entertainment, cultural and recreational opportunities, such as restaurants, movie theaters, museums, and public spaces, within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy [effective , 2011]. It is anticipated that the County will work with the CRA, Chamber of Commerce, the Naples Marco Island Everglades Convention and Visitors Bureau, and other public and private organizations to promote these opportunities. Policy 2.3.2: Eco- tourism Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1, will encourage the development of ecotourism in the Immokalee Area, with a particular focus on Lake Trafford and surrounding RT designated lands. It is anticipated that the County will work with the CRA, Chamber of Commerce, the Naples Marco Island Everglades Convention and Visitors Bureau, and other public and private organizations to promote these opportunities. Policy 2.3.3: Seminole Casino Immokalee Collier County will continue efforts to work with the Seminole Tribe to: a) integrate future plans for the Casino and Reservation within an Immokalee -wide tourism development and marketing campaign; and b) address impacts of the expansion of the Casino, the Resort Hotel and other resort structures and uses on the community and surrounding area. Policy 2.3.4: Entertainment istr Area In recognition of the fact that the casino is a significant attraction, Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1., will encourage the development of an entertainment area near the casino that is complementary and connected to Immokalee's existing downtown core. OBJECTIVE 2.4: To enhance and expand educational and cultural facilities and opportunities in Immokalee. Policy 2.4.1: Research and Development Collier County subject to Policy 1.1.1, will seek to attract educational research facilities, similar to the Southwest Florida Research and Education Center, to Immokalee. It is anticipated that the County will work with the CRA, public and private colleges and universities, and other public and private organizations to promote these opportunities. Policy 2.4.2: Cultural Programs and Facilities Collier County will identify cultural programs and facilities to address the needs of Immokalee residents and visitors subject to Policy 1.1.1. ,z OBJECTIVE 2.5: To promote and support development and redevelopment initiatives in the Immokalee Area. E Policy 2.5.1: Technical Assistance Within two (2) years of the of the effective date of this Policy [effective 2011], subject to Policy 1.1.1, Collier County will review existing programs meant to provide technical assistance for the establishment and permitting of new or expanding businesses and make recommendations to better implement these programs. This technical assistance will be made available through the CRA. It is anticipated that Collier County will work with the CRA, and public and private organizations, to complete this review and make recommendations. Policy 2.5.2: Infill and Downtown Redevelopment Collier County will promote infill development and redevelopment within the Commercial -Mixed Use Subdistrict through amendments to the Land Development Code (LDC) (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) that facilitate mixed -use projects and provide for flexible performance -based incentives. Policy 2.5.3: Alternative Funding Collier County may seek to partner with Front Porch Florida and other similar entities to promote or expedite the development and redevelopment of residential structures and properties within Immokalee by pursuing alternative funding sources on an ongoing basis. 10 GOAL 3: TO PROVIDE A DIVERSITY OF SAFE AND SANITARY HOUSING FOR ALL RESIDENTS OF THE IMMOKALEE URBAN AREA. OBJECTIVE 3.1: Collier County shall coordinate with federal, state, local and private agencies to address farmworker housing and migrant labor camp needs for Immokalee. Policy 3.1.1: Farmworker Housing Land Development Regulations Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1, will review and revise, as necessary, the LDC provisions regulating Farmworker Housing within the Immokalee Urban Area to eliminate regulations that are duplicative to Federal and State provisions, specifically in regards to farmworker housing and migrant labor camps for seasonal workers with temporary, non - immigrant visas. Policy 3.1.2: Agricultural and Housing Partnerships Collier County will encourage local agricultural growers to work in partnership with housing organizations to provide affordable and suitable housing for migrant and seasonal farmworkers. OBJECTIVE 3.2: Collier County shall promote the conservation and rehabilitation of housing in Immokalee neighborhoods. Policy 3.2.1: Targeted Redevelopment Areas Collier County will promote the development and redevelopment of housing within targeted redevelopment areas. Targeted redevelopment areas include neighborhoods with occurrences of substandard structures, vacant parcels or groups of vacant parcels, and areas where issues of compatibility between land uses exits. Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1, will review the 2004 Immokalee Housing Condition Inventory to determine if the findings of the Inventory are still valid, and, if necessary, update the Inventory to accurately identify targeted redevelopment areas. Policy 3.2.2: Funding Opportunities Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1, in coordination with federal, state, and other local agencies and private organizations will seek funding for the housing needs identified in the Immokalee Housing Condition Inventory. Policy 3.2.3: Substandard Housing Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1, will periodically update its program for the repair, removal, or replacement of substandard housing units, based on the most recent Immokalee Housing Condition Inventory. 11 Policy 3.2.4: Displaced Occupants Collier County will coordinate with local non - profit social service organizations to provide relocation assistance for occupants who are displaced from substandard dwelling units, subject to Policy 1.1.1. Policy 3.2.5: Housing Code Enforcement Collier County shall make reasonable effort to require that substandard housing be brought into compliance or eliminated. Enforcement efforts will focus on properties that are abandoned, owned by an absentee landlord, or whose operation is not in compliance with the Collier County Land Development Code. OBJECTIVE 3.3: The County will continue to explore and provide innovative programs and regulatory reforms to reduce development costs and promote safe and sanitary affordable- workforce housing for Immokalee residents. Policy 3.3.1: Housing Grant Opportunities Collier County, in coordination with the CRA, will pursue government grants and loans for affordable- workforce housing. Policy 3.3.2: Affordable - Workforce and Gap Housing Incentives Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1, will review its affordable- workforce housing (including gap) incentives to determine the effectiveness of existing provisions and whether additional incentives are necessary or desired. 12 GOAL 4: TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE AND EFFICIENT PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES FOR THE IMMOKALEE URBAN AREA. OBJECTIVE 4.1: To provide a comprehensive system of parks and recreational facilities that supports diverse active and passive recreational activities within the Immokalee area. Policy 4.1.1: Priority Park Sites Collier County will prioritize the development of future parks within, or adjacent to, the most densely populated urban areas to ensure convenient access by the majority of residents, and in coordination with the CRA, will identify locations for public plazas, greens, or urban parks. Policy 4.1.2: Community Input Collier County will solicit community input to ensure provision of appropriate facilities to address the demographics of the Immokalee Area. Policy 4.1.3: Expansion of Parks and Trails Collier County will expand the network of parks and connect recreational areas throughout the community where appropriate and feasible, subject to Policy 1.1.1, and as identified in the Parks Master Plan, to be developed after adoption of this Master Plan. Policy 4.1.4: Encourage Active Lifestyles Collier County will encourage outdoor activity and active lifestyles by creating new recreational facilities, such as ball fields, soccer fields, basketball courts, tot lots, and jungle gyms, as appropriate to Immokalee's demographics and as feasible, subject to Policy 1.1.1. Policy 4.1.5: Use of Vacant Residential Parcels Subject to Policy 1.1.1, Collier will consider acquiring vacant residential parcels in order to develop new neighborhood parks. These parcels may be small in size and should be evenly distributed throughout the community. Policy 4.1.6: Park Amenities Collier County will evaluate park amenities and identify deficiencies, such as drinking fountains, shelters, lighting, sanitary facilities, and emergency phones for the convenience and security of park users. The list of needed improvements will be updated in the most recent Community and Regional Park Master Plan. OBJECTIVE 4.2: To provide a network of roads, sidewalks, and bike paths to support growth, to provide for the safe and convenient movement of pedestrians, motorized, and non - motorized vehicles. 13 Policy 4.2.1: Bicycle and Pedestrian Pathways Plan Related to pathways specifically in the Immokalee Urban Area, the Collier County 5 -Year Pathways Plan will give priority to linking existing and future residential neighborhoods with commercial and employment areas, as well as schools, libraries, community parks, recreation sites and other public service areas. Input will be sought from landowners and residents to identify priority. The Collier County 5 -Year Pathways Plan will depict existing and planned future pathways for the Immokalee community, subject to Policy 1.1.1. Policy 4.2.2: Long Range Transportation Improvements Collier County will explore the possibility of accelerating the implementation of the Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range Transportation Plan, subject to available funding, as a precursor to initiating new investment in the Immokalee area. In particular, the County will support and encourage: • the Florida Department of Transportation in the widening of SR 82 between 1 -75 and SR 29 as a first step in improving transportation access to Immokalee; • the building of the SR 29 Bypass Route to create direct access to SR 82 and SR 29 from the Immokalee Regional Airport and Florida Tradeport; • the Florida Department of Transportation to improve road conditions along State -owned roads; • the creation of new, or expansion of existing, transportation corridors that improve access between Immokalee, the City of Naples, and coastal Collier County; and • the creation of new collector roads, including the Little League Road extension near Lake Trafford, to handle increased future population growth and traffic in that area. Policy 4.2.3: Access from Immokalee Airport to Future SR 29 Bypass Collier County will coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and with landowners and other stakeholders, to identify one or more preferred routes to connect the Airport and the future SR 29 Bypass, subject to Policy 1.1.1. Policy 4.2.4: Safety Improvements Collier County will develop a plan identifying locations for new traffic signals, signage, crosswalks, bikepaths, and street lighting for the purpose of improving pedestrian and bicycle circulation and safety within prioritized areas within the Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU) as part of the Walkability Study funded by the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization, subject to Policy 1.1.1. Policy 4.2.5: Public Transit Routes Collier County will consider expansion of public transit routes to comprehensively cover the downtown area, connect significant employment centers and public facilities, and interconnect to adjacent communities, where deemed appropriate and subject to Policy 1.1.1. 14 Policy 4.2.6: Enhanced Transit Services Collier County will encourage the provision of a wide array of transit services, such as bike -and- ride and medical transport, subject to Policy 1.1.1. Policy 4.2.7: Transportation Concurrency Alternatives (for SR 29) Within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy [effective 2011], Collier County shall identify alternatives methods to allow non - residential development in the Immokalee Urban Area to proceed with limited exceptions and /or a mitigated waiver from existing concurrency requirements due to the economic and job creation benefits such development would provide. Funding for the alternatives to concurrency feasibility analysis will be provided by the Immokalee CRA. The following shall be considered as a part of the analysis: a. Establishing a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) or Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA) or other alternative that would allow limited exceptions and /or mitigated waivers from concurrency for economic development, diversity, and job creation in the Immokalee Urban Area; and b. Potential limitations on such exceptions and /or waivers from concurrency including: 1. Limiting applicability to certain locations in the Urban Area such as the Airport/ Tradeport, other lands around the airport, and the Central Business District corridor (Urban Infill designated lands); 2 Requiring a case -by case approval of any such exception or waiver based upon certain targeted and measurable objectives, including Transit Oriented Design, job creation and other commitments by the developer that would be deemed to be beneficial to the community; and 3. Limiting the duration, or requiring mandatory periodic reviews, of the continued feasibility of any such exception or waiver process. OBJECTIVE 4.3: To improve stormwater management and surface drainage in Immokalee. Policy 4.3.1: Immokalee Stormwater Master Plan Within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy [effective 2011], subject to Policy 1.1.1, Collier County will implement, to the degree necessary on a phased schedule, the Immokalee Stormwater Master Plan and its recommendations for the particular locations (Lake Trafford, Fish Creek, Madison Creek Ditch, and Sanitation Road Slough Cross -Drain Additions) where significant drainage issues are known. OBJECTIVE 4.4: To provide an efficient and economical solid waste management system that ensures public health and safety, and protects the environmental resources of the area. 15 Policy 4.4.1: "Clean Immokalee" Plan Collier County will develop a "Clean Immokalee" Plan to improve the physical appearance of the streets and lots through education, enforcement, and clean -up activities by 2011. This program will solicit input and participation from community organizations and neighborhood associations. 16 GOALS: TO PROTECT IMPORTANT NATURAL RESOURCES THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF IMMOKALEE- SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND POLICIES. OBJECTIVE 5.1: To address the protection of natural resources in Immokalee, including Lake Trafford and connected wetland systems and listed species habitat including upland habitat used by listed species, through incentives and innovative techniques not otherwise addressed in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Policy 5.1.1: Incentives and Innovative Land Development Regulations Collier County will promote the preservation of native vegetation in the Immokalee Urban Area exceeding the minimum required amounts set forth in CCME Policy 6.1.1, and pursuant to IAMP Policy 2.1.3. This may be accomplished by utilizing incentives and innovative land development regulations, including but not limited to: cluster development, transferable development rights, density bonuses, and flexible development standards to incentivize infill development and redevelopment within targeted MR, HR, C -MU and I -MU designated lands. In order to qualify for any such incentives, on -site or off -site preservation, if allowed in specifically targeted areas within the Immokalee Urban designated area, shall exceed the minimum applicable amounts set forth in Policy 6.1.1. by at least 10 percent. Incentives may be provided based upon a sliding scale, providing greater levels of incentive for greater amounts of preservation above the applicable minimum amounts set forth in Policy 6.1.1. Within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy [effective , 2011], subject to Policy 1.1.1, the County will explore the feasibility of adopting a TDR program in the Immokalee Urban Area to further this Objective and Policy 2.1.3. Within two years of the effective date of this Policy [effective , 2011 ] the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) subject to Policy 1.1.1, shall be amended to provide for other incentives and innovative land development regulations, including but not limited to cluster development and flexible development standards, that do not require an amendment to the IAMP. Policy 5.1.2: Lake Trafford Development Recognizing the importance of Lake Trafford, and the surrounding wetlands and natural habitat to the ecosystem, economy and ecotourism activities in Immokalee, proposed development adjacent to Lake Trafford will conform to best management practices (BMPs) regarding water quality in order to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to the lake and its surrounding wetlands or natural habitat. These BMPs will primarily include measures or design standards by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 17 that address increased or enhanced on -site treatment of storm water runoff, and measures to address Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and nutrient loading. Within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy [effective , 2011], subject to Policy 1.1.1, the County in conjunction with any applicable state or federal agencies, will amend the LDC (Ordinance 04- 41, as amended) to establish specific best management practices and will identify the specific locations where such best management practices shall be required. The Lake Trafford Drainage Basin shall be the geographic area intended for implementation of these BMPs. Policy 5.1.3: Lake Trafford Remediation Collier County will, subject to Policy 1.1.1, continue to cooperate with agencies on remediation, restoration, and long term management efforts at Lake Trafford (e.g., organic sediment and invasive plant removal) to improve the health and recreational potential of the Lake. Policy 5.1.4 Conservation Designation During the next Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) cycle, and at least during each subsequent EAR cycle, Collier County shall identify and map lands within the Immokalee Urban Area owned by a public entity, where such lands were acquired for the purposes of conservation, provided for in the Collier County Future Land Use Conservation Designation. The County shall then consider whether such lands should be designated Conservation on the FLUM. 18 GOAL 6: TO ALLOW AND ENCOURAGE A MIXTURE OF LAND USES THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR IMMOKALEE. OBJECTIVE 6.1: The Immokalee Area Master Plan and its Future Land Use Map will apply to all Development Orders within the Immokalee Urban Area. The Future Land Use Map is designed to coordinate land use with the natural environment; maintain and develop cohesive neighborhood units; promote a sound economy; and encourage desirable growth and energy efficient development patterns. Standards and allowed uses for each District and Subdistrict are identified in the Land Use Designation Description Section. Policy 6.1.1: Future Land Use Designation The Immokalee Area Master Plan's URBAN Future Land Use Designation includes the following Future Land Use Districts, Subdistricts, Overlays and Features: A. URBAN — MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Low Residential Subdistrict 2. Medium Residential Subdistrict 3. -High Residential Subdistrict 4. Commercial — Mixed Use Subdistrict 5. Recreational/Tourist Subdistrict B. URBAN — INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT 1. Industrial Subdistrict 2. Industrial — Mixed Use Subdistrict 3. Industrial — Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict C. OVERLAYS AND FEATURES 1. Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay 2. Seminole Reservation 3. Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area Policy 6.1.2: Compatibility between Land Uses Compatibility between lower and higher intensity uses will be achieved through land development regulations specifically applicable to the Immokalee Urban Area. Policy 6.1.3: Right to Farm Lawfully existing agricultural activities may continue within the Urban Designated Area as provided by the State of Florida Right to Farm Act, 823.14, F.S. Policy 6.1.4: Farmworker Housing Collier County recognizes the need for farm labor to support the County's agricultural industry. Collier County will encourage the provision of housing for seasonal, temporary or migrant 19 farmworkers, provided that such housing is consistent with Migrant Labor Housing provisions of Section 64E -14, Florida Administrative Code, and does not conflict with the existing zoning districts or the Immokalee Area Future Land Use Map. Policy 6.1.5: Compact Mixed -Use Development Collier County will encourage compact mixed -use development in appropriate zoning districts and particularly within the HR and C -MU designations, as an innovative planning technique to create walkable communities, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and increase energy efficiency. Policy 6.1.6: New Mobile Homes within the Immokalee Urban Area New mobile homes shall be allowed in the Immokalee Urban Area as a temporary residence as identified in LDC Section 5.04.02 C; or within an existing mobile home park or subdivision as identified in Policy 6.1.7; or as part of a new mobile home park or subdivision approved in the Low Residential (LR) or Medium Residential (MR) Subdistricts. Within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy, [effective , 2011], the County will amend LDC to prohibit the placement of new mobile homes within the Immokalee Area except as provided for in this Policy and in Policy 6.1.7. Until such LDC amendment is adopted, new mobile homes shall be permitted as provide herein or in Policy 6.1.7, or if the use is allowed with the applicable underlying zoning district, as is the case in the Agricultural district with a Mobile Home Overlay (A -MHO) and the Village Residential (VR) district. Policy 6.1.7: Existing Mobile Homes within the Immokalee Urban Area a. Existing mobile homes located on individual lots or parcels and not located within an approved mobile home park or subdivision may continue in any Future Land Use Subdistrict; however, said mobile homes may only be enlarged, altered, improved or replaced in accordance with the nonconforming provisions provided in LDC Section 9.03.00. b. Existing mobile home parks that have an approved Site Development Plan (SDP) or Site Improvement Plan (SIP) as of the effective date of this Policy are allowed in all subdistricts that allow residential development. c. Additionally, within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy, [effective , 2011], the County will amend LDC Section 2.03.07 G.6, Nonconforming Mobile Home Park Overlay Subdistrict, to include mobile home subdivisions as well as mobile home parks, and to extend the compliance deadline for an additional two (2) year period from the date of that LDC amendment for mobile home parks and subdivisions that do not have an approved SDP or SIP, and which are located within subdistricts that allow residential development. Policy 6.1.8: Public Educational Plants Public educational plants and ancillary plants shall be allowed as provided for in Policy 5.14 of the Future Land Use Element. 20 Policy 6.1.9: Rezonings A. All rezonings must be consistent with the Growth Management Plan. For properties that have zoning in place prior to a change in Land Use Designation where the prior zoning allows for a higher density or intensity than the new Land Use Designation, the property may be rezoned as follows: 1. For such commercially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity commercial zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of commercial land use allowed by the existing zoning district is not exceeded in the new zoning district. A zoning change of such commercial -zoned properties to a residential zoning district is allowed as provided for in the Density Rating System of this Master Plan. 2. For such industrially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity industrial or commercial zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of industrial land use allowed by the existing zoning district is not exceeded in the new zoning district. 3. For such residentially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the authorized number of dwelling units in the new zoning district does not exceed that authorized by the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of development allowed by the new zoning district does not exceed that allowed by the existing zoning district. 4. Properties subject to the above limitations may be combined and developed with other property, whether or not such other property has had a change in Land Use Designation. For residential and mixed use developments only, the accumulated density between these properties may be distributed throughout the project, as provided for in the Density Rating System or the underlying subdistrict, as applicable. 5. Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district. 6. This Section does not apply to changes to the Land Use Designation initiated by the property owner. B. Any property owner who believes that they have been adversely affected by this IAMP may utilize the procedures set forth in Chapter 9 (Vested Rights and Takings Determinations) of the LDC. All applications must be submitted within one year from the effective date of the IAMP or applicable TAMP amendment. This procedure shall be considered supplemental to any other claim or remedy that the property owner may have. Notice of the Adoption of this Plan and the one -year time frame within which any property owner who believes that they have been adversely affected by this IAMP may utilize the procedures set forth in Chapter 9 (Vested Rights and Takings Determinations) of the LDC shall be provided with a minimum 1/8 page notice in one or more newspapers of general circulation in the Immokalee area within 15 days of Adoption of this plan by the BCC. 21 Policy 6.1.10: Non - Residential Development Non - residential development in the Immokalee Urban Area will be limited to no more than 8.45 million square feet through the 2025 Planning Horizon. Non - residential development includes commercial, retail, office, industrial, institutional and governmental buildings, but excludes hotels, motels, government subsidized, affordable or farmworker housing, and development within the Seminole Reservation. Collier County staff shall maintain records on the amount of non - residential development in Immokalee and shall review, and update as necessary, the non- residential development limit as part of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report process. 22 GOAL 7: TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR IMMOKALEE. OBJECTIVE 7.1: Collier County shall develop Immokalee- specific land development regulations to the extent required by this Master Plan, and which reflect the unique character and cultural diversity of the residents, encourage pedestrian - friendly urban form, and promote energy efficiency. Policy 7.1.1: Development of Land Development Code Standards Within two (2) years of adopting this Policy [effective , 2011] and subject to Policy 1.1.1, Collier County, in coordination with and funding from the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency, will develop LDC standards specific to Immokalee to address the unique needs of the Immokalee Urban Area. These standards include those related to permitted and conditional land uses; density and intensity; signage; landscaping and buffering; native preservation retention; off - street and on- street parking and loading; architectural design; development standards, including setbacks to Lake Trafford; floor area ratio for certain nonresidential uses; site access; and treatment of existing nonconforming uses and structures. Policy 7.1.2: Location of Service Uses Collier County will encourage parks, and other community facilities to be placed within one -half mile of residential and mixed -use centers in order to encourage walking, bicycling and non - vehicular access to and from these service uses. Collier County shall require interconnection of pedestrian facilities to the existing pedestrian network. Policy 7.1.3: Innovative Design Within two (2) years of the effective date of this policy [effective , 2011] and subject to Policy 1.1.1, Collier County and the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency will develop incentives and /or regulations to promote: enhanced pedestrian access; pedestrian - friendly design; compact mixed -use development and redevelopment; shared infrastructure; enhanced public spaces and signage; and use of public transit. Policy 7.1.4: Downtown Pedestrian Amenities Within two (2) years of the effective date of this policy [effective 2011] and subject to Policy 1.1.1, Collier County, in coordination with the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency, will evaluate the need for additional passive recreation and outdoor dining and entertainment opportunities along downtown streets, and, if warranted, adopt amendments and incentives to the Collier County LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) to encourage the development of these amenities provided the free and safe movement of pedestrians is maintained. 23 Policy 7.1.5: Central Business District Within two (2) years of the effective date of this policy [effective 2011], subject to Policy 1.1.1., Collier County will amend the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) to include a Central Business District in Immokalee. The District will be depicted in the LDC and will encourage high- intensity, multi -story, and pedestrian- oriented commercial and mixed -use development. Policy 7.1.6: Safe Neighborhood Initiatives Collier County, subject to Policy 1.1.1, will coordinate with local and state law enforcement, developers, and citizens to seek funding opportunities available under the Safe Neighborhood Act (Section 163.501, F.S.) or other programs to improve safety within the Immokalee community and to provide for safe streets. This may include implementation of CPTED (crime prevention through environmental design) strategies, where such strategies are compatible with the community design objectives set forth herein. 24 GOAL 8: TO COORDINATE AND PROVIDE FOR THE CONTINUAL EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION WITH OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, UTILITY PROVIDERS, NOW PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS, THE SCHOOL BOARD, AND THE SEMINOLE TRIBAL COUNCIL THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN. OBJECTIVE 8.1: Pursue effective interlocal and inter - governmental coordination in order to provide a range of human services to Immokalee residents. Policy 8.1.1: Regional Economic Development Initiatives Collier County will collaborate in regional initiatives with with local and regional economic development organizations and the State of Florida to assist the Immokalee area in attracting businesses, marketing, and developing infrastructure. Policy 8.1.2: Redevelopment Implementation Partners Collier County, in coordination with the CRA, Immokalee Enterprise Zone Development Agency, local and regional economic development organizations, and other local organizations, will actively coordinate efforts to implement the Immokalee Area Master Plan, the Community Redevelopment Area Plan, and the Enterprise Zone. Policy 8.1.3: Immokalee Government Services Center Within two (2) years of the effective date of this Policy [effective 2011], subject to Policy 1.1.1, Collier County will consider the establishment of an Immokalee -based government service center that would allow co- location of the various county entities and departments to ensure effective collaboration, and where utilization warrants. This office may include but is not limited to the following services: a. Animal control b. Child support enforcement C. Code enforcement d. Court e. Domestic violence services f. Emergency management services g. Emergency medical services h. Permitting, planning, and economic development needs i. Public health services j. Housing and Human Services k. Board of County Commissioners Office I. Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency m. Branch Office of the Collier County Tax Collector 25 LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION The Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Designations include the following Districts and Subdistricts. The following describes land use designations shown on the Immokalee Master Plan Future Land Use Map. These designations generally indicate the types of land uses for which zoning may be requested. However, these land use designations do not guarantee that a zoning district request will be approved. A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT The purpose of this District is to allow residential and nonresidential land uses, including mixed uses. Nonresidential uses are subject to the intensity limitations in Policy 6.1.10. Mixed uses can be located within individual buildings and /or projects in areas deemed appropriate and identified on the FLUM. Nonresidential uses allowed in the Residential subdistricts include, but are not limited to: agriculture, home -based businesses, recreation and open space, churches, libraries, cemeteries, public and private schools, day -care centers, and essential services, as defined in the Land Development Code, except as may be limited within a specific subdistrict or overlay. New commercial development may be allowed in the Low Residential, Medium Residential or High Residential subdistricts through Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning, subject to the following limitations: Commercial development may be permitted within a PUD, provided the following size and development criteria are meta The commercial component within a PUD may be allowed to develop up to the maximum acreage specified in the table below: In addition to the above criteria, the following standards must also be met: a. Commercial zoning shall be no closer than one (1) mile to any lands designated C- MU and no closer than one mile from the nearest PUD commercial zoning of ten acres or greater in size; b. The configuration of the commercial parcel shall be no more frontage than depth unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners; C. Commercial zoning or development shall be no closer than a Y4 mile from the nearest existing elementary school boundary, unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners; 26 CATEGORY I CATEGORY If CATEGORY III PUD Acres >80 >160 >300 Min. Gross Density 2.5 du /gross acre 2.5 du /gross acre 3.0 du /gross acre Max. Commercial Acres 5 acres 10 acres 20 acres Permitted Zoning C -2 C -2, C -3 C -2 through C -4 In addition to the above criteria, the following standards must also be met: a. Commercial zoning shall be no closer than one (1) mile to any lands designated C- MU and no closer than one mile from the nearest PUD commercial zoning of ten acres or greater in size; b. The configuration of the commercial parcel shall be no more frontage than depth unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners; C. Commercial zoning or development shall be no closer than a Y4 mile from the nearest existing elementary school boundary, unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners; 26 d. The commercial development shall be integrated with the residential portion of the project, including common elements such as signage, and providing vehicular and non - vehicular interconnection; and e. No construction in the commercial designated area shall be allowed until construction has commenced on at least 30% of the project's residential units, unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners. 1. Low Residential Subdistrict (LR) The purpose of this subdistrict is to provide for low- density residential development and supporting ancillary uses. All types of residential dwellings are allowed; however, mobile homes are only allowed pursuant to the provisions of Policies 6.1.6. and 6.1.7. Residential densities are allowed as provided below, except for properties within the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay. Since agriculture is a significant economic driver in Immokalee, agricultural research and technology facilities focusing on agri- business and reliant upon proximity to active agriculture are also allowed through a Conditional Use process. Such facilities must demonstrate compatibility with adjacent properties Base Density: Four (4) dwelling units per gross acre. Maximum Density: Eight (8) dwelling units per gross acre, inclusive of all density bonuses. Densities above the base density can only be achieved through available density bonuses. 2. Medium Residential Subdistrict (MR) The purpose of this subdistrict is to provide for a mixture of housing types and supporting ancillary uses. Mobile homes are allowed pursuant to the provisions of Policies 6.1.6 and 6.1.7. Residential densities are allowed as provided below, except for properties within the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay. Base Density: Six (6) dwellings units per gross acre. Maximum Density: Fourteen (14) dwelling units per gross acre, inclusive of all density bonuses. Densities above the base density can only be achieved through available density bonuses. 3. High Residential Subdistrict (HR): The purpose of this subdistrict is to provide for a mixture of housing type and supporting ancillary uses. Mobile homes are allowed pursuant to the provisions of Policies 6.1.6 and 6.1.7. Residential densities are allowed as provided below, except for properties within the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay. 27 Base Density: Eight (8) dwelling units per gross acre. Maximum Density: Sixteen dwelling units per gross acre, inclusive of all density bonuses. Densities above the base density can only be achieved through available density bonuses. 4. Commercial - Mixed Use Subdistrict (C -MU): The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for pedestrian - scaled, higher density residential and mixed -use development, employment and recreational opportunities, cultural and civic activities, and public places to serve residents of, and visitors to, the Immokalee Urban Area. All types of residential uses are allowed within this Subdistrict, except that mobile homes are only allowed as provided by Policy 6.1.6 and 6.1.7. Residential densities are allowed as provided below, except for properties within the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay. Nonresidential uses allowed within this Subdistrict include those uses allowed in the C -1 through C -4 zoning districts in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ord. No. 04 -41, as amended. Base Density: Sixteen (16) dwelling units per gross acre. Maximum Density: Twenty (20) dwelling units per gross acre, inclusive of all density bonuses. Densities above the base density can only be achieved through available density bonuses. Transient lodging is allowed at a maximum density of thirty -two (32) units per acre. Mix of Uses: Projects equal to or greater than 10 acres will be encouraged to provide both residential and non - residential uses. In no case shall more than 70% of the C -MU Subdistrict, in aggregate, be developed as single -use, non - residential projects. 5. Recreational/Tourist Subdistrict (RT) The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for recreational and tourist activities related to the natural environment, and to allow for limited compact residential development. Uses allowed in this Subdistrict include, but are not limited to: passive parks; nature preserves; wildlife sanctuaries; open space; parks; museums; cultural facilities; marinas; transient lodging facilities (including hotel /motel, rental cabins, bed and breakfast establishments, campsites); restaurants; recreational vehicle parks; sporting and recreational camps; low- intensity retail directly associated with the purpose of this Subdistrict; agriculture; and essential services as defined in the Land Development Code. Mobile homes are allowed pursuant to the provisions of Policies 6.1.6 and 6.1.7. Single and multi - family dwelling units are allowed. To minimize impacts on the natural environment, residential development shall be clustered subject to the following: 28 • Within any project the average single family home parcel shall not exceed 6,000 square feet, and in no case shall any individual single family lot or parcel exceed 12,000 square feet; and • Multi- family development projects shall be submitted in the form of a Planned Unit Development. Base Density: Four (4) dwelling units per gross acre. Maximum Density: Four (4) dwelling units per gross acre. Density bonuses do not apply in this subdistrict. Transient lodging is permitted at a maximum density of twenty -six (26) units per acre. Rezonings are encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The minimum acreage requirement for a PUD within this Subdistrict will be two (2) contiguous acres. Density Rating System The Density Rating System is applicable to areas designated Urban - Mixed Use District, as identified on the Immokalee Future Land Use Map. Except as provided below, the final determination of permitted density via implementation of this Density Rating System is made by the Board of County Commissioners through an advertised public hearing process (rezone). Density achieved by right (as may be permitted for qualifying Affordable Workforce Housing projects) shall not be combined with density achieved through the rezone public hearing process. 1. THE DENSITY RATING SYSTEM IS APPLIED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: a. Within the applicable Urban designated areas, the base density of the subdistrict is allowed, though not an entitlement. Density may be increased using applicable density bonuses. For purposes of calculating the eligible number of dwelling units for the project, the total number of dwelling units may be rounded up by one unit if the dwelling unit total yields a fraction of a unit 0.5 or greater. Acreage used for the calculation of density is exclusive of commercial portions of the project, except within the Commercial Mixed -Use Subdistrict, wherein residential project densities will be calculated on total gross acreage, and portions of a project for land uses having an established equivalent residential density in the Collier County Land Development Code. b. This Density Rating System only applies to residential dwelling units. This Density Rating System is not applicable to accessory dwelling or accessory structures that are not intended and /or not designed for permanent occupancy, nor is it applicable to caretaker residences. 29 C. All new residential zoning located within the Urban Mixed Use District shall be consistent with the Density Rating System, except as provided for in Policy 6.1.9. d. Within the applicable areas of the Urban Mixed Use District, all properties zoned A, Rural Agricultural, and /or E, Estates, and /or RSF -1, 2, 3, Residential Single Family, for which an affordable workforce housing project is proposed and approved, in accordance with Section 2.06.00 of the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004), shall be permitted the base density of four (4) dwelling units per gross acre by right, except in the case of lands designated LR on the IAMP Future Land Use Map (FLUM), wherein the bonus shall not exceed 50% of the maximum permitted density of the zoning district for the subject property; that is, a rezone public hearing shall not be required. Such a project must comprise a minimum of ten acres. Density achieved by right shall not be combined with density achieved through the rezone public hearing process. The Table below illustrates the maximum "by right' density based on the FLUM subdistrict and the zoning district. 2. DENSITY BONUSES In order to encourage infill development, the creation of affordable- workforce housing, and preferred roadway access, certain density bonuses are available. If these bonuses are utilized, base densities may be exceeded. In the Low Residential Subdistrict, the base density of four (4) units per acre may only be exceeded if utilizing an affordable- workforce housing bonus. In no case shall the resulting density exceed the maximum density specified in each sub district. a. Proximity to Commercial -Mixed Use If 50% or more of a project is within the Commercial - Mixed Use Subdistrict, then the base density allowed within the Commercial - Mixed Use Subdistrict of sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre applies to the entire project, except that this bonus cannot be used to increase density on lands within the project designated Low Residential. Buffering to achieve compatibility with adjacent lower intensity uses shall be required. 30 Zoned Maximum Density Zoning Maximum (per acre) with "By Maximum Density (per District Density Right" Density acre) with "By Right" (Per Acre) Bonus Outside of LR' Within - LR Designation Designation A 0.2 4 0.3 E 0.46 4 0.69 RSF -1 1.0 4 1.5 RSF -2 2.0 4 3.0 RSF -3 3.0 4 4.0 2. DENSITY BONUSES In order to encourage infill development, the creation of affordable- workforce housing, and preferred roadway access, certain density bonuses are available. If these bonuses are utilized, base densities may be exceeded. In the Low Residential Subdistrict, the base density of four (4) units per acre may only be exceeded if utilizing an affordable- workforce housing bonus. In no case shall the resulting density exceed the maximum density specified in each sub district. a. Proximity to Commercial -Mixed Use If 50% or more of a project is within the Commercial - Mixed Use Subdistrict, then the base density allowed within the Commercial - Mixed Use Subdistrict of sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre applies to the entire project, except that this bonus cannot be used to increase density on lands within the project designated Low Residential. Buffering to achieve compatibility with adjacent lower intensity uses shall be required. 30 b. Affordable - Workforce Housing Bonus, by Public Hearing To encourage the provision of affordable- workforce housing within certain Subdistricts in the Urban Designated Area, a maximum of up to eight (8) dwelling units per gross acre may be added to the base density if the project meets the definition and requirements of the Affordable - Workforce Housing Density Bonus Ordinance (Section 2.06.00 of the Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, adopted June 22, 2004, and effective October 18, 2004). This bonus may be applied to an entire project or portions of a project provided that the project is located within the Commercial - Mixed Use (C -MU) Subdistrict or any residential subdistrict. C. Affordable - Workforce Housing Bonus, by Right To encourage the provision of affordable- workforce housing within that portion of the Urban Mixed Use District, properties zoned A, Rural Agricultural, and /or E, Estates, and /or RSF -1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Residential Single Family, Village Residential, and /or RMF -6, Residential Multi - Family, for which an affordable- workforce housing project is proposed in accordance with the definitions and requirements of the Affordable- workforce Housing Density Bonus Ordinance (Section 2.06.00 of the Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004), a maximum of four (4) residential units per gross acre shall be added to the base density of 4 dwelling units per acre, except in the case of lands designated LR on the IAMP Future Land Use Map (FLUM), wherein the bonus shall not exceed 50% of the maximum permitted density of the zoning district for the subject property. Therefore, the maximum density that may be achieved by right shall not exceed eight (8) dwelling units per acre. Such a project must comprise a minimum of ten acres. Density achieved by right shall not be combined with density achieved through the rezone public hearing process. The Table below illustrates the maximum "by right" density based on the FLUM subdistrict and the zoning district. Zoning District Zoned Maximum Density (Per Acre) Maximum Density (per acre) with "By Right" Density Bonus Outside of LR Designation Maximum Density (per acre) with "By Right" Within LR Designation A 0.2 8.0 0.3 E 0.46 8.0 0.69 RSF -1 1.0 8.0 1.5 RSF -2 2.0 8.0 3.0 RSF -3 3.0 8.0 4.5 RSF -4 4.0 8.0 6.0 RSF -5 5.0 8.0 7.5 31 RSF -6 6.0 8.0 8.0 RM F -6 6.0 8.0 8.0 VR 7.26 8.0 8.0 d. Residentiallnfill 1. To encourage residential infill, three (3) residential dwelling units per gross acre may be added if the following criteria are met: The project is twenty (20) acres or less in size; at the time of development, the project will be served by central public water and sewer; at least one abutting property is developed; the project is compatible with surrounding land uses; the property in question has no common site development plan with adjacent property; there is no common ownership with any adjacent parcels; and the parcel in question was not created to take advantage of the residential infill density bonus and was created prior to the adoption of this provision in the Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989. This bonus cannot be used to exceed the base density in the Low Residential (LR) Subdistrict. 2. This Residential Infill bonus shall only be applicable on a one time basis and shall not be expanded or continued to other adjacent properties, except for additional properties not exceeding 20 acres in aggregate when added to the original application of this provision and meeting all the above criteria. e. Roadway Access If the project has direct access to two (2) or more arterial or collector roads or if there is project commitment for provision of interconnection of roads accessible to the public with existing or future adjacent projects, one (1) dwelling unit per gross acre may be added above the base density of the district. This bonus cannot be used to exceed the base density in the Low Residential (LR) Subdistrict. 