The URL can be used to link to this page

CP-2008-1 Updated Project Infoc ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT CP~2008-1 c UPDATED PROJECT INFORMATION BCC Transmittal Hearing March 22, 2011 c II GradyMinor Civil Engineers · Land Surveyors · Planners · Landscape Architects January 10, 2011 Ms. Michele Mosca, AICP Principal Planner Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FI 34104 Re: CP2008-01; Golden Gate Estates Area Master Plan Amendment; Estates Shopping Center Dear Ms. Mosca: As one of the authorized representatives for the application, I wanted to provide to you supplemental information related to the recent results of the November 2, 2010 straw ballot question concerning the proposed Estates Shopping Center. We also wanted to provide you with results from an on-line poll from the Naples Daily News (Collier Citizen). Both of the supplemental items demonstrate the high level of support for the proposed amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to permit construction of grocery anchored commercial project at the Northwest comer of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. On the straw ballot question, a total of 7,038 votes were cast in support of the proposed shopping center, which represented over 76% of the total certified votes on the question. There were 1,924 votes cast against the shopping center, which represented slightly over 21 % of those voting on the issue. The on-line poll results were similar to that of the general election. Readers were asked to respond to a question regarding two proposed shopping centers in Golden Gate Estates. One located near Randall Blvd. and lmmokalee Road and the other is the subject center located at Wilson Blvd. and Golden Gate Blvd. A total of 1,603 votes were cast in the poll and of those responding a total of 76% said they supported either the center at Golden Gate Blvd. and Wilson Blvd. or both centers. A total of 21 % supported either center, or only the center at Randall Blvd. and Immokalee Road. We are requesting that staff include the election and poll results information in the agenda packets provided to the Board of County Commissioners for their upcoming I). Grady ]'vlinor & Associates. P.i\. 31100 Via Del Rcy Bonita Springs. FL 34134 Ph. 2:m-B47-1 144. Fx: 239-947-0:n5 EB 0005151 · LB 0005151 · LC 26000266 \\'\vw.gradym j 11 0 r.com Ms. Michele Mosca, Alep Re: CP2008-0Ij Go/dell Gate Estates Area Master Plan Amemlme1ltj Estates S/Iopping Center January 10, 2011 Page 2 of2 transmittal hearing on this matter. Previously, we provided staff with back-up material which outlined the extensive public outreach effort associated with the proposed plan amendment. It would be appreciated if the election and poll results could be included in the public outreach section of the application materials. If you have any questions regarding any of the election or poll information, please feel free to contact Rich Yovanovich at 435-3535 or me. Sincerely, ~uj D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Director of Planning ~ \ ~ Election and Poll Results Transmittal.doc -, "'~; Page 2 of 218 http://naplesnews.com/Rolls/201 O/iul/golden gate estates shopping centers/results/ Poll: Does Golden Gate Estates need the shopping centers? Response Percent Votes Only at Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards 53% 862 Yes, both 23% 381 No, neither 12% 202 Only at Randall Boulevard and lmmokalee Road 9% 158 Total Votes: 1603 G:\PRO.l- PLANNINO\RCGMPA\Poll- Golden Gate Estates Shopping Ctrs.doc Page3of218 Collier County -- Supervisor of Elections Page 2 of3 ,.-.-----.-.------..-.----.--------------.--..--.--- I 2010 General Election I November 2, 2010 Final Official Results - Updated 11/12/2010 EARLY VOTING TOTALS --100% ABSENTEE TOTALS -100% ELECTION DAY TOTALS -- 100% WITH 94 OF 94 PRECINCTS REPORTING Provisional ballots included Federal ballots included GOLDEN GATE SHOPPING CENTER QUESTION Last Updated Nov 13.201010:12 AM Back Precinct: 551 I Total Number of Votes in this Precinct: 1241 I YES/SI I NO Over Votes Under Votes I Precinct: 552 Total Number of Votes In this Precinct: 1014 YES/SI I NO i lOver Votes I Under Votes Precinct: 554 Total Number of Votes in this Precinct: 1291 II' YES/SI NO Over Votes Under Votes Precinct: 555 Total Number of Votes in this Precinct: 1592 YES/SI NO Over Votes Under Votes Precinct: 590 Total Number of Votes in this Precinct: 2416 YES/SI NO Over Votes I Under Votes I Precinct: 591 Total Number of Votes in this Precinct: 1747 YES/SI I NO i Over Votes i I' Under Votes . Back i 1 931 (75.0%)-'--~..".'''.- 266 (21.4%)1 o (0%)1 44 (3.54%) I 735 (72.4%)~rllf~ 265 (26.1 %) L:>i o (0%)1 14 (1.38%)1 1,044 (80.8%)~ 224 (17.3%)1'" o (0%)1 23 (1.78%) 1 - 1,081 (67.9%)~ 421 (26.4%) ,....... .. o (0%)1 90 (5.65%) I' 1,407 (80.5%)~~~ 285 (16.3%) 1 2 (0.11%)1 53 (3.03%)\ ~ http://www.colliervotes.com/index. php ?id= 185 &spanish= N 12/7/2010 Page 4 of 218 H U rl 0:> r-- N 0 0 0 0 0 rl 0 0 H 0"\ OJ") N ""' ""' 0 0-1 <r: Z H ""' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0:> N rl N CO "" \D \D '" OJ") r- 0:> rl rl r- rl "" rl rl OJ") rl -N OJ") OJ") \D m 0:> N ,.: N rl o 0:> N 0"\ r-- "" "" OJ") rl rl 0:> OJ") "" CO rl "" '" rl CO rl rl M rl rl 01 0 01 m N ~ rl 0:> N "" 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rl