3. Density and Intensity Blending a. This provision is intended to encourage unified plans of development and to preserve the high quality wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features that exist within areas of the Immokalee Urban Area, which are proximate to Lake Trafford and Camp Keais Strand. In the case of properties which are contiguous to Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand, which straddle the Immokalee Urban Area and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA) as depicted on the countywide Future Land Use Map, and which were in existence and under unified control as of October 22, 2002, the allowable gross density and /or intensity may be shifted from the Urban designated lands to lands within the RLSA which are contiguous and under unified control, and which are designated as a Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) in the RLSA. The density and /or 32 intensity may be shifted on an acre per acre basis. This Density and Intensity Blending provision is further subject to the following conditions and limitations: i. The project in aggregate must be a minimum of 200 acres in size and the Urban portion must be designated Recreation al/Tourist subdistrict (RT) or Low Residential subdistrict (LR) in the Immokalee Area Master Plan; ii. It must be demonstrated the lands designated Urban have a high natural resource value as indicated by the presence of Group 1 or Group 2 FLUCCS Codes and a score of greater than 1.2 (both as identified on the Stewardship Credit Worksheet in the RLSA; iii. Density and Intensity may only be shifted from lands within the Immokalee Urban Area containing this high natural resource value (as measured above) to the lands within a contiguous SRA, on an acre per acre basis, providing such lands were under unified control as of October 22, 2002; and iv. Lands within the Urban area, from which the density and /or intensity has been shifted, shall be placed in a conservation easement in perpetuity. b. For properties containing two or more Future Land Use Subdistricts, the overall density and intensity that could be achieved in aggregate, may be distributed throughout the project provided the total allowable density and intensity is not exceeded, and subject to the following: i. The project furthers the protection, enhancement or restoration of wetlands, listed species habitat, or other natural features, ii. The project is consistent with and furthers the applicable objectives of the Immokalee Master Plan and is compatible with surrounding properties and environment, iii. The project is approved as a Planned Unit Development; iv. The project mitigates for any negative impacts on adjacent properties through appropriate measures, such as buffering, separation, or other land design techniques, adequate to lessen these effects. B. URBAN — INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT The purpose of this District is to function as a major employment center and is intended to accommodate industrial, distribution, trade, agriculture, and manufacturing uses, essential services, as well as office and commercial uses as limited within each Subdistrict. Nonresidential uses are subject to the intensity limitations in Policy 6.1.10 1. Industrial Subdistrict (IN) 33 The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for industrial, distribution, trade and manufacturing uses. Allowed uses include a variety of industrial, limited commercial, and associated uses, including: manufacturing; processing; storage and warehousing; wholesaling; distribution; packing houses; recycling; high technology industries; laboratories; assembly; storage; computer and data processing; and services intended to serve the needs of employees and visitors, such as daycare centers, restaurants, and convenience stores. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with these principal uses include ancillary offices and retail sales. 2. Industrial — Mixed Use Subdistrict (I -MU) The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide a transition area from the Industrial Subdistrict to adjacent commercial and residential land uses. The State Farmers Market and related facilities are located in this Subdistrict. This Subdistrict allows for: higher intensity commercial uses as described in the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) for Commercial (C -4 and C -5) and Research and Technology Parks and Business Park Districts, subject to development standards set forth in the LDC. This Subdistrict also allows for light manufacturing, processing, and packaging in fully enclosed buildings; research, design and product development; printing, lithography and publishing; and similar industrial uses; agriculture and agricultural - related uses, such as packing houses; warehousing; and targeted industries. Targeted industries include distribution; medical laboratories, research, and rehabilitative centers; high technology; computer software, services, and processing, and similar uses. Within certain IMU designated lands denoted on the IAMP Future Land Use Map, commercial uses are permitted on up to 30% of the total IMU acreage. The percentage and mix of each category of use shall be determined at the time of rezoning in accordance with the criteria specified in the Land Development Code. The acreage and building square footage figures and percentages shall be included in the PUD ordinance or rezone ordinance so as to demonstrate compliance with this requirement. In order to ensure compatibility and ameliorate impacts on adjacent residentially zoned properties (including A -Rural Agricultural or E- Estates zoned properties), a minimum 75- foot building setback within which a minimum 20 -foot wide vegetated landscape buffer shall be provided. This vegetated buffer shall be located adjacent to the property line and shall contain, at a minimum, two staggered rows of trees that shall be spaced no more than 30 feet on center, and a double row hedge at least 24 inches in height at time of planting and attaining a minimum of three feet height within one year. Existing native trees must be retained within this 20 -foot wide buffer area to aid in achieving this buffer requirement; other existing native vegetation shall be retained, where possible, to aid in achieving this buffer requirement. Water retention /detention areas shall be allowed in this buffer area if left in natural state, and drainage conveyance through the buffer area shall be allowed if necessary to reach an external outfall. For properties adjacent to 34 residentially zoned property, including properties zoned Agriculture (A) and Estates (E), the required 75 -foot setback may be reduced to 50 feet if a minimum 6 -foot tall decorative wall or fence providing at least 80 percent opacity is installed within the reduced setback, and providing that the required 20 -foot wide landscape buffer and all required vegetation is located between the wall and residential zoned properties. 3. Industrial — Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow the Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA) and leaseholders to develop the Immokalee Regional Airport and surrounding lands for the economic health and development of the greater Immokalee area and Collier County as a whole. Because the CCAA needs to retain flexibility to provide various general aviation and revenue - generating opportunities via land leases as the Airport grows and changes over time, a broad range of uses shall be allowed in this Subdistrict. In addition to all uses permitted in the Industrial Subdistrict, allowable uses include: airport facility and related accessory uses; commercial, industrial, institutional and agricultural uses; freight and warehousing; trade; and ancillary recreational, vehicular racing, communications and essential service uses. C. OVERLAYS AND FEATURES 1. Wetlands Connected To Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay The Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP, Policy 6.2.4(4), identifies possible high quality wetland systems connected to the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand system within the Immokalee Urban Area. These wetlands require greater protection measures than wetlands located in other portions of the Urban Designated Area, and therefore the wetland protection standards set forth in Policy 6.2.5 of the CCME apply to this area. These wetlands are identified on the Immokalee Future Land Use Map by the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay (LT /CKSSO). The Density and Intensity Blending provisions of this Master Plan may be utilized for lands within this LT /CKSSO. The maximum allowable gross density for lands within the LT /CKSSO is the base density established for the applicable subdistrict. Lands within the LT /CKSSO are not eligible for any density bonuses, including by right. Essential Services shall be limited to: those necessary to ensure public safety; and, those necessary to serve permitted uses, such as, private wells and septic tanks, utility lines, lift stations, and water pumping stations. The additional wetland protection measures do not apply to properties within the LT /CKSSO that have been legally cleared of native vegetation as of the adoption of this Master Plan, but do apply to all new development and redevelopment pursuant to the 35 applicable nonconforming provisions set forth in the LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended). If development on the Seminole Reservation functionally severs the connectivity of the wetland system for properties within the LT /CKSSO, east of the Reservation, the additional wetland protection measures will not be applied to those severed eastern wetlands. The standard measures for wetlands in Urban designated lands shall be applied as described in the CCME to those severed eastern wetlands. 36 2. Seminole Reservation (SR) Feature The Seminole Reservation within Immokalee comprises approximately 600 acres of largely undeveloped land owned by the Seminole Tribal Council and located on the east side of First Street, South of (SR 29). The Seminole Reservation is not controlled or regulated by the Collier County Growth Management Plan or LDC (Ordinance 04 -41, as amended) and is identified on the Future Land Use Map for illustrative purposes only. 3. Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area Feature In order for local governments to designate a geographic area within its jurisdiction as an Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area pursuant to Section 163.2517 (4), Florida Statutes, it must amend its comprehensive land use plan to delineate the boundaries within the Future Land Use Element. The Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area is consistent with criteria outlined in Section 163.2514(2) (a) -(e), Florida Statutes. The intent of this delineation is to comprehensively address the urban problems within the area consistent with the goals of this plan. The Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area was adopted by Ordinance 2000 -66 and the Urban Infill and Redevelopment Plan was adopted by Ordinance 2000 -71. This designation is informational and has no regulatory effect. 37 IR LR _,,, ,-,.LA RT i CMU �0.477 ^ � HR bI ra 177,' Lit � 4 �= IR cHl Mlcm utio - k ' ar"Y kepi HR 6R crau LR LR IIMMOWEE•CRA Immokalee Proposed Future Land Use Map Changes 10/10 Legend Immokalee Future Land Use URBAN DESIGNATION URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT (_ RT- Recreatonal Tourist Subdistrict I LR - Low Res denbsl Subdistrict t MR- Medium Residential Subdistrict HR - High Res dental Subdistrict CMU - Commerc al Mixed Use Subdistrict URBAN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT IMU - Industrial Mixed Use Subdistrict IMU -I dustrial Mind Use Subdistrict - Commercial Use Limitation IN Industrial Subdistrict APO - Industrial Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES OImmokalee Urban Area Boundary Immokalee Urban Area Expansion - Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Collier County Local Roads QWetlands Connected to Lake Trafford/ Camp Keais Strand System Overlay ® SR- Seminole Reservation Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area 0 1000 2.= 4,000 sooO Feet Q N IMMOKALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency I The Place to Call Home! COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN DATA & ANALYSIS Prepared by IMMOKALEE MASTER PLAN AND VISIONING COMMITTEE Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY and the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DECEMBER 2010 1. K 3 L, 5 Table of Contents IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 Introduction.............................................................................. ............................... 1 1.1 History of Immokalee .............................................................. ............................... 1 1.2 History of Planning Efforts in Immokalee ............................... ............................... 2 1.3 State and Federal Designations ................................................ ............................... 3 1.3.1 Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern ( RACEC) .............. ............................... 4 1.3.2 Florida Enterprise /Empowerment Zone ................................... ............................... 4 1.3.3 Immokalee Brownfield Designation ........................................ ............................... 4 1.4 Public Meetings and Workshops ............................................. ............................... 5 1.5 Demographics .......................................................................... ............................... 5 1.6 Economic Overview ................................... .............................:. 1.6.1 Income and Housing ................................................................ ............................... 8 1.6.2 Agricultural Statistics ............................................................... ............................... 9 Population Projections ........................................................... ............................... 12 2.1 Population Projections Prepared by Collier County .............. ............................... 12 2.2 Population Projections Prepared by BEBR ............................ ............................... 14 ExistingLand Use .................................................................. ............................... 15 3.1 Agriculture ............................................................................. ............................... 16 3.2 Conservation .......................................................................... ............................... 16 3.3 Commercial .............................................................................. .............................16 3.4 Government .............................................................................. .............................20 3.5 Industrial ................................................................................ ............................... 20 3.6 Institutional ............................................................................ ............................... 24 3.7 Residential ................................................................................ .............................24 3.8 Roadways /Rights -of- way ......................................................... .............................29 3.9 Seminole Reservation ............................................................ ............................... 29 3.10 Vacant Land ........................................................................... ............................... 29 NaturalResources .................................................................. ............................... 33 4.1 Soils .......................................................................................... .............................33 4.2 Wellfields ................................................................................. .............................35 4.3 FLUCCS ................................................................................ ............................... 36 4.4 Wetlands ................................................................................ ............................... 39 4.5 Drainage Basins ..................................................................... ............................... 40 4.6 Groundwater Resources ......................................................... ............................... 41 4.7 Listed Species ........................................................................ ............................... 41 4.8 Archaeological & Historical Sites ......................................... ............................... 42 4.9 Mineral Resources ................................................................. ............................... 42 FutureLand Use Analysis ...................................................... ............................... 43 5.1 Changes to Future Land Use Designations ............................ ............................... 43 5.1.1 Residential Designations ........................................................ ............................... 46 5.1.2 Recreational Tourist Designation .......................................... ............................... 46 5.1.3 Commercial Designations ...................................................... ............................... 46 5.1.4 Industrial Designations .......................................................... ............................... 47 5.1.5 Future Land Use and Density Potential Analysis .................. ............................... 48 5.1.6 Future Land Use and Nonresidential Potential Analysis ....... ............................... 52 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 5.2 Future Land Use Overlays and Special Features ................... ............................... 52 5.2.1 Overlays Related to Wetlands and Environmentally Sensitive Areas .................. 55 5.2.2 Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area ................................... ............................... 60 5.2.3 Seminole Reservation ............................................................ ............................... 60 5.3 Proposed FLUM and Zoning Map ......................................... ............................... 61 5.3.1 Zoning and Future Land Use Map Inconsistencies ................ ............................... 64 6. Public Facilities ...................................................................... ............................... 64 6.1 Parks and Recreational Facilities ........................................... ............................... 66 6.2 Schools ..................................................................................... .............................67 6.3 Transportation ........................................................................ ............................... 70 6.3.1 Existing Roadway Network .................................................... ............................... 70 6.3.2 Roadway LOS (Arterials and Collectors) .............................. ............................... 70 6.3.3 Roadway Improvements ...................................................... ............................... 711 6.3.4 SR 29 Loop Road ................................................................. ............................... 733 6.3.5 Freight .................................................................................. ............................... 766 6.3.6 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities ......................................... ............................... 777 6.3.7 Transit .................................................................................... ............................... 79 6.3.8 Transportation Concurrency System .................................... ............................... 800 6.4 Water and Wastewater Facilities ......................................... ............................... 800 6.4.1 Potable Water ....................................................................... ............................... 811 6.4.2 Sanitary Sewer ..................................................................... ............................... 833 6.4.3 Five- and Ten -Year Water and Sewer Availability ............... ............................... 84 6.5 Drainage /Stormwater ............................................................. ............................... 84 6.6 Solid Waste ............................................................................ ............................... 87 6.7 Fire ......................................................................................... ............................... 87 6.8 Police ........................................................................................ .............................88 6.9 Demand Analysis from Potential Residential Build - Out ....... ............................... 88 7. Other Items ............................................................................. ............................... 92 7.1 House Bill 697 /Energy Efficiency ......................................... ............................... 92 7.2 Changes to Other Growth Management Elements ................. ............................... 93 7.3 Government Services in Immokalee ...................................... ............................... 93 7.4 Analysis of Potential Impacts to Transportation Facilities .... ............................... 95 TAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 List of Tables Table 1 -1 Estimate of Permanent Population, 1970 to 2008 .................. ............................... 6 Table 1 -2 Age Distribution in Immokalee and Collier County .................. ............................... 7 Table 1 -3 Race in Immokalee and Collier County ................................... ............................... 8 Table 1 -4 Income and Housing ................................................................ ............................... 9 Table 1 -5 Collier County, Selected Data, Census of Agriculture, 1997, 2002, and 2007.... 10 Table 1 -6 Collier County, 2007 Average Weekly and Annual Pay for Selected NAICS Codes..................................................................................... ............................... 11 Table 2 -1 Immokalee Population Estimates and Projections, 2000 -2025 ........................... 12 Table 2 -2 BEBR Population Projections for Collier County, 2008 - 2035 .............................. 14 Table 3 -1 Existing Land Use in the Immokalee Urban Area ................. ............................... 15 Table 3 -2 Commercial Development within the Immokalee Urban Area by DOR Use Code ................................................................................................ ............................... 17 Table 3 -3 Office Development within the Immokalee Urban Area by DOR Use Code........ 18 Table 3 -4 Industrial Development within the Immokalee Urban Area ... ............................... 21 Table 3 -5 Collier County Industrial /Business Park Land Surplus /Deficit ............................. 23 Table 3 -6 Residential Planned Unit Developments in Immokalee ........ ............................... 25 Table 3 -7 Mobile Home Parks in Immokalee, 2000 Inventory .............. ............................... 27 Table 3 -8 Immokalee Housing Inventory, Definitions and Aggregated Points ..................... 28 Table 3 -9 Immokalee Housing Inventory, Overall Results, All Categories .......................... 28 Table 3 -10 Vacant Acreage by Future Land Use Designations .............. ............................... 30 Table 3 -11 Vacant Acreage by Proposed Future Land Use Designations ............................ 31 Table 3 -12 Vacant Acreage by Zoning District ........................................ ............................... 32 Table 4 -1 Soil Types within the Immokalee Urban Area ....................... ............................... 33 Table 4 -2 Suitability of Soil Associations for Septic Tank Installation ... ............................... 35 Table 4 -3 Immokalee Urban Area by Level One FLUCCS Category .... ............................... 37 Table 4 -4 Immokalee Urban Area by Level Four FLUCCS Code Descriptions ................... 38 Table 5 -1 Proposed Future Land Use Designations ............................. ............................... 43 Table 5 -2 Adopted Future Land Use Designations and Acreages ........ ............................... 44 Table 5 -3 Proposed Future Land Use Designations and Acreages ...... ............................... 44 Table 5 -4 Adopted Future Land Use by Generalized Categories ......... ............................... 45 Table 5 -5 Proposed Future Land Use by Generalized Categories ....... ............................... 45 Table 5 -6 Difference between Adopted and Proposed Future Land Use (Generalized Categories) ............................................................................. ............................... 45 Table 5 -7 Adopted Future Land Use, Maximum Density Calculations . ............................... 49 Table 5 -8 Proposed Future Land Use, Maximum Density Calculations .............................. 49 Table 5 -9 Adopted Future Land Use, Maximum Density with Bonuses ............................. 50 Table 5 -10 Proposed Future Land Use, Maximum Density with Bonuses ............................ 50 Table 5 -11 Average FAR Based on Existing Development .................... ............................... 52 Table 5 -12 Nonresidential Development Potential Based on Average FAR .......................... 53 Table 5 -13 Nonresidential Development Potential Based on TAZ Analysis .......................... 53 Table 5 -14 Nonresidential Development Potential Based on Economic Studies .................. 54 Table 5 -15 Nonresidential Development Potential Through Planning Horizon ...................... 54 Table 5 -16 LT /CKSSO FLU Acreages and Densities ............................. ............................... 57 Table 5 -17 Proposed FLU Categories with Zoning Districts ................... ............................... 61 Table 5 -18 Zoning and FLUM Inconsistencies ........................................ ............................... 64 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 Table 6 -1 Immokalee Park Land Inventory ............................................ ............................... 66 Table 6 -2 Immokalee Area Schools ....................................................... ............................... 67 Table 6 -3 Immokalee Student Enrollment ............................................. ............................... 68 Table 6 -4 Immokalee School Capacity and Projected Enrollment ........ ............................... 69 Table 6 -5 2008 Peak Hour /Peak Directional Volume and LOS for Arterials & Collectors in Immokalee.............................................................................. ............................... 71 Table 6 -6 Unfunded Priorities List, 2008 -2009, Immokalee Projects .... ............................... 72 Table 6 -7 Roadway Projects within Immokalee from the 2009 -2014 TIP .......................... 722 Table 6 -8 Evaluation Matrix, SR 29 Loop Road Alignments Recommended for Further Study.................................................................................... ............................... 755 Table 6 -9 Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement Priorities ................... ............................... 788 Table 6 -10 IWSD Population Projections, 2009 - 2041 ........................... ............................... 811 Table 6 -11 IWSD Water Treatment Plants ............................................ ............................... 822 Table 6 -12 Potable Water Demand Projections, 2009 - 2041 ................. ............................... 833 Table 6 -13 Wastewater Flow Demand Projections, 2009 - 2041 ............ ............................... 844 Table 6 -14 Five- and Ten -Year Water and Sewer Availability ................ ............................... 85 Table 6 -15 Difference between Adopted and Proposed Future Land Use Maximum Residential Build -Out Potential ............................................ ............................... 889 Table 6 -16 Maximum Nonresidential Buildout Water and Sewer Demand ............................ 90 Table 6 -17 Difference between Adopted and Proposed Future Land Use Maximum Facility Demand Potential ( Base) ..................................................... ............................... 911 Table 6 -18 Difference between Adopted and Proposed Future Land Use Maximum Facility Demand Potential ( Bonuses) ............................................... ............................... 911 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 iv List of Figures Figure 1 -1 Acres in Farms, Collier County, 1997 - 2007 ....................... .............................10 Figure 2 -1 Immokalee Population Estimates and Projections, 2000 - 2020 .....................13 Figure 3 -1 Existing Land Use by Percent of Total Acreage ............... .............................16 Figure 3 -2 Industrial Park Locations at Build -Out, RLSA and Immokalee ..................... 22 Figure 3 -3 Vacant Acreage by Future Land Use Designations .......... .............................30 Figure 3 -4 Vacant Acreage by Proposed Future Land Use Designations .....................31 Figure 3 -5 Vacant Acreage by Generalized Zoning Categories ......... .............................32 Figure 4 -1 Immokalee Urban Area by FLUCCS ................................... .............................37 Figure 5 -1 Immokalee Urban Area GIS Mapping Discrepancy ........... .............................56 Figure 5 -2 Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands Aerial ................................ .............................57 Figure 5 -2 Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands FLUCCS ............................ .............................57 Figure 5 -3 Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands Soils ................................. .............................58 Figure 5 -4 Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands per SFWMD ...................... .............................59 Figure 6 -1 SR 29 Loop Road Alignments Recommended for Further Study .................74 Figure 6 -2 SR 29 PD &E Study Schedule ............................................. .............................76 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 v List of Maps After Page Map 1 -1 Incentive Program Areas---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -3 Map 1 -2 Immokalee Planning Boundaries .............•_._.._______...________________.. ...._________.__....__________. 6 Map 3 -1 Immokalee Existing Land Use Exhibit ... ................. ......... ......... ......... ...........15 Map 3 -2 Planned Unit Developments Map .............................................................................. --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- _________ __________ 24 Map 3 -3 Immokalee Existing Vacant Land Use Exhibit_________________________ _______________________________ 29 Map 4 -1 Immokalee Soils Exhibit ........ ........ ....................33 Map 4 -2 Wellfield Cones of Influence, Immokalee Water & Sewer District ........................ 36 Map 4 -3 Immokalee FLUCCS 37 Map 4 -4 Immokalee Wetlands ............................39 Map 4 -5 Major Drainage Basins in Collier County .................................... .............................40 Map 4 -6 Drainage Sub - basins ......... ......... ......... ...........40 Map 4 -7 Groundwater Recharge to Surficial Aquifer ................................ .............................41 Map 4 -8 Groundwater Recharge to Lower Tamiami Aquifer.......................................... _____41 Map 4 -9 Immokalee Listed Species.---- ------------- - - - - -- ------------------------------------------------------------ • -• -41 Map 4 -10 Immokalee Archaeological and Historic Sites. ............................ .............................42 Map 4 -11 Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites. ............... ........ ........ ........ ........ ...........42 Map 5 -1 Immokalee Proposed Future Land Use Map ... ........ ........ ........ ........ ...........43 Map 5 -2 Immokalee Future Land Use Map ............... F ------- .-....I .- - - -. -- ___..... ________ ...........43 Map 5 -3 Existing Land Uses in LT /CKSS Overlay ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ......... 59 Map 5 -4 Immokalee Zoning Map-------------------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- ------- - - - -61 Map 5 -5 Zoning and FLUM Inconsistencies .............................................. .............................64 Map6 -1 Immokalee Parks ........................................................................................................ 66 Map6 -2 Immokalee Schools------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - -67 Map 6 -3 Existing Roadway Network, Arterials & Collectors .................................................. 70 Map 6 -4 Existing Roadway Network, Local Roads ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ...........71 Map 6 -5 Existing Immokalee Bicycle /Pedestrian Facilities.................................................... 77 Map 6 -6 Collier Area Transit Routes__________________ _______________________________________ _______________ ______________79 Map 6 -7 Immokalee Water & Sewer District, Franchise Area and Treatment Plants......... 80 Map 6 -8 Immokalee Water & Sewer District, Potable Water Facilities .... .............................82 Map 6 -9 Immokalee Water & Sewer District, Sanitary Sewer Facilities ............................. 83 Map 6 -10 Existing Immokalee Utilities. ......................................................... .............................83 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 vi Support Documents Airport Master Plan Update for Immokalee Regional Airport (excerpts), prepared by URS, March 2009 Collier County Business Park Lands Study, prepared by Fishkind & Associates for the Economic Development Council of Collier County, August 2007 DRAFT Immokalee Area Master Plan and Data and Analysis, prepared by RMPK, September, 2007 DRAFT Immokalee CRA Concurrency Options Transportation Considerations, prepared by Tindale Oliver and Associates, April 2009 Immokalee Housing Initiative, Phase I (Mobile Home Park Initiative) and Phase II (Immokalee Housing Condition Inventory), prepared by Community Development and Environmental Services Division (CDES) staff, September 2004 Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis, prepared by Regional Economic Research Institute at Florida Gulf Coast University, November 2006 Immokalee Regional Airport Legal Description and Sketch, prepared by Grady Minor & Associates, September 2008 Immokalee Water and Sewer District Master Plan Study, Final Report, prepared by Boyle Engineering, July 2008 "Population Need as a Criteria for Changes to a Local Government's FLUM," The Florida Senate, Interim Report 2010 -107, October 2009 Statement of Compliance with 9J -5, 9J -11, F.A.C., and Chapter 163 Part II, F.S. ( "Attachment A "), prepared by RWA, November 2009 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 vii Collier County Reports Referenced Annual Update & Inventory Report on Public Facilities, 2008 AUIR, prepared by Comprehensive Planning Department, October 2008 Capital Improvements Plan, FY2010 -29, District School Board of Collier County, April 2009 Collier County 2005 Fire /Rescue Services Impact Fee Update Study, prepared by Tindale Oliver & Associates, Inc., January 2006 Collier County Bus Stop /Shelter Needs Plan, prepared by Michael Greene, Collier County Transportation Services Division, prepared for the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization, October 2009 The Collier Interactive Growth Model (CIGM), Executive Summary, prepared by Van Buskirk, Ryffel & Associates, Inc., September 2008 Immokalee Storm Water Management Plan, Hydrologic and Hydraulic Water Quality Modeling, Collier County, prepared by H.W. Lochner, Inc., December 2004 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 viii 1. Introduction 1.1 History of Immokalee When Collier County was formed in 1923, the only non - coastal settlement in Collier County was located in the Immokalee and Corkscrew areas. Today, Immokalee is the only community of considerable size in interior Collier County. Immokalee was first settled by the Seminole Indians, who used the land as a camping and resting place. Hunters, cattlemen, and Indian traders were the next inhabitants of Immokalee. They found their way to Immokalee around the middle of the 19th century. No permanent settlers appeared in Immokalee until 1872. Immokalee has been known by several different names, changing with its varied settlers. The Seminoles gave Immokalee the name "Gopher Ridge" because of the unusual number of land turtles and gophers in the area. Immokalee was also known at one time as "Allen Place" after William "Billy" Allen, one of the first settlers. The Community received its current name, "Immokalee," meaning "my home," in October 1897 with the naming of the first post office. The name was suggested by Bishop William Crane Gray, who argued that the name should be a Seminole word with pleasant associations. The population in Immokalee continued to grow, and the first school and church opened not long after the establishment of the post office. Immokalee possessed all the elements of a flourishing community, but was relatively isolated until 1921, when the Atlantic Coast Line Railway Company (ACL) expanded its lines south from LaBelle and broke the isolation. Before the railroad was extended to Immokalee, trips were made by waterway or by sand trails, which were terrible for traveling during the wet season. When Collier County was created in 1923, the transportation situation for the 74 citizens of Immokalee did not immediately improve. In fact, in order to reach the County seat at Everglades (now known as Everglades City), the residents of Immokalee had to first go to the County seat of Lee County, Fort Myers, and then by boat to Everglades City, or they could drive south along poor road conditions to Marco Island and continue from Caxambas by boat. Barron Collier and his associates were aware of the importance of opening a direct route from Immokalee to Everglades City. They made a strenuous effort to open a North -South road and to induce the ACL to extend its lines to Everglades City. Efforts continued for the building of a roadway into Immokalee, but the transportation problem was not resolved until Immokalee Road (CR -846) was rebuilt and resurfaced a second time in 1955 -56. With such a major improvement in the transportation system, Immokalee became a thriving center for ranching, farming, and lumbering. The Immokalee community, with the improvements in transportation and its increasing popularity as an agricultural community, began to witness an influx of residents to the area. With such growth came the need for regulations to manage the activities occurring in the area. The Board of County Commissioners established an Immokalee Area Planning Commission (IAMPC) in October of 1965. The Community had its own Zoning and Subdivision Regulations, separate from the coastal area of Collier County. The Immokalee Area was governed under its own Zoning Ordinance until January 1982, when a unified Zoning Ordinance was adopted for the entire unincorporated Collier County. The duties of the IAMPC continued until September IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 1 1985 when the nine - member Collier County Planning Commission was established with representatives from all areas within Collier County. Today, there are two representatives from County Commission District 5, which include Immokalee, serving on the Collier County Planning Commission. 1.2 History of Planning Efforts in Immokalee Immokalee has long been recognized as a distinct community within Collier County due to its unique geographic, social, and economic characteristics. This distinction led to the establishment of the Immokalee Area Planning Commission in 1965 and separate zoning and subdivision regulations, which were in effect through 1982. While Immokalee is now regulated through the county -wide Land Development Code, Collier County reaffirmed the distinctive nature of Immokalee by designating it as a distinct Planning Community in the 1983 Comprehensive Plan. In 1989, Collier County adopted revisions to the comprehensive plan, renamed it the Growth Management Plan (GMP), and recommended that an area master plan for Immokalee be developed. This was completed in 1991 with the establishment of the Immokalee Area Master Plan (TAMP) as a separate element of the GMP. The IAMP supplements the county -wide goals, objectives, and policies of the Collier County GMP by providing Immokalee- specific provisions. As stated in Objective 4.1 of the GMP's Future Land Use Element, the IAMP specifically "addresses conservation, future land use, population, recreation, transportation, housing, and the local economy" of the Immokalee urban area. On March 14, 2000, the Collier County Commission made a finding of conditions of blight for Immokalee through Resolution 2000 -82, allowing for the establishment of the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA). The purpose of the CRA is not to create policy, as found within the GMP and IAMP, but rather to encourage economic and social improvement in the urban areas of Immokalee. To accomplish this, the CRA prepared the 2000 Immokalee Community Redevelopment Plan, which addresses the unique needs and overall goals for redevelopment of Immokalee, and identifies the types of projects planned for the area. By statute, the Redevelopment Plan is required to conform to the GMP. The Board of County Commissioners found it necessary to restudy the Immokalee Urban Designated Area after designating the CRA. On May 27, 2003, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Resolution 2003 -192, thereby establishing the Immokalee Area Master Plan Restudy Committee as an ad hoc advisory committee to the Board. On September 28, 2004, the Board adopted Ordinance 2004 -62, extending the timeframe for the advisory committee and renaming it the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee ( IMPVC). The IMPVC assisted the County in selecting a consultant to update to the IAMP. Over a four year period, the IMPVC and consultant conducted extensive public outreach, collected and analyzed data, and drafted recommended amendments to the IAMP. Despite this extensive effort, the amendments were not finalized. The Board of County Commissioners again extended the timeframe for the IMPVC and selected a new consultant to help fulfill the original purpose and duties of the Committee. These duties include: • Assisting County staff with the review of general planning matters related to the Immokalee Community, such as housing, zoning, economic and /or other issues as may be brought before the Committee; • Identifying and providing recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners relating to road improvements; economic incentives; increasing the quality and quantity IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 2 of affordable housing; land uses and improvements relative to the Immokalee Regional Airport; density increases in mixed -use districts; restructuring of future land use designations boundaries; the facilitation of construction of commercial development in commercial districts; the preparation of revisions to current zoning districts and the development of associated Unified Land Development Code standards; and the review of the 5 -year Schedule of Capital Improvements relative to the Immokalee community. Assisting in the development of revised goals, objectives, and policies, and land use designation descriptions for the Immokalee Area Master Plan; and Assisting in the review and updating of the Immokalee Area Master Plan in order to establish consistency between the Master Plan and the County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay provisions. The IMPVC has been working steadily towards achieving these goals over the last five years. The adoption of this revised IAMP and Future Land Use Map represents the first step in completing the objectives of the Committee. Once complete, the IMPVC will recommend changes to the Collier County Land Development Code in order to establish Immokalee- specific land development regulations that are necessary to implement the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the TAMP, followed closely by an update to the CRA- specific Capital Improvements Plan, and the creation of a long -term transportation strategy. Additionally, the County and CRA should amend the Immokalee Area Redevelopment Plan to ensure that it conforms to the updated [AMP. This IAMP presents a comprehensive program for guiding the physical, social, and economic well -being of the Immokalee community. The proposed IAMP guides economic development, environmental preservation efforts, future land use decisions, and redevelopment efforts in a manner that best reflects the wishes of the Immokalee community. Specific guidelines for support documentation for optional Growth Management Plan elements such as the IAMP are not provided in Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, or Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code. This Support Document includes the following sections: 1. Introduction; 2. Population Projections; 3. Existing Land Use; 4. Natural Resources; 5. Future Land Use Analysis; 6. Public Facilities; 7. Other Items Appendix 1.3 State and Federal Designations The need for economic development in Immokalee has been recognized on the state and federal level, through its designation as a Florida Enterprise /Empowerment Zone, Brownfield designation for lands at the Immokalee Regional Airport, and as a Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern (RACEC) through Governor's Executive Order 06 -34. These programs are discussed in greater detail in the following sections. Map 1 -1 on the following page shows the boundaries for the incentive program areas (RACEC, Enterprise /Empowerment Zone, and Community Redevelopment Area). IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 3 1.3.1 Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern (RACEC) Through Executive Order Number 06 -34, authorized February 24, 2006, Governor Jeb Bush designated Immokalee a Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern. This status establishes Immokalee as a priority assignment for the Rural Economic Development Initiative (a program sponsored by twenty -one state and regional economic development agencies). Programs now made available to Immokalee through the REDI include, but are not limited to: • Qualified Target Industry Tax Refund Program (Section 288.106 F.S.) • Quick Response Training Program (Section 228.047 F.S.) • Quick Response Training for Welfare Transition Program Participants (Section 228.047(8) F.S.) • Special Transportation Projects (Section 288.063) • Brownfield Redevelopment Bonus Refund (Section 288.107 F.S.) • Rural Job Tax Credit Program (Sections 212.098 and 220.1895 F.S.) 1.3.2 Florida Enterprise /Empowerment Zone An Enterprise Zone is a state - defined geographic area targeted for economic revitalization. The Enterprise Zone designation offers tax advantages and incentives (which may be augmented by local tax breaks) to businesses locating within the Zone boundaries. Immokalee was designated a Federal Enterprise Community in 1999. During the application process for the Empowerment Zone /Enterprise Community grant, a series of community meetings resulted in input used to develop a Strategic Plan. The Plan identifies four areas of concern: 1. Reduced accessibility of education and /or training 2. Weak diversification of the local economic base and lack of higher wage jobs 3. The reduced availability of decent and affordable housing 4. Lack of community pride As an Enterprise Community, Immokalee is authorized to receive economic and other assistance that will help it achieve its future growth and revitalization goals. 1.3.3 Immokalee Brownfield Designation On March 3, 2004, 211 acres in the Florida Tradeport area received a state brownfield designation. According to the Florida Brownfield Redevelopment Act (Florida Statute 376.79), "brownfield sites are defined as real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by actual or perceived environmental contamination." Brownfields are often an ideal redevelopment opportunity as numerous incentives are available for clean -up and redevelopment activities. Florida, in particular, offers tax incentives for job creation on brownfield sites and reserves 30% of its Quick Response Training program funding for employees of businesses that establish on designated brownfield sites. This designation will reduce the work and time involved in the approvals process for redevelopment schemes that will enhance the economic potential of the Tradeport and surrounding area. Immokalee will benefit from the availability of these new programs, and is strongly advised to take full advantage of this assistance. The revision to the Master Plan will address these assistance programs and how they may expedite the attainment of the economic and social goals of the community. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 4 1.4 Public Meetings and Workshops The master plan update has been an extensive process, initiated in 2005 and involving many stakeholders. The following is a summary of the key dates of public meetings and workshops held in Immokalee related to the preparation of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. Additionally, the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee (IMPVC) and the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board (CRAAB) met at least monthly from January 2006, through the present, November, 2009, to track and direct the progress of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. 1. February 22, 2006 at 1 PM: special meeting of the IMPVC; 2. May 2, 2006 at 5:30PM: public workshop; 3. September 19, 2006 at 5:30PM: public meeting to review the Inventory and Analysis Report, priorities for development and redevelopment, and strategies for the Immokalee Area Master Plan; 4. October 3, 2006 at 5:30PM: workshop to receive input regarding the "Illustrative Plan "; 5. October 17, 2006 at 5:30PM: workshop to continue October 3 public input regarding the "Illustrative Plan "; 6. November 3, 2006 at 10:OOAM: Bus tour of Immokalee to do "ground - truthing" of draft Immokalee Area Master Plan and to stimulate discussion regarding goals, objectives and policies related to development and redevelopment in Immokalee; 7. November 7, 2006 at 5:30PM: Public workshop to review code enforcement, Housing Sub - committee recommendations, and the draft Immokalee Area Master Plan; 8. November 29, 2006 at 8:30AM: Joint meeting of the IMPVC and the Community Redevelopment Advisory Board to review the Immokalee Master Plan Economic Analysis Study. 9. January 31, 2007 at 2:OOPM: Special meeting to review the draft Immokalee Area Master Plan; 10. February 20, 2007 at 5:30PM: Public meeting to review the draft Immokalee Area Master Plan 11. September 25, 2008 at 5:30 PM: Public workshop to review the draft Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Immokalee Area Master Plan 12. November 6, 2008 at 10 AM: Public meeting to review draft Immokalee Area Master Plan prior to submittal 13. August 10, 2009 at 9 AM: Public meeting to review revised draft Immokalee Area Master Plan prior to resubmittal 1.5 Demographics Documenting demographics for the Immokalee area is a critical step in formulating an Immokalee Area Master Plan. Demographics provide the basis for major planning decisions and are essential in forecasting demand for housing, potable water, recreation facilities, transportation facilities, and other public facilities and services. This section outlines the population characteristics of Immokalee. Topics reviewed include historical and existing population estimates, age breakdown, population projections, race, sex, IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 5 and income. Much of the information is taken from the most recent U.S. Census as the best available data; however, the Immokalee Census Designated Place (CDP) has slightly different boundaries than the Immokalee Community Planning Area, as shown on Map 1 -2. Other data sources were consulted, but they do not provide information for Immokalee, as it is not an incorporated municipality. The Immokalee CDP had a dramatic increase in population between 1970 and 1980. However, population growth for Immokalee has slowed down and has been less than the rest of the County. Table 1 -1 contrasts the growth in Immokalee with growth in the County as a whole. Table 1 -1 Estimate of Permanent Population, 1970 to 2008 Source: 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 population from U.S. Census; 2008 population estimate, Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department Collier County, as a whole, experiences major fluctuations in population each year between November and April. The coastal influx comes from winter visitors and part -time residents. Immokalee's population influx, which also occurs in the winter months, is assumed to be mostly a result of an influx of workers in the agricultural industry. This increase occurs when the harvest season for vegetables and citrus is at its peak. Table 1 -2 provides comparative statistics regarding age distribution. The age distribution in Immokalee is considerably different from the County as a whole. The 2000 median age in Immokalee is estimated at 25, while the Collier County median age is estimated at 44. The median age for Collier County has steadily increased from 1980 to 2000, from 38 to 44, while it has stayed about the same in Immokalee. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 6 IMMOKALEE CDP COLLIER COUNTY Year Persons % Increase Persons % Increase 1970 3,764 38,040 1980 11,038 193.25% 85,971 126.00% 1990 14,120 27.92% 152,099 76.92% 2000 19,410 1 37.46% 251,377 65.27% 2008 24,519 1 26.32% 332,854 32.29% Source: 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 population from U.S. Census; 2008 population estimate, Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department Collier County, as a whole, experiences major fluctuations in population each year between November and April. The coastal influx comes from winter visitors and part -time residents. Immokalee's population influx, which also occurs in the winter months, is assumed to be mostly a result of an influx of workers in the agricultural industry. This increase occurs when the harvest season for vegetables and citrus is at its peak. Table 1 -2 provides comparative statistics regarding age distribution. The age distribution in Immokalee is considerably different from the County as a whole. The 2000 median age in Immokalee is estimated at 25, while the Collier County median age is estimated at 44. The median age for Collier County has steadily increased from 1980 to 2000, from 38 to 44, while it has stayed about the same in Immokalee. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 6 c� u Table 1 -2 Age Distribution in Immokalee and Collier County AGE DISTRIBUTION 1980 CENSUS IMMOKALEE CDP COLLIER COUNTY Total % of Total % of Age Persons Total Persons Total Under 14 years 3,186 28.9% 15,874 18.5% 15 -24 years 2,360 21.4% 12,628 14.7% 25 -44 years 3,222 29.2% 20,283 1 23.6% 45 -64 years 1,762 15.9% 20,796 24.2% 65 over 508 4.6% 16,390 19.0% TOTAL 11,038 100.0% 85,971 100.0% Median Age 24.9 1 38.0 AGE DISTRIBUTION (1990 CENSUS) IMMOKALEE CDP COLLIER COUNTY Total % of Total % of Age Persons Total Persons Total Under 14 years 4,579 32.4% 25,785 17.0% 15 -24 years 2,605 18.4% 16,006 10.5% 25 -44 years 4,503 31.9% 42,249 1 27.8% 45 -64 years 1,813 12.8% 33,503 22.0% 65 over 620 4.4% 34,556 22.7% TOTAL 14,120 100.0% 152,099 100.0% Median Age 21.4 40.7 AGE DISTRIBUTION 2000 CENSUS) IMMOKALEE CDP COLLIER COUNTY Total % of Total % of Age Persons Total Persons Total Under 14 years 51707 28.9% 41,562 16.5% 15 -24 years 4,294 21.7% 25,090 10.0% 25 -44 years 6,169 31.2% 61,720 24.6% 45 -64 years 2,791 14.1% 61,492 24.5% 65 over 802 4.1% 1 61,513 24.5% TOTAL 19,763 100.0% 251,377 100.0% Median Age 24.7 44.1 Source: U.S. Census 1980, 1990, 2000 The racial composition of Immokalee's population is substantially different from the County as a whole. In 1980, 3,962 people or 36% of Immokalee's population was identified as white, in contrast to 84% of the remainder of Collier County population. In 1990, 65% of Immokalee's population was of Hispanic Origin, compared to 7% of the remainder of Collier County's population. In 2000, 70% identified themselves as Hispanic or Latino in Immokalee, compared to 15% for the rest of the County. Refer to Table 1 -3 for a comparison of the racial composition of Immokalee and the balance of the County. TAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 7 Table 1 -3 Race in Immokalee and Collier County Race White Black Others TOTAL RACIAL COMPARISON -1980 Immokalee CDP Percent 3,962 36% 2,739 25% 4,289 39% 10,990 100% Balance of County 70,699 1,811 11,726 84,236 Percent 84% 2% 14% 100% RACIAL COMPARISON -1990 Balance of Race Immokalee CDP Percent County Percent White 7,518 53% 130,059 95% Black 3,381 24% 3,505 3% Others 3,221 23% 2,554 2% TOTAL 14,120 100% 136,115 100% Persons of Hispanic Origin* 9,199 65% 9,789 7% RACIAL COMPARISON -2000 Balance of Race Immokalee CDP Percent County Percent White 7,201 37% 208,504 90% Black 3,641 19% 8,032 3% Others 8,568 44% 15,431 7% TOTAL 19,410 100% 231,967 100% Persons of Hispanic Origin* 13,670 70% 35,626 15% * People who identify their origin as Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino may be of any race. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1980, 1990, 2000 1.6 Economic Overview 1.6.1 Income and Housing The main focus of this revised master plan is economic development. The introduction discussed the many designations and programs that are in effect in the Immokalee area to help address economic concerns and promote economic development. A brief review of key statistics is included to again highlight the challenges that face Immokalee and the importance of economic development to the area. The statistics included in Table 1 -4 are taken from the U.S. Census as the best available data, and the area covered, the Immokalee CDP, is slightly different from that of the Immokalee Planning Community; see Map 1 -2. Collier County data is provided for comparison. The data indicates a low- income community with a high percentage of the population living below the poverty level. The majority of housing is renter - occupied, and a third of the housing stock is made up of mobile homes. Almost one out of ten homes lack complete kitchen or plumbing facilities, and median home values are less than half of that reported for Collier County as a whole. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 8 Table 1 -4 Income and Housing Source: Census 2000, Summary File 3, Tables P53, P77, P88, H7, H30, H35, H47, H50, H63, H82, H85 1.6.2 Agricultural Statistics Most of the County's agricultural production occurs in and around Immokalee and it continues to be the major industry. It is "difficult to assess the future of the agricultural industry in Immokalee, but it is assumed that it will continue to be a key industry throughout the planning timeframe, given the ability of the area to continue to meet winter demand for vegetables. According to the "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis," prepared by Regional Economic Research Institute at Florida Gulf Coast University in 2006, more than 60 percent of all employment and around 20 percent of all business establishments in Immokalee were based in agriculture in 2005. To put it another way, one out of every five businesses is related to agriculture, and over half of the employed population — more than one out of two — works in an agricultural industry. (A copy of the full report is included as a support document). As shown in Table 1 -5, from 1997 to 2007, overall farm acreage in Collier County has decreased by approximately 60 percent, while the value of agricultural sales has remained about the same. Data specific to Immokalee are not recorded by the Census of Agriculture. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 9 Immokalee CDP Collier Count Median household income, 1999 $24,315 $48,289 Median family income, 1999 $22,628 $54,816 Per capita income, 1999 $8,576 $31,195 Income below poverty level ( %), 1999 40% 10% Tenure: Owner-occupied units % 39% 76% Renter-occupied units % 61% 24% Mobile homes % of housing units 29% 7% Median year structure built (housing units 1980 1987 Lack complete plumbing facilities of housin g units 7% 0.5% Lack complete kitchen facilities (% of housing units 7% 0.5% Median gross rent $406 $753 Median value for mobile homes $19,700 $41,100 Median value for all owner- occupied housing units $56,000 $149,000 Source: Census 2000, Summary File 3, Tables P53, P77, P88, H7, H30, H35, H47, H50, H63, H82, H85 1.6.2 Agricultural Statistics Most of the County's agricultural production occurs in and around Immokalee and it continues to be the major industry. It is "difficult to assess the future of the agricultural industry in Immokalee, but it is assumed that it will continue to be a key industry throughout the planning timeframe, given the ability of the area to continue to meet winter demand for vegetables. According to the "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis," prepared by Regional Economic Research Institute at Florida Gulf Coast University in 2006, more than 60 percent of all employment and around 20 percent of all business establishments in Immokalee were based in agriculture in 2005. To put it another way, one out of every five businesses is related to agriculture, and over half of the employed population — more than one out of two — works in an agricultural industry. (A copy of the full report is included as a support document). As shown in Table 1 -5, from 1997 to 2007, overall farm acreage in Collier County has decreased by approximately 60 percent, while the value of agricultural sales has remained about the same. Data specific to Immokalee are not recorded by the Census of Agriculture. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 9 Table 1 -5 Collier County, Selected Data, Census of Agriculture, 1997, 2002, and 2007 Source: The Census of Agriculture, United States Department of Agriculture, 1997, 2002, and 2007 Census Publications, Volume 1, Chapter 2: County Level Data, Florida, available from: http: / /www.agcensus.usda.gov /Publications /2007 /Full Report/Volume 1, Chapter 2 County Level/ Florida /index.asp, accessed July 7, 2009. Figure 1 -1 Acres in Farms, Collier County, 1997 -2007 1997 2002 2007 Farms number 235 273 322 Farms acres 277,279 180,852 109,934 Estimated market value of land and buildings: Average per farm $ $2,152,046 $1,652,022 $2,039,523 Average per acre $ $1,796 $2,660 $5,974 Market value of agricultural products sold $276,924,000 $267,636,000 $278,822,000 Vegetables, potatoes, and melons harvested for sale acres 17,010 17,947 12,982 Citrus acres 34,861 35,930 21,551 Source: The Census of Agriculture, United States Department of Agriculture, 1997, 2002, and 2007 Census Publications, Volume 1, Chapter 2: County Level Data, Florida, available from: http: / /www.agcensus.usda.gov /Publications /2007 /Full Report/Volume 1, Chapter 2 County Level/ Florida /index.asp, accessed July 7, 2009. Figure 1 -1 Acres in Farms, Collier County, 1997 -2007 Source: The Census of Agriculture, United States Department of Agriculture, 1997, 2002, and 2007 Census Publications, Volume 1, Chapter 2: County Level Data, Florida, available from: http: / /www.agcensus.usda.gov /Publications /2007 /Full Report/Volume 1, Chapter 2 Country Level/ Florida /index.asp, accessed July 7, 2009. Graphic prepared by RWA, Inc. The Census of Agriculture does not report on lands used for grazing (ranching) or ornamental crops (nurseries). However, the property appraiser does record information regarding use and the type of agriculture for parcels in Collier County. According to the Collier County Property Appraiser, approximately 5,071 acres are used for grazing land (DOR Code 60) within the Immokalee Urban Area (30 percent of the IUA), and approximately 18 acres are used for ornamental or miscellaneous agricultural (DOR Code 69) (0.1 percent of the IUA). IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 10 Farms (acres) 300,000 250,000 ^� v sG Illli y �rrI R ail lyl l II I U I s 200, 000 , �V �IIM' �,jl�pp ('a aip:Mas+�2 _ L 150,000 � 100, 000 t OJ 934 ' v t III III II I! R III r Kil Idn m ^ ^. 0I 1997 2002 2007 Year Source: The Census of Agriculture, United States Department of Agriculture, 1997, 2002, and 2007 Census Publications, Volume 1, Chapter 2: County Level Data, Florida, available from: http: / /www.agcensus.usda.gov /Publications /2007 /Full Report/Volume 1, Chapter 2 Country Level/ Florida /index.asp, accessed July 7, 2009. Graphic prepared by RWA, Inc. The Census of Agriculture does not report on lands used for grazing (ranching) or ornamental crops (nurseries). However, the property appraiser does record information regarding use and the type of agriculture for parcels in Collier County. According to the Collier County Property Appraiser, approximately 5,071 acres are used for grazing land (DOR Code 60) within the Immokalee Urban Area (30 percent of the IUA), and approximately 18 acres are used for ornamental or miscellaneous agricultural (DOR Code 69) (0.1 percent of the IUA). IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 10 In order to expand the local economy, it must be diversified beyond its agricultural base. As documented by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), a federal agency, individuals working on farms earn substantially less than those working in other jobs. In 2007, the average weekly salary for a person working in agriculture in Collier County was $377. Other occupations are shown for comparison in Table 1 -6 — workers in the retail trade sector earned an average weekly wage of $561; those in the construction trade earned $1,108, and those in the repair business earned $625 weekly. Table 1 -6 Collier County, 2007 Average Weekly and Annual Pay for Selected NAICS Codes NAICS Occupation Code Average Weekly Pay Average Annual Pa NAICS 11 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting $377 $19,584 NAICS 111 Crop production $374 $19,436 NAICS 112 Animal production* $650 $33,799 NAICS 115 Agriculture and forestry support activities $377 $19,596 NAICS 236 Construction of buildings $1,108 $57,600 NAICS 237 Heavy and civil engineering construction $1,117 $58,109 NAICS 238 Specialty trade contractors $747 $38,832 NAICS 44 -45 Retail trade $561 $29,165 NAICS 811 Repair and maintenance $625 $32,501 * 2007 data not available for NAICS 112, 2006 data is shown Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, 2007, available 6n -line at: http: / /www.bls.gov /cew /, accessed July 7, 2009. The "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis" also includes forecasts on the future of agriculture in the area. The report forecasts an annual growth rate in agricultural employment of between -1.0 percent and -2.6 percent. As the report explains: Forecasts predict that agriculture will to continue to play a very important role in Collier County and Immokalee. Agricultural land is expected to taken out of production as new towns ... are developed. The additional construction and growth in business and industrial parks will compete for the available workforce as Eastern Collier County develops into a more diversified economy. Currently, Immokalee has about 4,000 agricultural employees identified by quarterly surveys done by the Agency for Workforce Innovation. This number is expected to understate the number of agricultural workers since many are self - employed and not counted by in the unemployment compensation survey. Collier County uses a rough estimate for peak seasonal farm workers of around 15,000 during the winter months. The acreage required for agriculture is expected to decline slowly as land is developed for communities and business parks. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 11 2. Population Projections Per Chapter 9J- 5.005, Florida Administrative Code, (2)(e): The comprehensive plan shall be based on resident and seasonal population estimates and projections. Resident and seasonal population estimates and projections shall be either those provided by the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, those provided by the Executive Office of the Governor, or shall be generated by the local government. The County uses a Peak Season population methodology that is adopted in the Capital Improvements Element and has been approved by the Department of Community Affairs. 2.1 Population Projections Prepared by Collier County Table 2 -1 presents the projected average April and October permanent population and peak population for the Immokalee Planning Community, as prepared by Collier County. Table 2 -1 Immokalee Population Estimates and Projections, 2000 -2025 Year April 1 Permanent Population Percent Increase October 1 Permanent Population Percent Increase Peak Population* 2000 21,845 22,032 26,438 2001 22,219 1.7% 22,314 1.3% 26,777 2002 22,410 0.9% 22,605 1.3% 27,126 2003 22,800 1.7% 23,336 3.2% 28,003 2004 23,872 4.7% 24,058 3.1% 28,870 2005 24,244 1.6% 24,348 1.2% 29,218 2006 24,453 0.9% 24,622 1.1% 29,546 2007 24,790 1.4% 24,654 0.1% 29,585 2008 24,519 -1.1% 24,445 -0.8% 29,334 2009 24,372 -0.6% 24,298 -0.6% 29,158 2010 24,225 -0.6% 24,882 2.4% 29,858 2011 25,539 5.4% 26,208 5.3% 31,450 2012 26,878 5.2% 27,561 5.2% 33,073 2013 28,244 5.1% 28,940 5.0% 34,728 2014 29,636 4.9% 30,346 4.9% 36,415 2015 31,056 4.8% 31,727 4.6% 38,072 2016 32,399 4.3% 33,088 4.3% 39,706 2017 33,777 4.3% 34,491 4.2% 41,389 2018 35,205 4.2% 36,048 4.5% 43,258 2019 36,891 4.8% 38,104 5.7% 45,725 2020 39,317 6.6% 1 40,530 6.4% 48,636 * Estimated at 20% above October 1 population figures, consistent with peak population calculated for Collier County as a whole. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 12 Iq Figure 2 -1 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Immokalee Population Estimates and Projections, 2000 -2020 �000 tioo� �oc�` ti000 �000 �o,�o �o,�ti �o ^� do ^o tioNo �o�o Year IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 April 1 October 1 — Peak 13 2.2 Population Projections Prepared by BEBR While not specific to Immokalee, the most recent population projections for Collier County from the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Florida (BEBR) are also included in Table 2 -2. BEBR prepares a low, medium, and high population projection for each county. They do not include seasonal residents in their projections. Collier County utilized BEBR medium range projections in calculating projections for each planning community (including Immokalee). Table 2 -2 BEBR Population Projections for Collier County, 2008 -2035 County Census Estimate Projections, April 1 April 1, 2000 April 1, 2008 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 COLLIER 251,377 332,854 Low 315,200 328,400 341,600 350,900 355,800 355,900 Medium 331,800 363,300 400,700 437,400 472,000 504,200 High 348,400 1 401,300 1 462,100 526,300 592,900 661,000 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 14 3. Existing Land Use The purpose of the existing land use analysis is to provide an understanding of how Immokalee functions: the relationship of residential areas to shopping, employment, and recreational centers; the relationship between the transportation system and land use activities that attract large numbers of people and vehicles; and the relationship between development patterns and the natural environment. The analysis assists in determining strengths and weaknesses of the existing land use pattern, and aids in developing overall planning strategies, to produce a development pattern desired by the residents of Immokalee. The following table and figure summarize existing land uses within the Immokalee Urban Area. Map 3 -1 on the fo)lowing page shows existing land uses within Immokalee. Table 3 -1 Existing Land Use in the Immokalee Urban Area Land Use Parcel Count Acres Percent Agriculture 103 9,442.1 55.2% Commercial 198 187.6 1.1% Conservation 4 90.6 0.5% Government 77 2,683.0 15.8% Industrial 57 127.1 0.7% Institutional 120 386.6 2.3% Multi-Family 163 140.7 0.8% Single-Family 2,973 1,790.8 10.5% Seminole Reservation 2 423.9 2.5% Roadways 60 718.0 4.2% Vacant Land 1,467 1,101.6 6.4% Total 5,224 17,092.0 100.0% Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, 2008 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 15 Sovice(s): Exk — — (Collier County PropeM Apgs'Ser Parcels 07/20091 r fimmo WEE•CRA 'NWJ H', PLAN UPDA11 Map 3 -1 Immokalee Existing Land Use Exhibit Legend Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Agriculture Conservation - Commercial - Government - Industrial Institutional Single - Family Multi- Family Vacant Land - Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads -- - Collier County Local Roads 0 1.000 2,000 4,eW 6,000 \ Feet N N DIVA INC. C5 SU LTIN G IMMOKALEE CRA Community Peclevelopment Agency IT Ie Place to Call Home! Figure 3 -1 Existing Land Use by Percent of Total Acreage 6% 2% 4% ❑Agriculture ■ Conservation 10% n Commercial ■ Government ■ Industrial 1%_ ❑ Institutional 2% 56% ❑ Multi - Family 1% ❑ Single - Family ❑ Roadways 16% ■ Seminole Reservation ❑ Vacant Land 1% 1% Each of the existing land uses will be further analyzed in the subsections that IbIlow. 3.1 Agriculture Agriculture is the dominant land use type within the Urban Designated Area ( DA), making up approximately 55 percent of the land, or approximately 9,440 acres. Agricultu al lands are generally located at the periphery of the Immokalee boundary, surrounding the downtown core. Agriculture is a permitted use within Immokalee, provided the areas used for agriculture are zoned for such use. The Immokalee Future Land Use Map does not identify a Future Land Use category for agriculture within the UDA. 3.2 Conservation The parcels designated as conservation for the purposes of existing land use are conservation areas within the Arrowhead PUD, making up approximately 91 acres and 0.5 percent of the total land within Immokalee. 3.3 Commercial Commercial land use makes up only about one percent of Immokalee, or about 188 acres. A more detailed analysis by specific Department of Revenue Use Codes, which are used by the Collier County Property Appraiser to classify land, included in Table 3 -2, below, shows approximately 161 acres developed as commercial, with a total of 1,140,025 square feet of commercial building space. This equates to approximately 39 square feet of commercial building space per resident, using 2008 peak population of 29,334. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 16 Table 3 -2 Commercial Development within the Immokalee Urban Area by DOR Use Code Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, 2008, and RWA, Inc. There are a total of ten parcels, totaling 14 acres and 85,000 square feet of office space within Immokalee. This information is shown in Table 3 -3, below. This equates to 3 square feet of office space per resident, again calculated using 2008 peak population of 29,334. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 17 Total Use Number of Building Code Description Parcels Total Acres Square Feet 11 Stores, one story 66 39.88 363,292 Mixed use — store and office or store and 12 residential or residential combination 38 26.76 198,111 14 supermarkets 5 2.88 23,874 16 Community Shopping Centers 3 28.88 152,483 Airports (private or commercial), bus terminals, marine terminals, piers, 20 marinas 1 5.00 3,321 21 Restaurants, cafeterias 11 6.79 38,231 22 Drive -in Restaurants 3 2.42 8,702 Financial institutions (banks, savings and 23 loan companies, mortgage) 4 8.46 37,767 Repair service shops (excluding automotive), radio and T. V. repair, refrigeration service, electric repair, 25 laundries, laundromats 8 5.18 44,394 26 Service stations 10 5.51 40,152 Auto sales, auto repair and storage, auto service shops, body and fender shops, commercial garages, farm and machinery sales and services, auto rental, marine equipment, trailers and related equipment, mobile home sales, 27 1 motorcycles, construction vehicle sales 17 14.19 100,273 29 Wholesale outlets, produce houses 9 10.07 86,862 32 Enclosed theaters, enclosed auditoriums 1 1.56 14,683 33 Nightclubs, cocktail lounges, bars 4 0.87 12,285 Bowling alleys, skating rinks, pool halls, 34 enclosed arenas 2 0.34 3,505 Tourist attractions, permanent exhibits, other entertainment facilities, fairgrounds 35 (privately owned 1 0.26 39 Hotels, motels 2 1.41 12,091 TOTAL 185 160.49 1,140,025 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, 2008, and RWA, Inc. There are a total of ten parcels, totaling 14 acres and 85,000 square feet of office space within Immokalee. This information is shown in Table 3 -3, below. This equates to 3 square feet of office space per resident, again calculated using 2008 peak population of 29,334. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 17 Table 3 -3 Office Development within the Immokalee Urban Area by DOR Use Code Use Code Description Number of Parcels Acres Square Feet 17 Office buildings, non - professional service buildings, one story 7 11.02 71,450 18 Office buildings, non - professional service buildings, multi-story 1 1.03 6,579 19 Professional service buildings 2 1.90 6,713 TOTAL 10 13.94 84,741 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, 2008, and RWA, Inc. The "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis," prepared by Florida Gulf Coast University, developed retail and office space forecasts out to the year 2020. The study forecasts employment and then converts projected employment into acreage, using the ratio of employees to building square footage from the Fiscal Impact Analysis Model (FIAM). The FIAM model was developed by Fishkind and Associates for the Florida Department of Community Affairs to forecast the fiscal impacts of development. The acreage forecasts indicate the need for developed retail and office space, not for commercial zoning. It is also important to note that the study did not look at whether there is an existing deficiency in retail and office supply in Immokalee. An excerpt from the retail and office space analysis included in the study is provided, below. A full copy of the study is included as a support document. Generally, the analysis shows a medium -range forecasted need for developed commercial space of 49 acres by 2020 and of developed office space of 33 acres. Again, any existing deficiencies in commercial or office space are not considered. The forecast is based on projected population growth only, and does not take into consideration the need for economic development, the targeted expansion of tourist - related business, growth outside of Immokalee that may influence the need for retail services, or increases in needed office space resulting from a growth in industry. Excerpt from the "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis:" 3.2.1. Retail Space Forecast Currently, Immokalee has about 55 residents per retail employee. The state average is about 18.2 residents per employee and Collier County has an average of about 16.8 residents per employee. It is expected that Immokalee will move over time to a ratio closer to the state and county. The low case assumes that the ratio of residents to retail employees falls from 55 to 36 by 2030. The medium case assumes that Immokalee's population to retail employees falls to the state average of 18.2 by 2030 and the high case assumes that the ratio falls to Collier County's average of 16.8 by 2030. Florida's Agency for Workforce Innovation (AWI) provides an annual forecast for Collier County's retail employment that predicts an average annual growth rate of about 2.1 percent per year from 2005 to 2013. The medium forecast's growth rate or trend developed for this study for Immokalee is much faster, growing at about six percent per year over the forecast horizon. This faster growth would be expected as development shifts eastward in the county and as local incomes rise. The surrounding developments of Ave Maria and Big Cypress are expected to create increased retail traffic during their IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 18 Excerpt from the "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis:" (continued -1) development and this is expected to continue even after they develop their own town centers. Tables 3.2 though 3.4 provide the low, medium, and high forecasts for employment, square footage, and acres needed to support the retail sector. The medium or reference case shows a local need for 12 additional acres by 2010. This need increases to 28 acres by 2015 and to 49 acres by 2020. The high forecast increases the need for retail acres to 65 by 2020 while the low case shows a need for only about 16 additional acres by 2020. Table 3.2 Immokalee Low Case Retail Planning Forecast Year Employment Growth Square Footage Acres Needed 2005 to 2010 64 38,114 5 2005 to 2015 136 81,647 10 2005 to 2020 219 131,370 16 Table 3.3 Immokalee Medium Case Retail Planning Forecast Year Employment Growth Square Footage Acres Needed 2005 to 2010 164 98,480 12 2005 to 2015 373 223,761 28 2005 to 2020 650 389,792 49 Table 3.4 Immokalee High Case Retail Planning Forecast Year Employment Growth Square Footage Acres Needed 2005 to 2010 193 115,746 15 2005 to 2015 469 281,470 35 2005 to 2020 865 518,751 65 3.2.2 Office Space Forecast The Office space requirements to meet Immokalee's future growth will be primarily driven by the need to locate in the local area to meet customer needs. This forecast for office space is based on the projected increases in the local population. The ratio of office employees to population for both Immokalee and Collier County were both about one office employee for each 17 people. Office employees were defined as those in information, financial, professional, education, health, other services, and government. The FIAM model assumption of 600 square feet on average per employee and an estimate of 8,000 square feet per acre were used to arrive at the square footage and acres needed forecasts. Table 3.5 shows the low forecast case for office employment growth, square footage, and acres needed. Growth in the service and professional occupations are expected to create additional employment opportunities for Immokalee and Eastern Collier County. The low case shows increased employment by 2020 of about 278 employees. The number of acres of office land to support the growth rises to 21 acres by 2020. Table 3.5 Immokalee Low Case Office Spa e Plannin Forecast Year Employment Growth Square Footage Acres Needed 2005 to 2010 120 72,225 9 2005 to 2015 197 118,298 15 2005 to 2020 278 166,722 21 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 19 Excerpt from the "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis:" (continued -2) The medium or reference forecast for Immokalee's office employment and space planning forecast is shown in Table 3.6. The employment rises by 436 employees by 2020 and the office land to support the employment rises to 33 acres by 2020. Table 3.6 Immokalee Medium Case Office Space Planninq Forecast Year Employment Growth Square Footage Acres Needed 2005 to 2010 188 112,763 14 2005 to 2015 310 186,027 23 2005 to 2020 436 261,545 33 Table 3.7 shows the office employment and space planning high forecast case. Faster growth in employment adds 689 employees by 2020 and the land to support the employees is estimated at 52 acres. Table 3.7 Immokalee Hiqh Case Office Space Planninq Forecast Year Employment Growth Square Footage Acres Needed 2005 to 2010 236 141,318 18 2005 to 2015 449 269,089 34 2005 to 2020 689 413,649 52 Currently, approximately 525 acres are zoned for commercial uses (including office). Of this, approximately 93 acres are vacant. 3.4 Government There are approximately 2,680 acres of government -owned land in Immokalee, making up approximately 16 percent of the total land area. Examples of government -owned land uses include the Immokalee Regional Airport; public schools; Farmworker's Village, which is owned by the Collier County Housing Authority; and the South Florida Water Management spoil site, being used for the remediation of Lake Trafford. 3.5 Industrial Immokalee consists of approximately one percent developed industrial lands, or approximately 127 acres. The majority of industrial uses in Immokalee are related to agriculture, such as packing houses and farm machinery sales and repair. A more detailed analysis of industrial lands, by specific Department of Revenue Use Codes (used by the Collier County Property Appraiser to classify land), included in Table 3 -4, below, shows approximately 127 acres developed as industrial, with a total of 1,316,718 square feet of industrial building space. This equates to approximately 45 square feet of industrial building space per resident, using 2008 peak population of 29,334. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 20 Table 3 -4 Industrial Development within the Immokalee Urban Area Use Number of Total Building Code Description Parcels Total Acres Square Feet 42 Heavy industrial, heavy equipment 2 5.67 40,359 Packing plants, fruit and vegetable 44 1 packing plants, meat packing plants 24 82.80 1,043,875 Mineral processing, phosphate processing, cement plants, refineries, 47 clay plants, rock and gravel plants 1 0.94 6,481 Warehousing, distribution terminals, trucking terminals, van and storage 48 warehousing 13 19.43 140,439 Open storage, new and used building supplies, junk yards, auto wrecking, fuel 49 storage, equipment and material storage 17 18.28 85,564 TOTAL 57 127.11 1,316,718 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, 2008, and RWA, Inc. Economic development is the main goal of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. The community particularly looks to the industrial lands surrounding the Immokalee Regional Airport as key economic drivers for Immokalee. These lands have been designated for industrial development and three future land use categories for industrial development have been developed — Industrial, Industrial Mixed -Use, and the Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistricts — to better encourage and manage industrial growth in these areas. Designating land for industrial development is a policy decision, as Van Buskirk notes in the Collier Interactive Growth Model Executive Summary (September 2008): The industrial sub -model is not a demand model based on the demand of the population. Rather, it is a design model determined by the community's policy makers. The CIGM design is one scenario based on economic diversification. One economic objective is to insure employment opportunities for future residents. In the early and intermediate stages, a community is developing a large portion of its labor force in construction and construction related business. As the community matures, construction opportunities diminish and are replaced with opportunities in manufacturing, research and development and services. In order to meet this objective, industrial or tech parks are needed. Another objective for industrial development for a community is to diversify its tax as well as its economic base. These industrial lands will serve to diversify not only the economy of Immokalee, which has been based on predominantly low -wage agricultural jobs, but also of Collier County as a whole. Three different studies to determine future demand for industrial land were consulted: the Collier Interactive Growth Model Executive Summary, prepared by Van Buskirk, Ryffel and Associates, Inc.; an industrial lands needs analysis prepared for the Economic Development Council of IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 21 Collier County by Fishkind & Associates; and the Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis, prepared by the Regional Economic Research Institute at Florida Gulf Coast University. The Van Buskirk/CIGM study, already cited, shows the majority of industrial development at build -out located within the Immokalee Urban Area, and estimates that Collier County will need 52 50 -acre industrial parks (2,600 acres) by build -out. While not specifically prepared for this amendment, the report was prepared for and accepted by Collier County, which includes Immokalee. Figure 3 -2 Industrial Park Locations at Build -Out, RLSA and Immokalee 0 n if am i LEGEND: • Industrial Park • 2007 Existing Industrial Park RLSA Source: Collier Interactive Growth Model Executive Summary, Van Buskirk, Ryffel and Associates, Inc, September 2008 The second study consulted, prepared by Fishkind & Associates, reviewed and determined the future need for business park /light industrial space in Collier County through the year 2030. The study found that the County will have more than a 2,000 -acre deficit of industrial and business park land by 2030. See Table 3 -5, contained on the following page. A complete copy of the study is attached as a support document. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 22 Table 3 -5 Collier County Industrial /Business Park Land Surplus /Deficit Source: Fishkind & Associates, August 2007, Industrial /Business Park Land Needs Analysis The final study consulted was developed by the Regional Economic Research Institute at Florida Gulf Coast University. This is excerpted from the larger report, which is included as a support document and was prepared for this amendment. The report estimates the need for approximately 1,630 acres of developed industrial land by 2020. Excerpt from the "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis:" Immokalee's industrial employment and acreage forecast is dependent upon Collier County's overall growth. It is likely that most of the new industrial growth will be located in Eastern Collier County where most of the undeveloped land in the county is located. Given that Immokalee [has established] industrial areas that can meet Collier County's projected industrial needs, it should be a strong candidate for Collier County's future industrial development. This study defines industrial companies for this study as those in construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, and transportation and warehousing. Companies in these sectors would want to locate company buildings and sites in areas designated for industrial use. Based on the FIAM model and other sources, the assumptions for square feet per employee for this study are 200 square feet per construction employee; 2,500 square feet for wholesale trade and manufacturing employee; and 5,000 square feet per transportation and warehouse employee. An average of 8,000 square feet per acre is assumed to transform square feet to acres. Each year the Florida's Agency for Workforce Innovation (AWI) forecasts Collier County employment trends using regression analysis and shift -share analysis for 2005 through 2013. These trends are used by this study to provide a medium case forecast for Collier County's industrial employment for 2010, 2015, and 2020.... Table 3.9 provides the medium or reference case employment forecasts and acres needed for industrial development. Employment grows by over 17,000 from 2005 to 2020. The need for additional acres of land to support the growth in industrial companies grows to approximately 1,600 acres by 2020. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 23 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Industrial Sq. Ft. Total Demand 30,652,642 6,247,194 6,549,116 6,506,391 6,160,814 6,161,395 Industrial Acres Demanded 3,832 781 819 813 770 770 Indus /Business Park Acreage 1,878 379 586 315 299 299 Available Acreage Surplus - (402) (232) (498) (471) (472) or Deficit Cumulative Acreage Surplus (402) (634) (1,132) (1,604) t (2,075) or Deficit Source: Fishkind & Associates, August 2007, Industrial /Business Park Land Needs Analysis The final study consulted was developed by the Regional Economic Research Institute at Florida Gulf Coast University. This is excerpted from the larger report, which is included as a support document and was prepared for this amendment. The report estimates the need for approximately 1,630 acres of developed industrial land by 2020. Excerpt from the "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis:" Immokalee's industrial employment and acreage forecast is dependent upon Collier County's overall growth. It is likely that most of the new industrial growth will be located in Eastern Collier County where most of the undeveloped land in the county is located. Given that Immokalee [has established] industrial areas that can meet Collier County's projected industrial needs, it should be a strong candidate for Collier County's future industrial development. This study defines industrial companies for this study as those in construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, and transportation and warehousing. Companies in these sectors would want to locate company buildings and sites in areas designated for industrial use. Based on the FIAM model and other sources, the assumptions for square feet per employee for this study are 200 square feet per construction employee; 2,500 square feet for wholesale trade and manufacturing employee; and 5,000 square feet per transportation and warehouse employee. An average of 8,000 square feet per acre is assumed to transform square feet to acres. Each year the Florida's Agency for Workforce Innovation (AWI) forecasts Collier County employment trends using regression analysis and shift -share analysis for 2005 through 2013. These trends are used by this study to provide a medium case forecast for Collier County's industrial employment for 2010, 2015, and 2020.... Table 3.9 provides the medium or reference case employment forecasts and acres needed for industrial development. Employment grows by over 17,000 from 2005 to 2020. The need for additional acres of land to support the growth in industrial companies grows to approximately 1,600 acres by 2020. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 23 Excerpt from the "Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis" (continued): Table 3.9 Collier Medium Case Industrial Planning Forecast Years Employment Growth Acres Needed 2005 to 2010 4,751 470 2005 to 2015 10,387 1,009 2005 to 2020 17,078 1,629 Source: Immokalee Master Plan Study Economic Analysis, Regional Economic Research Institute, College of Business, Florida Gulf Coast University, 2006 While each of the studies referenced calculates a different acreage amount for needed industrial lands, all three identify a significant shortfall in industrial lands, and a significant opportunity for industrial development in Immokalee. The community supports this economic development initiative and has therefore amended the future land use map to accommodate opportunities for additional industrial development. Currently there are 2,005 acres zoned industrial in Immokalee. Approximately 1,500 acres of this industrial land is government -owned land contained within the Immokalee Regional Airport. There are approximately 105 acres of vacant, industrially zoned land. 3.6 Institutional Institutional uses make up approximately 387 acres or about two percent of existing land uses in Immokalee. Institutional uses include churches, private schools, and non - profits. Institutional land uses offer essential community services and are an important component of any community. 3.7 Residential Within Immokalee, approximately 1,932 acres are in residential use, or about 11 percent of all land uses. Of that, about 1,791 acres are developed as single - family residential, and 141 acres as multifamily residential (refer to Table 3 -1). Residential development is generally located south of Westclox Road and west of New Market Road and the Immokalee Regional Airport. There are a number of Planned Unit Developments already approved in the Immokalee Planning Community, totaling 4,244 units on 1,052 acres. Some are completed and some are under construction. Refer to Table 3 -6 for a list and Map 3 -2, contained on the following page. [AMP Data & Analysis March 2010 24 �IMMOI(A[EE•CRA LK PLAN UPDAII_ Map 3 -2 Immokalee Planned Unit Developments Legend PUD —._ "eh 9 r Immokalee Urban Area Boundary u • a, 0 <<wn nEE�enm �Oa - Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads moron° aww enewxsao ' - -- Collier County Local Roads mi \1 H�a4 0 10001.000 4.000 6.000 Feet a c()NSUL'FING Z \ T--TA—_J IMMOKALEE CRA Community Rec}evelopment Agency I The Place to Call Home! Table 3 -6 Residential Planned Unit Developments in Immokalee Name of Developments Ord. No. Project Acreage No. of Approved Units No. of Units Built No. of Vested Units Arrowhead 2005 -13 307.44 1,245 329 916 Collier Village 90 -18 39.14 210 122 88 Cypress Green Apartments B 87 -3 5.00 42 42 0 Davenport 87 -75 29.00 187 142 45 Es eranza Place 2008 -28 31.63 262 0 262 Faith Landing 2007 -35 35.11 175 0 175 Garden Lake Apartments B 89 -09 7.29 66 66 0 Garden Walk Village S 96 -4 17.06 204 0 0 Harvest for Humanity 2007 -59 38.40 105 89 16 Heritage S 91 -73 345.60 798 0 0 Immokalee Senior Housing 2004 -29 7.44 119 30 89 Kaicasa 2007 -34 100.00 400 0 400 Liberty Landing 2006 -29 26.85 162 60 102 R. Roberts Estate 92 -007 39.90 103 79 24 Sanders Pines B 88 -5 5.00 41 41 0 Summer Glen Apartments B 91 -7 7.43 46 46 0 Timber Ride B 94 -23 10.10 59 59 0 TOTAL 1,052.39 4,244 1,105 2,117 (B) — Built -out (S) — Sunsetted, no activity within allotted timeframe Source: PUD Master List, July 2009, prepared by the PUD Monitoring Section of the Engineering & Environmental Services Department, Collier County There are very few residential areas in Immokalee that do not have mobile homes. Unlike the coastal area, Immokalee contains many areas with mixed housing types. Mobile homes are next to duplexes, next to single - family homes, next to apartments. To accommodate that situation, the County developed the Village Residential Zoning District in 1982, which allows such mixing of residential types. However, mobile homes, especially those that are seriously deteriorated, can negatively impact surrounding single - family homes property values, and new regulations to address existing mobile homes have been put forth in this TAMP. As demonstrated in Table 1 -4, mobile homes in the Immokalee Census Designate area have values significantly lower than Collier County as a whole. By direction of the Board of County Commissioners, in September, 1999, Collier County Community Development and Environmental Services (CDES) embarked on a program specifically targeting mobile home parks in the Immokalee Urban Area. The Immokalee Housing Initiative, Phase 1, the Mobile Home Park Initiative, created the Nonconforming Mobile Home Park Overlay Subdistrict. This subdistrict is identified in the Land Development Code Section 2.03.07(6) and requires nonconforming mobile home parks to upgrade their parks and obtain an approved Site Improvement Plan (SIP) by January 9, 2003. Parks that did not come into compliance within this time frame were supposed to eliminate all substandard mobile home units. Despite this requirement, only a small percentage of the nonconforming parks obtained a SIP, and there has been minimal enforcement to remove substandard units. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 25 As part of the Mobile Home Park Initiative, a list of mobile home parks within the Immokalee area and the permit status of each was developed. The inventory found 33 mobile home parks with 515 confirmed mobile homes. No discussion of the condition of the units was undertaken, and the report did not look at mobile homes not located within mobile home parks. A summary of the findings of this Phase 1 is provided in Table 3 -7. Under the new mobile home policies of this TAMP, existing mobile homes (not within mobile home parks) are treated as nonconforming uses, and existing mobile home parks, such as those listed in Table 3 -7, may continue if they have obtained SDP or SIP approval or obtain it within a certain timeframe. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 26 Table 3 -7 Mobile Home Parks in Immokalee, 2000 Inventory Street Address No. MH'S No. Confirmed MH's Size (Acres) DU /AC Permits Issued Zoning & FLU Designation 607 10TH ST. N. 17 18 1.24 14.52 0 RMF -6 /HR 301 12TH ST SE. 19 13 2.2 5.91 1 MH /HR 301 13TH ST SE 8 8 2 4.00 0 MH /HR 402 15TH ST S.E. 3 3 0.19 1579 2 MH /HR 331 15TH ST. N. 25 25 3 8.33 0 C- 4- RMF -6 /C 550 19TH ST. N. 102 103 18.71 5.51 0 PUD /HR 711 2ND AVE 38 41 2.74 14.96 1 MH /CC -MU 204 4TH ST. S. 4 4 1.32 3.03 0 VR /MR 207 4TH ST N. 4 3 0.34 8.82 1 RNP VR /CC -MU 617 5TH ST. S. 3 3 0.44 6.82 2 VR /LR 311 6TH CT. S. 3 3 0.14 21.43 0 VR /MR 318 6TH ST. S 3 3 0.18 16.67 0 VR /MR 302/ 304 7TH ST. S. 4 4 0.28 14.29 1 RNP VR /MR 1900 8TH AVE N. 117 102 3.41 2991 32 RNP MH /MR 301 8TH ST. S. 8 8 1.65 4.85 2 VR /MR 110 9 TH ST S. 23 21 1.43 14.69 0 MH /CC -MU 108 9 TH ST S. 20 20 2.39 8.37 1 RNP MH /CC -MU 612 9TH ST S. 3 3 0.39 7.69 0 VR /LR 1101 ALACHUA ST. 29 15 0.92 16.30 0 I /CC -1 1123 ALACHUA ST. 4 5 0.92 5.43 0 I /CC -1 3003 ALAMO DR. 8 8 0.37 21.62 5 RNP VR /MR 815 ANDRES LN 7 7 1.01 6.93 6 VR /MR 610 BOOKER BLVD. 5 5 2.36 2.12 5 VR /MR 2700 BRADLEY DR 14 14 2.07 6.76 2 VR /MR 1503 CARSON RD. 12 3 1.69 1.78 0 VR /MR 1410 CARSON RD. 13 13 2.02 6.44 8 VR /MR 3507 CARSON RD. 20 18 3.33 5.41 0 MH /MR 408 MINERS LN 15 12 2.34 5.13 2 VR /MR 625 PALMETTO 5 5 0.25 20.00 0 VR /LR 310 WEEKS TERR 3 3 0.19 15.7895 2 MH /HR 3513 WESTCLOX ST. 6 4 2.02 1.9802 0 VR /MR 3503 WESTCLOX ST. 5 5 0.96 5.20833 1 VR /MR 3601 WESTCLOX ST. 15 13 1.34 9.70149 0 VR /MR Total 565 515 63.84 10.2* - Average Density Source: Immokalee Housing Condition Inventory, Phase 1, 2000 Notes: LR = 4 du /acre MR = 6 du /acre HR 8 d u /acre NC = 12 CC -MU = 12 Affordable Housing = + 8 du /ac Maximum = 16 units maximum IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 27 Phase 2 was the Immokalee Housing Condition Inventory, an assessment of the condition of housing in the Immokalee Urban Area, other than mobile home parks, based on observations of the exterior aspects of these dwelling units. These aspects include the physical condition of each dwelling unit, its visible infrastructure, and surrounding conditions. The Inventory was conducted between May and August, 2004, and represents the best available data on residential units in the Immokalee area. The report in its entirety is included as support document. The inventory includes 16 fields or categories representing the condition of each dwelling unit as well as infrastructure (drainage and driveway) and overall property condition. Points were assigned according to the condition of each feature, with a total tally indicating the overall condition of the property. Each dwelling unit was assigned a total rating, according to the following classifications and definitions: Table 3 -8 Immokalee Housing Inventory, Definitions and Aggregated Points Condition Description Aggregated Points Standard No visual defects 0 -9 Standard M Slight defects that can be corrected during the course of 10 -19 Substandard regular maintenance. The structure can still provide safe and 12.0 Deteriorated adequate structure. 8.1 Substandard Minor defects requiring more repair than would be provided 20 -29 Total Survey ruing regular maintenance. Structure still provides safe and 100.0 adequate shelter. Deteriorated Major defects requiring extensive repairs. Structure will not 30 or more provide safe and adequate shelter unless repairs are made. Dilapidated/ Does not provide safe and adequate shelter in present No points assigned Demolition condition and endangers health, safety, and well -being of occupants. Structure cannot be economically repaired. Repair costs would exceed 50% of the total value of the shelter. Source: Immokalee Housing Condition Inventory, 2004 Field participants visited and evaluated 3,558 dwelling units on 2,898 parcels. On 363 parcels, two or more dwelling units were observed (including apartment complexes). The overall results for all properties covered by this inventory are shown in Table 3 -9, below. Approximately three - quarters of the dwelling units were determined to be "standard," and about eleven percent — more than one out of ten - was determined to be "deteriorated" or "dilapidated," requiring extensive repairs in order to provide safe and adequate shelter. Table 3 -9 Immokalee Housing Inventory, Overall Results, All Categories Classification No. of Dwelling Units Percent Standard 2,024 56.9 Standard M 701 19.7 Substandard 427 12.0 Deteriorated 287 8.1 Dilapidated* 119 3.3 Total Survey 3,558 100.0 "These properties were specifically identified for further review by Building Department specialists. They were either identified verbally as possible demolitions, or received scores in the first 5 fields of at least 30 (of 35) points. Source: Immokalee Housing Condition Inventory, 2004 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 28 3.8 Roadways /Rights -of -way There are approximately 718 acres, or about four percent of the land area, dedicated to roadway rights -of -way and other rights -of -way, such as those used for utilities. The 718 acres only represent roadways that are publicly dedicated, and do not reflect all of the roads within Immokalee. The majority of roadways in Immokalee are privately owned and maintained. 3.9 Seminole Reservation The Seminole Reservation contains approximately 600 acres. Currently the Reservation is developed with the Seminole Casino at the northwest corner, located on South 1St Street, and single - family homes along the southern border, which are accessed via Stockade Road. Areas of the Reservation developed as residential have been included in that total (approximately 176 acres). The remaining 424 acres, or about 3 percent of the land area within the Immokalee Urban Area, has been coded as Seminole Reservation for the purposes of the existing land use discussion. 3.10 Vacant Land Approximately six percent, or 1,102 acres, of the land area within Immokalee is vacant, developable land. The following tables and figures classify the vacant acreage by Future Land Use Category, Proposed Future Land Use Category, and Zoning District. The majority of vacant land (26 percent) is zoned for agriculture, followed by vacant land with PUD zoning (18 percent), the majority of which is within Arrowhead PUD, located on the south of Lake Trafford Road, and single - family zoning (13 percent). Arrowhead was approved in 2005, and construction had started when the real estate market crashed. Under the proposed FLUM, most of the vacant lands would be designated Medium Residential (29 percent), Low Residential (20 percent), or Commercial Mixed -Use (25 percent). The majority of vacant land (see Map 3 -3) is within developed areas and would not be expected to have significant environmental constraints. Likewise, the majority of these lands have roadway access and all are within the Immokalee Water and Sewer District service area for potable water and sanitary sewer. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 29 --(-y E -M L - the (COIF. C ^P— ,AP — P- 10]120041 - jIMMOICA[EE•CRA Map 3 -3 Immokalee Existing Vacant Land Use Exhibit Legend Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Vacant Land Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads -- Collier County Local Roads 1 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 6,600 M Feet N N DAUA INC. CONSULTING 1 \T U. 1 IMMOKALEE CRA Community Re4evelopmentAgency i The Place to Call Home! i u.F rn.rw6o 0 X #•�l�® y1 i �N. �h S9 M1.x,! 4 it L 6♦ .. KI'iyyl 4T L --(-y E -M L - the (COIF. C ^P— ,AP — P- 10]120041 - jIMMOICA[EE•CRA Map 3 -3 Immokalee Existing Vacant Land Use Exhibit Legend Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Vacant Land Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads -- Collier County Local Roads 1 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 6,600 M Feet N N DAUA INC. CONSULTING 1 \T U. 1 IMMOKALEE CRA Community Re4evelopmentAgency i The Place to Call Home! Table 3 -10 Vacant Acreage by Future Land Use Designations FLU Acres Commercial 24.2 Commerce Center -Mixed Use 38.8 Neighborhood Center 132.2 Industrial 26.8 Commerce Center - Industrial 127.5 Recreational Tourist 3.0 Low Residential 557.6 Mixed Residential 73.9 High Residential 115.6 Seminole Indian Reservation 2.0 Total 1,101.7 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser Data, 2008 and RWA, Inc. Figure 3 -3 Vacant Acreage by Future Land Use Designations 11% 2% 4% 5U% ❑ Commercial • Commerce Center -Mixed Use • Neighborhood Center ' -% 1 ❑ Industrial ■ Commerce Center - 12% Industrial ■ Recreational Tourist ❑ Low Residential ❑ Mixed Residential ❑ High Residential IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 1 30 Table 3 -11 Vacant Acreage by Proposed Future Land Use Designations Proposed FLU Acres Commercial Mixed Use 233.9 Industrial 26.8 Industrial Mixed Use 128.2 Low Residential 393.8 Medium Residential 169.0 High Residential 103.4 Recreational Tourist 46.6 Total 1,101.7 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser Data, 2008 and RWA, Inc. Figure 3 -4 Vacant Acreage by Proposed Future Land Use Designations 4% 9% 21% Commercial Mixed Use 15% ■ Industrial 2% ■ Industrial Mixed Use ❑ Low Residential ❑ Medium Residential 12% ❑ High Residential ❑ Recreational Tourist 37% IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 31 Table 3 -12 Vacant Acreage by Zoning District Zoning District Acres A 23.2 A -MHO 254.0 C -1 10.7 C -3 8.9 C -4 30.0 C -5 43.6 E 125.6 1 104.4 MH 22.6 P 3.4 PUD 192.1 RMF -12 0.1 RMF -16 2.4 RMF -16 13 9.1 RMF -6 58.0 RSF -3 71.8 RSF -4 31.7 RSF -5 6.0 RSF -5 4 30.1 VR 74.0 Total 1,101.7 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser Data, 2008 and RWA, Inc. Figure 3 -5 Vacant Acreage by Generalized Zoning Categories 6% 11 7% 8% ■ Agriculture ■ Commercial ❑ Estates ❑ Industrial m Mobile Home ■ Public • Planned Unit Development • Residential Multi - Family ❑ Residential Single - Family ■ Village Residential IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 32 4. Natural Resources When developing a comprehensive land use plan for an area, it is essential to identify the known natural resources, and ensure that important natural resources areas are appropriately protected. This section identifies and analyzes the various biological, geological, and hydrological resources that exist in and around the Immokalee Urban Area. A description of these resources and their significance to Immokalee is presented. 4.1 Soils The soil types present in Collier County reflect both the past and present environmental characteristics of the sites where they are found. Soils are derived from physical and chemical weathering of rock or mineral material. This material is then acted upon and used by living organisms. The characteristics of soil depend upon the parent material, the climate, the types of organisms in and on the soil, the topography of the land, and the amount of time these factors have acted on the material. Map 4 -1 depicts generalized soil distribution for Collier County and Table 4 -1 lists the acreage and percentage of each soil type within Immokalee. Table 4 -1 Soil Types within the Immokalee Urban Area SOIL ID DESCRIPTION ACRES PERCENT -AGE 3 Malabar Fine Sand 112 0.7% 6 Riviera, Limestone Substratum — Copeland Fine Sand 233 1.4% 7 Immokalee Fine Sand 4,222 24.7% 8 M akka Fine Sand 1,095 6.4% 14 Pineda Fine Sand, Limestone Substratum 13 0.1% 15 Pomella Fine Sand 595 3.5% 16 Oldsmar Fine Sand 2,431 14.2% 17 Basinger Fine Sand 672 3.9% 18 Riviera Fine Sand, Limestone Substratum 100 0.6% 20 Ft. Drum and Malabar, High, Fine Sands 6 0.0% 21 Boca Fine Sand 47 0.3% 22 Chobee, Winder and Gator Soils, De ressional 915 5.4% 23 Holo aw and Okeelanta Soils, De ressional 495 2.9% 25 Boca, Riviera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland FS, De ressional 494 2.9% 27 Holo aw Fine Sand 743 4.3% 28 Pineda and Riviera Fine Sands 298 1.7% 29 Wabasso Fine Sand 1,179 6.9% 31 Hilolo Limestone Substratum, Jupiter and Margate Soils 154 0.9% 32 Urban Land 9 0.1% 33 Urban Land — Holo aw — Basinger Complex 13 0.1% 34 Urban Land — Immokalee — Oldsmar, Limestone Substratum, Complex 1,668 9.8% 37 Tuscawilla Fine Sand 966 5.7% 38 Urban Land — Matlacha — Boca Complex 30 0.2% 43 Winder, Riviera, Limestone Substratum, and Chobee Soils De ressional 494 2.9% 99 Water 108 0.6% TOTAL 17,092 100.0% ,source: ,south I -lonaa water Management Uistrict, 1996 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 33 n o ImmokAtEE•CRA or: Map 4 -1 - Immokalee Soils Exhibit ` \il s ®� Legend QIMMOKALEE URBANAREA BOUNDARY SOIIS J, MAIUA RFNESAND 0, RMERA, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM- COPELAND NNE SAND 2, IMMOKALI NNESAND 0, MYAKKA FINE SAND 10. OLDSMAR ENE SAND. LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM 1S, POLIEUAFINE SANO 10, OLDSMAR FINE SAND 12, BASIN­ FINE SAND 18, RN ERA NNE SAND. LIMESTONE RUSSTRATI A. FT DRUM AND MALABAR. HIGH, FINE SANDS 2.CHOBEE, KINDER AND WOR SOILS, DEPRESSNNUL 23, NO 01 AW AND OKEELANTA SOILS, DEPRESSIONAL 25. BOLA. RNIERA, LIMESTONE SUBRT- ANDCOPEUND FS, UEPRESSKINAL 22. HOLOIA FINESAND Ie. PNEDAAND RMERA FINE SANDS W. URBAN LAND - HOLDPAW- SASINGER COMP T, TUSCAWILIA FINE SAND 3 URRANIAND-AMTLICHA-BOCACOMPLEX AO, WINDER, RNIERA. LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM, AND CHOSEE SOILS OEPRESSIONAL DEPRESSIONAL KITH INDICATORS SLOUGH KITH LIMESTONE SLOUGH K OUT LIMESTONE WATER ON YDRIC SOILS ® HYDRMSOILS- DEPRESSIONAL COLLIER COUNTY ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROADS COLLIER COUNTY LOCAL ROADS O 1,000 Z_ 'I= E,_ AM ■T� A A Kul \IN,. Y \IF t11j IMMOKALEE CPA Community WeMebpment Agency 1 TUe Glace to Call Home! o� w Because plants differ in their nutrient requirements and in their ability to live in water - saturated areas, soil type also plays a role in determining plant distribution. The influence of soil, though not noticeable in South Florida as in other areas of the U.S., is reflected in plant cover. For example, the plants found on ancient sand dune deposits in the northwestern part of the County differ greatly from those found on lower elevation peat deposits. For the same reason, a completely different flora occurs on inland sandy - marisites. Thus, soil type is an important factor in defining Collier County's vegetative communities. Soil type also plays a role in determining suitability of different soil associations for septic tank installation and urban development. The United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA - NRCS), Soil Survey Division, provides soil ratings for septic tank absorption fields. These interpretations are a tool for guiding the user in site selection for safe disposal of household effluent. Septic tank absorption fields are subsurface systems of tile or perforated pipe that distribute effluent from a septic tank into the natural soil. The centerline depth of the tile is assumed to be 24 inches or deeper. Only the soil between the depths of 24 and 60 inches is considered in making the ratings. Soil properties and site features considered are those that affect the absorption of the effluent, those that affect the construction and maintenance of the system, and those that may affect public health. Soils are rated and placed into septic tank absorption field interpretive rating classes per their rating indices. These are: not limited (rating index = 0), somewhat limited (rating index > 0 and < 1.0), or very limited (rating index = 1.0). Almost all of the soils found within Collier County were rated very limited in 2008. Soil properties and qualities that affect the absorption of the effluent are permeability, depth to a seasonal high water table, depth to bedrock, depth to a cemented pan, and susceptibility to flooding. Stones and boulders and a shallow depth to bedrock, ice, or a cemented pan interfere with installation. This interpretation is applicable to both heavily populated and sparsely populated areas. While some general observations may be made, onsite evaluation is required before the final site is selected. Improper site selection, design, or installation may cause contamination of ground water, seepage to the soil surface, and contamination of stream systems from surface drainage or flood water. Potential contamination may be reduced or eliminated by installing systems designed to overcome or reduce the effects of the limiting soil property. The United States Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has analyzed the soil associations and assigned variegated numbers to individual soils within each association. These reflect the suitability for septic tank drainfields (Table 4 -2). The following list shows the suitability range: 90 -100 Very High Potential 80-89 High Potential 50-79 Medium Potential 30-50 Low Potential 0-29 Very Low Potential IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 34 Table 4 -2 Suitability of Soil Associations for Septic Tank Installation Association Name Soil Name Percent* Weighted Soil Potential Index 1. Urban - Udorthents Urban 72 72.0 Basinger Udorthents 17 13.3 2. Immokalee- Basinger Immokalee 57 49.4 Oldsmar Basinger 23 18.0 Oldsmar 20 17.9 3. Holopaw- Basinger Holopaw 59 48.9 Immokalee Basinger 28 22.0 Immokalee 13 11.2 4. Wabasso- Winder Wabasso 40 33.8 Holopaw Winder 31 10.2 Holopaw 29 24.0 5.Ochopee- Ochopee 81 32.8 Pennsuco Pennsuco 19 7.7 6. Pineda- Boca Pineda 40 30.7 Hallandale Boca 32 25.5 Hallandale 28 23.4 7. Riviera- Boca Riviera 39 13.1 Copeland Boca 38 14.0 Copeland 23 8.6 8. Winder- Riviera Winder 49 13.1 Chobee Riviera 36 13.3 Chobee 24 2.9 9. Durbin- Wulfert Durbin 73 0.0 Canaveral Wulfert 25 0.0 10. Kesson- Peckish Kesson 58 0.0 Anclote Peckish 19 0.0 Anclote 22 0.0 - I nis figure is the percentage of the association this soil represents. Source: Collier Soil and Water Conservation Service 4.2 Wellfields Section 163.3202(2)(K), Florida Statutes, specifically mandates that local governments adopt land development regulations for the protection of potable water wellfields. The Growth Management Act also requires the Comprehensive Plan to show "cones of influence" for potable water wells, and to provide policies to protect water quality by restriction of activities known to adversely affect the quality and quantity of identified water resources, including existing cones of influence, water recharge areas, and water wells. The Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the County Growth Management Plan explains in detail the functions and importance of these water resource systems, and provides necessary programs to protect wells and wellfields from potential contamination sources. The IAMP amendments do not IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 35 impact, or propose any changes to, these existing provisions. Wellfield Cones of Influence within Immokalee are shown in Map 4 -2. Wellfields are comprised of two or more wells that, when pumped, change the natural direction and speed of groundwater. The groundwater surface around a pumping well is pulled down (draw -down) as water is pumped into the well, creating a cone of depression. The extent of this cone can vary from a few feet to several miles depending on hydrogeological factors. Potable wellfields are considered to be very sensitive since the wells produce large quantities of water for a large segment of the population and since the step water gradient, which defines the cone of depression of the wellfield, causes relatively high groundwater velocities towards the well. A pollutant can therefore move very quickly and contaminate the water supply that may be serving a large number of people. Wellfield protection requires the prevention of hazardous and toxic materials from entering groundwater, and subsequent withdrawal by public drinking water wells. This may be accomplished by restricting hazardous and toxic materials or activities which use these materials from a predetermined distance. Zones have been established around the wells or wellfields with various degrees of restriction. Accurately establishing these protective zones requires a sophisticated computer analysis. The County has completed a study that resulted in the development of a computer model applicable to Collier County for determining groundwater flows in the County. This model provides the technical justification for defining zones of protection, which has been used in a comprehensive groundwater protection ordinance for establishing land use controls and land development regulations around well - fields. In 1991, Collier County adopted the Ground Water Protection Ordinance, as included in Section 3.06.00 of the Collier County Land Development Code, to protect existing and future public potable water supply wells. In addition, the Wellfield Protection Zones are designated on Collier County Zoning Maps as special treatment overlays. 4.3 FLUCCS FLUCCS mapping, or Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System, is an evaluation of land use, vegetation cover and land form classification, based on satellite and aerial imagery. The FLUCCS system is arranged in hierarchical levels, with each level containing land information of increasing specificity. Level One is the most general data, with land use broken down into nine broad categories. Eight of these categories occur within the Immokalee Urban Area, and Table 4 -3 shows the amount and distribution of each within Immokalee. According to the FLUCCS mapping, prepared by the South Florida Water Management District in 2005, the majority of Immokalee, 37 percent, is "Agriculture;" followed by "Wetlands," 23 percent; and "Urban and Built -up," 18 percent. More than 75 percent of the Immokalee area is classified as one of these three categories. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 36 THE CARSON ROAD WATER TREATMENT PLANT WELLFIELD y« THE JERRY V. WARDE WATER TREATMENT PLANT WELLFIELD THE AIRPORT WATER TREATMENT PLANT WELLFIELD - 1 I I m m okA[EEOCRA hi: V, I j R PL \ LIPD \ I [. m Map 4 -2 Wellfield Cones of Influence Immokalee Water and Sewer District Legend Immokalee Urban Area Boundary STMT -1 - One Year - STMF2 - Two Year - ST/W -3 - Five Year - STNV-4 - Twenty Year • Well Locations Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads ---------- Collier County Local Roads o 1,000 2.000 4,000 6,000 ^\ F- N DAI / \INC. CONSULTING Z \ v IL JL IMMOK.ALEE CPA Community Redevelopment Agency i The Place to Call Home! Table 4 -3 Immokalee Urban Area by Level One FLUCCS Category FLUCCS Level One Acres Percent Urban and Built-Up 3,102.18 18.1% Agriculture 6,385.48 37.4% Rangeland 627.42 3.7% Upland Forests 2,395.60 14.0% Water 90.98 0.5% Wetlands 3,861.48 22.6% Barren Land 103.65 0.6% Transportation & Utilities 526.22 3.1% TOTAL 17,093.01 100.0% Source: South Florida Water Management District Figure 4 -1 Immokalee Urban Area by FLUCCS 3% 1% I )18 % 23% Urban and Built -Up m Agriculture ■ Rangeland ❑ Upland Forests 1 % ■ Water ■ Wetlands 14% [1 Barren Land % im Transportation 4% L "- - - - - -' More detailed information for Immokalee is shown on Map 4 -3 and in Table 4 -4, which follow. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 37 sx m a; sovicets): rtiuccs tso�n Fgrim wne� wrea.rrem oismn ronrory IIimmo WEE•CRA LtiS I LK PLAN U?DAI L • Map 4 -3 Immokalee FLUCCS Legend Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Collier County Local Roads FLUCCS - AGRICULTURE BARRENLAND RANGELAND - TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION AND UTILITIES UPLAND FORESTS ® URBAN AND BUILT-UP WATER - WETLANDS 0 1— 2= n,000 6.M - NN -DIA T• _INC. CONSUL "rING .L t IF VA. JL IMMOKALEE CPA Community key evelopment Agency i The Place to Call Home! Table 4 -4 Immokalee Urban Area by Level Four FLUCCS Code Descriptions FLUCCS Code FLUCCS First Level Description FLUCCS Fourth Level Description Acreage 1009 URBAN AND BUILT -UP RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME UNITS -ALL 111.67 1110 URBAN AND BUILT -UP FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS 2041.89 1310 URBAN AND BUILT -UP FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS > 5 DWL UNITS /ACRE 209.39 1330 URBAN AND BUILT -UP MULTIPLE DWL UNITS -LOW RISE 2 STORIES OR LESS 23.96 1340 URBAN AND BUILT -UP MULTIPLE DWL UNITS -HIGH RISE 3 STORIES OR MORE 6.74 1410 URBAN AND BUILT -UP RETAIL SALES AND SERVICES 2.75 1411 URBAN AND BUILT -UP SHOPPING CENTERS 11.64 1470 URBAN AND BUILT -UP MIXED COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES 43.45 1550 URBAN AND BUILT -UP OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 349.12 1710 URBAN AND BUILT -UP EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES 149.02 1720 URBAN AND BUILT -UP RELIGIOUS 3.22 1850 URBAN AND BUILT -UP PARKS & ZOOS 11.16 1860 URBAN AND BUILT -UP COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL FACILITIES 26.17 1910 URBAN AND BUILT -UP UNDEVELOPED LAND WITHIN URBAN AREAS 28.19 1920 URBAN AND BUILT -UP INACTIVE LANDS WITH STREET PATTERN BUT WITHOUT STRUCTURES 68.19 1930 URBAN AND BUILT -UP URBAN LAND IN TRANSITION W/O POSITIVE INDICATORS OF INTENT 15.62 2110 AGRICULTURE IMPROVED PASTURES 2722.80 2120 AGRICULTURE UNIMPROVED PASTURES 107.06 2130 AGRICULTURE WOODLAND PASTURES 94.50 2140 AGRICULTURE ROW CROPS 371.78 2210 AGRICULTURE CITRUS GROVES 2859.13 2430 AGRICULTURE ORNAMENTALS 9.67 2510 AGRICULTURE HORSE FARMS 81.18 2590 AGRICULTURE OTHER 5.22 2610 AGRICULTURE FALLOW CROP LAND 134.15 3100 RANGELAND HERBACEOUS 98.35 3210 RANGELAND PALMETTO PRAIRIES 348.90 3290 RANGELAND OTHER SHRUBS AND BRUSH 162.04 3300 RANGELAND MIXED RANGELAND 18.13 4110 UPLAND FORESTS PINE FLATWOODS 1187.91 4119 UPLAND FORESTS PINE FLATWOODS /MELALEUCA INFESTED 936.61 4220 UPLAND FORESTS BRAZILIAN PEPPER 14.24 4240 UPLAND FORESTS MELALEUCA 43.22 4250 UPLAND FORESTS TEMPERATE HARDWOODS 23.64 4340 UPLAND FORESTS HARDWOOD, CONIFER MIXED 165.01 4380 UPLAND FORESTS MIXED HARDWOODS 24.97 5100 WATER STREAMS & WATERWAYS 5.83 5210 WATER LAKES > 500 ACRES 15.94 5240 WATER LAKES < 10 ACRES 5.00 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 38 Table 4 -4 Immokalee Urban Area (continued) by Level Four FLUCCS Code escriptions FLUCCS Code FLUCCS First Level Description FLUCCS Fourth Level Description Acreage 5340 WATER RESERVOIRS < 10 ACRES 64.20 6170 WETLANDS MIXED WETLAND HARDWOODS 64.27 6172 WETLANDS MIXED WETLAND SHRUBS 381.91 6210 WETLANDS CYPRESS 632.19 6218 WETLANDS CYPRESS /MELALEUCA INFESTED 269.44 6240 WETLANDS CYPRESS /PINE /CABBAGE PALM 483.00 6300 WETLANDS WETLAND FORESTED MIXED 324.73 6410 WETLANDS FRESHWATER MARSHES 1183.75 6412 WETLANDS CATTAIL 127.81 6430 WETLANDS WET PRAIRIES 365.77 6439 WETLANDS WET PRAIRIES WITH PINE 28.61 7420 BARREN LAND BORROW AREAS 96.31 7430 BARREN LAND SPOIL AREAS 7.34 8110 TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION AND UTILITIES AIRPORTS 440.49 8320 TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION AND UTILITIES ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES 44.82 8330 TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION AND UTILITIES WATER SUPPLY PLANTS 40.91 TOTAL 17,093.01 Source: South Florida Water Management District, 2005 Wetlands are discussed in further detail in Section 4.4. 4.4 Wetlands Wetlands are areas where water is present on an annual, seasonal, or periodic basis, and where the water regime or hydrology is the dominant factor determining the existing assemblage of plants and animals (Day, et al., 1988; Gosselink and Lee, 1987). It is a general term referring to a configuration of diverse ecosystems that are periodically inundated with fresh and /or salt water. Small differences in ground elevation have a major effect of the hydrological characteristics of a site. South Florida vegetation is closely associated with th se differences in water characteristics. Generally, wetlands have shallow water or saturated soil during part of the year. Wetlands accumulate organic plant material and support a variety of plants and animals that have adapted to these saturated conditions (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1986). The major freshwater wetlands habitats found in Collier County include Low Pinelands, Inland Swamps, Cypress Forests, Freshwater Marshes, and Wet Prairies. Fresh Water Marshes are the type of wetland found largely concentrated within and around the Immokalee Community (see Map 4 -4 for generalized location of wetlands in Immokalee). IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 39 2 o �I • I rqt Mn�oUEE•CRA f S'T 1:R NAN 1111 f s + ! �t • ? f . ,. • ',, asp' r � r 1 V ♦ p w►, Immokalee Wetlands � l.I fsiM i i6► ���� y6 ' ff¢. f k ♦ * a 1.000 8,000 4.000 6.000 'a 64b -� • ". ; �,��� w: • . ► �; INC. t , , ... ;� • ,,,�! SA a _ _ .. r • ss r •r ! S j 1 f1N j i•'� thy'♦ s'z. •+ �' f.� f S r �w ♦- y • * .... do — IMMOKALEE CRA S• r Community kedevelopmentAgedcyr B • Aft i The Place to Call Home! •a. r•, j •. . : • 111111 Bill The Freshwater Marsh habitat around Immokalee connects to the slough /swamp system known as Corkscrew Swamp. The swamp and marsh serve as primary water storage areas and provide drainage for surface flow. Lake Trafford, the largest Lake in Collier County, is a natural lake located directly west of the Immokalee urban area. Oval in shape, it measures approximately 1.7 miles by 2.0 miles along the major and minor axes (Gore, 1987). The average depth is between 6 -8 feet, with the maximum depth at 10 feet. Lake Trafford contains a watershed of approximately 30 square miles and provides water to the Corkscrew Swamp /Bird Rookery Swamp ecosystem. There are wetlands within the Immokalee Urban Area that are connected to the Camp Keais Strand, and therefore stricter preservation requirements have been developed for these wetland areas. The area is delineated as the "Wetlands Connected To Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay" on the Future Land Use Map, and is discussed in greater detail in Section 5.2.1 of this report. The wetland protection measures of the CCME and the LDC continue to apply within Immokalee and are not affected by this amendment. 4.5 Drainage Basins Both man -made and natural drainage systems collect and transport surface water run -off that occurs during and immediately following rainfall. The two major facilities can function independently of one another or in combination. Natural drainage systems are defined by the topography of an area. The largest feature of a natural drainage system is the drainage basin or watershed. The boundary of the basin is called the basin divide, and is created by an upper elevation feature so that the natural land elevation direct run -off is from the highest areas to the lowest ones, toward a common major drainage feature, such as a stream, lake, bay or ocean. In the case of Immokalee, due to its relatively flat topography, drainage occurs in sheet flow pattern within a very shallow but wide depression classified as a slough. The major drainage feature is often called the receiving body and smaller features are its tributaries. Man -made drainage facilities are artificially constructed elevation differences designed to store or convey stormwater run -off. Some typical manmade conveyance structures include ditches, canals, swales or storm sewers. They function to collect stormwater and direct it toward downstream waters. Stormwater storage structures can be classified as either retention or detention facilities. Retention facilities are designed to impound stormwater run -off until it is released by evaporation into the atmosphere and /or percolation into the ground, with no direct discharge to other nearby surface waters. Detention facilities are designed to temporarily impound run -off and gradually release it through an outlet structure at a designed outflow rate to downstream portions of the drainage system. Map 4 -5 displays the major drainage basins in Collier County. Two drainage basins cover the Immokalee area: Barron River Canal Basin and Fakahatchee Strand Basin. Map 4 -6 shows drainage sub - basins in Collier County. Three sub - basins pass through Immokalee: Corkscrew Slough Basin; Urban Immokalee Basin; and Barron River Canal Basin (North). IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 40 6_. S—W,) Dminoge Brims(tallier County W Ooe) k w., lmmokAkFeCRA Map 4 -5 Major Drainage Basins in Collier County Legend Collier County Boundary OImmokalee Urban Area Boundary -Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Collier County Major Drainage Basins - Barton River Canal Basin - Cocohatchee River Canal Basin - Fata -Union Canal Basin - Fakahatchee Strand Basin - Gateway Triangle Basin - Gator Hook Strand Basin Gordon River Fidension Basin - Henderson Creek Basin - L -28 Tieback Basin Ley Canal Basin - Ley Manor Canal Basin Main Golden Gate Canal Basin ® Micellaneous Coastal Basins - Palm Street Basin - Rock Creek Basin - Southern Coastal Basin ® Turner River Canal Basin m5w.. N 17 Al TA INC. CONSULTING 1 \ 1 VL JL IMMOKALEE CPA Community Re�evelopmentAgency I The Vlace to Call Home! Sourco(s)CoAiar County Transportation DNi— Road MaiMerence D P.—M St.—ter Marwge Section Qoo5) �F r �lmmokAIEE *CRA (' klA�IER lrl.n'\IHIP1n. Map 4 -6 Drainage Subbasins Legend Collier County Boundary Immokalee Urban Area Boundary - Collier County Arterial and Collector Road WXAIIA CONSULTING 1%6 T 7L JL IMMOKALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency I The Place to Call Home! 4.6 Groundwater Resources Water found below the surface constitutes groundwater. The speed and direction of groundwater flow depends on the permeability of the soil and rock layers, in addition to the relative pressure of groundwater. Groundwater moves down gradient from areas of high water pressure to areas of low water pressure. Aquifers are water - bearing layers of porous rock, sand or gravel. Several aquifers may be present below one surface location, separated by confining layers of materials which are impermeable or semi - permeable to water. Rainfall is the primary source of water for aquifers. Under the force of gravity, rainfall percolates downward through porous surface soils to enter the aquifer. Areas having this downward groundwater flow are called recharge areas. Due to the variable permeability of different soil types, the rate of aquifer recharge from rainfall may vary from one location to another. The areas of highest recharge potential are known as prime recharge areas. These are found where the aquifer is exposed on the land's surface. The presence of overlying confining beds also determines which surface areas will be effective recharge areas for a given aquifer, and is another factor in identifying prime recharge areas. Collier County's Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub - Element identifies and provides protection measures for recharge areas in Collier County. Two maps, taken from this Sub - Element, show groundwater recharge rates for the surficial (Map 4 -7) and Tamiami (Map 4 -8) aquifers in Immokalee. The maps show that recharge rates within most of Immokalee are relatively low compared to other areas of the County. The IAMP amendments do not impact, or propose any changes to, the provisions of this Sub - Element. 4.7 Listed Species Although Collier County has experienced one of the fastest growth rates in the nation, the County contains a large amount of land area devoted to conservation use, much of it in eastern Collier County. The Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary is a major preserve located immediately west of the Immokalee Urban Area. It is largely cypress swamp, with freshwater marsh and occasional pine flatwoods. This swamp contains the most extensive virgin cypress forest, and the largest woodstork rookery on the continent. Within the Immokalee Urban Area, areas of primary and secondary panther habitat have been designated, see Map 4 -9. Thirty -eight panther telemetry points from radio - collared cats have been recorded within the Immokalee Urban Area, the majority along the eastern boundary. The 38 points represent seven panthers active between 1994 and 2007. More than eighty percent of the telemetry points (31) are from two panthers, active between 1998 and 2002. Other listed species that have been observed within the Immokalee Urban Area include, but are not limited to, the bald eagle, Florida scrub jay, little blue heron, northern yellow bat, great egret, and the gopher tortoise. The goal, objectives, and policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element provide protection standards for listed species that apply to all of unincorporated Collier County. The Immokalee Urban Area will continue to be governed by these provisions, as well as all State and Federal regulations. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 41 e, Source(s)'. South Fbntla Water Maw9emenf Distract (1995) y� ..s y �ImmokAIEE•CRA Map 4 -7 Groundwater-Recharge-to Surficial Aquifer Legend Collier County Boundary Immokalee Urban Area Boundary - Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Surficial Aquifer 31 to < 43" vj 43 to<56" 56 to 67" a N ��! / - . CONSULTING t \1 tl JL IMMOKALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency Me Place to Call Home! r Scurce(5): Soutft Fbdda Water Marapemenl gsirlct (199s) `0mmokali=F•CRA Map 4 -8 Groundwater Recharge to Lower Tamiami Aquifer Legend Collier County Boundary Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Lower Tamiami Aquifer ,..; �7to <14" 14to<21" - 21 to 102" i N INC. 6d ; i %. T i`N i �l IMMOKALEE CRA Q Community Redevelopment Agency fj iThe Place to Call Home! 3 A � �IMMOI(A[EE *CRA Map 4 -9 Immokalee Listed Species Legend MImmokalee Urban Area Boundary • Eagle Nest + Panther Telemetry r/ Panther Primary Zone Panther Secondary Zone Wildlife Observation Locations • Florida Scrub-Jay • Gopher Tortoise • Great Egret • Little Blue Heron • Northern Yellow Bat Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads - Collier County Local Roads D tpao z,000 n,aoo s,oao Feet N DIATA INC. - - -- CONSULTING IMMOKALEE CPA Community PCB evelopment Agency i The Place to C111 Home! 4.8 Archaeological & Historical Sites Collier County identifies six archaeological and historic sites within the Immokalee Urban Area. They are shown on Map 4 -10. The largest, totaling 29.4 acres and located east of the Immokalee Regional Airport, is the location of the Tradeport Trail, a historic road segment. The ' others represent Indian middens and mounds, ranging in size from 0.4 acres to 1.5 acres. 4.9 Mineral Resources The principal mineral commodities occurring in Collier County are limestone, sand, peat, and petroleum. Of these minerals, lime -rock and sand are mined extensively throughout the County for use by the construction industry. Lime -rock is also an important mineral used in the agricultural industry to adjust soil properties for crop production. Mineral extraction sites associated with major commercial lime -rock and sand mining in Collier County as recorded by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection are depicted on Map 4 -11. One of the sites, Site 14, is within the Immokalee Urban Area. Site 14 is the Silver Strand III Partnership 14.6 -acre mine. The goal, objectives, and policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element continue to apply to mining operations in unincorporated Collier County and no change to the land use of this site is proposed. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 42 {.h '1.mokAIEE -CRA Map 4 -10 Immokalee Archaeological and Historical Sites Legend Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Collier Archaeological Sites -Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads ------ - Collier County Local Roads 0 1,0001,000 4,000 a= MENU --- 0000009 ee[ a N -DAVA INC. CONSULTING 1 \1 TL_ 1 IMMOKALEE CRA Community Re4evelopmentAgency I The Place to Call Home! ep lIMMoWEE-CRA Map 4 -11 Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Legend OImmokalee Boundary Collier County Major Roads Collier County Boundary Approximate Areas of Mineral Extraction Sites 1 APAC- Southeast, INC. -APAC Mine 2 Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP 3 Big island Excavating, Inc. - Big Island Pa 4 Darryl J. Damico 5 East Naples Land Company - East Naples Mine 6 Florida Rock Industries, Inc. - Naples Mine 7 Florida Rock Industries, Inc. - Sunniland Mine 6 Jesse J. Hardy 9 Mining Venture, LLC 10 Orangetree Associates - Onangetree Mine 11 R.H. Of Naples 12 Richard Johnson 13 Rinker Materials of Florida, Inc. 14 Silver Strand III Partnership 15 Southern Sand 8 Stone, Inc. - Willow Run Quarry 16 Stewart Mining Industries - Immokalee Mine 0 6,000 12.000 24.000 36,000 Feet a T7 T I l \INC, C'IINSUL "I'INC; 1 \t 1L a IMMOKALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency I The Place to Call Home! 5. Future Land Use Analysis The IAMP encourages a mix of uses, fosters compact, pedestrian- oriented and energy efficient development patterns, and makes economic development a priority. The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) graphically represents this desired pattern of development and redevelopment in the Immokalee Urban Area. The following subsections provide an analysis of the recommended changes to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). 5.1 Changes to Future Land Use Designations The Immokalee Urban Area currently includes three (3) Districts and eleven (11) Subdistricts on the adopted FLUM. The proposed IAMP restructures the FLUM into two (2) Districts and eight (8) Subdistricts. Within the Urban -Mixed Use District, the Neighborhood Center and Planned Unit Development Commercial Subdistricts have been combined into the Commercial -Mixed Use District. Further discussion on the PUD subdistrict is provided in Section 5.1.3. The Urban - Commercial District and Commercial subdistrict have been eliminated. The Urban Industrial District has replaced the Commerce Center— Industrial and Business Park Subdistricts with the Industrial Mixed Use Subdistrict. Also, the Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict has been introduced within the Urban — Industrial District. Table 5 -1 lists the existing and proposed Future Land Use designations. A copy of the proposed FLUM and adopted FLUM are included as Maps 5 -1 and 5 -2, respectively. A summary and analysis of the proposed changes is provided in the following sections. Table 5 -1 Proposed Future Land Use Designations Adopted Future Land Use Designations Proposed Future Land Use Designations URBAN -MIXED USE DISTRICT URBAN -MIXED USE DISTRICT LR Low Residential LR Low Residential MR Mixed Residential MR Medium Residential HR High Residential HR High Residential NC Neighborhood Center CMU Commercial -Mixed Use CC -MU Commerce Center — Mixed -Use RT Recreational/Tourist PUD Planned Unit Development Commercial RT Recreational Tourist URBAN - COMMERCIAL DISTRICT C Commercial – SR 29 and Jefferson Ave. URBAN - INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT URBAN - INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT dustrial IN Industrial E ommerce Center — Industrial IMU Industrial Mixed Use usiness Park APO Immokalee Regional Airport Tables 5 -2 and 5 -3 summarize the acreages for each of the future land use designations included in the adopted and proposed FLUM, respectively. Approximately 100.6 acres of land has been added to the Immokalee Urban Area as part of the Immokalee Regional Airport runway expansion, thereby increasing the Immokalee Urban Area from 16,989 acres to 17,089.6 acres. The Seminole Indian Reservation, which is identified as a Future Land Use IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 43 m L 99 g �Y HR u.ern ii "CMU ? HR A wR :1 p ur -'� ^�, y ^ APO •J� y In MR I LR .! —17T r .y1 m. LR K cm 11MM0WEE•CRA IASIFft PLAN UPI Map 5 -1 Immokalee Proposed Future Land Use Map Legend Immokalee Future Land Use URBAN DESIGNATION URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT RT - Recreational Tourist Subdistrict LR- Low Residential Subdistrict IJ MR- Medum Residential Subdistrict HR- High Residential Subdistrict ... CMU - Commerc al Mixed Use Subdistrict URBAN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ® IMU - Industrial Mixed Use Subdistrict IMU - IndustralMixedUseSubdistrict - Commercial Use Limitation - IN- Industrial Subdistrict ® APO - Industrial - Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES QImmokalee Urban Area Boundary Immokalee Urban Area Expansion Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads - Collier County Local Roads QWetlands Connected to Lake Trafford' Camp Keels Strand System Overlay SR- Seminole Reservation ® Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area 0 1,800 3,80D <.000 8,800 \ FeN N N C �S. , j IMMOKALEE CPA Community Redevelopment Agenry 111 e Place to Cali Home! Aj i .�a M MOWEE•CRA " \ AS a R PLAN LIPF AI I Map 5-2 immoKaiee rumre Lana use Map Legend Immekal„�man.naaean ry Urban Designation Mixed U.e d.hict Lnu vecbmalal sues Mrin _ b nklennal sues sMtt -............ uxrsueE Smn _, R eeaeoiW TOUrIN SUeeMrlel Plmnetl Unit DevNopmmt Sebtli.hict Lom rcial Dishict Indusry al 0 str ct nosiness Park Spbtl.trlet __ j eum1a15uetllcmR '' - B zinezc verk suealsmct suearemn Overlay. entl Seecial F-.— ® Mesn inrin t�Nmnmemelry snsni.enreac perneneb ana soilpro I� BrNmnmennly 5ensmae area: per s.F.w.N.O. - &minob neurrenon Q � eleon&nacma u LekeTmrtomt v ea. nm sycrem wcoumy ena celMmrReeae '. Merteunry oaac 0 1.000 2.000 4000 6.0110 INC Feet a N CONSULTING IM.MOKALEE CRA Community Pec evelopment Agency I The Place to Call Home! Feature and is further discussed in Section 5.2.3, has been revised to reflect actual locations, resulting in a reported decrease of six acres. Table 5 -2 Adopted Future Land Use Designations and Acreages Future Land Use ABBREV. ACRES Commercial C 162.6 Commerce Center — Mixed -Use CC -MU 395.0 Commerce Center — Industrial CC -1 589.7 Industrial ID 2,053.8 Low Residential LR 10,405.6 Mixed Residential MR 463.9 High Residential HR 1,603.1 Neighborhood Center NC 466.8 Recreational Tourist RT 251.2 Seminole Indian Reservation* RES 597.3 TOTAL 16,989.0 *The area for the Seminole Reservation is not accurately depicted on the adopted FLUM. Table 5 -3 Proposed Future Land Use Designations and Acreages PROPOSED Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Commercial Mixed Use CMU 1,108.1 Industrial Mixed Use IMU 866.0 Immokalee Regional Airport APO 1,484.0 Industrial IN 752.0 Low Residential LR 9,154.0 Medium Residential MR 1,110.4 High Residential HR 1,572.0 Recreational Tourist RT 451.8 Seminole Reservation* SR 591.3 TOTAL 17,089.6 *The area for the Seminole Reservation is not accurately depicted on the adopted FLUM. Of the adopted subdistricts that have been retained in the proposed FLUM, the Low Residential subdistrict saw a decrease of 1,251.6 acres, while the Medium (previously Mixed) Residential subdistrict increased by 646.5 and the High Residential subdistrict decreased by 31.1 acres, respectfully. The proposed FLUM also adds 200.6 acres to the Recreational Tourist subdistrict. To help summarize the proposed FLUM changes, Tables 5 -4 and 5 -5 combine similar Future Land Use designations into broad land use categories. For example, the Commercial, the Commerce Center – Mixed Use, and the Neighborhood Center Subdistricts, as provided on the adopted FLUM, have been combined as Commercial FLU designations in Table 5 -4. Commercial designations on the proposed FLUM include the Commercial – Mixed Use subdistrict only. Table 5 -6 shows the difference in acreage of generalized land use categories between adopted and proposed FLUM. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 44 Table 5 -4 Adopted Future Land Use by Generalized Categories Future Land Use Generalized Categories Acreage All commercial FLU designations C, CC -MU, NC 1,024.4 All industrial FLU designations CC -I, ID 2,643.5 All residential FLU designations (I-R, MR, HR 12,472.6 Recreational Tourist 251.2 Seminole Reservation* 597.3 TOTAL 16,989.0 *The area for the Seminole Reservation is not accurately depicted on the adopted FLUM. Table 5 -5 Proposed Future Land Use by Generalized Categories PROPOSED Future Land Use Generalized Categories Acreage All commercial FLU designations CMU 1,108.1 All industrial FLU designations IMU, IN, APO 3,102.0 All residential FLU designations (LR, MR, HR 11,836.4 Recreational Tourist 451.8 Seminole Reservation* 591.3 TOTAL 17,089.6 *The area for the Seminole Reservation is not accurately depicted on the adopted FLUM. Table 5 -6 Difference between Adopted and Proposed Future Land Use (Generalized Categories) *The area for the Seminole Reservation is not accurately depicted on the adopted FLUM. ** Additional Urban Area to accommodate the Immokalee Regional Airport runway expansion As demonstrated in the preceding tables, the proposed FLUM reduces the amount of land with a residential designation by 636 acres and increases the areas designated as commercial ( +84 acres), industrial ( +458 acres), and Recreational Tourist ( +201 acres). These proposed changes are discussed in the following sections. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 45 FLUM Acreage PROPOSED FLUM Acreage Difference All commercial FLU designations 1,024.4 1,108.1 83.7 All industrial FLU designations 2,643.5 3,102.0 458.5 All residential FLU designations 12,472.6 11,836.4 -636.2 Recreational Tourist 251.2 451.8 200.6 Seminole Reservation* 597.3 591.3 -6.0 TOTAL 16,989.0 17,089.6 100.6 ** *The area for the Seminole Reservation is not accurately depicted on the adopted FLUM. ** Additional Urban Area to accommodate the Immokalee Regional Airport runway expansion As demonstrated in the preceding tables, the proposed FLUM reduces the amount of land with a residential designation by 636 acres and increases the areas designated as commercial ( +84 acres), industrial ( +458 acres), and Recreational Tourist ( +201 acres). These proposed changes are discussed in the following sections. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 45 5.1.1 Residential Designations The proposed FLUM converts 636.2 acres of residentially designated land to other uses. Areas designated as Low Residential are predominately located along the periphery of the Immokalee Urban Area and in existing agricultural areas. In many cases, areas designated Low Residential on the adopted FLUM that are currently developed and located proximate to the commercial areas of SR 29 and CR 846 have been designated to allow for higher densities and non - residential uses. In total, the proposed FLUM results in a 12 percent decrease of Low Residential areas totaling almost 1,250 acres. Much of the revised Low Residential Areas are being designated as Medium Residential subdistrict. The Medium Residential subdistrict (identified as Mixed Residential on the adopted FLUM) includes an additional 646.5 acres on the proposed FLUM, and helps create a transitional land use category between the higher intensity areas along SR 29, Lake Trafford Road, and New Market Road and the outlying Low Residential and Agricultural areas. Areas designated as High Residential subdistrict are located adjacent to commercial and employment areas. The amount of High Residential areas saw a slight decrease, 2 percent, from the proposed FLUM. The densities allowed in the Medium and High Residential subdistricts are appropriate adjacent to the downtown area. The densities proposed in these subdistricts will help establish downtown Immokalee as a walkable community. This in turn will encourage a multi -modal transportation system and public transit. Additionally, higher densities will help reduce land and energy consumption, allow for more efficient delivery of public services, and provide opportunities for a better mix of housing options. 5.1.2 Recreational Tourist Designation The Recreational Tourist subdistrict is located adjacent to Lake Trafford. The proposed FLUM expands this subdistrict by 201 acres, by extending RT subdistrict to the east of Pepper Road and south of Lake Trafford Road. The IAMP seeks to expand and diversify the economic opportunities of the Immokalee Urban Area, and specifically references the potential for additional tourism, recreation, and entertainment opportunities in Objective 1.3. The RT subdistrict is intended to provide for recreational and tourist activities related to the natural environment, primarily ecotourism. Residential development is permitted in the RT subdistrict; however, it must be compatible with the natural resource and recreational value of the area. The additional 200 acres are currently designated Low Residential on the adopted FLUM. The RT and Low Residential subdistricts both allow for a base density of not more than 4 dwelling units per acre. The proposed changes do not affect the residential development potential for these areas, but provide additional opportunities for recreation and tourism uses. Additionally, since the RT subdistrict is not eligible for bonus densities and cannot exceed 4 dwelling units per acre, the additional 201 acres of RT will actually decrease the overall development potential. 5.1.3 Commercial Designations The proposed FLUM provides significant changes in regards to Commercial future land use designations. As demonstrated in Table 5 -1, the existing Commerce Center — Mixed Use (CC- MU), Neighborhood Center (NC), Planned Unit Development Commercial (PUD), and IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 46 Commercial — SR 29 and Jefferson Ave (C) subdistricts have been replaced with a single Commercial — Mixed Use subdistrict (CMU). The CMU subdistrict allows for both commercial and residential development and supports the smart growth principles that are a focus of the TAMP. Also, greater flexibility is provided by utilizing a single commercial category that also supports residential development at higher densities. Lands on the adopted FLUM that are designated with one of the existing commercial designations have been identified as CMU. Additionally, since this new mixed use district allows for residential development, areas along SR 29 and South 1St Street that are currently residential have also been designated as CMU on the proposed FLUM. This designation appropriately allows for a mix of commercial and higher density residential uses along this corridor, which is well - served by transit and is the focus of redevelopment efforts by the CRA. In total, the proposed FLUM provides for an additional 80 acres of commercial areas. As noted in Section 3.2, commercial uses are currently underrepresented in Immokalee and there will be a need for additional commercial land for retail and office space to support future growth. The proposed FLUM designates significant areas as CMU to provide additional opportunities for expanded commercial development, while retaining the potential for residential development. The adopted IAMP includes a Planned Unit Development Commercial Subdistrict, although there are no lands designated as such on the adopted Future Land Use Map. The purpose of this provision is to allow a reasonable amount of commercial development within planned residential developments. The proposed IAMP eliminates this designation as a separate subdistrict, but has incorporated these provisions under the Urban — Mixed Use District description. This will provide increased flexibility, by allowing mixed commercial and residential uses within a PUD without the need to amend the Future Land Use Map. Additionally, the proposed language incorporates a minimum number of dwelling units to ensure that any PUD is of sufficient size and density to support and warrant commercial development. 5.1.4 Industrial Designations The IAMP proposes changes to the industrial designations to stimulate economic development within the Immokalee Urban Area. As discussed in Section 3.4, additional industrial development is needed to provide employment opportunities, diversify the tax base and to meet future needs, not just for Immokalee, but Collier County as a whole. The Economic Development Council and Chamber of Commerce have both concluded that Immokalee and eastern Collier County should be the primary location for future industrial uses for the entire County. The existing FLUM includes the Industrial (ID) and the Commerce Center— Industrial (CC -1) subdistricts. The Industrial subdistrict has been retained, and the proposed FLUM has revised the CC -I subdistrict, and renamed it Industrial Mixed -Use (IMU). Additionally, the proposed IAMP introduces the Immokalee Regional Airport (APO) subdistrict to help accomplish the special goals and objectives of the Airport. The APO applies to the area included within the Immokalee Regional Airport Master Plan Update, as provided by the Airport's consultant. The IMU subdistrict allows for the light industrial and business park uses that are desired in the Immokalee Urban Area and are currently allowed in the existing CC -I subdistrict. The proposed FLUM designates areas to the north and northeast of the airport as IMU to increase economic IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 47 development near the Immokalee Regional Airport. The IMU subdistrict allows for support uses to the airport, such as restaurants, lodging, and office space, and will serve as a transition between the intensive airport and adjacent residential areas. A substantial buffer is required for IMU developments adjacent to Residential Subdistricts to mitigate potential impacts to non - compatible uses. The IMU, in combination with the CMU subdistrict, will help meet the existing shortfall of land available for commercial and office space. In total, the proposed FLUM results in a net increase of just over 462 acres of industrial land from the adopted FLUM. One hundred acres of this increase is provided for the Airport's runway expansion and is not included in the adopted TAMP. Excluding the Immokalee Regional Airport subdistrict, approximately 1,621 acres are proposed for industrial development. This amount is consistent with various forecasts for industrial land use demand included in Section 3.4. 5.1.5 Future Land Use and Density Potential Analysis Tables 5 -7 and 5 -8 calculate the theoretical maximum number of dwelling units allowed under the adopted FLUM and the proposed FLUM. The maximum number of dwelling units is calculated by multiplying the total acreage by the base dwelling unit per acre allowed for each subdistrict. It should be noted that while the base density provided for each subdistrict is allowed, it is not an entitlement, as described within the Density Rating System of the [AMP. The actual amount of development is dependent on the permitted density of the zoning designation. See Section 5.3 for a discussion on FLU designations and zoning. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 48 Table 5 -7 Adopted Future Land Use, Maximum Density Calculations Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Base DU /AC Max. # DUs Commercial C 162.6 0 0.0 Commerce Center — Mixed -Use CC -MU 395.0 12 4,739.5 Commerce Center — Industrial CC -1 589.7 0 0.0 Industrial ID 2,053.8 0 0.0 Low Residential LR 10,405.6 4 41,622.3 Mixed Residential MR 463.9 6 2,783.2 High Residential HR 1,603.1 8 12,824.4 Neighborhood Center NC 466.8 12 5,601.6 Recreational Tourist RT 251.2 4 1,004.8 Seminole Indian Reservation* RES 597.3 n/a 0.0 Total 16,989.0 68,575.9 *The area for the Seminole Reservation is not accurately depicted on the adopted FLUM. Table 5 -8 Proposed Future Land Use, Maximum Density Calculations PROPOSED Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Base DU /AC Max. # DUs Commercial Mixed Use CMU 1,108.1 16 17,729.6 Industrial Mixed Use IMU 866.01 0 0.0 Immokalee Regional Airport APO 1,484.0 0 0.0 Industrial IN 752.0 0 0.0 Low Residential LR 9,154.0 4 36,616.0 Medium Residential MR 1,110.4 6 6,662.4 High Residential HR 1,572.0 8 12,576.0 Recreational /Tourist RT 451.8 4 1,807.2 Seminole Reservation* SR 591.3 n/a 0.0 Total 17,089.6 75,391.2 *The area for the Seminole Reservation is not accurately depicted on the adopted FLUM. To summarize the change in density potential between the adopted and proposed FLUMs, the maximum number of dwelling units changes by less than 10 percent, or 6,814 dwelling units. This increase is due to higher permitted densities proposed in the proposed subdistricts, and the increased acreage of Medium Residential and Commercial Mixed -Use subdistricts. The proposed increase in Recreational Tourist area does not result in a net increase in dwelling units, because the additional area was previously Low Residential, which also allows up to 4 dwelling units per acre. As previously discussed, all of the existing Commercial subdistricts have been combined into one commercial category, CMU, which allows for commercial and /or residential uses. The majority of the increase in units comes from this consolidation, which allows residential development at a density of 16 units /acre. The majority of this subdistrict is likely to develop for commercial uses, so it is highly improbable that the mixed use areas will develop to the full residential potential. Also, there is little empirical evidence that development will actually occur at the maximum allowed densities. The adopted FLUM, as demonstrated in Table 5 -7, has an excess capacity of density units. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 49 The existing and proposed IAMP also allows for density bonuses that would increase the density potential in Immokalee; however, in order to achieve these bonuses, new developments would need to provide some form of public benefit, such as affordable or workforce housing. The proposed TAMP reduces the maximum density potential through the use of density bonuses in the Low Residential (LR) subdistrict from a maximum of 12 du /ac to 8 du /ac, and increases the potential bonuses in the Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) from 12 du /ac to 20 du /ac. These changes have reduced the overall density potential, inclusive of all density bonuses more than 18 %, or 30,583 dwelling units. Tables 5 -9 and 5 -10 show the maximum development potential for the Adopted and Proposed FLUM, inclusive of all density bonuses. Table 5 -9 Adopted Future Land Use, Maximum Density with Bonuses Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Max DU /AC Max. # DUs Commercial C 162.6 0 0 Commerce Center — Mixed -Use CC -MU 395.0 12 4,740.00 Commerce Center — Industrial CC -1 589.7 0 0 Industrial ID 2,053.8 0 0 Low Residential LR 10,405.6 12 124,867.20 Mixed Residential MR 463.9 14 6,494.60 High Residential HR 1,603.1 16 25,649.60 Neighborhood Center NC 466.8 12 5,601.60 Recreational Tourist RT 251.2 4 1,004.80 Seminole Indian Reservation* RES 597.3 n/a 0 Total 16,989.0 168,357.80 Table 5 -10 Proposed Future Land Use, Maximum Density with Bonuses Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Max DU/AC Max. # DUs Commercial Mixed Use CMU 1,108.1 20 22,162.0 Industrial Mixed Use IMU 866.01 0 0.0 Immokalee Regional Airport APO 1,484.0 0 0.0 Industrial IN 752.0 0 0.0 Low Residential LR 9,154.0 8 73,232.0 Medium Residential MR 1,110.4 14 15,545.6 High Residential HR 1,572.0 16 25,152.0 Recreational /Tourist RT 451.8 4 1,807.2 Seminole Reservation* SR 591.3 n/a 0.0 Total 17,089.6 137,898.8 Tables 5 -8 and 5 -10 show the maximum buildout potential for the proposed Future Land Use Map based on the total acreage. Table 5.8 calculates maximum base density per sub district, while Table 5.10 calculates maximum density with bonuses per subdistrict. However, this methodology does not take into account the public lands within the Immokalee Urban Area that will never be developed or will never be developed as residential projects. These public lands include preserves, such as the recently acquired Pepper Ranch, and existing schools and public facilities. In total, there is approximately 615 acres that can be classified as Public Land. Excluding these areas from the Density Calculations would reduce the maximum development IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 50 potential by 3,785 base units and 6,036 bonus density units. Attachment C, esidential Buildout Potential Comparison identifies the acreages of Public Lands. The maximum development potentials identified in Tables 5 -8 and 5 -10 can be potentially reduced further by accounting for development limitations established in the Wetlands Connected To Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay. These potential reductions could eliminate approximately 663 base units and 6,195 bonus units and are further discussed in Section 5.2.1. It should also be noted that GIS mapping inconsistencies with the Adopted Future Land Use Map have been corrected with the Proposed FLUM. The existing Collier County GIS shapefile shows the Immokalee Urban Area shifted slightly to the east compared to the actual location. This discrepancy is visibly noticeable by looking at where SR 29 intersects the Immokalee Urban Area Boundary as shown in Figure 5 -1. Correcting this mapping error has contributed to an increase in the maximum density potential. For example, the triangular area designated as High Residential surrounding Farmworker's Village has increased from 590 to 627 acres, which translates into an additional 296 potential dwelling units (8 dwelling units per acre x 37 acres). Figure 5 -1 Immokalee Urban Area GIS Mapping Discrepancy Overall, the proposed changes to the FLUM only result in a slight increase in ensity potential for the base densities, and a substantial decrease in density potential when in luding bonus density. The increase in base densities, and the expansion of the CMU subdistrict, provides more flexibility and opportunities for developers, and the potential for economi development. Additionally, the higher densities proposed in the FLUM will allow for the compact design subdistricts and will help establish downtown Immokalee as a walkable community. The higher densities will help reduce land and energy consumption, allow for more efficient delivery of public services, and provide opportunities for a better mix of housing options, and support the desired energy efficient land patterns as discussed in Section 7.1. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 51 5.1.6 Future Land Use and Nonresidential Potential Analysis The existing IAMP does not include maximum intensity standards for nonresidential development, in accordance with Section 163.3177(6)(a)(c) and (d), F.S.. In order to meet the statutory requirements, the proposed TAMP has established a maximum amount of non- residential development that can occur during the planning timeframe (2025). Be�use the existing IAMP does not provide nonresidential intensity standards, the proposed IAMP has elected to provide a maximum square footage for the entire Immokalee Urban. An analysis of existing conditions and growth projections was conducted In order to determine an appropriate nonresidential development threshold. Specifically, the following analyses were conducted: 1. Review of existing nonresidential development in Immokalee was analyzed to determine the average FAR for nonresidential development and apply these averages to the IAMP Subdistricts. 2. Review of buildout projections utilizing Collier County's Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ). 3. Review of buildout projections utilizing the Economic Analyses referenced in Sections 3.3 and 3.5 of this Data & Analysis. AVERAGE FAR ANALYSIS: Average FARs have been determined for existing commercial, industrial, governmental and institutional development in Immokalee utilizing Collier County Property Appraiser information. This data is summarized below. Non - residential development includes retail, office, industrial, institutional and governmental buildings, but excludes hotels, motels, government subsidized, affordable or farmworker housing, and development within the Seminole Reservation. A full copy of the spreadsheet is included as an attachment. Table 5 -11 Average FAR based on Existing Development Commercial 7,657,459.92 175.79 1,235,261.15 0.161314739 Industrial 5,892,815.12 135.28 1,389,411.88 0.235780666 Governmental 83,630,007.67 1,919.88 1,681,461.85 0.020105963 Institutional 5,982,384.14 137.34 785,497.48 0.131301745 TOTAL 103,162,666.84 2,368.29 5,091,632.35 0.049355377 Combined Gov & Inst 89,612,391.80 2,057.22 2,466,959.32 0.027529221 In order to determine the nonresidential development potential for Immokalee, the average FARs were applied to acreages for each Future Land Use subdistrict in the IAMP based on the anticipated type and amount of development. Subdistricts that are intended for commercial development (CMU) utilize the average FAR for commercial uses while those intended for industrial uses (APO, IN and IMU) utilize the average FAR for industrial uses. Other subdistricts (LR, MR, and HR) are not specifically intended for commercial or industrial development and therefore utilize the average FAR for combined government and institutional uses. Recreational Tourist (RT) district allows for residential and limited commercial uses and utilizes the higher commercial FAR. An applicability factor was provided to the APO, RT and residential subdistricts to identify the approximate amount of nonresidential development that can be anticipated in each subdistrict. The APO subdistrict utilized a factor of 48.03 %, because the approved PUD (Ordinance 10 -07) limits the industrial tract to 712.72 acres, or 48.03% of the IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 52 APO area. The RT district utilizes an applicability factor of 25 %, while the LR, MR, and HR utilize an applicability factor of 5 %. Utilizing the average FAR, it is estimated that the [AMP has a buildout potential for 33.3 million square feet of nonresidential development. This would be an increase of more than 28 million to the existing 5 million square feet of nonresidential development in Immokalee. Table 5 -12 Nonresidential Development Potential Based on Average FAR Immokalee Airport, APO 1,484.00 0.235780666 48.03% 7,320,066.17 Commercial Mixed -Use, CMU 1,108.10 0.161314739 100.00% 7,786,474.67 High Residential, HR 1,572.00 0.027529221 5.00% 94,254.99 Industrial Mixed -Use, IMU 866.01 0.235780666 100.00% 8,894,409.35 Industrial, IN 752.00 0.235780666 100.00% 7,723,495.58 Low Residential, LR 9,154.00 0.027529221 5.00% 548,861.42 Medium Residential, MR 1,110.40 0.027529221 5.00% 66,578.08 Recreational Tourist, RT 451.80 0.161314739 25.00% 793,684.97 Seminole Reservation, SR 591.30 N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 17,089.61 33,227,825.23 TAZ Analysis Each year, Collier County conducts the Annual Update & Inventory Report (AUIR) to analyze existing and future Level of Service Standards for key facilities. These reports utilize growth projections in five -year increments for various Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) in the County and project population growth and the need for retail, office and industrial space, among other variables. An analysis of the Immokalee TAZs was conducted to determine the potential nonresidential development through 2025 and at buildout. Based on the TAZ analysis, Immokalee will have a demand of 3.9 million square feet of non residential development through the 2025 planning period and 10.9 million square feet at buildout. The AUIR projects buildout around 2080. It should be noted that the existing 4.9 million square feet of nonresidential development as provided in Table 5.11 exceeds the total demand calculated by the TAZ Analysis through 2025. Table 5 -13 Nonresidential Development Potential Based on TAZ Analysis 2010 23,736 631,260 339,904 877,193 1,848,357 2015 28,303 827,973 445,824 1,129,004 2,402,801 2020 32,785 1,082,018 582,618 1,443,421 3,108,057 2025 36,248 1,367,864 736,538 1,790,381 3,894,783 Buildout 59,325 3,942,316 2,122,779 4,801,365 10,866,460 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 53 Economic Studies Analysis Retail, office and industrial space need were determined for Immokalee as part of the 2006 Economic Analysis for Immokalee and the 2007 Collier County Business Park Land Study, which are referenced in Sections 3.3 and 3.5, Retail and office space need is calculated based on 600 square feet of retail for every retail employee and 600 square feet of office space for office employee. It is estimated that Immokalee will have 1 retail employee for every 18.2 residents by 2025 and 1 office employee for every 17 residents. Industrial space need is based on demand for the entire county, but is expected to be located in Immokalee and eastern Collier County. Based on these studies, it is estimated that Immokalee will need 9.8 million square feet of nonresidential development by 2025. Table 5 -14 Nonresidential Development Potential Based on Economic Studies 2010 29,858 984,330 1,053,812 6,247,194 8,285,335 2015 38,072 1,255,121 1,343,718 6,549,116 9,147,955 2020 48,636 1,603,385 1,716,565 6,506,391 9,826,340 2025 53,091 1,750,253 1,873,800 6,160,184 9,784,237 * Population Projections from Table 2 -1 of the IAMP Data & Analysis for 2010 -2020; 2025 assumes 9.16% growth rate from 2020 per BEBR Medium projections ' Retail Space need calculated at 1 employee per 18.2 residents and 600 sf of retail per employee (2006 Economic Analysis for Immokalee) 2 Office Space need calculated at 1 employee per 17 residents and 600 sf of office per employee (2006 Economic Analysis for Immokalee) 3 Industrial Space need based on 2007 Collier County Business Park Land Study Immokalee Nonresidential Development through 2025 Planning Period The table below provides a summary of the existing and projected nonresidential development in Immokalee through 2025 based on the Average FAR Analysis, the TAZ Analysis and the Economic Studies. The FAR Analysis projection, which estimates a buildout figure in Table 5- 12, was prorated to reflect anticipated development through 2025. In order to prorate this figure, it was assumed that buildout would occur in 2080 per the AUIR and that the growth rate would be constant; therefore, development in 2025 would be 21.43% of buildout (15 years /70 years). Based on these analyses, Immokalee can anticipate an increase in nonresidential development between 2.0 and 3.4 million square feet. An average of the FAR Analysis and the Economic Studies Analysis was used to establish a maximum threshold of 8.45 million square feet for nonresidential development through 2025, Table 5 -15 Nonresidential Development Potential through Planning Horizon WV 1-5 Average FAR Analysis 5,091,632 7,120,248 2,028,616 TAZ Analysis 5,091,632 Economic Studies Analysis 5,091,632 Avg of FAR and Econ Studies 5,091,632 " Collier County Property Appraiser, per Table 5 -11 3,894,783 - 1,196,849 9,784,237 4,692,604 8,452,243 3,360,610 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 54 5.2 Future Land Use Overlays and Special Features Currently, the Immokalee FLUM has five overlays and special features: the "Wetlands connected to Lake Trafford/ Camp Keais Strand System Overlay," "Environmentally Sensitive Areas per Aerials and Soil Data," "Environmentally Sensitive Areas per SFWMD," "Seminole Reservation," and "Urban Infill ". As proposed, the Immokalee FLUM will contain three overlays — the wetlands overlay, which was redrawn in accordance with the recommendation of Collier County Environmental Services; the Seminole Reservation Overlay, and the Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area. The following sections discuss the changes to the wetlands overlay and environmentally sensitive area overlays; the creation of the Seminole Reservation Overlay, and changes to the Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area language. 5.2.1 Overlays Related to Wetlands and Environmentally Sensitive Areas (The following discussion was prepared by Collier County Environmental Services Department, November 2008) The current line on the Immokalee Future Land Use Map (FLUM) titled "Wetlands connected to Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System" was part of a county -wide mapping of "Environmentally Sensitive Areas," as identified on the above - mentioned map and the county- wide Future Land Use Element (FLUE) map in 1989. The Environmentally Sensitive Areas Overlay was removed from the county -wide FLUE map. The IAMP FLU map was not updated at the same time. The 1999 Final Order required Collier County to do more to protect its native habitats and agricultural lands. The 2004 EAR -based GMP amendments to CCME Policy 6.2.4 (4) (copied below) required the adoption of wetland protection standards in the Land Development Code for the wetlands in the Immokalee urban area identified on the Immokalee Future Land Use Map (FLUM). To make the figure to identify these wetlands, digital data from the 2002 Immokalee FLUM was overlaid on current data to see what had been developed since then. (The 2002 version was the most recent when this project was started. There is a 2007 update with no noticeable change to the Wetlands Connected to Lake Trafford / Camp Keais Strand System.) It was immediately apparent that there had been development within the designated wetlands and that all of the connected wetlands were not included in the polygon on the FLUM. Figure 5 -1 shows the area on a composite aerial from 2005 and 2007. GIS data and aerials were used to develop a polygon that more closely captured the complete wetland area connected to the Lake Trafford and Camp Keais Strand for discussion purposes in the review process. This was first done with the 1999 SFWMD Land Cover, and soils GIS data with the 2007 aerials. As new data became available it was also reviewed. These iterations are included as Figures 5 -2 — 5 -4. Although it appears the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System wetlands within the Immokalee Urban Area bottleneck towards the middle of the area, it is clear by the figures below that these wetlands extend into the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) program lands, as part of the same system. They were not included in this mapping as they are under different regulation. They are designated as Open in the RLSA and there would be agency permitting issues if there were plans for their development. Also, the wetlands east of S. R.858 (1st St S) IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 55 were not previously included; however, field verification has shown water in th se wetlands flows to the west, indicating they are part of the Lake Trafford and Camp Keai Strand. CCME 6.2.4 (4) Within the Immokalee Urban Designated Area, there ay exist high quality wetland systems connected to the Lake Trafford /Camp Keois Strand system. These wetlands require greater protection measures than wetlands located in other portions of the Urban Designated Area, and therefore the wetland protection standards set forth in Policy 6.2.5 shall apply in this area. This area is generally identified as the area designated as Wetlands Connected To Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System on the Immokalee Future Laid Use Map and is located in the southwest Immokalee Urban designated are c', connected to the Lake Trafford /Camp Keais System. Within one (1) year of the effective date of these amendments, the County shall adopt land development regulations to determine the process and specific circumstances when the provisions of Policy 6.2.5 will apply. Figure 5 -2 Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands Aerial Immokalee - Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands 2007 and 2005 Aerials IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 56 Figure 5 -3 Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands FLUCCS IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 57 Figure 5 -4 Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands Soils Immokalee - Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands - Soils one anro� IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 58 Figure 5 -5 Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands per SFWMD Immokalee - Lake Trafford Urban Wetlands with 2004 SFWMD Wetlands The proposed FLUM incorporates the updated Wetlands Overlay and identifies it as the Wetlands Connected To Lake Trafford /Camp Keais Strand System Overlay (LT /CKSSO). The revised area encompasses 1,492.5 acres. Map 5 -3 identifies the current land uses within the Overlay. To help protect this environmentally sensitive area from developmental impacts, the IAMP proposes to limit any residential development within the LT /CKSSO to a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre. This would result in a reduction in the overall development potential by 661 base density units and 6,195 units with density bonuses. Table 5 -17 identifies the Proposed FLU subdistricts within the LT /CKSSO and the how the density limitation will impact the total buildout potential of the TAMP. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 59 (1 O Table 5 -16 LT /CKSSO FLU Acreages and Densities LT /CKSSO FLU Abbrev. Acres Maximum Units Permitted in Overlay Change in Number of Max. Base Density Units Permitted by Subdistrict Change in Number of Max. Bonus Density Units Permitted by Subdistrict (4 du /ac) (base) Change (bonus) Change Commercial Mixed Use CMU 33.4 133.6 534.4 -400.8 668.0 -534.4 Industrial Mixed Use IMU 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Immokalee Regional Airport APO 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Industrial IN 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Low Residential LR 1,193.0 4,772.0 4,772.0 0.0 9,544.0 - 4,772.0 Medium Residential MR 25.6 102.4 153.6 -51.2 358.4 -256.0 Hi h Residential HR 52.7 1 210.8 421.6 -210.8 843.2 -632.4 Recreational/Tourist RT 10.8 43.2 43.2 0.0 43.2 0.0 Seminole Reservation SR 175.3 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Total 1,492.5 5,262.0 5,924.8 -662.8 10,212.0 - 6,194.8 5.2.2 Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area The current TAMP contains the following discussion for this Overlay: The Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area is consistent with criteria outlined in Section 163.2514(2) (a) -(e), Florida Statutes. The intent of this delineation is to comprehensively address the urban problems within the area consistent with the goals of this plan. This designation is informational and has no regulatory effect. The designation has been maintained on the Immokalee FLUM, and the language related to the designation has been clarified as follows: In order for local governments to designate a geographic area within its jurisdiction as an Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area pursuant to Section 163.2517 (4), Florida Statutes, it must amend its comprehensive land use plan to delineate the boundaries within the Future Land Use Element. The Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area is consistent with criteria outlined in Section 163.2514(2) (a) -(e), Florida Statutes. The intent of this delineation is to comprehensively address the urban problems within the area consistent with the goals of this plan. The Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area was adopted by Ordinance 2000 -66 and the Urban Infill and Redevelopment Plan was adopted by Ordinance 2000 -71. This designation is informational and has no regulatory effect. 5.2.3 Seminole Reservation There is a 556 -acre Seminole Reservation within the Immokalee Urban Area and shown on the Immokalee FLUM. The boundaries of the Reservation have been revised to correct a mapping IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 60 error on the adopted FLUM, resulting in a net decrease of six (6) acres. The Seminole Tribe is a federally recognized tribe, meaning it possesses a nationhood status and retains inherent powers of self - government. Recognized tribes possess both the right and the authority to regulate activities on their lands independently from state government control. The Overlay is meant to recognize the special status of the Seminole Reservation and the fact that it is exempted from the land use regulations of this master plan. 5.3 Proposed FLUM and Zoning Map To the extent possible, the location of existing zoning districts was taken into consideration when redrawing the Immokalee Future Land Use Map. Agricultural zoning districts are allowed in all future land use categories. No conflicts have been identified. It should be noted that neither the FLUM nor the zoning map were created as "parcel- specific" maps in GIS by Collier County; therefore, small acreages (less than five acres) may not reflect an actual parcel with that zoning in the future land use category; it may only reflect small differences in the way the boundaries were drawn on the maps (the proposed future land use map and zoning map). A copy of the zoning map is provided for reference, Map 5 -4. Table 5 -17 Proposed FLU Categories with Zoning Districts Proposed FLU CMU Zoning District Description Acres A Agriculture 65.4 A -MHO Agriculture 152.0 C -1 Commercial 39.2 C -3 Commercial 30.3 C -4 Commercial 233.2 C -5 Commercial 15.9 E Estates 100.0 MH Mobile Home Residential 42.7 P Public 2.8 PUD Planned Unit Development 76.9 RMF -12 Residential Multi-Family 8.6 RMF -16 Residential Multi-Family 0.1 RMF -6 Residential Multi-Family 138.4 RSF -3 Residential Single-Family 94.3 RSF -4 Residential Single-Family 0.7 RSF -5 RSF -5(4) RT VR Residential Single - Family Residential Single - Family Residential Tourist Village Residential 3.2 0.2 2.2 98.7 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 61 I j Table 5 -17 Proposed FLU Categories with Zoning Districts (continued -1) Proposed FLU HR Zoning Description Acres District Description Acres A Agriculture 51.2 A -MHO Agriculture 662.6 C -3 Commercial 0.6 C -4 Commercial 0.7 E Estates 30.1 1 Industrial 0.4 MH Mobile Home Residential 38.6 P Public 5.6 PUD Planned Unit Development 131.3 RMF -16 Residential Multi- Family 10.2 RMF- 16(13) Residential Multi - Family 11.1 RMF -6 Residential Multi - Family 439.3 RSF -3 Residential Single- Family 8.0 RSF -4 Residential Single - Family 64.1 RSF -5 Residential Single - Family 4.6 RSF -6 Residential Single- Family 6.0 VR Village Residential 103.5 Proposed FLU IMU Zoning District Description Acres A -MHO Agriculture 368.2 C -4 Commercial 0.1 C -5 Commercial 195.8 1 Industrial 292.7 MH Mobile Home Residential 4.5 P Public 8.1 RMF -6 Residential Multi-Family 0.7 Proposed FLU APO Zoning District Description Acres I Industrial 1,380.0 Proposed FLU IN Zoning District Description Acres A -MHO A riculture 421.1 I Industrial 330.1 P Public 0.4 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 62 Table 5 -17 Proposed FLU Categories with Zoning Districts (continued -2) Proposed FLU LR Zoning District Description Acres A Agriculture 38.5 A -MHO Agriculture 8,230.0 C -3 Commercial 1.3 CF Community Facilities 26.8 E Estates 0.1 MH Mobile Home Residential 6.3 MH 4 Mobile Home Residential 5.0 PUD Planned Unit Development 589.5 RMF -6 Residential Multi-Family 87.2 RSF -3 Residential Single-Family 56.0 RSF -4 RSF -5(4) VR Residential Single - Family Residential Single - Family Village Residential 13.0 63.1 42.7 Proposed FLU MR Zoning District Description Acres A -MHO Agriculture 120.7 C -1 Commercial 0.4 C -3 Commercial 0.2 C -4 Commercial 4.5 C -5 Commercial 1.7 E Estates 26.7 MH Mobile Home Residential 43.6 P Public 38.0 PUD Planned Unit Development 91.6 RMF -12 Residential Multi-Family 0.1 RMF -6 Residential Multi-Family 104.2 RSF -3 RSF -4 RSF -5 VR Residential Single - Family Residential Single - Family Residential Single - Family Village Residential 277.7 84.0 24.4 291.2 Proposed FLU RT Zoning District Description Acres A -MHO Agriculture 435.2 P Public 10.6 PUD Planned Unit Development 5.0 Proposed FLU SR Zoning District Description Acres A -MHO Agriculture 591.4 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 63 5.3.1 Zoning and FLUM Inconsistencies There are 7 areas, consisting of 26 parcels and 74.90 acres, which have a zoning designation that are inconsistent with the proposed Future Land Use Map. Two of the inconsistencies involve commercial zoning and uses in a Residential subdistrict. Another inconsistency is the result of an existing PUD that was approved for a density of 9 units per acre, while the existing and proposed FLU designation of LR only allows for a maximum density of 8 du /acre. The majority of the inconsistencies are a result of the limitations within the LT /CKSSO; which restrict density to 4 du /acre and does not allow for bonus density. It should be noted that this restriction only applies to what can be developed within LT /CKSSO, and that the IAMP includes a recommendation to allow for density to be transferred to areas outside of this environmental overlay. The following table outlines the areas with zoning inconsistencies, and they are also identified on Map 5 -5. Table 5 -18 Zoning and FLUM Inconsistencies Inconsistency No. of Existing Proposed Adopted Acres Description Parcels Zoning FLU FLU PUD approved with 9 du /ac; LR allows Bonus Density 2 PUD LR LR 7.404 du /ac (8 w/ bonuses) Zoned Commercial w/ Improved Commercial Use; LR does not allow Uses 2 C -3 HR LR 1.04 commercial Zoned Commercial w/ Improved Commercial Use; HR does not allow Uses 2 C -3 HR HR 0.60 commercial Zoning allows 7.2 du /ac; LT /CKSSO LT /CKSSO Density 5 VR MR LR, MR 6.10 limits density to 4 du /ac Zoning allows 6 du /ac; LT /CKSSO limits LT /CKSSO Density 12 RMF -6 HR, CMU LR, HR 11.66 density to 4 du /ac Zoning allows 6 du /ac; LT /CKSSO limits LT /CKSSO Density 2 RMF -6 LR, HR LR, HR 36.98 density to 4 du /ac PUD approved with 5.37 du /ac; LT /CKSSO Density 1 PUD HR LR, HR 11.12 LT /CKSSO limits density to 4 du /ac 26 1 74.90 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 64 oot o Lld- d �i /CkssO MN x0.0.0 u, NR =;wx, n;e',, ;o .EU /acc 6. Public Facilities Section 9J- 5.005(2), F.A.C. and subparagraphs 9J- 11.006(1)(b)1. through 5., F.A.C. provide the general data and analysis requirements for amendments to the comprehensive plan and the Future Land Use Map. These sections require that a description of the availability and the demand of public facilities be provided (9J- 11.006(1)(b)4., F.A.C.). Facilities include sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, traffic circulation, schools and recreation, as appropriate. Section 6 of the Data & Analysis describes the availability and demand of existing public facilities and lists program improvements for parks and recreation, schools, transportation, water and wastewater, solid waste, fire, and police protection. The proposed IAMP amendments do not increase the demand for public facilities above the projected population estimates, and therefore the adopted Capital Improvements Element (CIE) and Schedule of Capital Improvements will not be affected. CIE Policy 1.2, Part B states that proposed amendments to the IAMP "affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissable development" will be reviewed by the Board of County Commissioners to determine impacts to demand for utilities. Part A of the same Policy provides a specific formula to quantify the amount of public facilities needed, which is based on Level of Service Standard (LOSS), demand (such as population) and inventory of existing facilities. The proposed amendments to the TAMP affect the overall density of permissable development, as they include revisions to the FLUM and the densities permitted within each subdistrict, and therefore meet the review threshold in CIE Policy 1.2, Part B. The methodology for how demand is quantified is not provided in Rule 9J- 5.005(2) and is highly debatable. Should demand be based upon potential maximum intensities and densities allowed under proposed land use categories or should it be based on the accepted population projections? For development specific FLUM amendment applications, the impacts to demand are easily quantified through a LOSS Analysis because these amendments typically have a precise build - out timeframe that is compatible with the planning horizon of the Capital Improvements Element (five to ten years), as well as a known development capacity (number of dwelling units and non- residential square footage). Based on this analysis, the County can determine whether the project included in the amendment will result in the need for facility improvements to maintain LOSS requirements over the time period covered by the CIE. Impacts to facility demand related to the proposed IAMP amendments are not as easily computed, and are not warranted. While the proposed amendments to the IAMP include revised and amended Future Land Use subdistricts that have the potential for increased densities and intensities, the proposed amendments will not have an impact on the demand for public facilities. The proposed IAMP amendments reflect an ideological change in how growth should occur in the Immokalee Urban Area, through greater flexibility of mixed use districts and the encouragement of higher densities around the urban core areas. Because there is not a specific development attributed to this amendment, future demand directly resulting from amendments to the TAMP remains unchanged and should be based on accepted resident and seasonal population estimates and projections, as identified in Rule 9J- 5.005(2)(e). This is consistent with Collier County procedures for addressing public facilities demand as provided in the Annual Update & Inventory Report (AUIR), which identifies capital needs for the construction of new facilities to serve projected population growth and for necessary replacements of existing facilities that are needed to maintain adopted LOSS. As new development applications are proposed within the Immokalee Urban Area, consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the IAMP and Collier County GMP, an analyis of that IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 65 development's impacts on public facilities will be conducted to ensure that it complies with the Collier County Concurrency Management system (CIE Objective 5.0.2 and Section 6.02.02 of the LDC). 6.1 Parks and Recreational Facilities There are nine park facilities located within the Immokalee Planning Community. Ten are listed in the 2008 AUIR as being within Immokalee; however, Oil Well Park is actually located in Sunniland, off of SR 29, south of Oil Well Road. The complete list from the AUIR is included below as Table 6 -1. A map of park locations is included as Map 6 -1. Table 6 -1 Immokalee Park Land Inventory *Not within the Immokalee Planning Community Source: Collier County 2008 AUIR, Park Land Inventory The County has developed the following level of service (LOS) standards for community and regional park land: Community Park Land LOSS: 1.2 acres /1000 population (unincorporated areas) Regional Park Land LOSS: 2.9 acres /1000 population (county -wide standard) Currently, the unincorporated, county -wide inventory for community parks is 591.54 acres, which exceeds the meets the required 436.60 acres based on peak season unincorporated population. No new community parks are planned during the next five year growth period, as the County anticipates to maintain LOSS for community parks through 2015 -2016 (Source: 2008 AUIR). The proposed amendments to the IAMP will not affect the population projections used to determine facility needs in the AUIR, and therefore, will have no impact on community park facilities. For regional parks, the available county -wide inventory is 1,043.97 acres, with a required inventory, based on peak season countywide population, of 1,356.70 acres, a deficiency of 312.73 acres. Over the next five years, the county has scheduled regional park acquisitions IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 66 Location Type Acreage Community Park Acres Regional Park Acres Neighborhood Park Acres 1 Immokalee Community Park Community 23.0 23.0 2 Immokalee Sports Complex Community 14.0 14.0 3 Immokalee High School Community 1.0 1.0 4 Air ort Park Community 19.0 19.0 5 South Immokalee Neighborhood Park Neighbor 3.2 3.2 6 Ann Oleski Park Regional 2.3 2.3 7 Dreamland Neighborhood Park School 0.5 0.5 8 Tony Rosbough Community Park Community 7.0 7.0 9 Oil Well Park* Neighbor 5.5 5.5 10 Eden Park Elementary Community 2.8 1 2.8 TOTAL 78.3 1 66.8 1 2.3 9.2 *Not within the Immokalee Planning Community Source: Collier County 2008 AUIR, Park Land Inventory The County has developed the following level of service (LOS) standards for community and regional park land: Community Park Land LOSS: 1.2 acres /1000 population (unincorporated areas) Regional Park Land LOSS: 2.9 acres /1000 population (county -wide standard) Currently, the unincorporated, county -wide inventory for community parks is 591.54 acres, which exceeds the meets the required 436.60 acres based on peak season unincorporated population. No new community parks are planned during the next five year growth period, as the County anticipates to maintain LOSS for community parks through 2015 -2016 (Source: 2008 AUIR). The proposed amendments to the IAMP will not affect the population projections used to determine facility needs in the AUIR, and therefore, will have no impact on community park facilities. For regional parks, the available county -wide inventory is 1,043.97 acres, with a required inventory, based on peak season countywide population, of 1,356.70 acres, a deficiency of 312.73 acres. Over the next five years, the county has scheduled regional park acquisitions IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 66 � e • M mokALEE•CRA Map 6-1 Immokalee Parks Legend Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Parks rye it - Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Collier County local Roads i _ a-• o r,oao z,000 a,aoo s.000 N DAITA CONSULTING 1\ 1 Il jk IMMOKALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency �r ".� I The Place to Call Home! totaling 719.16 acres. Two of the regional park sites are within Immokalee: the Immokalee Lake Trafford ATV park, a 625 -acre commitment from the SFWMD; and Pepper Ranch, a 50 -acre regional park site. These acquisitions will allow the County to maintain LOSS for regional parks over the next decade (Source: 2008 AUIR). The proposed amendments to the IAMP will not affect the population projections used to determine facility needs in the AUIR, and therefore, will have no impact on regional park facilities. While there are no neighborhood park level of service standards, the community supports the creation of new neighborhood parks in order to provide additional recreational opportunities to support this youthful community and provide additional public gathering spaces. 6.2 Schools As of 2008, the Collier County School Board operates six elementary schools, one middle school, one high school, and one technical school in the Immokalee area. The RCMA Immokalee Community School is a charter elementary school, and the Bethune Education Center at the Immokalee Technical Center conducts adult education courses. The existing schools are listed in Table 6 -2 and shown on Map 6 -2. Table 6 -2 Immokalee Area Schools School T pe Name Elementary Schools: Eden Park Highlands Immokalee Community Lake Trafford Pinecrest Village Oaks Middle School: Immokalee Middle High School: Immokalee High Technical School: Immokalee Technical Center State Rd 29 Site: TBD (school planned but unfunded Source: Collier County School District, 2008 Based on information gathered in 2008 from the District School Board of Collier County, the number of students enrolled in Collier County schools in Immokalee was 5,534 (enrollment number includes Pre -K through High School). The total enrollment county -wide was 42,688, which means that Immokalee's enrollment is 13.0% of the countywide enrollment. In comparison, the permanent population of Immokalee (24,445) is 7.4% of the countywide population (332,591), based on the projected April 2008 population figures prepared by Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section, 2009. Table 6 -3 shows the change in student enrollment from 1988 to 2008. From 06 -07 to 08 -09, there was an increase in elementary school enrollment but the middle and high school enrollment decreased. The middle school student population contains the 7th and 8th grades only as of the 2008 school year. As a consequence of meeting growth demands and implementing a specialized educational delivery model for Immokalee area schools in 2008, the Middle School's 6th grade was moved to the Elementary schools, additions and renovations IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 67 NbEe Oe6 t EY�nnbry �IMMOI(A[EE•CRA Map 6 -2 Immokalee Schools Legend OImmokalee Urban Area Boundary Schools t Elementary _ t Middle Z High 8 Pdvate S Technical t Special Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Collier County Local Roads D 1,000 3,000 4,000 6.000 1\ Feet N DIX 1 \INC. C(-) NSULTING Z t T 11 1 .nc�k. 41 IMA h =.EE CPA Communitcl`, le I Clopment Agency I The I tc Al Home! were made to all existing elementary schools, and one new elementary (Eden Park) was completed and opened. Table 6 -3 Immokalee Student Enrollment LEVEL OF Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment SCHOOL 1988 -89 1995 -96 2006 -07 2008 -09 Increase or Decrease ( ) 06 -07 to 08 -09 Elementary 2,893 2,312 2,878 3,395 517 Middle 992 1,635 1,138 800 (338) High 824 1,152 1,435 1,339 (96) TOTAL 4,709 5,099 5,451 5,534 83 Source: Collier County School Board, October 2008, Public School Facilities Element Data & Analysis, August 2007 In October 2008, Collier County adopted the Public School Facilities Element, which establishes Concurrency Service Areas (CSAs) for determining the availability of public school facilities to meet the demand created by new residential development. The CSAs are broken down by school level and location. There are two elementary school CSAs in Immokalee, E11 and E12. E11 covers most of Immokalee, and E12 includes the area south of the SR 29 curve. There is one middle school CSA, M5, and one high school CSA, H5. The District has adopted a district -wide LOSS of 95% of the permanent Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) capacity for elementary and middle schools, and 100% of permanent FISH capacity for high schools. The following table, Table 6 -4, shows current and projected enrollment through 2013/2014 and includes the FISH capacity for each school. None of the CSAs within Immokalee are predicted to exceed the LOSS through the five -year planning timeframe. The proposed amendments to the IAMP will not affect the population or enrollment projections used to determine facility needs in the Public School Facilities Element, and therefore, will have no impact on school capacity. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 68 Table 6 -4 Immokalee School Capacity and Projected Enrollment CSA School Name FISH Capacity 2008/09 Enrollment 2009/10 Enrollment 2010/11 Enrollment 2011/12 Enrollment 2012/13 Enrollment 2013/14 Enrollment E11 Eden Park 874 620 621 640 660 693 741 Highlands 808 732 722 721 727 746 769 Lake Trafford 845 692 715 739 766 802 841 E11 CSA Capacity & Enrollment 2,527 2,044 2,058 21100 2,153 2,241 2,351 E12 Pinecrest 854 652 659 672 702 732 760 Village Oaks 854 699 682 695 715 746 804 E12 CSA Capacity & Enrollment 1,708 1,351 1,341 1,367 1,417 1,478 1,564 M5 Immokalee Middle 1,244 800 759 691 636 647 683 H5 Immokalee High 1,550 1,339 1,325 1,251 1,273 1,296 1,282 FISH capacity and projected enrollment not determined for the Immokalee Community School (charter school) or the Immokalee Technical Center. Schools that do not have a specific geographic attendance boundary do not have a concurrency service area. Source: District School Board of Collier County, Capital Improvement Plan FY10 -29, April 2009 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 69 6.3 Transportation It is important to understand the linkage between land use and roads. Access is critical to whether land is developed or sits vacant. Also important are routes and options for non - motorized travel and transit. For additional discussion of impacts to transportation facilities, see Attachment A to this document, Analysis of Potential Impacts to Transportation Facilities. 6.3.1 Existing Roadway Network The existing roadway pattern is graphically depicted in Maps 6 -3 and 6 -4. Key roads include SR 29, the major North -South roadway in Immokalee; CR 846; New Market Road; Immokalee Drive; and Lake Trafford Road. The area east of SR 29 has a developed grid street pattern. This roadway configuration provides a driver numerous options to reach his destination. A grid roadway network can help minimize traffic congestion. West of SR 29, the converse occurs, with most locations only accessible via Lake Trafford Road. Other key roads west of SR 29 include Immokalee Drive, Westclox Road, Little League Road, and Carson Road. 6.3.2 Roadway LOS (Arterials and Collectors) The Collier County Transportation Services Department maintains a traffic count program that monitors vehicle movement activities at a number of locations throughout Immokalee. This program assists in the monitoring of service deficiencies and provides a basis for the projection of future demands upon the roadway system. Table 6 -5 shows the LOS for arterials and collectors based on 2008 traffic counts for the Immokalee roads as listed in the most recent Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities (AUIR), adopted in 2008. The County has adopted the following traffic performance standard for County collector and arterial roads: County arterial and collector roads, as well as State highways not on the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS), shall be maintained at Level of Service "D" or better, as addressed in the Implementation Strategy of the Transportation Element, except for the roadways listed below that have been widened to 6 lanes and cannot be widened any further. The County will also adopt FDOT's LOS on roadway segments where the County has entered into a TRIP (Transportation Regional Incentive Program) agreement for funding. TRIP eligible facilities and SIS facilities are identified on Map TR -8 and Map TR -9 of the Transportation Element. Level of Service "E" or better shall be maintained on all six -lane roadways. The Collier County Transportation Division shall determine the traffic volumes that correspond to the different LOS thresholds on county roads. The Transportation Division shall install, as funds permit, permanent traffic count stations to better identify traffic characteristics of county roads. Based on the traffic count data, the Transportation Division shall develop a financially feasible Roads component for the Capital Improvement Program of the CIE. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 70 i i E_ Source(s): ColierArtedeVCOAecror end Minor Roedwry (C!!Wr County Gowrnrner426o9) �lommokALEE•CRA MAST IR i LAv LIPPA E Map 6 -3 Existing Roadway Network Arterials and Collectors Legend QImmokalee Urban Area Boundary - Immokalee Regional Airport I Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Collier County Local Roads 61,000,066 4.O 6." \� Feet N N DA'X T/ ZINC. CONSULTING Z t ♦ TA 1 IMMOKALEE CPA Community Redevelopment Agency I The Place to Cal I Home! As the policy indicates, certain roads have been assigned a lower LOS standard; however, it does not include any roadway in and around the Immokalee Planning Community. In addition, the Growth Management Plan has assigned LOS designations to state and federal highways, as well. State Road 29, which passes through Immokalee, has been assigned a LOS standard 11C11 All arterials and collectors within Immokalee currently operate at or above the adopted LOSS. Table 6 -5 2008 Peak Hour /Peak Directional Volume and LOS for Arterials & Collectors in Immokalee Road # Link From To Existing Road Peak Hour/ Peak Dir Current LOS CR 846 Immokalee Road Oil Well Road SR 29 2U 262 C Lake Trafford Road West of SR 29 SR 29 2U 367 C N. First Street New Market Road Main Street 2U 457 C New Market Road Broward Street SR 29 2U 448 C SR 29 SR 29 CR 858 CR 29A (New Market Rd) 2U 404 C SR 29 SR 29 CR 29A South N 15 Street 4D 661 B SR 29 SR 29 N 15 Street CR 29A North 2U 550 C SR 29 SR 29 CR 29A (New Market Rd) SR 82 2U 550 C Westclox St Carson Rd SR 29 2U 147 B 2U: 2 -lane, undivided 4D: 4 -lane, divided Source: Collier County Annual Update & Inventory Report on Public Facilities, 2008 AUIR, Prepared by Comprehensive Planning Department, Community Development & Environmental Services Division, October 2008 6.3.3 Roadway Improvements The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) of the Collier County MPO sets forth scheduled (funded) roadway improvements as well as a list of "unfunded priorities" (Table 6 -6). The Unfunded Priorities list is produced annually, and the adopted list of priorities is transmitted to the FDOT to be considered during their project selection process for the FDOT's Five -Year Work Program. The following information is taken from the TIP. TAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 71 e �I. �lmmokA[EE+CRA vl A T LIB I'LlN i1PD % i :y °lo J W Map 6 -4 IF Existing Roadway Network Local Roads w 14 ii� t'� r� Legend / lO Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Immokalee Regional Airport Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads 21 � a ` — - — -- - -- - Collier County Local Roads e^..' a t,000 2.aoo 4= e.= I N CONSULTING, 1 \ 1 Il 1 IM OKALEE CRA Community kec{evelopmentAgency I The Place to 0711 Home! ` n �""��•"a, y�±.r'"�2�``'„ ?R-.: `` "„""',fir. Source(s) Collier County Local Roads (C ff.r County Government 2009) Table 6 -6 Unfunded Priorities List, 2008 -2009, Immokalee Projects 2008 Facility Limit Improvement Next Unfunded Phase Estimated Estimated Reason* Rank Resurfacing 8.192 $10.21 M SR 29 Cost PDC Cost FY 12/13 Resurfacing 2.180 $5.72M SR 29 N 11 Street PD &E Design ROW CST 5 Immokalee SR 29 north New route 06/07 X 0.9M 1.1M Econ./ Intmdl. Bypass to SR 29 @ around SR 82 Immokalee 10 Immokalee Camp Keais New 4 lane X 1.7M 2.1 M LOS Road Ext Rd to SR 29 facility Source: Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), FY 2009/2010 - 2013/2014, Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization, Adopted June 12, 2009 *Reason for prioritization: LOS: Existing level -of- service deficiency, or projected within five years based on County data Econ: Economic Development Intmdl: Intermodal Table 6 -7 Roadway Projects within Immokalee from the 2009 -2014 TIP Roadway Link From To Description Project Length miles Total Cost 2009 -2014 SR 29 N Oil Well Road CR 846 Resurfacing 8.192 $10.21 M SR 29 N of 9 Street N of CR 29A Resurfacing 2.180 $5.72M SR 29 N 11 Street Immokalee Drive Sidewalk 0.600 $0.77M Source: Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), FY 2009/10 - 2013/14, Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization, adopted June 12, 2009 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 72 6.3.4 SR 29 Loop Road The Florida Department of Transportation, District One, is performing a Project Development and Environment (PD &E) study on a segment of State Road (SR) 29 that runs from Oil Well Road to SR 82. This evaluation is necessary due to the ongoing population and employment growth in and around the study area. The provision of safe and efficient transportation to support this growth requires action to improve the existing transportation network. The development of the loop road will have a positive impact on the redevelopment of Immokalee, especially Main Street, by removing trucks and industrial and agricultural vehicles from the downtown area. The PD &E study is scheduled for completion in June 2010. The design phase of the project is not currently scheduled in the adopted FDOT 5 -Year Work Program. The expansion of SR 29 from Oil Well Road to SR 82 is identified as a needs project within the Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and is consistent with Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan. This roadway improvement consists of increasing capacity on SR 29 between Oil Well Road and SR 82 in Collier County. The project involves evaluating the widening of the existing 2 -lane undivided segment of SR 29 to four lanes, as well as the study of an alternative corridor(s) that bypasses downtown Immokalee. The last PD &E meeting, the Alignments Workshop, was held June 23, 2009. Currently FDOT is in the alignments analysis phase of the process, which involves the evaluation of viable alignments within the selected corridors. Five alignments, shown on Figure 6 -1 and described in more detail in Table 6- 8, are being recommended for further study. Following this phase, alternatives will be developed from the recommended alignments. The 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) prepared by Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) also mentions the SR 29 Loop Road and states: "It will provide the ability to create additional economic stimulus to a Florida Free Trade Zone and provide for intermodal access to the SIS system." (page 9 -8) The Immokalee community supports an alignment east of downtown. This would remove unwanted truck traffic from downtown, and, in removing these trips, free road capacity for development and redevelopment. An alignment west of downtown would traverse environmentally sensitive wetlands. Additionally, a western alignment would not provide access to the airport and surrounding industrial areas, which have been targeted for economic development. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 73 Figure 6 -1 SR 29 Loop Road Alignments Recommended for Further Study http : / /www.sr29collier.com /alignments- workshop.html, accessed July 13, 2009. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 74 Table 6 -8 Evaluation Matrix, SR 29 Loop Road Alignments Recommended for Further Study Size ill Floes Alignments Recommended for Further Study L A-1-{ 901.8 1420.1 1087.6 11915 1201.9 Length in rites 15.8 18.2 15.6 15.6 15.6 socto- cultural effects Schools 2 1 1 0 0 Religion institutions 3 0 0 0 0 EMS I police ! rro 0 0 0 0 0 Cemetery 1 0 0 0 0 Atrpott 1 0 1 0 0 Medium density residential • acres 9.1 7.0 7.0 7 -0 7.0 High density res dpntial -acres 40,2 40 35.0 0 -0 0.0 Deveiopnlent of regier�3l impact (DR]) - arras 10.0 0 -0 10.0 0.0 OA Planned unit development MUD) - acres 217 136 77 0.0 0.0 Tribal -*weed lards - acres 1,2 RecreaGOn t3nds acres 0.6 0.0 0 0 1,2 0.6 0_0 0.0 010 OA Historical (archaeological irr"Cls (Y or N) Y N N N N Natural effects M� Hon- forested wetlands - acres 33.2 532 41.1 57 4 100.0 Forested wetlands - acres 59.3 62.3 52.8 25.5 28.5 Open wafer Features - acres 50..0 39.3 51,6 451 43.3 Publicly managed lands - acres Eagle rests 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 Rookeries 4 0 0 0 0 Threatened 8 e- radar :gered species occurences 0 0 1 0 1 1 Panther primary habitat - acres 587,6 514.3 587,6 826.5 834.8 Panthv secondary habitat - acres 102.7 836.5 316.1 367.2 367.2 Physical eft®cts Potential contamination sites 50 3 20 t 1 Sinkhotes 1 0 0 0 0 Sruwnfields Mater treatment fac;Jkies 1 0 0 1 0 0 U 0 tl Sower treatment facilities 0 0 n 0 0 Source: Florida Department of Transportation, District One, SR 29 PD &E Study Website, http: / /www.sr29collier.com /alignments- workshop.html., accessed July 13, 2009. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 75 The proposed project schedule for the PD &E Study is included below. Figure 6 -2 SR 29 PD &E Study Schedule Source: FDOT District One SR 29 PD &E Website: http: / /www.sr29collier.com /project- schedule.html, accessed July 14, 2009. 6.3.5 Freight The Collier County Freight and Goods Mobility Analysis (June 2008) was prepared for the Collier County MPO to conduct a comprehensive freight analysis at the county level in order to better develop its freight program. The analysis references the Immokalee community in several places, specifically, anticipated freight traffic around the Immokalee Regional Airport and Tradeport as industrial development occurs. Critical to the Tradeport initiative and other freight interests in the area is the limited capacity of SR 29 in the proximity of County Road 846. One suggested solution to this capacity constraint is the notion of a bypass route which effectively circumvents the intersection altogether by establishing a route north of the airport to alleviate the traffic congestion in the center of town mainly consisting of large trucks.' Other key improvements in support of this initiative are the widening of SR 82 northwest of Immokalee and expanding the runways at Immokalee Regional Airport. SR 82 provides a connection to 1 -75, the major north -south corridor of Southwest Florida, and currently is designated an Emerging SIS facility. Immokalee Regional Airport currently has two 5,000- foot runways. ' See the SR 29 Loop Road discussion. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 76 All factors considered, the likelihood of enticing major firms near and around the Immokalee area is promising, as major retailers have expressed interest in the location recently, only to be dissuaded by the current infrastructure constraints. The area is regarded as having high potential for industrial and distribution uses, save for requiring key transportation improvements. (pages 4- 27 -4 -28) The report also records the input of "freight stakeholders" in Section 6, and several concerns related to Immokalee, the Immokalee Regional Airport and Tradeport are discussed. Anxiety over accessibility to mines, landfills, other producers, and end customers was also a recurring theme in Collier County. Truck drivers and truck management companies indicated that the current north -south and east -west connections in the county are not on par with projected population and economic growth in southwest Florida. This was of particular concern in central Collier and the Immokalee area (Oil Well Road, Immokalee Road, and State Road 82) where poor infrastructure conditions and roadway capacity have been the leading factor for repelling retailers from the region. (page 6 -4) Inadequate runway space at Immokalee Airport – Currently, Immokalee Airport has two 5,000 feet runways. In order to handle larger planes to attract more business the airport needs to extend one or both of their runways. The airport director indicated they are working with the FAA and the Collier County Economic Development Council to obtain the necessary resources to extend one of the runways in the next five years. (page 6 -7) Potential for increase in economic expansion if transportation issues were addressed – Some involved in economic development for the Immokalee area as well as the county expressed concern that the lack of adequate transportation infrastructure is hurting the areas chances for economic expansion. (page 6 -9) Florida Tradeport – One positive project for the Immokalee area is the Florida Tradeport. This focus to bring business to the airport is part of a plan to help the Immokalee area grow economically. Stakeholders said that access to ground transportation was identified as the most important site selection criteria based on a study of various industry leaders. This reiterates the need for improved transportation infrastructure to stimulate economic growth. (page 6 -9) These comments illustrate the need for the SR 29 Loop as well as the expansion of Immokalee Road in order to address roadway capacity issues to accommodate freight and shipping enterprises wishing to locate at the Immokalee Regional Airport. 6.3.6 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities As previously shown, many of the residents of Immokalee are low- income, and many do not have access to an automobile, and rely on bicycles, transit, or walking to reach their destination. Therefore, adequate pedestrian and bicycle facilities are particularly important in this community. Map 6 -5 on the following page shows existing sidewalks and paved shoulders within Immokalee. Collier County MPO is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Pathways Plan, which was included as part of the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), also being updated. The vision included in the Plan is "to provide a safe, connected and convenient on -road and off -road network IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 77 E.51ma S'd— lkslFared s-- (Coee, C -y OW—) t! r IIMmokALEE *CRA ° S)ASIFR PLA\ UPDAfE Map 6 -5 Existing Immokalee Bicycle /Pedestrian Facilities ... _ .... _.__ ..........._..-..- Legend OImmokalee Urban Area Boundary Existing Bicycle /Pedestrian Facilities Lasting Paved Shoulders Existing Sidewalks — Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads -- - - -- -- Collier County Local Roads 0 1.000 2.000 4.000 6,000 Feel N 'DAITAINC. CONSULTING Z%. V 11 1 IMMOKALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency i The Place to Call Home! throughout the Collier MPA accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians to improve transportation efficiency and enhance the health and fitness of the community while allowing for more transportation choices." The 2030 LRTP and the 2006 Pathways Plan are still the most up -to -date information available. Table 6 -9 shows bicycle and pedestrian improvement priorities as identified in the Pathways Plan. These are identified improvements; however, they are not necessarily programmed nor have they been determined to be financially feasible. Table 6 -9 Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement Priorities Bicycle Improvement Priorities On Street From Street To Street Length (miles) Facility Type Priority Tier New Market Rd SR 29A North 15 St (SR 29 Main St (SR 29) 2.1 Rural BL I 15 St N Main St SR 29 Immokalee Dr 0.4 Rural BL I Lake Trafford Rd CR 890 Little League Rd North 15 St (SR 29 2.1 Rural BL I Westclox St Carson Rd SR 29 15 n St) 1.0 Rural BL I 9 St N Lake Trafford Rd Main St SR 29 0.9 Rural BL I 911, St S Main St SR 29 Eustis Ave 0.4 Rural BL I Immokalee Dr Dead End SR 29 N 15 n St) 0.9 Rural BL I Immokalee Dr Charlotte St SR 29 (N 15 n St) New Market Road 1.1 Rural BL I Lake Trafford Rd CR 890 Pepper Rd Little League Rd 1.0 Rural BL II Carson Rd Lake Trafford Rd Westclox St 0.5 Rural BL II Sidewalk Improvement Priorities On Street From Street To Street Length (miles) Facility Type Priority Tier 1S St N Main St SR 29 Immokalee Dr 0.4 Sidewalks 1 15 St North (SR 29 9 St Lake Trafford Rd 1.3 Sidewalks I* Lake Trafford Rd CR 890 Little League Rd North 15 St (SR 29 2.1 Sidewalks I Immokalee Dr Charlotte St SR 29 (N 15 1h St) New Market Rd 1.1 Sidewalks I Roberts Ave N19 11 St N 18 St 0.8 Sidewalks I Westclox St Carson Rd SR 29 N 15 St 1.0 Sidewalks II* Carson Rd Lake Trafford Rd Westclox St 0.5 Sidewalks II Lake Trafford Rd CR 890 Pepper Rd (CR 850 Little League Rd 1.0 Sidewalks II Carson Rd Westclox St Dead end north 0.5 Sidewalks 11 CR 846 (Devil's Garden Rd ) SR 29 (Narrow Lanes ) Hendry County Line 8.5 Sidewalks II SR 82 Corkscrew Road CR 850 SR 29 5.3 Sidewalks III* *Included in the 2030 LRTP BL: Bike Lane Source: Collier County Pathways Plan, 2006 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 78 The MPO is also in the process of completing a Walkability Study for Immokalee; however, the study is not yet available and will probably not go before the MPO for consideration until January 2010. Data collected from the study will be used in the Pathways Plan update. The Adopted FY08 /09 Pathways Box Priorities is shown below. The FY 2009/2010 priorities box is in the process of being approved. Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization Adopted FY 2008/09 Pathways Box Priorities 2007 Road From To kWovemeM Projected Cost Commwft Reason Rank 1 Morth 1M Street SR 25 Oak Street Fill M,000 Wwakelee PAC ftft Y Maio Street SR H 11th Street mmokahe Drive Fit i 400,OW Mrnokakw PAC PrMty 6.3.7 Transit Transit in Immokalee consists of four bus routes operated by Collier Area Transit (CAT): Blue Route 5, the Immokalee Shuttle, which runs from Immokalee to the Collier County Government Center; Light Blue Route 7, the Marco Island Shuttle, which runs from Immokalee to Caxambas Park in Marco Island; and Pink Routes 8.A and 8.13, the Immokalee Circulator. See Map 6 -6 for CAT routes in Immokalee. Collier County MPO recently completed in May 2009 the "Collier County Bus Stop /Shelter Needs Plan," which analyzes current ridership data to propose a list of stops where shelter may be warranted. As the study states, bus stop shelters are important to redevelopment and place- making: "Bus stop shelters provide shelter from rainstorms, direct sun, and gusting winds. It is important to understand shelters provide the waiting transit rider shelter from the elements, the shelter also provides for a place to rest while waiting for the bus; a bench to sit on and walls to lean on. In Collier County due to the extremely long headways of the transit system and weather pattern, stops with shelters and amenities are critical." Page 8 In Immokalee, nine bus stops were identified as needing bus stop shelters: 1. Lake Trafford / 19th St. 2. 1 st Street at Carver (across from casino) 3. Seminole Casino 4. Farm Workers' Village 5. Lake Trafford Elementary . 6. Lake Trafford Road at Ringo Lane 7. Winn Dixie 8. S5 th Street at Stokes Avenue 9. S5 th Street (Career Services Center) IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 79 4 -i `_ 0MMOWEE•CRA PUBIK I I AI-M Map 6 -6 Collier Area Transit Routes Legend JQ ImmYaba Urban Area BouMary 1 1/ r— Transit Routes Rohe Roble B�ImmoYake BM1Unk — "' ONGPlill,RUWa] Marro Island SM1U111A R-88 Imm .1- Cmaklor 1 I� Co1'si County Anedei and Colksloe Roads 1 [ � � —Coll er COUMy Loral ROada /A } r r �a n TO® o l,000 2,= 400o s000 F- TJ � I 1A CONSIIL"1'INU Z %I Il 1 IMMOKALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency I The place to Call Home! 6.3.8 Transportation Concurrency System Transportation concurrency refers to the state - mandated regulatory framework in which development proposals are reviewed to ensure adequate infrastructure is available to serve the additional demands placed on them by the development. For adequate infrastructure to be available on an on -going basis requires that a flow of revenue be available to fund transportation facilities and services to continuously meet adopted level of service standards. This requirement is challenging for any community in Florida, but more so for Immokalee. State laws governing transportation concurrency assign responsibility for administering the development review process to the local government, but have reserved two aspects of the process, which contribute to the burdensomeness of the process, to the State. These are: SR 29 has been designated an element of the Emerging Strategic Intermodal System (SIS). State law gives authority to set level of service standards for the SIS system to the Florida Department of Transportation (DOT), rather than to local governments, so proposed changes in concurrency strategy must involve coordination with the Florida DOT to ensure mitigation for impacts to the SIS system are addressed to the DOT's satisfaction. In addition, four roads that pass through the Immokalee CRA (SR 29, CR 846, 849, and CR 890) are designated as hurricane evacuation routes. This places more restrictive concurrency requirements on them. The regulatory procedures and standards that are currently applied to the Immokalee CRA are the same as those that are applied to the rest of Collier County. The regulations and standards were primarily designed to address the faster - growing and economically stronger urbanized portions of "Coastal" Collier County. These procedures may make sense for the more urbanized areas of Collier County because the road segments they apply to are generally shorter, and there are more lower -cost solutions available to developers to resolve concurrency issues compared to the Immokalee area. In addition, the economic climate in the urban areas of Collier County provides more opportunities to defray the costs of meeting concurrency -- Immokalee is more challenged in its ability to generate funds from development interests for roadway improvements. Consistent with Policy 3.2.9 of the TAMP, the Immokalee CRA is currently investigating the possibility of implementing a TCEA for at least a portion of the Immokalee Planning Community to address these issues. A copy of the draft transportation strategy is provided. If it is determined that a TCEA is warranted for all or a portion of the Immokalee Urban Area, then amendments to the GMP in compliance with Section 163.3180(5)(d)2, F.S., including a FLUM amendment, will be provided at that time. 6.4 Water and Wastewater Facilities Public potable water and wastewater services are provided by the Immokalee Water and Sewer District. This district was created by a special act of the Florida Legislature. In 2005, the Enabling Act for the IWSD was amended and the boundary expanded so that the district expanded from an approximately 27 square mile area to encompassing 108 square miles. The boundaries of the district are graphically depicted in Map 6 -7 along with the location of the IWSD treatment plants. The Governor of Florida appoints the district's governing board. Land use in the district can be generally described as urban and agricultural. Until the 1989 Legislature passed House Bill 599, special districts were largely autonomous and had little interaction with local governments. Under this legislation, the state fosters coordination between special districts and local governments as it relates to growth management efforts of counties and [AMP Data & Analysis March 2010 80 1 O ti � ,t ' ""`01-MmokALEE•CRA Map 6 -7 Immokalee Water and Sewer District Franchise Area and Treatment Plants Legend QImmokalee Urban Area Boundary ® Immokalee Water and Sewer District Franchise Area TreatmentPlant 0 Wastewater Treatment Plant Water Treatment Plant Sections Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads - -- Collier County Local Roads o.zs os t is -- � Milos ,TjT jT� TA CONSULTING 1 %. I TL 1 IMMOKALEE CPA Community Redevelopment Agency s I The Place to Call Home! cities. To accomplish this policy, beginning March 1, 1991, each independent special district must now submit an annual report to the appropriate local government. The report must include the following information: A description of its existing public facilities; 2. A description of each public facility the district is building, improving, or expanding or is planning to build, expand or improve within the next five years; 3. An identification of any facility the district plans to replace within the next ten years; 4. An anticipated construction time frame on each proposed facility; 5. The anticipated capacity and demands on each public facility when completed. In July 2008, Boyle Engineering completed the "Immokalee Water and Sewer District Master Plan Study." In this study, Boyle carefully examined all aspects of the IWSD and provided their analysis and recommendations for expansion and redevelopment. This study is used as a reference for the Water and Wastewater section of this document and a copy is included as a support document. Since the entire district is not served by water and sewer, it is difficult to make assumptions of the future capacity of the system based only on population projections. According to the District's calculations, the water and wastewater capacity will be sufficient for the next five years. New developments within the Immokalee urbanized area are required to extend water and wastewater to the project and contribute their proportionate share to ensure levels of service are maintained. The Immokalee District bases their reported population projections on Collier County peak population projections for Immokalee, extrapolated out to 2041, plus population projections for anticipated PUDs and DRIs within the IWSD treatment area. Table 6 -10 lists population projections included in the report in five -year intervals starting in 2009. Table 6 -10 IWSD Population Projections, 2009 -2041 Year Immokalee Peak Season Population Estimates PUD & DRI Population Estimates TOTAL Population Estimates 2009 41,586 0 41,586 2014 44,491 9,623 54,114 2019 47,234 44,693 91,927 2024 49,725 85,583 135,308 2029 52,086 126,920 179,006 2034 55,616 176,656 232,272 2039 59,384 206,707 266,092 2041 build -out 60,963 210,168 271,130 Source: Immokalee Water and Sewer District, Master Plan Study, Final Report, July 2008 6.4.1 Potable Water While some households draw their potable water from their private wells, the vast majority of the Immokalee residents receive water from the Immokalee Water and Sewer District. The District franchise area encompasses approximately 108 square miles. However, the actual area that is currently provided with water and sewer services covers approximately 9.29 square miles. The IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 81 existing service area is graphically depicted in Map 6 -8. According to the District, in October 2008, there were a total 7,561 dwelling units provided water and 7,114 dwelling units provided wastewater by the District. The Immokalee Water & Sewer District obtains its raw water supply from three wellfields that contain 13 operational wells and draw from the surficial aquifer. The District's current SFWMD Consumptive Use Permit, #11- 00013 -W, provides for a maximum annual allocation of 1,227 million gallons (MG) from these wellfields. Maximum daily permitted withdrawal shall not exceed 4.71 MG. Table 6 -11 summarizes the groundwater wells, well firm capacities, and permitted capacities, for the three WTPs. Table 6 -11 IWSD Water Treatment Plants WTP Number of Wells Well Firm Capacity MGD Permitted Capacity MGD Carson Road 31 0.75 2.00 Airport 3 1.01 1.35 Jerry V. Warden 73 2.08 2.25 TOTAL 13 3.84 5.60 1- There are four existing wells, but only 3 are operational for a firm capacity of 0.75 MGD. Two additional wells will be drilled as part of a current construction contract. 2- There are nine existing wells, but only seven are operational, for a firm capacity of 2.08 MGD. One additional well will be drilled as part of a current construction contract. 3- Operational capacity of Carson Road WTP is currently 0.9 MGD, but expansion is under construction, to increase capacity to 2.00 MGD. Source: Immokalee Water and Sewer District, Master Plan Study, Final Report, July 2008 The annual average daily demand (AADD) for 2007 was 2.34 MGD, below both well -firm capacity and permitted capacity. The IWSD estimates a potable water consumption of 105 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) for planning purposes. The Airport Road Water Treatment Plant was built in 1985 and is located adjacent to the Immokalee Airport. Its wellfield has three wells that are pumped to a 0.75 MG storage tank and treated. There is no possibility of expansion to this WTP due to the surrounding scrub jay habitat. In addition, the wellfield has had contamination issues in the past. The long -term reliability of this Airport WTP is in question. The Carson Road Water Treatment Plant was built in 1975 and is located on Carson Road. There are three wells which fill a 0.50 MG storage tank and a new concrete 1.5 MG ground storage tank. The third and main plant is the Jerry V. Warden Treatment Facility, also known as the South 9th WTP. It was originally built in 1967 and is located on Dump Road. It consists of seven wells located on or adjacent to the plant site, which pump to a 0.3 MG and 1.5 MG water storage tank. At the present time, only the 1.5 MG tank is in operation. The basic water treatment scheme consists of the following components: tray aeration; sequestering with polyphosphates for iron; disinfection by chlorination and ammonia; fluoridation; ground storage reservoirs; and a high service pumping station. Average demands range from 2.0 to 2.25 MGD. After treatment, water is distributed through 12 -inch, 8 -inch, and 6 -inch distribution mains, and 2 -inch service laterals. This distribution system totals approximately 120 miles of pipe. The District has made limited improvements to the distribution system in expansions from 1994 -1995, and more recently from 2007 -2008. Recent distribution system improvements include additional water main looping, isolation valves, and fire hydrants to improve distribution water quality and pressure; improve fire protection; and provide for improved operational flexibility and reliability. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 82 f �IMMOICALEE•CRA Map 6 -8 Immokalee Water and Sewer District Potable Water Facilities y. r`' Legend / Immokalee Urban Area Boundary __. r/ /7] Potable Water Service Area S T/W1- OneYear gas % F' . ._ ,__.: Well • Location '.. Storage Tank Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Collier County Local Roads F� .......... ...__— .........._ ..... ............. ....._i i • h fl ♦ f FaN \ ( N "DAI / / \INC. CONSULTING Z ♦T TL 1 IMM KALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency iThe Place to Call Home! so��� :): w.n Faun.ea twn�e, cony coV.��m«rt moat: w„n Lxenoin, E.xo-ro aona> wmr s.mo. nr.a, smren• r � cconmrco�my cowmman zom/ The report provides the following potable water demand projections, shown in Table 6 -12, based on the population projections developed, a per capita water flow of 105 gpcd (equal to the adopted LOSS for the IWSD), and a maximum month daily demand (MMDD) peaking factor. Table 6 -12 Potable Water Demand Projections, 2009 -2041 Year MMDD Water Demand (MGD) Projected Reliable WTP Capacity (MGD) 2009 5.37 5.60 2014 6.99 14.20 2019 11.87 14.20 2024 17.47 24.50 2029 23.12 24.50 2034 30.00 35.00 2039 34.37 35.00 2041 build -out 35.02 35.00 Source: Immokalee Water and Sewer District, Master Plan Study, Final Report, July 2008 In order to accommodate the increased population and potable water demand, the report recommends that the IWSD initiate a water supply availability study and coordinate with the Water Management District regarding anticipated population growth. Additional water supply will have to come from alternative water supply sources, such as brackish groundwater, and the creation of new or modification of existing water treatment plants to reverse osmosis systems. It is anticipated that short -term water supply increases can be accommodated through modification and minor expansion of existing water supply and treatment facilities. The water system implementation schedule proposed a 2.5 MGD water treatment plant at Tradeport in 2013 and additional 2.5 MGD water treatment plants in 2016 and 2019 to maintain LOSS. The proposed amendments to the IAMP will not affect the population projections used to determine facility needs, and therefore, will have no impact on potable water facilities. 6.4.2 Sanitary Sewer Wastewater treatment is also provided by the Immokalee Water and Sewer District. The central wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal system was designed in the late 1970's, and was constructed and in operation by February 1982. The system is comprised of over 60 miles of sewer pipe, 43 lift stations, over 1,700 manholes, and a 2.5 MGD treatment plant. Average daily flows range between 1.6 and 2.0 MGD. The District owns a 640 -acre sprayfield (Section 8 Sprayfield) and irrigates approximately 350 acres with treated effluent. The effluent disposal site is situated immediately Southwest of the District office. The present geographical area served by the District is graphically depicted in Map 6 -9. Actual demand for 2007 was 1.98 MGD according to the Immokalee Water & Sewer District, based on 5, 500 connections to the system. Average per capita wastewater flow from 2000 -2007 was 78.37 GPD. The report provides the following wastewater demand projections, shown in Table 6 -13, based on the population projections developed, a per capita wastewater flow of 78 gpd, and a maximum month daily demand (MMDD) peaking factor. TAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 83 I 1MmokAIEECRA i Map 6 -9 Immokalee Water and Sewer District Sanitary Sewer Facilities t '.. Legend Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Existing Service Area _ Proposed Effluent Disposal Site Waste Water Treatment Plant Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads __._- .....—.__........... - Collier County Local Roads ,r .. z� Feet r L INC. DAVA CONSULTING Z V. IF TL 1 IMMOKALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency I The Place to Call Home! fir r'r � o Table 6 -13 Wastewater Flow Demand Projections, 2009 -2041 Year MMDD Wastewater Flow (MGD) Projected Reliable WWTP Capacity (MGD) 2009 3.80 4.50 2014 4.94 10.00 2019 8.39 10.00 2024 12.35 17.50 2029 16.34 17.50 2034 21.20 25.00 2039 24.28 25.00 2041 build -out 24.74 25.00 Source: Immokalee Water and Sewer District, Master Plan Study, Final Report, July 2008 IWSD anticipates expanding their facilities to 4.5 MGD in the short -term. Preliminary planning and design will begin in the near future. The expansion will accommodate short -term growth based on population projections through 2013. In order to provide for long -term growth, the ISWD is considering either expanding the existing WWTP and adding regional pumping stations, or building an additional WWTP and regional pumping stations to provide 10 MGD of capacity, which will maintain an acceptable LOS through 2020. The proposed amendments to the IAMP will not affect the population projections used to determine facility needs, and therefore, will have no impact on wastewater facilities. 6.4.3 Five- and Ten -Year Water and Sewer Availability Water and sewer is available to meet the short -term five -year demand in Immokalee, and is projected to meet the long -term ten -year demand. The projected peak population as provided in Table 2 -1 is utilized to estimate the water and sewer demand from future residential and non - residential growth. Non - residential growth is calculated by assuming a growth rate of 39 square feet of commercial space per resident, as described in Section 3.3, and 15 square feet of office space per resident. The amount of office space is anticipated to grow in the future; therefore, this analysis increased the anticipated amount of office space from the existing 3 square feet per resident, as identified in Section 3.3., to 15 square feet of office space per resident. Residential demand is calculated using LOS requirements for the IWSD as provided in the Collier County Capital Improvements Plan for water (105 gpcd) and sewer (100 gpcd). Non - residential demand is calculated using the standards provided by Rule 64E- 6.008, F.A.C. for commercial (0.1 gpd /ft2) and office (0.15 gpd /ft2) uses. The additional residential and non - residential demands were added to the 2009 Water and Sewer Demands as provided by the IWSD to determine a projected demand from future growth at the 5 -year and 10 -year timeframe. The calculations are shown in Table 6.14. The analysis shows that water demand will increase from 5.37 MGD to 5.96 MGD over the next five years and sewer demand will increase from 3.80 to 4.36 MGD. The increased demand can be met by the projected 2014 capacity for water (14.20 MGD) and sewer (10.00 MGD). The 10 -year projections show water and sewer demand increasing to 6.18 MGD and 4.57 MGD, respectively, which can be met by the projected 2019 capacity for water (14.20 MGD) and sewer (10.00 MGD). An analysis on the maximum development potential of the IAMP is included in Section 6.9. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 84 Table 6 -14 5- and 10 -Year Water and Sewer Availability IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 85 Water Demand Analysis Sewer Demand Analysis Estimated Estimated (Residential 105 gpcd; (Residential 100 gpcd; Change in Comm. Office Commercial 0.1 gpd /sf; Office 0.15 gpd /sf) Commercial 0.1 gpd /sf; Office 0.15 gpd /sf) Year Population Population from 2009 Sq. Ft. Growth Sq. Ft. Growth Additional Res. Additional Comm. Additional Office Total Water Additional Res. Additional Comm. Additional Office Total Sewer (39 sf /res) (15 sf /res) Water Water Water Demand Sewer Sewer Sewer Demand Demand Demand Demand (MGD) Demand Demand Demand (MGD) 2009 24,372 - - - - - - 5.37 - - - 3.80 2014 29,636 5,264 205,296 78,960 552,720 1 20,530 1 11,844 1 5.96 526,400 20,530 11,844 1 4.36 2019 36,891 7,255 282,945 108,825 761,775 1 28,295 1 16,324 1 6.18 725,500 28,295 16,324 1 4.57 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 85 6.5 Drainage /Stormwater An "Immokalee Stormwater Management Plan" was commissioned by the Big Cypress Basin of the South Florida Water Management District, at the request of Collier County. It was accepted by the Board of County Commissioners at their June 9, 2009, meeting. The report summarizes the hydrologic and hydraulic (H &H) modeling of the existing conditions, without control measures. The Immokalee SWMP Basin area is described and the delineation of the sub - basins discussed. The following items were covered in the report: • The setup of the H &H model of the Immokalee SWMP Basin. • The calibration of the model using one year of continuous rainfall data at four gage locations (Main, Slough, Fish and Madison). • The verification of the model using a period of four months of continuous rainfall data at the same four gage locations (Main, Slough, Fish and Madison). • Event simulation results showing the response of water levels throughout the basin to a series of four design storms: 5 -year, 24 -hour storm; 10 -year, 72 -hour storm; 25 -year, 72- hour storm; and 100 -year, 72 -hour storm. These results will be used to develop level -of- service ratings for the Immokalee SWMP Basin. • Water quality simulation results showing the response of water quality concentrations to the design storm events for contaminants of concern. These results will also be used in a subsequent task to develop level -of- service ratings for the Immokalee SWMP Basin. According to the report, the Immokalee SWMP Basin has negligible topographic relief and it is a mix of urbanized and undeveloped areas drained by a network of canals to one of two outlets: the SR -29 Canal or Lake Trafford. The aquifer below the drainage basin is highly transmissive and provides baseflow to the canals. Through the use of topographic (road crown elevations) data, and by combining many of the conterminous closed sub - basins into one sub - basin, the Immokalee SWMP basin was delineated into 33 sub - basins. The recommended alternative identifies improvements in the following areas: • Madison Ditch — The proposed improvement includes dredging of the ditch to a minimum of 1 foot. • Slough — The proposed improvements include installing two additional circular pipes under Sanitation Road, two circular pipes under the next crossing to the west, and one circular pipe at the third crossing to the west. • Lake Trafford Road and Fish Creek — The proposed Lake Trafford Road improvements include installing elliptical pipes for all driveway culverts. The proposed Fish Creek improvements include upgrading the cross section from Lake Trafford Road to a proposed 5 acre lake to the north (1/2 mile). • Immokalee Drive — The proposed improvements include a combination of solid pipes and exfiltration trenches interconnected to an outfall control structure. • Downtown Immokalee — The proposed improvement includes alignments of solid pipes and exfiltration trenches that are interconnected to a control structure and construction of a five acre lake. Now that the plan has been accepted by the County, prioritization and planning can begin, with construction programmed in phases. The master plan will need to be updated as part of this effort; specifically the project 2005 conceptual cost estimates as well as the funding source analysis detailed in Section 8.0 of the master plan Alternative Analysis will need to be revised. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 86 An analysis of the ultimate stormwater outfall location and adequacy, along with any anticipated real property acquisition or easements rights necessary, will also be undertaken as part of the plan updates. The update to the stormwater report is scheduled to take place in 2010. The proposed amendments to the IAMP will have no impact on drainage and stormwater. 6.6 Solid Waste Prior to 1982, the Immokalee community utilized a landfill at Eustis Avenue. After 1982, the use of this location stopped, and the Stockade Landfill was placed in operation, located east of CR 846 near the County Stockade Jail. The Stockade Landfill was closed in 2004, and now operates as a transfer station. The Eustis Avenue site has been closed and accepted by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation as meeting closure standards in July 1987. A groundwater monitoring system is intact with tests made at scheduled intervals and the site is meeting all of the Department of Environmental Protection standards. The 2008 AUIR projects that the Collier County Landfill will deplete disposal (airspace) capacity in FY 2036. The projected tons per capita disposal rate in the 2008 AUIR for 2009 forward is 0.64. The proposed amendments to the TAMP will not affect the population projections used to determine facility needs in the AUIR, and therefore, will have no impact on solid waste facilities. 6.7 Fire The Immokalee Community is served by the Immokalee Fire Control and Rescue District, an independent fire district. The IFCRD provide fire protection and EMS to Immokalee. Information regarding the IFCRD was taken from the Collier County 2005 Fire /Rescue Services Impact Fee Update Study, dated January 2006. The service area encompasses 215 square miles. The IFCRD has two stations, totaling 14,216 square feet of building space. The replacement value of the buildings and assessed value of the land amount to $3.2 million. There are two fire stations. One is located on Carson Road, 1107 Carson Road, near the intersection with Lake Trafford Road, while the other is situated on New Market Road, 502 E. New Market Road, near the intersection with State Road 29. There are 15 full -time, career firefighters and one full -time support staff. They are supported by 10 volunteers. In terms of equipment, there are two engines, one ladder truck, one brush truck, one water tanker, and one heavy rescue vehicle. Also, there are three support vehicles. The equipment values $2.8 million. The Immokalee District has the highest impact fee assessment for residential property of the fire districts in Collier County, at $1.11 per square foot under roof for residential and $0.32 per square foot under roof for nonresidential (effective July 27, 2009). The next highest is Big Corkscrew, at $0.82 for residential and $0.87 for nonresidential. Future expansions include a permanent fire station at Ave Maria University and at the Immokalee Regional Airport, with associated increases in equipment and staffing. In 2008 the district purchased two additional fire trucks. The proposed amendments to the TAMP will not affect the population projections used to determine facility needs in the AUIR, and therefore, will have no impact on fire service needs. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 87 6.8 Police Being an unincorporated jurisdiction, police protection is provided by the Collier County Sheriff's Office. Immokalee is District 8. In 1994, a new Immokalee substation was built at the Government Complex, a shared facility, at 112 S. 1St Street. Emergency Medical Services for Immokalee is also located at this location. The substation has 57 certified deputies and 8 civilians stationed in Immokalee on a permanent basis. (Source: Lt. Mike Dolan, Collier County Sheriff's Office, July 22, 2009) The Immokalee Jail or Stockade houses pre- sentenced misdemeanors and trustees. All felony offenders are sent to the Naples Jail Center. The Immokalee Jail employs 23 people. (Source: Immokalee Jail, October 2008) In addition to the Collier County Sheriff's office, the Seminole Indians have their own police force that patrols the reservation and provides security to the Seminole Indian Gaming Palace. The Collier County Sheriff's office does provide back -up services on an as- needed basis. The LOSS for police protection is 0.196 officers per 1000 residents. The proposed amendments to the IAMP will not affect the population projections used to determine facility needs in the AUIR, and therefore, will have no impact on police service needs. 6.9 Demand Analysis from Maximum Potential Build -Out The adopted FLUE provides an analysis on potential residential development build -out in Section I.D. It states that "enough land had been included (in the Immokalee Urban Area) for approximately 39,000 dwelling units with a build -out time horizon of 2105." The Data & Analysis for the TAMP, Immokalee Residential Development Build -out Analysis, notes that this figure is derived by examining the existing residential development and total undeveloped acres that are projected for residential development for each Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ). The analysis totally excludes undeveloped acreage that is in agricultural production or that is considered environmentally sensitive and only counts forty percent (40 %) of large tracts of land under single ownership. The Analysis also assumes that only 53 out of 181 acres designated as Neighborhood Center (NC) subdistrict, or 29 percent, will be used for residential development. Because this methodology fails to account for potential redevelopment and places arbitrary limits on development in other areas, it is not an accurate projection of residential build -out potential. Additionally, the existing Data & Analysis does not account for non - residential buildout. An alternative residential build -out projection can be provided by assuming all of the Immokalee Urban Area will eventually develop at the highest permitted densities, regardless of current use. This can be accomplished by taking the acreage for each FLU subdistrict and multiplying it by the base density. While this methodology provides a maximum potential, it is unlikely that the Immokalee Urban Area would ever reach these thresholds and it is impossible to predict when such a buildout would occur. Actual developments in Collier County and Immokalee are typically at lower residential densities than allowed by the FLU subdistrict. Additionally, this methodology assumes that all land designated as Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) will achieve the highest possible residential development potential, although it is likely that a significant amount of development in the CMU district will not include a residential component. It should also be noted that the base density provided for each subdistrict is not an entitlement as described within the Density Rating System of the TAMP. The actual amount of development is dependent on the permitted density of the zoning designation; most of which would need to be rezoned in order to achieve the highest development potential. TAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 88 0 As previously noted, the proposed amendments to the IAMP will not increase the population projections used to determine future facility needs. It is assumed that Immokalee will maintain projected growth patterns into the future and that ultimate build -out will not be reached until the next century. Despite the uncertainty surrounding potential build -out resulting from the IAMP amendments, as discussed above, and the conviction that Florida Statutes do not require an analysis of impacts to public facilities based on the maximum intensities and densities allowed under the proposed land use categories, the following LOS Analysis is provided for informational purposes. This analysis is not intended to prescribe the timing or scale of future capital improvements. Those improvements will be programmed based on facility demand from updated population projections and through the AUIR and annual update to Collier County's financially feasible Schedule of Capital Improvements As illustrated in Tables 5 -7 and 5 -8, the proposed FLUM amendments result in a 10 percent increase to the maximum development potential from 68,576 to 75,391 dwelling units (DUs). Maximum development potential assumes all properties, whether already developed or vacant, can be successfully rezoned and develop at the maximum permitted density, without any density bonuses. This is a 10 percent (6,815 DUs) increase above the adopted FLUM. Assuming 2.5 persons per household, the proposed FLUM could accommodate an additional 17,036 people. As noted in Section 5.1.5, the maximum potential density could be reduced even further by accounting for Public lands ( -3,785 DUs) and areas within the LT /CKSSO ( -663 DUs), which would reduce the potential population by 9,462 and 1,657 people, respectfully. Using this data, Table 6.15 shows the changes to maximum residential development potential based on the proposed IAMP FLUM amendments: Table 6 -15 Difference between Adopted and Proposed Future Land Use Maximum Residential Build -Out Potential The IAMP establishes a maximum nonresidential development threshold of 8.45 million square feet. Maximum buildout potential for non - residential uses is calculated by utilizing the maximum nonresidential development threshold of 8.45 million square feet. For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that nonresidential development consists of 60% retail and 40% office (there is no methodology for determining water and sewer demand for industrial uses by F.A.C.; however, it is assumed that water and sewer demand for industrial uses would be lower than retail or office). Because the adopted IAMP and Collier County Future Land Use Element do not provide non - residential intensities, the maximum non - residential development potential from IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 89 Maximum Development (Base) Maximum Development (Bonuses) DUs Population DUs Population Adopted FLUM 68,575.8 171,440 168,357.8 420,895 Proposed FLUM 75,391.2 188,478 137,898.8 344,747 Change from Adopted # 6,815.4 17,036 - 30,459 - 76,148 Change from Adopted % 9.9% 9.9% -18.1% -18.1% Proposed FLUM less Public Lands 71,606.3 179,016 131,862.1 329,655 Change from Adopted # 3,030.5 7,576 - 36,495.7 - 91,240 Change from Adopted % 4.4% 4.4% - 21.7% -21.7 Proposed FLUM less LT /CKSSO 70,942.5 177,356 125,667.3 314,168 Change from Adopted # 2,3667.5 5,916 - 42,690.5 - 106,727 Change from Adopted ( %) 3.5% 3.5% - 25.4% - 25.4% The IAMP establishes a maximum nonresidential development threshold of 8.45 million square feet. Maximum buildout potential for non - residential uses is calculated by utilizing the maximum nonresidential development threshold of 8.45 million square feet. For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that nonresidential development consists of 60% retail and 40% office (there is no methodology for determining water and sewer demand for industrial uses by F.A.C.; however, it is assumed that water and sewer demand for industrial uses would be lower than retail or office). Because the adopted IAMP and Collier County Future Land Use Element do not provide non - residential intensities, the maximum non - residential development potential from IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 89 the proposed IAMP is considered to be a reduction from the existing plan. The demand on water and sewer facilities from maximum non - residential buildout potential is expressed in Table 6 -16. Table 6 -16 Maximum Non - Residential Build -Out Water and Sewer Demand The demand on public facilities, based on current adopted LOSS and maximum build -out potential, is summarized on the following page in Tables 6 -17 and 6 -18: IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 90 Space Water Demand Sewer Demand Retail 5,070,000 507,000 507,000 Office 3,380,000 507,000 507,000 Total 8,450,000 1.014 MGD 1.014 MGD The demand on public facilities, based on current adopted LOSS and maximum build -out potential, is summarized on the following page in Tables 6 -17 and 6 -18: IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 90 Table 6 -17 Difference between Adopted and Proposed Future Land Use Maximum Facility Demand Potential (Base Density) Table 6 -18 Difference between Adopted and Proposed Future Land Use Maximum Facility Demand Potential (Density with Bonuses) aO. O S 2❑ N 20 o ` L N o 0 nE 0 C E� ` 3 CD -QL CE � 0) �cj>o °�^ a) �.a a- m n.. ° N i O o U) (.0 N . a) :6 0 W E U rn � U� 2 Cn 0) Q) O C y U rn > C � .- o .�.. O O U E ca C p U O D U o o tea C W M�� N No M - O� _O o Population ++o O a r+ O 0 a o �- > >� s=o o (no m ON N m �o O v •• Base v v v Adopted FLUM 171,440 18.00 No Limit 17.14 No Limit 109,721.60 205.7 497.2 336 10.45 Proposed FLUM 188,478 19.79 1.014 18.85 1.014 120,625.92 226.17 546.59 369 11.49 Change from Adopted # 17,036 1.79 Reduced 1.70 Reduced 10,903.04 20.44 49.40 33 1.04 Proposed FLUM less Public 179,016 18.80 N/A 17.90 N/A 114,570.24 214.82 519.15 351 10.92 Change from Adopted # 7,576 0.80 N/A 0.76 N/A 4,848.64 9.09 21.97 15 0.46 Proposed FLUM less LT /CKSSO 177,356 18.62 N/A 17.74 N/A 113,507.84 212.83 514.33 348 10.81 Change from Adopted # 5,916 0.62 N/A 0.59 N/A 3,786.24 7.10 17.16 12 0.36 Table 6 -18 Difference between Adopted and Proposed Future Land Use Maximum Facility Demand Potential (Density with Bonuses) IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 91 Cp 2 2❑ N p 6 •2 ❑ O O Y ^ O N L N O �O+ co w > > a0 M N 0 � E� m L 3 a0 N N U` � E i E � Q w CL N �, �^ o� d N Q^ o� ° U N L o W o w Oi O C� N E m 2,00 y C O O U c p U _O Population +.o a° + o° 0° (600 = M o O� 0 v c6 W N �` .. Base Adopted FLUM 420,895 44.19 No Limit 42.09 No Limit 269,372.80 505.1 1220.6 825 25.66 Proposed FLUM 344,747 36.20 1.014 34.47 1.014 220,638.08 413.70 999.77 676 21.02 Change from Adopted # - 76,148 -8.00 Reduced -7.61 Reduced - 48,734.72 -91.38 220.83 -149 -4.64 Proposed FLUM less Public 329,655 34.61 N/A 32.97 N/A 210,979.20 395.59 956.00 646 20.10 Change from Adopted # - 91,240 -9.58 N/A -9.12 N/A - 58,393.60 - 109.49 264.60 1 -179 -5.56 Proposed FLUM less LT /CKSSO 314,168 32.99 N/A 31.42 N/A 201,067.52 377.00 911.09 616 19.16 Change from Adopted # - 106,727 -11.21 N/A -10.67 N/A - 68,305.28 - 128.07 309.51 -209 -6.51 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 91 7. Other Items Collier County staff specifically asked that we address other items as part of this Data and Analysis. These issues are addressed below. 7.1 House Bill 697 /Energy Efficiency The Florida Legislature enacted HB 697 in the 2008 session. HB 697 establishes new local planning requirements relating to energy efficient land use patterns, transportation strategies to address greenhouse gas reductions, energy conservation, and energy efficient housing. These new requirements became effective on July 1, 2008. All Comprehensive Plan Amendments are required to comply with these requirements. While it is anticipated that Collier County will amend the Growth Management Plan to comply with HB 697 on a countywide basis, the Immokalee Area Master Plan has incorporated language within these Immokalee- specific amendments to address the energy efficiency issues. Specifically, the following Goals, Objectives and Policies comply with HB 697 in the following manner: Reducing the number and length of automobile trips (VMT): Objective 2.2, and its related policies, seeks to diversify the local economy and increase employment opportunities within the Immokalee Urban Area, thereby lowering the need to travel greater distances for work or services. Objective 4.2 addresses vehicular and non - vehicular transportation options and specifically references the need.to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize energy consumption. Policies 4.2.6 and 4.2.7 discuss the need to improve and expand public transit options in Immokalee. Policy 4.2.8 seeks to evaluate whether a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area is appropriate for Immokalee. Policy 6.1.5 specifically states that compact mixed -use development patterns are encouraged to create walkable communities, reduce vehicle miles traveled and increase energy efficiency. Promoting alternative modes of transportation: Objective 4.2 addresses non - vehicular transportation options and specifically references the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize energy consumption. Policy 4.2.2 references the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan and Policy 4.2.5 recognizes the need to improve safety for pedestrians and bicycles. Policies 4.2.6 and 4.2.7 discuss the need to improve and expand public transit options in Immokalee. Objective 7.1 recognizes the need for Immokalee- specific land development regulations that will encourage pedestrian friendly urban form and promote energy efficiency. Policy 7.1.2 encourages new community facilities to be within a half -mile of residential and mixed use centers to encourage walking, bicycling and non - vehicular travel. Allowing for compact mixed -use development patterns: Goal 6, and its related Objectives and Policies, pertain to land use and specifically reference allowing and encouraging a mixture of uses. Objective 6.1 references the need to coordinate the Future Land Use Map that encourages desirable growth and energy efficient development patterns. Policy 6.1.5 specifically states that the Immokalee area encourages compact mixed -use development patterns to create [AMP Data & Analysis March 2010 92 walkable communities, reduce vehicle miles traveled and increase energy efficiency. Policy 4.1.2 encourages future parks to be located in the most densely populated areas, and recognizes the need for public plazas, greens and urban parks to make Immokalee more pedestrian friendly. Objective 7.1, and its related policies, recognizes the need for Immokalee- specific land development regulations that will encourage pedestrian friendly urban form and promote energy efficiency. Policy 7.1.2 recognizes that new community facilities should be within walking distance to mixed use and residential centers. Policies 7.1.2, 7.1.3 and 7.1.4 all relate to compact, mixed -use, urban design criteria. The Urban -Mixed Use district allows for commercial development within the Residential Subdistricts, as described in the Land Use Designation Description section. Density bonuses are also allowed for projects that are proximate to Commercial Uses. Allowing for higher densities in appropriate places, which reduces the per capita carbon footprint, supports transit and reduces sprawl. Policy 7.1.5 also encourages high intensity development in Immokalee through the development of a Central Business District overlay subdistrict in the Land Development Code. The Urban -Mixed Use district and subdistricts, as referenced in the Land Use Designation Description section, allow for higher residential densities. The base residential densities range from four (4) units per acre for Low Residential (LR) subdistrict to ten (10) dwelling units per acre in High Residential (HR) and sixteen (16) in the Commercial -Mixed Use subdistricts. Density bonuses are also allowed for projects that are proximate to Commercial Uses or in infill areas, as well as for providing affordable- workforce housing. 7.2 Changes to Other Growth Management Elements In order to accommodate the change to the Immokalee Urban Area boundary in support of the Immokalee Regional Airport runway expansion, the boundary for the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) will also have to be amended as well as the RLSA land use tables. Changes to the Future Land Use Element will be necessary to refer correctly to the most recent TAMP. (XV) Policy 4.2: A detailed Master Plan for the Immokalee Urban designated area has been developed and was incorporated into this Growth Management Plan in February, 1991. Major revisions were adopted in 1997 following the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report and in 2010 according to the recommendations of the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee. The Immokalee Area Master Plan addresses conservation, future land use, population, recreation, transportation, housing, and the local economy. Major purposes of the Master Plan are the promotion of economic development, coordination of land uses and transportation planning, and redevelopment or renewal of blighted areas. Future Land Use Element, Overview, item D., Special Issues, Coordination of Land Use and Public Facility Planning, also references Immokalee. 7.3 Government Services in Immokalee Currently, the following government services have offices in Immokalee: IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 93 Board of County Commissioners — Commissioner Jim Coletta's Satellite Office 310 Alachua Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 Clerk of the Circuit Court 106 S. 1St Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 Code Enforcement 310 Alachua Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 Emergency Medical Services 112 S. 1St Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 Health Department 419 N. 18t Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 Immokalee CRA 310 Alachua Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 Immokalee Fire Control and Rescue District 1107 Carson Road, Immokalee, Florida 34142 502 E. New Market Road, Immokalee, Florida 34142 Library 417 N. 1St Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 Sheriff's Office 112 S. 1St Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 Tax Collector 106 S. 1St Street, Immokalee, Florida 34142 The following government services do not have physical locations within Immokalee. Their locations are listed below. Building Review and Permittinq Development Services Center 2800 Horseshoe Drive N, Naples, Florida 34104 Domestic Animal Services Shelter 7610 David Blvd., Naples, Florida 34104 Emergency Management 8075 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida 34113 Housing and Human Services 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida 34112 IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 94 During the period from the mid 1980's until 2008, the Collier County Building Review and Permitting Department was operating a satellite location at the County facility located at 310 Alachua Street, Immokalee. This facility reviewed and processed an average of 37 permit applications per month and provided critical feedback to the citizens of Immokalee regarding building codes and zoning regulations. In February 2008, the facility was closed due to staff limitations. On March 13, 2009, the office was reopened on a limited schedule and staffed only two days per month. On May 22, 2009, the office was once again closed due to staff reductions after processing a total of 19 permit applications in only six days of operation. There is an identified need for these services to be conveniently located to the residents of Immokalee. The distance from downtown Immokalee to the Horseshoe Drive location is approximately 40 miles and an hour's drive. While permits may be dropped off in Immokalee at the offices of the CRA, there is no one on -site to answer questions or assist residents in the permitting process. There are currently budgeting constraints to operating these services in Immokalee; however, it is the desire of the community to work towards their eventual reinstatement. DAS does respond to calls within Immokalee; however, the shelter is located at the address listed above. Emergency Management has only one office in the county, the office on Lely Cultural Parkway, built to withstand a Category 5 hurricane. Housing and Human Services also has only one office in the county, located at the address listed above. 7.4 Analysis of Potential Impacts to Transportation Facilities Please see Attachment A to this document for a discussion of these potential impacts. IAMP Data & Analysis March 2010 95 IMMOKALEE CRA FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS Prepared for: RWA Inc. Prepared by: Tindale- Oliver & Associates, Inc. Tampa, Florida November 20, 2009 Revised: November 10, 2010 588003 -00.09 COPR IMMOKALEE CRA FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction............................................................................. ............................... 1 StudyRoad Network ............................................................... ............................... 1 ExistingTransportation System ............................................ ............................... 3 Proposed Land Uses and Trip Generation ........................... ............................... 5 ModelAdjustments ................................................................. ............................... 6 FutureTransportation Planning Analyses ........................... ............................... 6 2030 Adopted "Constrained" Cost Feasible Plan Scenario ......................... 8 «2030 +„ Scenario ......................................................... ............................... 8 FinancialFeasibility ...................................................... ............................... 10 2016 "Short- Term" Scenario ........................................ ............................... 10 IMMOKALEE CRA FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLES Table 1. Summary of Proposed Future Land Use Changes .. ............................... 1 Table 2. 2008 Roadway Level of Service ............................. ............................... 4 Table 3. CRA Development Quantities and Traffic Generation Estimate........... 8 Table 4. 2030 Roadway Level of Service ............................. ............................... 9 Table 5 Transportation Revenues Generated by Increment . ............................... 10 Table 6. 2016 Roadway Level of Service ............................ ............................... 12 FIGURES Figure1. Area Map ............................................................... ............................... 2 Figure2. TAZ Map ............................................................... ............................... 7 Figure 3. Traffic Count Historical Trend .............................. ............................... 11 APPENDICES Appendix A: MPO Model Volume Plots ................................. ............................... A -1 IMMOKALEE CRA FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AMENIpMENT TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS Introduction The purpose of this report is to document a transportation impact analysis of a proposed comprehensive land use plan amendment for the Immokalee CRA (CRA). The analysis was undertaken to evaluate the ability of the regional roadway network to accommodate the increased intensity of the proposed land uses, addressing the information requirements of 9J- 5.019(3) FAC. The CRA was established in 1999, and contains approximately 17,000 acres of ontiguous, but independently owned, land parcels in northeast Collier County, Florida. Figure illustrates the location of the CRA, a larger CRA study "traffic- shed ", and the mayor public roads in the vicinity of and serving the CRA. Table 1 summarizes the existing and currently proposed land use designations. Table 1: Summary of Proposed Future Land Use Changes Note: Units are Acres This report identifies the traffic demands generated by an increment of land uses,, that could potentially be developed in the CRA and other potential "background" traffic growth to evaluate financial feasibility and to identify a transportation plan to serve those travel de and for the 2016 horizon and what will be referred to as a "2030 +" horizon. The traffic ana ysis was conducted using the Florida Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure (F UTMS) maintained by the Collier County MPO, and evaluated system needs using the procedures and measures typically used for long -range transportation planning studies. Study Road Network The extent of the roadway network studied included all major roads within the C RA itself, as well as the major roads in Collier County's transportation system up to 13 miles from Immokalee. These roads are delineated in Figure 1. Tindale- Oliver & Associates, Inc. - 1 - RWA, Inc. November 20, 2009 Immokalee CRA Proposed igh e ium undeveloped Business Light Density Density Low Density (Wetlands/ Park Commercial Industry Residential Residential Residential ROW) Total AG 33.0 100.7 342.9 410.1 199.0 160.9 701.8 1948.4 +, Con 0.0 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 38.2 38.2 L Res-1 1 15.3 0.01 63.7 110.5 0.0 0.0 124.8 314.4 U Res -3 0.0 1001 29.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.0 79.4 Totals: 48.31 A A n n1 Aor 91 520.61 199.01 160.91 895.8 23804 Note: Units are Acres This report identifies the traffic demands generated by an increment of land uses,, that could potentially be developed in the CRA and other potential "background" traffic growth to evaluate financial feasibility and to identify a transportation plan to serve those travel de and for the 2016 horizon and what will be referred to as a "2030 +" horizon. The traffic ana ysis was conducted using the Florida Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure (F UTMS) maintained by the Collier County MPO, and evaluated system needs using the procedures and measures typically used for long -range transportation planning studies. Study Road Network The extent of the roadway network studied included all major roads within the C RA itself, as well as the major roads in Collier County's transportation system up to 13 miles from Immokalee. These roads are delineated in Figure 1. Tindale- Oliver & Associates, Inc. - 1 - RWA, Inc. November 20, 2009 Immokalee CRA Figure 1 Area Map �° Tindale- Oliver & Associates, Inc. - 2 - RWA, Inc. November 20, 2009 Immokalee CRA Existiniz Transportation Svstem Conditions on the existing major roadway network are summarized in Table 2. The study network includes 17.8 miles of road network within the CRA boundaries, and 46.2 miles in eastern Collier County outside of the CRA boundaries. Figure 1 also illustrates the network within and surrounding the Immokalee CRA area. The level of service standard on most roads in the Immokalee CRA is LOS "D ", except for SR 29, which is "C" per Florida DOT policy for roads on the Emerging Strategic Intermodal System (SIS). The LOS "C" standard creates quality of service deficiencies and requires mitigation at lesser degrees of congestion than for other roads in the CRA. One road in the CRA is of near -term concern with regard to transportation concurrency. SR 29 from 9th Street to Lake Trafford Road is indicated as having a current level of service slightly better than the adopted standard of "C ". In recent years, traffic volumes have actually been higher, high enough to trigger an indication of level of service failure, but traffic volumes recorded in 2008 have been about ten to 15 percent lower than in recent years due to economic recession. If traffic volumes rebound, the road's status as a hurricane evacuation route will preclude any new development or expansion of an existing development without an improvement to restore the adopted level of service standard (FS 163.3180(6)). Any development proposal in the northern portions of the CRA would inevitably send traffic on this road, requiring its immediate improvement. All other concurrency- related roads in the CRA appear to have ample service volume available to sustain growth for the foreseeable future. Other roads outside of the CRA to the north also are of concern, for similar reasons. SR 29 from SR 29 and SR 82 are approaching failure (at 86 percent "full "), and could pose concurrency issues to larger development projects if traffic volumes re- bound, and if developments within the CRA are determined to have significant impacts there. Another feature of Immokalee transportation, one that has a bearing on defining a reasonable growth management policy for transportation, is that a significant proportion of the travel on roads within the CRA is generated by land uses outside of the CRA and outside of Collier County. Many communities look to assessments on development within their community, such as transportation impact fees, to address transportation needs associated with development within their own communities. But, based on estimates from Collier County's urban transportation system planning models, 32.3 percent of the travel on roads within Immokalee passes through, and is generated by developments outside of the CRA. To maintain level of service standards, the needs not only of travel generated in Immokalee, but of travel passing through Immokalee must be funded. Planned and Scheduled Improvements In order for development to be permitted, concurrency requires that road improvements to maintain level of service standards be in place or "committed" within three years from the time development permits are issued. Improvements to correct the above road deficiencies are planned in Collier County's long -range transportation plan; however, none of the initial steps for their planning or implementation are programmed within a known time - frame. Since road Tindale - Oliver and Associates, Inc. - 3 - RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 Immokalee CRA �y O S' p a , � 0 o� O CS O n A� S n i r O S n Table 1 2008 Roadway Level of Service ID u RoadwaySegMont ioP' n darts ay pactlt Se meet tSl i` 2006 g LOS Svc K "D? PM Volume 0.43 VNETx 394 IF Qn . ronitTo �o CR- 846(S 1st St): Eustis Ave to Colorado Ave County Len ti ttea 4NC11 Sttl V¢tume 'pater Fad Pk DNf / SeriM Cep �rVMT (vaiume / 176 „.� 1040.10 CR -846 (S 1st St): Colorado Ave to SR -29 (W Main St) County 4D NSR � 13,500 D ,V61time 0.095 0.55 Sery Cap) , WItl11n CRA 1040.8 CR -846 (S 1 st St): Camp Keais Rd to Eustis Ave County 21.1 Unint 2.50 6,964 D 860 0.096 0.55 368 0.43 1 920 394 1040.9 CR- 846(S 1st St): Eustis Ave to Colorado Ave County 4D NSR 0.25 13,500 D 1,620 0.095 0.55 705 0.44 176 77 1040.10 CR -846 (S 1st St): Colorado Ave to SR -29 (W Main St) County 4D NSR 0.25 13,500 D 1,620 0.095 0.55 705 0.44 176 77 1041.1 CR -846: SR- 29(WMain St) to Airpark Blvd County 21.1 Unint 0.40 3,383 D 1,130 0.095 0.55 177 0.16 71 11 1100.3 SR -29: Farm Worker Way to CR•846 FDOT 2U Art C -1 1.40 7,400 C 875 0.095 0.55 387 0.44 542 240 1100.4 SR -29 (Main St): CR -846 to CR -29 Alt (New Market Rd) FOOT 4D Art C -1 0.15 9,430 C 1,820 0.095 0.55 493 0.27 74 20 1100.5 SR -29 (Main St): CR -29 Alt (New Market Rd) to 1st St FDOT 4D Art C -2 0.41 7,800 C 1,860 0.095 0.55 408 0.22 167 37 1100.6 SR -29 (Main St): 1st St to 9th St FDOT 4D Art C -2 0.50 13,300 C 1 1,860 0.0951 0.55 695 0.37 3481 130 1101.1 SR -29 (15th St): 9th Stto Immokalee Dr FDOT 2D Art C -1 1.00 14,157 1 C 1 875 0.0951 0.55 740 0.85 7401 626 1101.2 SR -29 (15th St): Immokalee Dr to CR 890 (Lake Trafford Rd) FDOT 2D Art C -1 0.50 16,041 C 875 0.095 07 838 0.96 4191 401 1101.3 SR -29 (15th St): CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd) to CR -29A FDOT 2D Art C -1 0.58 11,562 C 875 0.0951 0.55 604 0.69 3501 242 1101.4 SR -29 (15th St): CR -29Ato CR -29 Alt (NewMarket Rd) FOOT 2D Art C -1 0.09 11,631 C 875 0.0951 0.55 608 0.69 551 38 1110.1 CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd): Carson Rd to SR -29 (15th St) County 2U NSR 1.00 11,700 D 875 0.095 0.55 0.70 611 427 1110.2 CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd): SR -29 (15th St) to 9th St County 2U NSR 0.50 4,347 D 760 0.095 0.55 0.30 114 34 1120.1 Carson Rd: CR -690 (Lake Trafford Rd) to CR -29A County 2U NSR 0.50 5,136 D 760 0.095 0.55 0.35 134 47 1130.1 CR -29A: Carson Rd to SR -29 (15th St) County 2U NSR 1.00 3,015 D 760 0.095 0.55 0.21 158 33 1140.2 CR -29 Alt (New Market Rd): SR -29 (North) to Charlotte St County 2U NSR 1.43 8,050 D 760 0.095 0.55 0.55 602 333 1140.3 CR- 29 Aft (New Market Rd): Chadotte St to SR-29 (Main St) County 2U NSR 0.71 5,416 D 1,010 0.095 0.55 0.28 201 56 1150.1 Immokalee Dr SR -29 (15th St) to 9th St County 2U NSR 0.50 3,684 D 760 0.095 0.55 1179 0.25 96 24 1150.2 Immokalee Dr: 9th St to Chadotte St County 2U NSR 0.50 3,684 D 760 0.095 0.55 0.25 96 24 1160.1 Charlotte St: Immokalee Dr to CR -29 Alt (New Market Rd) County 2U NSR 0.10 5,775 D 1,000 0.095 0.55 0.30 30 9 1170.1 9th St: CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd) to Immokalee Dr County 2U NSR 0.50 3,430 D 760 0.095 0.55 0.24 90 21 1170.2 9th St: Immokalee Drto Roberts Ave County 2U NSR 0.25 3,430 D 760 0.095 0.55 0.24 45 11 1170.3 9th St: Roberts Ave to SR -29 (Main St) County 2U NSR 0.25 3,430 D 760 0.095 0.55 0.24 45 11 1170.4 9th St: SR -29 (Main St) to Colorado Ave County 2U NSR 0.25 5,234 D 760 0.095 0.55 273 0.36 66 25 1170.5 9th St: Colorade Ave to Eustis Ave County 21-1 NSR 0.25 5,234 D 1 760 0.095 0.55 273 0.36 68 25 1180.1 Roberts Ave: 9th St to 1st St County 2U NSR 0.50 2,503 D 760 0.095 0.55 131 0.17 66 11 1190.1 Colorado Ave: 9th St 10161St County 21-1 NSR 0.50 871 D 760 0.095 0.55 46 0.06 23 1 1200.1 jEustis Ave: 9th St to 1 st St County 2U NSR 0.50 916 D 760 0.095 0.55 48 0.06 24 2 1210.1 1st St: Immokalee Drto Roberts Ave County 2U NSR 0.25 8,233 D 1,000 0.095 0.55 430 0.43 108 46 1210.2 1st St: Roberts Ave to SR-29 (Main St) County 21.1 NSR 0.25 8,2331 D 1,0001 0.0951 0.55 430 0.43 108 46 Inside CRA Totals: 17.77 6,723 3,477 East Collier, Outside CRA 0.52 1040.4 CR -846 (Immokalee Rd): CR-858 (Oil Well Rd) to Shady Hollow Blvd County 4D IFH 1.35 16,223 D 1 1,570 0.097 0.55 865 0.55 1,168 643 1040.5 CR-846 (Immokalee Rd): Shady Hollow Blvd to Everglades Blvd County 21.1 Unint 6.55 5,404 D 1 860 0.098 0.55 291 0.34 1,906 645 1040.6 CR -846 (Immokalee Rd): Everglades Blvd to Oil Well Grade Rd County 2U Unint 1.50 5,215 D 1 860 0.096 0.55 275 0.32 413 132 1040.7 CR -846 (Immokalee Rd): Oil Well Grade Rd to Camp Keais Rd County 21.1 Unint 6.80 4,954 D 1 860 0.098 0.55 267 0.31 1,816 564 1041.2 CR -846: Airpark Blvd to CR-858 County 21.1 Unint 4.10 1,421 D 1 860 0.098 0.55 77 0.09 316 28 1080.1 Camp Keais Rd: CR -846 (Immokalee Rd) to CR-858 (Oil Well Rd) County 21.1 Unint 5.60 3,355 D 860 0.096 0.55 177 0.21 991 204 1100.2 SR -29: CR -858 (Oil Well Rd) to Farm Worker Way FOOT 2U Unint 8.25 6 ,400 C 875 0.098 0.55 345 0.39 2,846 1,122 1101.5 SR -29 (15th St): CR -29 AR (New Market Rd) to SR-82 FOOT 2U Unint 3.00 13,952 C 8751 0.0981 0.551 7521 0.86 2,256 1,939 1101.6 SR -29 (15th St): SR -82 to Hendry Co Line FDOT 2U Unint 2.00 7,563 C 875 0.096 0.55 406 0.47 816 380 1220.1 SR -82: SR -29 (15th St) to Hendry Co Line FDOT 2U Unint 7.00 13,934 C 8751 0.0981 0.551 751 0.86 5,257 4,512 vuisrae �MM r Otars: 46.15 17,784 10,170 0.57 Table Totals: 63.92 24,507 13,647 0.56 improvements typically take seven to ten years to be developed and implemented, and considering the economic downturn of 2008 -2009, it's not likely that improvements will be forthcoming within the foreseeable future. On the positive side, planning for a "Loop" facility to route SR 29 eastward around Immokalee is the fifth- ranked unfunded need in the Collier MPO's Transportation Improvement Program adopted in July, 2008. Alternative Travel Modes Immokalee exhibits a strong potential for use of alternative modes of transportation. Walking and bicycling are prevalent, and workers from Immokalee make use of public transportation to access jobs in the "coastal" Collier County area. Sidewalks exist on 16.7 miles and bicycle facilities on 9.8 miles of the major roads within the CRA. Collier Area Transit has created four routes of service to and within Immokalee, an internal circulator (routes 8A and 813), a route that provides access to Marco Island and one to Naples. The Marco Island express shuttle, serving at the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, is very popular and the bus on that route operates at maximum capacity during peak seasons. The high propensity for use of alternative modes of travel may be indicative of an opportunity for providing mobility in the Immokalee area to address concurrency concerns. Proposed Land Uses and Trip Generation There are different approaches to establishing levels of development to evaluate when considering the transportation implications of this land use plan amendment. The most commonly preferred method is to identify the effects of the proposed change in maximum allowable development densities on the adopted, financially feasible transportation plan. However, the County's 2030 transportation plan provides for a level of growth that was forecasted (when the economy was good) to occur by 2030, and that amount of growth was well below the maximum development that would be allowed by the existing land use plan. Furthermore, population growth projections published by the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research in September, 2009, are substantially lower than those current when the MPO plan was developed so, as of now, even Collier County's adopted transportation plan analyzes a growth rate that would be considered aggressive. To create a transportation plan that addressed the current land use plan at its full build -out, and then to consider changes to that plan that might result from the proposed land use changes is not an exercise that the CRA could undertake without extensive cooperation from other agencies and County staff, considerable time, and considerable costs. Further, even the federally- mandated and State - mandated transportation planning processes do not require such a long -term planning effort. These processes require, just as the Collier MPO has undertaken, a 20- to 30 -year planning horizon. The total quantity of growth that may occur in the Immokalee CRA by 2030 may not be influenced by the proposed land use plan amendment, but the amendment may alter the location and density of development within the CRA. Knowing that the MPO and County undertake an on -going transportation planning process that is periodically updated to respond to changes in Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. - 5 - RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 Immokalee CRA development patterns, and knowing that the currently adopted LRTP actually has developed a transportation plan for development levels that exceed current 2030 growth forecasts, then the issue of financial feasibility becomes the issue of primary importance. For this planning exercise, then, the amount of travel added by an increment of development in the CRA is compared to the revenues generated for transportation purposes by that increment. If in reasonable balance, then an assurance that the transportation needs of the development can be addressed can be provided with the same confidence that is associated with the local government comprehensive plan. In this study, the 2030 development levels of the MPO's transportation plan were increased by approximately 20 percent, since the proposed land use plan amendment increases the residential development potential by 20 percent. The land use quantities incorporated into the MPO's 2030 long -range transportation plan for the CRA area, and the "boosted" land uses that represent the proposed land use plan amendment are summarized in Table 3. A map illustrating the locations and boundaries of TAZ's referenced in Table 3 is provided in Figure 2. The daily trip generation of the land uses, based on the MPO model, are also reported. Using multiple linear regression, the average vehicle -trip generation rate for each of the input variables was estimated, and is reported at the bottom of Table 3. While the trip generation rates are not identical as a result of constants in the trip generation equations and differing variables for TAZ's (such as persons per d.u., vacancy rates, and vehicle ownership), they are very similar for each variable, indicating a proper proportional relationship in trip generation. The socio- economic data in all other TAZ's were not altered. For the 2030 scenario, the proposed land use plan amendment is estimated to generate 178,110 daily trip -ends, 30,140 more than the 147,970 the adopted MPO plan is based upon. These estimates are based on the MPO model -based traffic generation equations, consistent with standard procedures used for long -range transportation planning. Model Adjustments The MPO's 2030 "Constrained" Cost - Feasible transportation plan was used in this analysis. No changes were made to the highway network, but socio- economic data was changed as described above. Future Transportation Planning Analyses Two year 2030 scenarios were reviewed to identify the effects of the proposed land use plan amendment. The first was the MPO- developed, adopted, 2030 "constrained" cost - feasible plan network, and the second was a "with proposed land use plan changes" incremental scenario. The quantity of travel, resulting levels of service, and possible changes to the network to address quality of service are discussed for each scenario in the following sections. The results are presented in Table 4 side -by -side to provide for easy comparisons. Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. - 6 - RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 Immokalee CRA IMMOKALEE INSET 421 425 430 418 417 e 436 `, f 426 , 435'432 420 416 433429 434 431 428` 408 405 413 4d4 410 409`"` 38 407 412 411 385 384 388 383 421 427 430 417 436 11 426 418 420 43543242 9 416434431428 408445413 410 409 404 412 407 411 385 384 3 LEGEND HYDROGAPHY 43o TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONES 0 382 N, A 2.5 425 Figure 2 TAZ Map 5 3 Miles Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. - 7- RRA, Inc. November 10, 2010 Immokalee CRA 381 i 383 I Figure 2 TAZ Map 5 3 Miles Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. - 7- RRA, Inc. November 10, 2010 Immokalee CRA Table 3: CRA Development Quantities and Traffic Generation Estimate 4,984 6,104 4,149 2,272 8,164 11,432 147,970 5,944 7,373 5,031 2,743 9,701 13,946 178,110 Average Trips per unit: 7.22 4.82 1.47 10.88 5.38 1.16 Average Trips per unit: 7.04 4.92 1.45 10.93 5.35 1.15 2030 Adopted Financially Feasible Plan Scenario The adopted 2030 Cost - Feasible Transportation Plan addresses an increase of 22,565 peak hour, directional vehicle -miles of travel (vmt), or a 92 percent increase in vmt over 2008 levels on the study network. The cost - feasible 2030 transportation plan contemplates adding 19,184 peak hour directional vehicle -miles of capacity (vmc) to the network, which closely matches the expected growth in travel. Most of the network roads operate at acceptable levels of service, except for portions of CR 846 and SR 29 within the CRA and Camp Keais Road to the south. The South 1St Street portion of CR 846 and Camp Keais Road deficiencies are located between the Ave Maria development and lmmokalee, where a six -lane facility or parallel road would alleviate congestion. SR 29 fails in the two -lane sections within the CRA. Four - laning, development of CR 29 Alternate (New Market Road), or developing the proposed "SR 29 Loop" are all options to provide relief to this section of road. "2030 +" Scenario The 2030+ scenario indicates an increase of 3,036 peak hour directional vmt. This represents a five percent increase in the total travel in the network. The increase in travel "causes" level of service failures on 1St Street to the north of Main Street (SR 29), but are the result of relatively small changes in traffic volume. Other than on 1 st Street, the addition of CRA traffic does not cause any new deficiencies in the network to occur, however CRA traffic does add to congestion on road segments that are otherwise estimated to fail. Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. - 8 - RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 lmmokalee CRA Adopted 2030 Plan TAZ SF IMF Ind Comm Svc SE Tr s 382 306 80 0 0 0 0 2,812 384 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 385 11 0 4 0 83 0 492 404 76 88 0 0 60 0 1,062 405 129 313 4 10 321 0 3,754 406 35 293 1 128 199 738 4,580 407 145 271 1 0 29 0 2,090 408 14 17 0 16 12 0 408 409 425 340 0 0 0 0 2,456 410 331 265 98 52 221 0 5,606 411 10 205 21 0 0 0 746 412 66 29 0 0 18 0 892 413 100 197 73 284 2,047 0 14,924 416 337 185 0 154 58 0 5,098 417 255 547 0 9 15 0 5,002 418 788 1,739 207 109 485 2,928 21,510 420 219 194 3 99 60 665 4,854 426 418 207 2,012 0 54 0 6,760 428 17 11 205 525 373 0 7,864 429 19 10 288 191 391 0 4,806 430 697 528 300 269 2,359 0 24,138 431 124 85 909 91 121 0 4,498 432 98 48 7 14 191 1,200 3,426 433 24 96 0 156 732 3,091 9,274 434 61 100 5 116 25 1,096 3,592 435 185 210 8 14 170 1,714 5,370 436 94 46 3 35 140 0 1,956 4,984 6,104 4,149 2,272 8,164 11,432 147,970 5,944 7,373 5,031 2,743 9,701 13,946 178,110 Average Trips per unit: 7.22 4.82 1.47 10.88 5.38 1.16 Average Trips per unit: 7.04 4.92 1.45 10.93 5.35 1.15 2030 Adopted Financially Feasible Plan Scenario The adopted 2030 Cost - Feasible Transportation Plan addresses an increase of 22,565 peak hour, directional vehicle -miles of travel (vmt), or a 92 percent increase in vmt over 2008 levels on the study network. The cost - feasible 2030 transportation plan contemplates adding 19,184 peak hour directional vehicle -miles of capacity (vmc) to the network, which closely matches the expected growth in travel. Most of the network roads operate at acceptable levels of service, except for portions of CR 846 and SR 29 within the CRA and Camp Keais Road to the south. The South 1St Street portion of CR 846 and Camp Keais Road deficiencies are located between the Ave Maria development and lmmokalee, where a six -lane facility or parallel road would alleviate congestion. SR 29 fails in the two -lane sections within the CRA. Four - laning, development of CR 29 Alternate (New Market Road), or developing the proposed "SR 29 Loop" are all options to provide relief to this section of road. "2030 +" Scenario The 2030+ scenario indicates an increase of 3,036 peak hour directional vmt. This represents a five percent increase in the total travel in the network. The increase in travel "causes" level of service failures on 1St Street to the north of Main Street (SR 29), but are the result of relatively small changes in traffic volume. Other than on 1 st Street, the addition of CRA traffic does not cause any new deficiencies in the network to occur, however CRA traffic does add to congestion on road segments that are otherwise estimated to fail. Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. - 8 - RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 lmmokalee CRA 2030+ TAZ SF MF Ind Comm Svc SE Tri s 382 313 82 0 0 0 0 2,870 384 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 385 13 0 5 0 101 0 628 404 93 107 0 0 73 0 1,346 405 157 382 5 12 392 0 4,576 406 43 357 1 156 243 900 5,634 407 177 331 1 0 35 0 2,602 408 17 21 0 20 15 0 608 409 519 415 0 0 0 0 2,978 410 404 323 120 63 270 0 7,006 411 12 250 26 0 0 0 994 412 81 35 0 0 22 0 966 413 122 240 89 346 2,497 0 18,254 416 411 226 0 188 71 0 6,278 417 311 667 0 11 18 0 6,178 418 961 2,122 253 133 592 3,572 26,266 420 267 237 4 121 73 811 6,024 426 510 253 2,455 0 66 0 8,220 428 21 13 250 641 455 0 9,656 429 23 12 351 233 477 0 5,778 430 774 586 333 299 2,618 0 26,810 431 151 104 1,109 111 148 0 5,456 432 120 59 9 17 233 1,464 4,234 433 29 117 0 190 893 3,771 11,314 434 74 122 6 142 31 1,337 4,460 435 226 256 10 17 207 2,091 6,528 436 115 56 4 43 171 0 2,408 4,984 6,104 4,149 2,272 8,164 11,432 147,970 5,944 7,373 5,031 2,743 9,701 13,946 178,110 Average Trips per unit: 7.22 4.82 1.47 10.88 5.38 1.16 Average Trips per unit: 7.04 4.92 1.45 10.93 5.35 1.15 2030 Adopted Financially Feasible Plan Scenario The adopted 2030 Cost - Feasible Transportation Plan addresses an increase of 22,565 peak hour, directional vehicle -miles of travel (vmt), or a 92 percent increase in vmt over 2008 levels on the study network. The cost - feasible 2030 transportation plan contemplates adding 19,184 peak hour directional vehicle -miles of capacity (vmc) to the network, which closely matches the expected growth in travel. Most of the network roads operate at acceptable levels of service, except for portions of CR 846 and SR 29 within the CRA and Camp Keais Road to the south. The South 1St Street portion of CR 846 and Camp Keais Road deficiencies are located between the Ave Maria development and lmmokalee, where a six -lane facility or parallel road would alleviate congestion. SR 29 fails in the two -lane sections within the CRA. Four - laning, development of CR 29 Alternate (New Market Road), or developing the proposed "SR 29 Loop" are all options to provide relief to this section of road. "2030 +" Scenario The 2030+ scenario indicates an increase of 3,036 peak hour directional vmt. This represents a five percent increase in the total travel in the network. The increase in travel "causes" level of service failures on 1St Street to the north of Main Street (SR 29), but are the result of relatively small changes in traffic volume. Other than on 1 st Street, the addition of CRA traffic does not cause any new deficiencies in the network to occur, however CRA traffic does add to congestion on road segments that are otherwise estimated to fail. Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. - 8 - RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 lmmokalee CRA y o m A z O O ip N � A O � O n A n O N as n Table 4 2030 Roadway Level of Service MOCF: 0.86 Outside CRA: 0.09 OIWeIGr Rdb Camp Neas Rd I County R int 6.80 13,576 14,500 11, 12,300 1,340 0.09 3R -29 Loop County R 2U 2U Un Unint 3.43 18,667 18,944 15,9500 00 16,100 1,340 0.09 I RJK4 I r. -- R 1 917 1 unlnl 1 450 1 47571 47681 - 4.0001 4.1001 t3aol 0.09 C RA Bdy bSR 82 County T IFlH7 3.00 10,762 12,415 9,t D0 10,600 1,620 0.09 N MI Rd)b SR -29L p FDOT R 2U Unint 3.88 3,898 4,500 3,300 3,600 770 0.09 I F-T I R I 211 I I loin} 1 416 61581 73501 54001 6.2001 7701 0.09 Unint 1 7.00 1 20,4851 20,6431 17,4001 17,5001 1,4801 0.09 Totals: 70.20 Outside CRA Totak Table Totals: 94.17 T.M. Totek dopted 2030 "2030 +" I �� �tlatluu� tv s.rr��wa �" sa.G�1C"p = ws r � 1nxT ��7 v sarvO.p sUi�aY 2,624 F 1.82 1 6560 11,939 2,7611 F 1.92 6,903 13,254 2,299 D 0.78 575 449 2,377 D 0.81 594 481 2,278 D 0.77 570 439 2,398 D 0.81 600 486 B31 F 1.14 332 378 846 F 1.16 338 392 502 C 0.90 703 633 554 C 0.99 776 768 1,223 B 0.37 183 68 1,301 B 0.39 195 76 1,379 C 0.56 565 316 1,489 C 0.60 610 366 1,515 C 0.61 758 462 1,656 C D.67 828 555 1,197 C 0.91 1197 1,089 1,311 D 1.00 1,311 1,311 1,217 C 0.93 609 566 1,244 C 0.95 622 591 1,071 C 621 509 1,176 C 0.90 682 614 1,035 8 93 51 1,024 B 0.54 92 50 763 C 763 420 799 C 0.57 799 455 554 C 277 111 679 C 0.49 340 167 303 C r11,41 152 33 355 C 026 178 46 167 C 167 20 261 C 0.19 261 50 632 C 904 407 700 C 0.50 1,001 501 575 C 408 167 658 C D.47 467 219 632 C 0.45 316 142 684 C 0.49 342 168 507 C 0.36 254 91 575 C 0.41 288 118 350 C 025 35 9 428 C 0.31 43 13 533 C 0.38 267 101 637 C 0.46 319 147 590 C 0.42 148 62 669 C 0.48 167 80 596 C D.43 149 64 669 C 0.48 167 BO 282 C 020 71 14 340 C 024 85 20 204 C 0.15 51 8 256 C 0.18 64 12 42 C 0.03 21 1 47 C 0.03 24 1 120 C 0.09 60 5 157 C 0.11 79 9 251 C 0.18 126 23 303 C 022 152 33 664 C 0.48 166 80 732 C 0.53 97 679 C 0.49 17D 83 737 C 0.53 98 334 C 024 150 36 413 C 0.30 56 606 C 0.38 758 2BB 643 C 0.40 k669 322 893 C 0.56 893 500 982 C 0.62 609 632 C 0045 632 284 669 C 0.48 321 523 C 0.38 1046 397 643 C 0.46 592 i 361 C 026 181 47 423 C 0.30 64 20,931 20,292 0.97 22,833 23,222 1.02 7 8861 C 1 0.31 1 1196 371 891 C 0.31 1203 373 3 291 B 1 022 1 1906 419 280L B 021 1834 385 618 B 0.30 1 927 278 6391 B 0.31 959 297 3 620 C 0.46 1 4216 1,939 663 C 0.49 4508 2,209 3 857 D 0.64 2940 1,882 868 D 0.65 2977 1,935 3 216 A 0.16 972 156 221 A 0.16 995 159 2,117 E 1.04 11855 12,329 2,144 E 1.05 12006 12,606 3 307 C 0.41 1320 541 313 C 0.42 1346 565 480 D 0.30 1440 432 560 B 0.35 1680 588 B 1781 A 023 691 159 205 A 027 1 7951 215 B 2911 B 0.38 1211 460 334 B 0.43 1389 597 B 1,364 B 0.62 4092 2,537 1,391 a 0.63 4173 2,629 6 663 C 0.86 1326 1,140 663 C 0.86 1326 1,140 B 938 C 0.63 6566 4,137 943 C 1 0.64 1 66011 4,225 40,668 26,780 0.66 61,689 47,072 0.76 41,792 27,923 0.67 64,626 61,146 0.79 Financial Feasibili As indicated previously, there is a substantial amount of travel on the study road network that is not associated with Immokalee CRA development. By comparing the two traffic forecasts presented in Table 4, the effects of the land use plan amendment can be gauged from a financial perspective. The 3,036 directional peak hour increase in vmt associated with the tested increment of development converts to a daily increase in vmt of 57,592. Borrowing cost data from Collier County's current transportation impact fee, it costs approximately $612 to construct a daily vehicle -mile of capacity in Collier County. This cost represents a mixture of urban and rural costs, and is probably on the higher side of conditions that would be expected on average in the Immokalee area. It would then cost (57,592 * $612 =) $35,246,304 to replace the capacity consumed by the additional travel in the study area network. Collier County's current transportation impact fee and gasoline taxes generated by the increment of development would generate $35.9 million (Table 5), which would almost exactly match the cost. Table 5: Transportation Revenues Generated by Land Use Increment Land -Use Units Conversion Rate Growth quantity Impact Fee Rate Impact Fee Revenue Gas Tax Reset Gas Taxes Generated Ad Valorem Credit Rate Ad Valorem Revenue Single-Family 960 d.u. 1 d.u. /d.u. 960 $9,012 /d.u. $8,651,520 $2,009 $1,928,640 5109 $104,64 Multi-Family 1,269 d.u. 1 d.u. /d.u. 1269 $7,464 /d.u. $9,471,816 $1,720 $2,182,680 $225 $285,525 Industrial 882 employees 750 s.f./em . 661500 $7,732 /1,000 s.f. $5,114,718 $1,765 $1,167,548 $177 $117,086. Commercial 471 employees 500 s.f./em . 235500 $15,000 /1,000 s.f. $3,532,5 $3,925 $924,338 $171 $40,271 Service 1,537 employees 300 s.f. /emp. 461100 $12,000 /1,000 s.f. $5,533,200 $2,716 $1,252,348 $197 $90,837 Total $32,303,754 $3,344233 $248,193 Total Transportation Revenue Generated by Growth: $35,896,179 Notes: 1. Average of units smaller than 1,500 s.f. and 1,500 to 2,499 s.f. assumed. 2. Rate assumed as 75% of retail 50-100 ksf assumed upon review of various rates provided in impact fee schedule. 3. Rate assumed as 84% of office 50 -100 ksf assumed upon review of various rates provided in impact fee schedule. 4. Rate schedule adopted February, 2009 used. The exact improvements that might be funded by these revenues certainly cannot be selected at this time, because the actual development patterns should have an influence. However, on a macro- scopic scale, it appears the development assessment program for transportation in Collier County is coming close to funding road capacity on a 1:1 basis. 2016 "Short- Term" Scenario To evaluate growth within a shorter -term period, an analysis that reflects the more recent trends was undertaken. This shorter -term analysis of future traffic conditions in the Immokalee CRA considered a less aggressive growth forecast than projected by the MPO. The MPO's growth forecasts were undertaken circa 2004/2005, when real- estate development was `hot" and the economic recession of the past year was not contemplated. They indicated an o erall growth rate in travel in and around Immokalee of over five percent per year, sustained through 2030. C, According to the 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan adopted in June, 2007, the Florida Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. _10- RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 Immokalee CRA Figure 3 Traffic Count Historical Trend Graph Data Table: Station No.: F03 -001 F03 -002 F03 -0205 F03 -0038 F03 -0029 C549 C551 C612 Year SR 29 N of Lake Trafford SR 29 SE of CR 846/14th St 29 0 Farm Workers Village SR 29 S of Lake Trafford SR 29 W of 1st St 1st St (CR 846) S of SR 29 Lake Trafford W of SR 29 New Market E of SR 29 1998 8,700 8,800 14,100 11,600 10,996 6,411 1999 1 8,500 9,300 8,700 13,900 12,239 11,228 6,830 2000 8,700 9,300 8,400 12,800 11,687 11,482 7,414 2001 9,900 9,600 7,800 13,000 11,943 12,265 7,875 2002 8,600 8,700 8,300 16,100 13,700 12,855 12,004 7,763 2003 10,400 8,600 8,600 17,200 12,800 12,945 12,280 8,137 2004 10,300 9,800 8,500 15,800 12,500 12,866 12,337 8,633 2005 11,400 8,900 8,800 17,600 13,600 13,782 12,4351 8,384 2006 11,900 8,700 8,200 17,000 14,300 14,565 13,653 9,006 2007 11,400 9,900 8,300 16,100 12,500 14,6711 12,658 8,969 2008 10,500 7,400 6,400 14,4001 13,300 13,5001 11,700 8,050 Ten -year trend: 2.67% -0.70% - 1.33% -1.28% -0.32% 2.12% 1.28% 2.64% 2 -year trend: -12% -15% -22% -15% -7% -7% -14% -11% Sources: Florida DOT 2008 Florida Traffic Information, Collier County Transportation Division Compiled by Tindale- Oliver and Associates, inc. Bureau of Economic and Business Research's 2030 county -wide permanent population forecast on which the plan was based was 597,400, an increase of 136 percent over 2000 levels (2.9 percent per year). In contrast, the September, 2009 update to population forecasts indicated a reduced forecast of 472,000 by 2030, an increase of only 88 percent (2.1 percent per year). Historic traffic volume counts recorded by the Florida DOT and Collier County in and near Immokalee were consulted. Figure 3 illustrates the counts. The counts illustrate the past ten - year history of recorded counts at the eight locations indicated, in and around Immokalee. Hal of the count stations show a negative growth trend over the past ten years, and all show that 2008 volumes are lower than the levels recorded two years ago. These trends are consistent with Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. - I 1 - RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 Immokalee CRA �y o� �Q r �o o� O O n m ry r O n. Table 6 2016 Roadway Level of Service 1040.8 CR -B46 (S 1st St): Camp Keais Rd to Eustis Ave County 21.1 Unint 2.50 7,999 D 860 0.096 0.55 422 0.49 1,055 518 1040.9 CR-846 (S I st St): Eustis Ave to Colorado Ave County 4D NSR 0.25 15,507 D 1,620 0.095 0.55 810 0.50 203 101 1040.10 CR-846 (S 1st St): Colorado Ave to SR- 29(WMain St) County 4D NSR 0.25 15,507 D 1,620 0.095 0.55 810 0.50 203 101 1041.1 CR -846: SR -29 (W Main St) to Airpark Blvd County 2U Unint 0.40 3,886 D 1,130 0.095 0.55 203 0.18 81 15 1100.3 SR -29: Farm Worker Way to CR -846 FDOT 2U Art C -1 1.40 8,500 C 875 0.095 0.55 444 0.51 622 315 1100.4 SR -29 (Main St): CR -846 to CR -29 At (New Market Rd) FDOT 4D Art C -1 0.15 10,832 C 1,820 0.095 0.55 566 0.31 85 26 1100.5 SR -29 (Main St): CR -29 Alt (New Market Rd) to 1st St FDOT 4D Art C -2 0.41 8,960 C 1,860 0.095 0.55 468 0.25 192 48 1100.6 SR -29 (Main St): 1st St to 9th St FOOT 4D Art C -2 0.50 15,278 C 1,860 0.095 0.55 798 0.43 399 171 1101.1 SR -29 (15th St): 9th St to Immokalee Dr FDOT 20, Art C -1 1.00 16,262 C 875 0.095 0.55 850 0.97 850 826 1101.2 SR -29 (15th St): Immokalee Dr to CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd) FDOT 2D Art C -1 0.50 18,426 C 875 0.095 0.55 963 1.10 482 530 1101.3 SR -29 (15th St): CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd) to CR -29A FDOT 2D Art C -1 0.58 13,281 C 875 0.095 0.55 694 0.79 403 319 1101.4 SR -29 (15th St): CR -29A to CR -29 Alt (New Market Rd) FDOT 2D Art C -1 0.09 13,360 C 875 0.095 0.55 698 0.80 63 50 1110.1 CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd): Carson Rd to SR -29 (15th St) County 2U NSR 1.00 13,440 D 875 0.095 0.55 702 0.80 702 563 1110.2 CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd): SR -29 (15th St) to 9th St County 1 21-1 NSR 0.50 4,993 D 760 0.095 0.55 2611 0.34 131 45 1120.1 Carson Rd: CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd) to CR -29A County 21-1 NSR 0.50 5,900 D 760 0.095 0.55 308 0.41 154 62 1130.1 CR -29A: Carson Rd to SR -29 (15th St) County 21-1 NSR 1.00 3,463 D 760 0.095 0.55 181 0.24 181 43 1140.2 CR -29 AK (New Market Rd): SR -29 (North) to Charlotte St County 21-1 NSR 1.43 9,247 D 760 0.095 0.55 483 0.64 691 439 1140.3 CR -29 AR (New Market Rd): Charlotte St to SR -29 (Main St) County 2U NSR 0.71 6,221 D 1,010 0.095 0.55 325 0.32 231 74 1150.1 Immokalee Dr. SR -29 (15th St) to 9th St County 2U NSR 0.50 4,232 D 760 0.095 0.55 221 0.29 111 32 1150.2 Immokalee Dr. 9th St to Charlotte St County 2U NSR 0.50 4,232 D 760 0.095 0.55 221 0.29 111 32 1160.1 Chadotte St Immokalee Drto CR-29 Alt (New Market Rd) County 2U NSR 0.10 6,634 D 1,000 0.095 0.55 347 0.35 35 12 1170.1 9th St: CR -890 (Lake Trafford Rd) to Immokalee Dr County 21-1 NSR 0.50 3,940 D 760 0.095 0.55 206 0.27 103 28 1170.2 9th St: Immokalee Dr to Roberts Ave County 2U NSR 0.25 3,940 D 760 0.095 0.55 206 0.27 52 14 1170.3 9th St: Roberts Ave to SR -29 (Main St) County 2U NSR 0.25 3,940 D 760 0.095 0.55 206 0.27 52 14 1170.4 9th St: SR -29 (Main St) to Colorado Ave County 21-1 NSR 0.25 6,012 D 760 0.095 0.55 314 0.41 79 32 1170.5 9th St: Colorade Ave to Eustis Ave County 2U NSR 0.25 6,012 D 760 0.095 0.55 314 0.41 79 32 1180.1 Roberts Ave: 9th St to 1st St County 2U NSR 0.50 2,875 D 760 0.095 0.55 150 0.20 75 15 1190.1 Colorado Ave: 9th St to 1st St County 21-1 NSR 0.50 1,001 D 760 0.095 0.55 52 0.07 26 2 1200.1 Eustis Ave: 9th St tolstSt County 2U NSR 0.50 1,052 D 760 0.095 0.55 551 0.07 28 2 1210.1 istSt: Immokalee Drto Roberts Ave County 2U NSR 0.25 9,457 D 1,000 0.0951 0.55 4941 0.49 124 61 1210.2 1st St: Roberts Ave to SR-29 (Main St) County 2U NSR 1 0.25 9,457 D 1,000 0.0951 0,651 4941 0.49 124 61 Inside CRA Totals: 17.77 7,719 4,585 East Collier, Outside CRA 0.59 1040.4 CR -846 (Immokalee Rd): CR -B58 (Oil Well Rd) to Shady Hollow Blvd County 4D IFH 1.35 18,635 D 1,570 0.097 0.55 994 0.63 1,342 850 1040.5 CR -846 (Immokalee Rd): Shady Hollow Blvd to Everglades Blvd County 21.1 Unint 6.55 6,207 D 860 0.098 0.55 335 0.39 2,194 855 1040.6 CR-846 (Immokalee Rd): Everglades Blvd to Oil Well Grade Rd County 21-1 Unint 1.50 5,990 D 860 0.096 0.55 316 0.37 474 174 1040.7 CR -846 (Immokalee Rd): Oil Well Grade Rd to Camp Keais Rd County 21-1 Unint 6.80 5,691 D 860 0.098 0.55 307 0.36 2,088 745 1041.2 CR -846: Airpark Blvd to CR -858 County 21-1 Unint 4.10 1,632 D 860 0.098 0.55 88 0.10 361 37 1080.1 Camp Keais Rd: CR -846 (Immokalee Rd) to CR -858 (Oil Well Rd) County 21-1 Unint 5.60 3,854 D 860 0.096 0.55 203 0.24 1,137 268 1100.2 SR -29: CR -858 (Oil Well Rd) to Farm Worker Way FDOT 21-1 1 Unint 8.25 7,352 C 875 0.098 0.55 396 0.45 3,267 1,479 1101.5 SR -29 (15th St): CR -29 AK (New Market Rd) to SR -82 FDOT 21-1 1 Unint 3.00 16,026 C 875 0.098 0.55 864 0.99 2,592 2,559 1101.6 SR -29 (15th St): SR -82 to Hendry Co Line FDOT 2U Unint 2.00 8,688 C 875 0.098 0.55 468 0.53 936 501 1220.1 SR -82: SR -29 (15th St) to Hendry Co Line FDOT 2U Unint 7.00 1 16,006 1 C 1 8751 0.0981 0.551 8631 0.99 6,0411 5,958 Outside CRA Totals: 46.15 20,431 13,426 0.66 Table Totals: 63.92 28,150 18,011 0.64 trends recorded in other communities that that are generally blamed on the effects of the economic slow -down. The short term analysis of road operating conditions was prepared assuming that traffic volumes would remain the same in 2009 as they were in 2008, then begin to grow again in 2010 by two percent per year. The resulting traffic volumes and levels of service are indicated in Table 5. This forecast indicates that by 2016, only SR 29 north of Lake Trafford Road would be failing, exceeding it's service volume by only ten percent of it's level of service "C" standard. This extent of exceedance cannot be considered significant, as the level of service D range of service typically extends for an additional 20 percent beyond the level of service "C" limit. In other words, even though level of service C would be exceeded, level of service D would be provided, which is the standard applied to many roads throughout the urbanized areas of Collier County. The segment of SR 29 south of Lake Trafford Road is estimated to operate at 97 percent of it's level of service "C" standard by 2016 if traffic grows at two percent per year. Outside of the immediate CRA area, the two additional road segments of potential concern identified above, SR 29 north of the CRA and SR 82 west of SR 29, are both estimated to operate at 99 percent of their respective service standards by 2016, as well. Based on the above, there is capacity to accommodate growth within the CRA in the short-term future with some locations of congestion intensity that are common to many other developed areas in Collier County. While agencies have identified improvements to alleviate congestion in Immokalee, current funding levels indicate improvements will not be forthcoming in the near - term future. Thus, it would appear that allowing the land use plan amendment to provide for greater development densities might be appropriate. Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. -13- RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 Immokalee CRA Appendix A MPO Model Volume Plots Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. -14- RWA, Inc. November 10, 2010 Immokalee CRA 91- O O O A. O Model -Vokxnn,---- avi af A 7579 9th 1783 �y J I Z 11755 7fv,9a m 3453 323M :.5689 i ?> yi tE6ttY law AN I-sm 4974 410 C ,.Wlll-n ddeo l-lt3o-tl,7cG_b..'HR-bXY r30 Licemed- tc 'mdWO-01tver and ASseciate4 1,1c. �y o �• o- ti O �p N � O O � O n O• N s 0 m s E0 I _ 2030 Adopted Model Volumes L[CenWC tO Tindfiie- '.?BYQf anQ RSSgci 4es inc_ o O 1p O 5 C) 2030 Proposed Model Volumes 4464 424 41i? -1- —19775 7 76 336" my? M" 39365 20413 2476426331 41 313M 326.53 37754377 59 241 Xirati 21365 -2 41 I 0.95 742t3 4M 6I172 APa% , I IfI4 340" 32231 lame 4=154 'nsul ,O ja Ina �vloft d. 414 I ---------- - -- - - - ------ Licensed Tinddje-oiiver - — - — ------ to and Associates Jnc. ----------- ------ ----------------- — R. O� 0 N 0 0 `i I C� n a n O gib n 2050 Proposed Model Volumes mow, �p v 8225 �6> a h* A7z Jff4 tiTSt 1M33 i' `Y'i "`f 4"'6 p 2,tbo c l 363 4 Li A *• � AT' 'm. dtC r A 31386 i 6y 4 / w 43 _ 4'k AYwi','.M h l I e i + y. i::,t\ 346{s i356'.'. -�t \t36°d M04 777 i8 3 '� ?y .17618 8686 '..'_SAS 7515, 295°8 MOi\ Z3888 28868 21572 � � r xery� fri. 7<tTv - y Vy� 400 Fitli 7 8 _ t!H 21591 2 _ _ _— _— 74bft(,.���. 6 +166 tSKrT 260F/ m Aff Lxer Sed to itndate- Oliver and .As -;oaaw i , Attachment C: Residential Buildout Potential Comparison BASE DENSITY COMPARISON EXISTING Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Base DU /AC Max. # DUs PROPOSED Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Base DU /AC Max. # DUs Change % Change Low Residential LR 10,405.6 4 41,622.40 Low Residential LR 9,154.0 4 36,616.0 - 5,006.4 -51.2 Mixed Residential MR 463.9 6 2,783.4 Medium Residential MR 1,110.4 6 6,662.4 3,879.0 -632.4 High Residential HR 1,603.1 8 12,824.8 High Residential HR 1,572.0 8 12,576.0 -248.8 10.0 Mixed Use CC -MU + NC 861.8 12 1 10,341.6 Commercial Mixed Use CMU 1,108.1 16 17,729.6 7,388.0 -662.8 Recreational /Tourist RT 1 251.2 4 1,004.8 Recreational /Tourist RT 451.8 4 1,807.2 802.4 Total 13,585.6 68,577.0 Totall 13,396.3 1 75,391.2 6,814.2 9.94% *RT allowance for transient lodging density has been increased from 10 du /ac to 26 du /ac. Less LT /CKSSO Density* -662.8 Sub -Total 6,151.4 8.97% Less Public Lands ** - 3,784.9 Sub -Total 2,366.51 3.45% MAXIMUM DENSITY COMPARISON (INCLUDES ALL BONUSES) EXISTING Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Max DU /AC Max. # DUs PROPOSED Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Max DU /AC Max. # DUs Change % Change Low Residential LR 10,405.6 12 124,867.2 Low Residential LR 9,154.0 8 73,232.0 - 51,635.2 -51.2 Mixed Residential MR 463.9 14 6,494.6 Medium Residential MR 1,110.4 14 15,545.6 9,051.0 -632.4 High Residential HR 1,603.1 16 25,649.6 High Residential HR 1,572.0 16 25,152.0 -497.6 10.0 Mixed Use CC -MU + NC 861.8 12 10,341.6 Commercial Mixed Use CMU 1,108.1 20 22,162.0 11,820.4 -662.8 Recreational /Tourist* RT 251.21 4 1,004.8 Recreational /Tourist RT 451.8 4 1,807.2 802.4 Total 13,585.61 168,357.81 Totall 13,396.3 137,898.8 - 30,459.0 - 18.09% *RT allowance for transient lodging density has been increased from 10 du /ac to 26 du /ac. Less-LT /CKSSO Density* - 6,194.8 Sub -Total - 36,653.8 - 21.77% Less Public Lands ** - 6,036.7 Sub -Total - 42,690.5 - 25.36% NOTE: As noted on page 51 of the Data & Analysis, a portion of the change in development potential may be attributed to mapping discrepencies between the Collier County GIS shapefiles and the offical FLUM which is provided as an AutoCAD drawing. The proposed FLUM corrects this discre enc . *LT /CKSSO Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Max DUs (base) Max. DUs (4 du /ac) Change Max DUs (bonus) Max. DUs (4 du /ac) Change Low Residential LR 1,193.0 4,772.0 4,772.0 0.0 9,544.0 4,772.0 - 4,772.0 Medium Residential MR 25.6 153.6 102.4 -51.2 358.4 102.4 -256.0 High Residential HR 52.7 421.6 210.8 -210.8 843.2 210.8 -632.4 Commercial Mixed Use CMU 33.4 534.4 133.6 -400.8 668.0 133.6 -534.4 Recreational /Tourist RT 10.0 40.1 40.1 0.0 40.1 40.1 0.0 Total 1,314.7 5,921.7 5,258.9 -662.8 11,453.7 5,258.9 - 6,194.8 * *Public Lands Future Land Use Abbrev. Acres Max DU /AC (base) Max. DUs (base) Max. DU /AC (bonus) Max. DUs (bonus) Low Residential LR 81.7 4 326.7 8 653.4 Medium Residential MR 162.6 6 975.4 14 2,276.0 High Residential HR 43.9 8 350.9 16 701.8 Commercial Mixed Use CMU 68.4 16 1,094.9 20 1,368.6 Recreational /Tourist RT 259.2 4 1,037.0 4 1,037.0 Total 615.8 3,784.9 6,036.7 CHANGES TO THE TRANSMITTED FUTURE LAND USE MAP: Minor revisions were made to the IAMP FLUM while responding to DCA's Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report. The minor revisions correct some mapping errors by ensuring the Proposed FLU designations do not reduce existing designations and follow existing property lines. The revisions are shown on the attached "Immokalee Proposed Future Land Use Map Changes 10/10" and are summarized below: PROPOSED Future Land Use Abbrev. Transmitted Acres Revised Acres Change Commercial Mixed Use CMU 1,104.4 1,108.1 +3.7 Industrial Mixed Use IMU 869.7 866.0 -3.7 Immokalee Regional Airport APO 1,484.0 1,484.0 - Industrial IN 752.0 752.0 - Low Residential LR 9,160.3 9,154.0 -6.3 Medium Residential MR 1,110.4 1,110.4 - Hi h Residential HR 1,565.7 1,572.0 +6.3 Recreational Tourist RT 451.8 451.8 - Seminole Reservation* SR 591.3 591.3 - TOTAL 17,089.6 17,089.6 - Data and Analysis Supporting Density and Intensity Blending Language Change Per IAMP proposed Amendments, July 7, 2010 version Language has been proposed to change the Density and Intensity Blending portion of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. In order to determine the extent of the applicability effects of the changes to properties in and around the Immokalee Urban Area, a GIS analysis was performed to determine what properties would be eligible to transfer units from the urban area to adjacent Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay (RLSA) areas. GIS Methodology: WilsonMiller Stantec, Inc was tasked to locate any ownership that fell into the criteria of having at least 200 acres of land within the Immokalee Future Land Use (FLU) designated as either low residential subdistrict (LRSD) or recreational subdistrict (RS). The land also had to be partially within the Lake Trafford or Camp Keais Strand flowways and had to straddle the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) and the Immokalee Urban boundary. We used the Collier County Property Appraiser September 2010 Parcel dataset and the Proposed Immokalee Future Land Use data set to isolate parcels that fell into these criteria. The parcel data set was queried to isolate parcels that are 200 acres or greater. The Immokalee FLU was queried to isolate only areas designated as either LRSD or RS. The queried parcels and the queried FLU were intersected to further isolate lands that fit the above criteria. A graphic indicating the resulting image is attached. The resulting lands exhibit was then visually observed to identify parcels that both partially within the flowways and straddled the RLSA and Immokalee Urban boundary. This analysis produced Williams Farms as the only ownership that fit the criteria. We then performed a cross check with the 2002 Collier County Property Appraiser Parcel dataset to determine if there had been a change in ownership within the Williams Farms lands and there had not been. Therefore, the Williams Farms property, and only the Williams Farms property, would qualify for the benefits from the July 7, 2010 language modifications to the IAMP relative to Density and Intensity Blending Unit Transfer Potential: The Williams Farms property contains approximately 732 acres of native lands within the lake Trafford flowway that could potentially qualify for unit transfers under the proposed language amendments. Of the 732 acres, those lands exhibiting higher functional value (score of 1.2 or greater) would ultimately qualify. Therefore, using the maximum potential acreage of 732 acres, the maximum units that could potentially be transferred from the Lake Trafford flowway area within the Immokalee Urban area to adjacent RLSA lands (within the current Williams farms ownership boundary) would be: 732 acres x the allowed gross density and /or intensity of 4 units /acre = 2928 units 11/19/2010 - 221265 - Ver: 1 - TDurham 02861 - 000 -001 - V WRK - 30400 Immokalee Urban Boundary Lake Trafford Flowway Immokalee Future Land Use ® (LRSD or RS) Collier County Property Appraiser Parcels �- AGENDA ITEM 9F COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN 0 L AMENDMENT 2010 CYCLE (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) SRI 1 6131 1 Itre I i1sc I mb■ I NMI I Inl I tail I OWN I $ME 1 Petition: CPSP- 2010 -5 CCPC : February 17, 2011 BCC: March 22, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS CCPC - Transmittal of CPSP- 2010 -5 GMP Amendment February 17, 2011 CCPC A eg nda 1) TAB: Table of Contents. 2) TAB: CCPC Advertisement. 3) TAB: CCPC Staff Report. 4) TAB: Resolution Alt. 1. 5) TAB: Exhibit "A" Text Alt 1. 6) TAB: Exhibit "A" Maps Alt. 1 -OR- 7) TAB: Resolution Alt 2. 8) TAB: Exhibit "A" Text Alt 2. 9) TAB: Exhibit "A" Maps Alt 2. DOCUMENT: Table of Contents DOCUMENT: Transmittal CCPC Advertisement & Affidavit memo DOCUMENT: CCPC Transmittal Staff Report DOCUMENT: Transmittal Resolution Alternate 1 (Change to: Residential Subdistrict) DOCUMENT: Exhibit A Text Alternate 1 (Change to: Residential Subdistrict) DOCUMENT: Proposed Davis Blvd/County Barn Road "Residential" Subdistrict Map; and proposed Future Land Use Map to reference "Residential" Subdistrict DOCUMENT: Transmittal Resolution Alternate 2 (Delete Existing Subdistrict) DOCUMENT: Exhibit A Text Alternate 2 (Delete existing Subdistrict) DOCUMENT: Deletion of Davis Blvd. /County Barn Road "Mixed Use" Subdistrict Map; And proposed deletion from Future Land Use Map the existing Davis Blvd/County Barn Road "Mixed Use" Subdistrict DATE: TO: FROM: February 09, 2011 Collier County Planning Commission (and others) Comprehensive Planning Section Land Development Services Department SUBJECT: CPSP- 2010 -5 Future Land Use Element Transmittal Growth Management Plan Amendment - CCPC Advertisement CCPC Hearing — February 17, 2011 Due to the timing of the Planning Commission meeting advertisement, we are unable to provide copy of the official affidavit as proof of advertisement at this time. However, as soon as the official affidavit has been received it will be provided in the binders going to the Board of County Commissioners for hearing on March 22, 2011. Growth Management Division Planning & Regulation Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on Thursday February 17. 2011 at 8:30 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, third floor, County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples. The purpose of the hearing is to consider recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs the Transmittal of 2010 Cycle Growth Man- agement Plan amendment to the Future Land Use Element and the Future Land Use Map and Map Series. The resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMEND- ED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESI- DENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Or- RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMEND- ED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN IT'S ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMIT- TAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. CPSP- 2010 -5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdis- trict by changing it from mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre — or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety; the subdistrict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 east, containing + 22.83 acres. [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] a. G.G. BLVD. a PINE RIDGE RD. r WGO�: S.R.- 84 1 -75 - 2010 -5 arr OF NAPLES All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Manage- ment Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Land Development Services Department, Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thursday. February 17, 2011 will be read and con- sidered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark P. Strain, Chairman - Collier County Planning Commission No 231188482 January 28. 2011 Co1Lle-r Co-u-r,.ty STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2011 RE: PETITION No. CPSP- 2010 -5, BOARD DIRECTED STAFF PETITION REQUESTING AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The 22.83 -acre subject property is situated on the southeast corner of the intersection of Davis Boulevard (SR 84) at County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. The property lies within the Royal Fakapalm Planning Community. REQUESTED ACTION and STAFF ANALYSIS: This petition consists of staff - prepared text and map amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series. These amendments were authorized by the Board of County Commissioners on December 14, 2010, with the stated concurrence of the owner /petitioner. The two amendment alternatives consist of both text and map revisions, and are identified below with brief explanation /analysis. In June of 2005, Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) adopted an amendment to the County's Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) establishing the Davis Boulevard/Count Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict (DB /CBRMU Subdistrict). The DB /CBRMU Subdistrict consists of 22.8 acres and includes as allowable uses, a 5 -acre (maximum 45,000 square feet of gross leasable area) commercial component limited to certain uses set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) C -1 through C -3 uses (generally office, personal services, and convenience retail uses). The DB /CBRMU Subdistrict also provides for residential uses on the balance of the property, with the eligible density being determined by the Density Rating System in the FLUE. Additionally, the DB /CBRMU Subdistrict requires a component of the residential units to be affordable housing. The amendment establishing this Subdistrict was initiated by the private sector — except for the affordable housing requirement. - 1 - After the establishment of the DB /CBRMU Subdistrict, the property owner submitted a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezone application. The review process has been protracted by several continuances by the applicant after Collier County Planning Commission meetings (in order to resolve issues of concern). The ultimate hearing before the BCC occurred on December 14, 2010, wherein the applicant agreed to continue the PUD rezone hearing while staff prepares and submits an amendment to the GMP's FLUE for changing the DB /CBRMU Subdistrict. The Amendment will either revise the Subdistrict to eliminate the commercial component, affordable housing requirement, specific development standards and requirements, and establish a maximum density of five (5) dwelling units per acre [BCC direction] or "repeal" it and leave allowable density to application of the Density Rating System [staff alternative] to be determined by the BCC. If the Subdistrict were repealed, then the land use designation would return to the Urban Designation, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. In either case, the amendment will eliminate the commercial component and requirement for developing affordable- workforce housing. The following supporting comparative analysis is provided as the supporting data required for Growth Management Plan amendments, using existing data associated with this Subdistrict. It should be noted that the basis for the Board determination to delete the DB /CBRMU Subdistrict and redesignate the site included all of the following: neighborhood concerns over compatibility; traffic impacts; changes in local conditions over time and the lack of need or desire for the commercial component at this location now or in the near future; and, the prevailing development pattern in the neighborhood. The Collier County Density Rating System allows for a base density in the Urban designated area of up to four (4) dwelling units per gross acre, typically excluding any commercial or industrial component of a mixed use PUD. The DB /CBRMU Subdistrict specifically provides that the commercial component of the mixed -use project may be used in determining the maximum eligible residential density. The entire Subdistrict (22.8 acres) is under unified control and the rezone application would apply to the entire acreage. Analysis Under the current Mixed -Use Subdistrict language, the most recently amended PUD rezone request provided for the following: • 35,000 square feet of (retail, personal service and office) use; and • 234 residential units. The traffic impacts provided by the applicant's Transportation consultant are as follows: Land Use Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total (2 -way) Multi - Family LUC 230 20 100 120 95 45 140 1,605 Shopping Center (LUC 50 35 80 155 160 315 3,430 820 Total Trips 1 70 1 15 1 205 1 250 205 455 5,035 -2- The proposed removal of the commercial component and a limitation on residential density to a maximum of up to 114 residential dwelling units (5 units per gross eligible acre) versus the currently proposed density of 234 dwelling units (10.25 units per gross eligible acre) would result in a significant reduction of public facilities impacts, as follows: Land Use Scenario Weekday PM Peak Hour (highest demand) Land Use In Out Total Total Trips 260 205 465 Less 15% internal Capture -40 -30 -70 External Trips 220 175 395 Less Retail Pass-by -35 -35 -70 New External Trips 185 140 325 The proposed removal of the commercial component and a limitation on residential density to a maximum of up to 114 residential dwelling units (5 units per gross eligible acre) versus the currently proposed density of 234 dwelling units (10.25 units per gross eligible acre) would result in a significant reduction of public facilities impacts, as follows: Land Use Scenario Total Trip Generation Current Residential 1605 Commercial 3430 Total Current Scenario 5035 Under Proposed Amended GMP Residential 786" * Represents a +/- 85, reduction in Total Trip Impacts With this reduction in intensity and density, there is sufficient capacity to serve the proposed maximum allowable density of 114 dwelling units. CPSP- 2010 -5 involves a number of Future Land Use Element text and Future Land Use Map and Map Series changes that remove or revise the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict entries in the FLUE. These changes are reflected in the two different Exhibit A sets presented for your consideration, as follows: ■ One version of the Exhibit A reflects revised Subdistrict provisions and Subdistrict map relabeling. The second version of ExhibitA reflects a wholesale deletion of the Subdistrict and coinciding Subdistrict map [and map listing]. This version is characterized by its strike - through of all Subdistrict provisions on ExhibitA pages 2, 3 and 4. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was held on Thursday, February 3, 2011, 5:30 p.m. at Terracina Grand, located at 6825 Davis Boulevard, Naples. Approximately twenty people other than the applicant's team and County staff attended. Corby Schmidt, AICP, staff Principal Planner, and Robert Mulhere, FAICP, consulting Planner provided a description of the proposed amendments. Developing the subject property as a residential project would no longer incorporate commercial uses or require affordable- workforce housing. Mr. Schmidt explained the GMPA Transmittal process including tentative hearing dates, to the group in attendance indicating how if the GMPA were approved in Transmittal, a subsequent GMPA Adoption process would be required. -3- Discussion surrounded differences between the two alternatives being presented for consideration. The applicant expressed a preference for the "repeal" of Subdistrict provisions in their entirety. This alternative would allow the desired flexibility in developing the project that re- written Subdistrict language may not allow, including reliance on established provisions for accessory uses and conditional uses in a residential zoning district. An attendee commented with observations on traffic congestion at the intersection of Davis Boulevard and County Barn Road. Another attendee asked about the nature of the residential development. The applicant indicated a variety of single - family and multi - family housing options are under consideration, with intentions to offer housing styles that are in demand in the area. No specific plans are envisioned to cluster the residences in a certain area of the property. Typical amenities such as a community pool and clubhouse can be expected, located on the property to provide a measure of buffering from traffic on Davis Boulevard. Clarification was provided to the group that the residential project would no longer incorporate commercial uses or require an affordable- workforce housing component. No one in attendance expressed opposition to the project. No major issues or contentions were raised or discussed. No statements of commitment were made by the agent, applicant or developer. Mr. Schmidt announced that another Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) has been scheduled to be held on Tuesday, February 15, 2011, 5:30 p.m. at this same location [due to a notice issue], which will afford neighbors additional opportunity to hear about the proposal and provide their input. The meeting was completed by 6:15 p.m [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt AICP Principal Planner] LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Office of the County Attorney's review of this Staff Report provided observations and comments on the legal aspects of CPSP- 2010 -5 planning considerations. These observations and comments were used in the preparation of this Staff Report for the February 17 consideration before the CCPC. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CPSP- 2010 -5 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for Transmittal one of the two discussed alternates for CPSP- 2010 -5 to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. 1. The Exhibit A, reflecting revised Subdistrict provisions and Subdistrict map relabeling. 2. The Exhibit A, reflecting wholesale "repeal" of the Subdistrict and Subdistrict map [and map listing] and re- designation as the Urban Residential Subdistrict. PREPARED BY: Corby Schmipt, AICP, Principal Planner Comprehens a Planning Section REVIEWED BY: D e David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager Date Comprehensive Planning Section Michael Bosi, AICP, Director Date Comprehensive Planning Section S l o2- Zvi/ Iliam D. Loren Jr., P. Director Date Land Development Services Department APPROVED BY: Nic alangu' Inistrator Date Growth Management S ices Division — Planning and Regulation Petition Number: CPSP- 2010 -5 Staff Report for February 17, 2011 CPCC meeting NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the March 22, 2011 BCC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: Mark P. Strain, CHAIRMAN G:ICDES Planning ServiceMComprehensive=IVIP PLANNING GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2009 -2010 Combined Cycles petitions\2010 Cycle Petitions \CPSP - 2010-5 Revamp of Davis Blvd - Cnty Barn Rd MU SubD \CCPC Transmittal \CPSP- 2010 -5 Staff Report.doc RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seg., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared plan amendments to the following elements of its Growth Management Plan: and Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission at a public hearing on February 17, 2011, has considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and Words underlined are added; Words stfeek thesuo are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendments and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendments, must review and determine if the Plan Amendments are in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J- 5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendments, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this day of , 2011. 2 Words underlined are added; Words swielc are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Heidi Ashton- Cicko, Assistant County Attorney, Land Section Chief BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLDER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN CPSP- 2010 -5 Transmittal Resolution Davis BivdJCounty Bam Road Residential Subdistrict 3 Words underlined are added: Words s>uek Owie ;!gh are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -5 EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL: TO GUIDE LAND USE DECISION - MAKING SO AS TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN A HIGH QUALITY NATURAL AND HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WITH A WELL PLANNED MIX OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WHICH PROMOTE THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE CONSISTENT WITH STATE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND LOCAL DESIRES. OBJECTIVE 1: Unless otherwise permitted in this Growth Management Plan, new or revised uses of land shall be consistent with designations outlined on the Future Land Use Map. The Future Land Use Map and companion Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Sub - districts shall be binding on all Development Orders effective with the adoption of this Growth Management Plan. Standards and permitted uses for each Future Land Use District and Subdistrict are identified in the Designation Description Section. Through the magnitude, location and configuration of its components, the Future Land Use Map is designed to coordinate land use with the natural environment including topography, soil and other resources; promote a sound economy; coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan; and discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl. Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict 6. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict 11. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict 13. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 14. Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Residential Mixed Use Subdistrict 15. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 16. Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 17. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** URBAN DESIGNATION CPSP- 2010 -5 Urban designated areas on the Future Land Use Map include two general portions of Collier County: areas with the greatest residential densities, and areas in close proximity, which have or are projected to receive future urban support facilities and services. It is intended that Urban designated areas accommodate the majority of population growth and that new intensive land uses be located within them. Accordingly, the Urban area will accommodate residential uses and a variety of non - residential uses. The Urban designated area, which includes Immokalee, Copeland, Plantation Island, Chokoloskee, Port of the Islands, and Goodland, in addition to the greater Naples area, represents less than 10% of Collier County's land area. The boundaries of the Urban designated areas have been established based on several factors, including: patterns of existing development; patterns of approved, but unbuilt, development; natural resources; water management; hurricane risk; existing and proposed public facilities; population projections and the land needed to accommodate the projected population growth. Urban designated areas will accommodate the following uses: a. Residential uses including single family, multi - family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, Subdistricts and Overlays that follow, except as allowed by certain policies under Objective 5. b. Non - residential uses including: * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, Davos BoulevaFdIGOURty Barn Read Mixed U6e Subdi6tFiGt, Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict; and, in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict; Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict, in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay; and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** A. Urban Mixed Use District * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 14. Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Residential Mixed W6e Subdistrict This Subdistrict comprises approximately 22.83 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road intersection. The intent of the Subdistrict is to provide for residential a development at a density comparable to, and compatible with, nearby developments. The maximum gross density shall not exceed five (5) dwelling units per. This subdistrict is not subject to the provisions of the Density Rating System. Rezoning is 2 CPSP- 2010 -5 encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. ; eR GOU Fagca- _ - WPM - le WIN— - -- • - - - CPSP- 2010 -5 * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9 ,5.10,5.11,5.12,5.13,5.14,5.15) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays Future Land Use Map Soils Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map Stewardship Overlay Map Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Maps North Belle Meade Overlay Map Existing Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Future Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Plantation Island Urban Area Map 5. The Subdi6tFiGt shall iRGlude a small types 6. The Rumber and type of aGGe66 paFk, plazas shall be and etheF of epeR 6paGe-. limited, deemed POORtS as appFGPF*ate DevelopmeRt Davis BouleyaFd the and GOURty BaFR R. 11. A monimum of 91 FesideRtial - DeRsity RatiRg System's - density - the total site aGreage). F9F the total density it is 91 dwelling - - F projeGt's arnGWRt as whetheF the Minimum of by the DeRsity Rating allowed System must hp - werkfaFGe - 80% the FnediaR - - - 0' be - • feF thase eaFRing thaR 80%, but no than 100%, the gFeater gFeateF ef median * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9 ,5.10,5.11,5.12,5.13,5.14,5.15) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays Future Land Use Map Soils Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map Stewardship Overlay Map Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Maps North Belle Meade Overlay Map Existing Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Future Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Plantation Island Urban Area Map CPSP- 2010 -5 Copeland Urban Area Map Railhead Scrub Preserve — Conservation Designation Map Lely Mitigation Park — Conservation Designation Map Margood Park Conservation Designation Map Urban Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Map Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Residential ""1V°,.n7ceV'c7 -se Subdistrict Map Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict Livingston Road/Veteran's Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict Map Exhibit A text alt. 1 DRAFT G:ICDES Planning ServiceslComprehensive=IVIP PLANNING GMP DATAIComp Plan Amendments12009 -2010 Combined Cycles petitions12010 Cycle PetitionslCPSP- 2010 -5, Revamp Davis Blvd. -Co. Barn Rd. MU Sub dw /12 -171 -0 5 UIT A t� DAVIS BOULEVARD / COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT O� COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PFTITIOM - .,P- 2ntn_n, PREPARED BY: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION - PLANNING AND REGULATION DATE 1/2011 FILE: CPSP- 2010- 5A.DWG ADOPTED - JUNE 7, 2005 (Ord. No. 2D05 -25) LEGEND SCALE Im SUBJECT AREA 0 1000 FT. 2000 FT, TA PE" V CPSP- 2010 -05 R 25 p 28 E R 27 E R 29 E R 29 E R R 31 E R 92 E R 33 E R 34 E _ 2006 - 2016 FUTURE LAND USE MAP Collier County Florida D N m � DETAILS OF THE RLSA OVERLAY AREA ARE SHOWN 'I ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TITLED: ~ "COLLIER COUNTY RURAL B AGRICULTURAL ❑ IN ALEE AREA ASSESSMENT STEWARDSHIP OVER MAP" 4AJ r` :SANCTUARY CAPE ROMANO - TEN THOLSAK s ANOS ,, AOUATC i MRVLL "_ F l _I URBAN DESIGNATION %!D uBe --T �.1 RURAL SETBELIENT AREA DISIRKT uaBAN aEaporsAL wawsTmcT mrn�n r�NreR suBwsmrcT V2 2ti ' O aESIDEN11Al OENSItt BANDS k m a UNN45RNi / MxE RIpCE ®caneERCIaL INFlU sumisTmcT �,1 I s PARx wews�xlcT i ® URBAN RE51DENnAL FwxcE SUBD —T Ast� DN AND TEawDLDDr PARx wBDlsTmcT OVERLAYS AND &15NE55 PAPit wBDISIRICT uHrvczrox RDAs / EATONwow LANE CpALRRGI Oei1LL SUBgSOtlCT SPECIAL FEATURES a\ g INCOfROFATED AaFAS L L AL ul%ED USE --T uMNCSroN RDAD / A�rtRAx•s 11E4aRU1 eLw. COMMERCAL INFlLL wBpISTRICT a ®VAN—I BEACH CIXLER BLw. CWMER<AL suw 5`AI - -�'NRPORi NgSE ` E BLOSSOM / U ORi CPOBSROADS CggAERCAl wBDISiR CT AREA OwPUr El N, -A) 4�1 T, AGRICULTURAL / RURAL y 1 cITY OFTi O ti Il "r !�"T LJ AoMCILTOIIALMWAL YDMD uN DMIRCT SIE nRD9 PS AREA 0,4RU1 1 uNN45fix! ROM /RADIO ROA➢ MRCUt MBILL wBgSTaICT FACIAL SUBwSTRICT . BOP . ® 'RAxStROx ZgIErn VERLAO Y VANDERBLT BEACH ROAD EgBgHOW COMMRC wB05TMCT A', CON.MERG pB I 'ROORFR ■ FCOWER �W� AAD C01111uxItt S RIC � zE0 ueE DMTIDDT M0UBIRULL gtTRICT LEa � H C, 1[2 H CAPE ROMANO - TEN THOLSAK s ANOS ,, AOUATC i MRVLL "_ F l _I URBAN DESIGNATION %!D uBe --T COYIRIIGAL DISTRICT RURAL SETBELIENT AREA DISIRKT uaBAN aEaporsAL wawsTmcT mrn�n r�NreR suBwsmrcT . RuRAL wpusrPUL DlsmlcT O aESIDEN11Al OENSItt BANDS INrzRwARa ArnRm CENTER wewsTRltt ESTATES DESIGNATION UNN45RNi / MxE RIpCE ®caneERCIaL INFlU sumisTmcT ® uaBAx wAnAL mwr� weDlsmlCT s PARx wews�xlcT CONSERVATION DESIGNATION ® URBAN RE51DENnAL FwxcE SUBD —T Ast� DN AND TEawDLDDr PARx wBDlsTmcT OVERLAYS AND &15NE55 PAPit wBDISIRICT uHrvczrox RDAs / EATONwow LANE CpALRRGI Oei1LL SUBgSOtlCT SPECIAL FEATURES OFFICE AND INFILL CRAMEAgAL wBDiS —T vUD uEICU1BtliH0pp Ml1AGE CENTER wwI—cT ^.AL r CDNMEaTGALaDINFl1 SUBgSTWCT INCOfROFATED AaFAS RE90EN Mx¢D USE NEIgIBOM,ODp w00151RICT a� uIRD U U BLOSSOM 11, SE SugwsTNICT AL ul%ED USE --T uMNCSroN RDAD / A�rtRAx•s 11E4aRU1 eLw. COMMERCAL INFlLL wBpISTRICT AREA TRnFTk cax¢sTIDN ewrm.wr STALE CwxLEAN OIERLAx ''. ®VAN—I BEACH CIXLER BLw. CWMER<AL suw 5`AI LEAF / 1 PID� ❑ CgfuEPGA. NFl wBpISIRC -�'NRPORi NgSE X�E�EASOU CREEK USE SUED SIA CT E BLOSSOM / U ORi CPOBSROADS CggAERCAl wBDISiR CT AREA OwPUr El N, -A) ARGx AND TEWN0.pCx vARK wBDSDtICT ■ BU WRED UBf suBDISMIC- AGRICULTURAL / RURAL OlE�ng1ESMEnC Ox 11 GEA ■ / ANDtE DESIONATION „� %;,1 cOAaraaAL u xED uu suewsrmcT 1 O�NS�BWtEVA�/�CWNTr BARN ROAD !�"T LJ AoMCILTOIIALMWAL YDMD uN DMIRCT SIE nRD9 PS AREA 0,4RU1 1 uNN45fix! ROM /RADIO ROA➢ MRCUt MBILL wBgSTaICT FACIAL SUBwSTRICT . BOP . ® 'RAxStROx ZgIErn VERLAO Y VANDERBLT BEACH ROAD EgBgHOW COMMRC wB05TMCT A', CON.MERG pB I NOR TX BELLF NEADE w.DeJ.r ■ FCOWER �W� AAD C01111uxItt S RIC � zE0 ueE DMTIDDT M0UBIRULL gtTRICT E[EiNNG LANDS La sesE,wwP'uo TEC�HUSgD�ex RARR slxwrBecr sdwND LAxDs ■ NEUTRAL Lwps _ (2) SFItlES�wa^wTMUEMNSAT� NNRE LvmmOVm uuumq+r uv. 0) X-4M I (A) (e) RE W- FLORIDA PANTHER NATIONAL WILDLIFE - REFUGE Te (sR IATCHEE STRAND STATE PRESERVE BIG CYPRESS NATIONAL PRESERVE NATIONAL PARR wsIDAD NArPRrp sECmN DCOMU �OEAE f¢£. CvsP xC. RDxuEUlA1 SQINCEB gVTW wouE -. j R 25 E R 26 E R 27 E R 29 E p 29 E R an c R III a R 32 E R 33 E I R 34 E 4- m A m A m M y a 1 a N v RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN IT'S ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. Se Q. Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared plan amendments to the following elements of its Growth Management Plan: and Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission at a public hearing on February 17, 2011, has considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and 1 Words underlined are added; Words sUeek dweagh are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendments and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty-five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendments, must review and determine if the Plan Amendments are in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J- 5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendments, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this day of , 2011. 2 Words underline d are added; Words amek thmgh are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text, ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN �v .V0 Heidi Ashton- Cicko, Assistant County Attorney, Land Section Chief CPSP- 2010 -5 Transmittal Resolution Davis BlvdlCounty Bam Road AKxed Use Subdistrict 3 Words underlined are added; Words Am& twemO are deleted Raw of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -5 EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL: TO GUIDE LAND USE DECISION - MAKING SO AS TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN A HIGH QUALITY NATURAL AND HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WITH A WELL PLANNED MIX OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WHICH PROMOTE THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE CONSISTENT WITH STATE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND LOCAL DESIRES. OBJECTIVE 1: Unless otherwise permitted in this Growth Management Plan, new or revised uses of land shall be consistent with designations outlined on the Future Land Use Map. The Future Land Use Map and companion Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Sub - districts shall be binding on all Development Orders effective with the adoption of this Growth Management Plan. Standards and permitted uses for each Future Land Use District and Subdistrict are identified in the Designation Description Section. Through the magnitude, location and configuration of its components, the Future Land Use Map is designed to coordinate land use with the natural environment including topography, soil and other resources; promote a sound economy; coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan; and discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl. Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict 6. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict 11. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict 13. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 44 Daavis R-e-i-devardICOURty Barn Read Mixed Use Subdi 4,5 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 46- 15. Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 4-7L. 16. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** I. URBAN DESIGNATION CPSP- 2010 -5 Urban designated areas on the Future Land Use Map include two general portions of Collier County: areas with the greatest residential densities, and areas in close proximity, which have or are projected to receive future urban support facilities and services. It is intended that Urban designated areas accommodate the majority of population growth and that new intensive land uses be located within them. Accordingly, the Urban area will accommodate residential uses and a variety of non - residential uses. The Urban designated area, which includes Immokalee, Copeland, Plantation Island, Chokoloskee, Port of the Islands, and Goodland, in addition to the greater Naples area, represents less than 10% of Collier County's land area. The boundaries of the Urban designated areas have been established based on several factors, including: patterns of existing development; patterns of approved, but unbuilt, development; natural resources; water management; hurricane risk; existing and proposed public facilities; population projections and the land needed to accommodate the projected population growth. Urban designated areas will accommodate the following uses: a. Residential uses including single family, multi - family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, Subdistricts and Overlays that follow, except as allowed by certain policies under Objective 5. b. Non - residential uses including: * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, Davis BeulevaFdiGeunty 13aFn Read Mixed Use SUbdiStFiGt, Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict; and, in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict; Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict, in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay; and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** A. Urban Mixed Use District * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 2 CPSP- 2010 -5 WILIMSTS ATIII -- CPSP- 2010 -5 * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 415- 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 4�&-. 15.Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 47-. 16.Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays - - - - - - Nord - - - - _ mud - - - - !!T ou * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 415- 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 4�&-. 15.Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** 47-. 16.Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays CPSP- 2010 -5 Future Land Use Map Soils Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map Stewardship Overlay Map Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Maps North Belle Meade Overlay Map Existing Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Future Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Plantation Island Urban Area Map Copeland Urban Area Map Railhead Scrub Preserve — Conservation Designation Map Lely Mitigation Park — Conservation Designation Map Margood Park Conservation Designation Map Urban Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Map Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict Livingston Road/Veteran's Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict Map Exhibit A text alt. 2 DRAFT G:ICDES Planning ServiceslComprehensive\COMP PLANNING GMP DATA1Comp Plan Amendments12009 -2010 Combined Cycles petitions\2010 Cycle Petitions\CPSP- 2010 -5, Revamp Davis Blvd. -Co. Barn Rd. MU Sub dw/1 -10 -11 5 Ex,,, BIT A pF11 DAVIS BOULEVARD / COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA rTZ7� � ������������� X111► t� BY. GIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION WAGEMENT DIVISION — PLANNING AND REGULATION )11 FILE. CPSP - 2010- 5B.DWG 1 1 0 0 PETITION �. P- 2010 -05 ADOPTED — JUNE 7, 2005 LEGE (Ord. No. 2005 -25) SCALE ® SUBJECT AREA 0 1000 FT. 2000 FT. R 25 R 28 E I R 27 E R 28 E ❑ RuRnL sETn&ewT AREA Drs T 2006 — 2016 FUTURE LAND USE MAP REaownaL owvtt eANOS Collier County Florida m V DETAILS OF THE RLSA OVERLAY AREA ARE SHOWN COYxFRU /mi1LL RSUwR"T BusHESS PAmc SECT ❑ CONSERVATION DESIGNATION ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TITLED: REBEARCH ANO 1ECxxOLaOr PARx —S—T ~ °COLLIER COUNTY RURAL 8 AGRICULTURAL 13 SPECIAL FEATURES of . AND INFlLL CONAQACJAL wBWSTRICT PUD x n i¢D USE Nl7Ex tER wBDKRUCi RESrow wRxoaD wBDrs;RIC T AREA ASSESSMENT STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY MAP" m f' R {4MPEV0 O�b�JARY . CONNED RILL /wBDIeiRICf �� Rlw. CREW NRPA to w OaOt£T£ / °NNE OG[ iJ CDNNERCIAL X wBDISIINCT T� —T NdSE ARE4 o4LxLAY ■ m„ED g "w�IJ RCr EBEARW ANO IECHN0.Wr 1A11 WIII 17 Dxx RDA B" / NRPaRT CRDJBRDADS e RICT ❑ PPOIECliON — ((NRPA) OVERLAY wa.Er .rxEO LEE weo—CT AGRICULTURAL / RURAL DESIGNATION ■ ORE /GATEWAY TR AxcLE mmuwT Dvwur m o AOMCNLTAAY./11U11AL AKIfED Y,� ONTRIOT Ru � --S A a�R,,,Y w COM.ERPU. --CT . COEaTiPgAL ww.SrHE� URBAN RURAL iRINCE Ax9ri ® 1R W 3pxE aN]hl.Y iAaun am'ieps�cr�uux rr Im uee mnwor � NoRTR BELLE uEAnE ow+ur ®RlOWTNLL �M'T ET RESEARdIPM TEC —LMY PARK SI— STRICT � ECE,hN6 LAADB SENNNG .ANDB N—AL —S (R) tK AnT Y OITFwvErm w'xour THE OoAS oRIE ivruAE vw uSE uAP T RAN. B� (J) AS EBE I Tn ruAE tAxD BFNwr TEVi. yAS,D wu wrzAaE.rs. uAiTEn crou„ A. n,DrEAUA N��CR� sm ruiuei.vms uen a nvz cwuu— w � i at5ez rA,'s'wri� h I.. .� -.1 Ei a0E➢EN ••- .�, ,....... NOR r; © l VEAjE NR A - Y m � - b H r " '9IT A R29E R �— J FLORIDA PANTHER NATIONAL WLDLIFE REFUGE aD "� —Y FAKAHATCHEE STRAND STATE y H .\ PRESERVE S 1 t.� N COLDER- STTATE ATE . \ - 1Jp P.VtK q PJ M � N moor rA. l � wrtrArn CAPE RX)MANO - TEaJ h AQUATIC Zp `� Yl e.e b SCAIE PREPARLD er: m3/CAO YAPpryyO SCC'IIOH W1WUxftt DflfLOPNwi AHD wNROHl22NTAL SERY.GES OM9WV wrt: 1/zmt Enc rnsv- zmo-m.oRc J 1125 E R 28 E R 27 E R 28 E R 28 E R 30 E PF- �N CPSP- 2010 -05 _ 1 E R 32 E R 33 E R 34 E i URBAN DESIGNATION nxm we YNSnncr oaNE oMTNCT ❑ RuRnL sETn&ewT AREA Drs T URBPN RESNw1vLL wBderMCr ■ ACTYNttttx1W SUBdSBBCr ■RURAL INWSIRiAL oRi1RICT REaownaL owvtt eANOS m A"m AcnNtt CENTER - OS11CT M ESTATES DESIGNATION ® uRBAx COASTAL iPIxOE SJB—CT COYxFRU /mi1LL RSUwR"T BusHESS PAmc SECT ❑ CONSERVATION DESIGNATION ® URB _ . sueol srmcr REBEARCH ANO 1ECxxOLaOr PARx —S—T ANF — - iTBRUARr tee0 - —Y, 2= .-E PAmc SuewsTRlcrNrs vuacE ROAO / uTOxwooD -E cauuwnu. wnu wwSmlcT SPECIAL FEATURES of . AND INFlLL CONAQACJAL wBWSTRICT PUD x n i¢D USE Nl7Ex tER wBDKRUCi RESrow wRxoaD wBDrs;RIC T ❑ COAMIX—CIAiROmFlLL wwISrRCi CONNERCNI — L. ww —.T ❑ INCORPORATED AREAS - -. Doasru xwx NAZwD AREA ■ ARAN LOJSW N . CONNED RILL /wBDIeiRICf �� Rlw. ........ RAmC CWCESTON �UxOtar —AREA of C A` STATE CONCERN ONEPoA. SE w�S/�COWw CA OaOt£T£ / °NNE OG[ iJ CDNNERCIAL X wBDISIINCT T� —T NdSE ARE4 o4LxLAY ■ m„ED g "w�IJ RCr EBEARW ANO IECHN0.Wr 1A11 WIII 17 Dxx RDA B" / NRPaRT CRDJBRDADS e RICT ❑ PPOIECliON — ((NRPA) OVERLAY wa.Er .rxEO LEE weo—CT AGRICULTURAL / RURAL DESIGNATION ■ ORE /GATEWAY TR AxcLE mmuwT Dvwur NII¢o L. wwlSTwcT o AOMCNLTAAY./11U11AL AKIfED Y,� ONTRIOT Ru � --S A a�R,,,Y um— wm CDNNEACIALRINF�ILL /..IRTRICT YNEµIQVN CgW�RC AL wBD STRICT COM.ERPU. --CT . COEaTiPgAL ww.SrHE� URBAN RURAL iRINCE Ax9ri ® 1R W 3pxE aN]hl.Y iAaun am'ieps�cr�uux rr Im uee mnwor � NoRTR BELLE uEAnE ow+ur ®RlOWTNLL �M'T ET RESEARdIPM TEC —LMY PARK SI— STRICT � ECE,hN6 LAADB SENNNG .ANDB N—AL —S (R) tK AnT Y OITFwvErm w'xour THE OoAS oRIE ivruAE vw uSE uAP T RAN. B� (J) AS EBE I Tn ruAE tAxD BFNwr TEVi. %Ij ZWA�' (ej ro raao wu wrzAaE.rs. uAiTEn crou„ A. n,DrEAUA N��CR� sm ruiuei.vms uen a nvz cwuu— �IN -1 v HIb R 31 E R 32 E R 33 E R 34 E p`�, ";. T\ "�. , .\ y FUTW— LA�SEAPIIK MAaus ! ADOPro - YNUARr. 19M I # m ANENpp - JNOIARY. 1pBp wEx0E0 - EEBRUART. tW1 y AMEN= IM Q E Qe ¢ BIG CYPRESS �S NATIONAL PRESERVE ryRAN uAA R+.a p A.— NAY. TMs w0m - APR. t00{ _ fA � W — pS m — ~ OI N m y Yi m - OClO k t9p] ANwDEO URUARY. teze ANF — - iTBRUARr tee0 - —Y, 2= aNwvw - NAY, 2000 .UIwDw - OECEYlFR 2000 A—OED - 11A —1 A.— - NA tA. RaOR (Ord. NR. ROM -RI) AM DFD - .UNE 11. RWR (ORD, x0. ROM -JR) ANENDFD - ocraMn n RMz (aa Ne. Rant -u) EE —my 11.:OaO Mtfli (SON No �A � sFVTRNMR 0. IDW (Od. no. Ra0Y1J) ANexOED - ta. gprE1MER 1E, RWJ tare RDDJ -wt> (a ANENaod oE,xAmw te, zaoJ Ne. mw-a'n ANwDEO ANEW- - GArvARr ]J. zoo] Ne.DECOr6 AuwaED 4. ROOD @d. Na. Hp]- ]e.N.el) (Or 2 OCTO�R -� 11. 300e s],sew) i � i R 31 E R 32 E R 33 E R 34 E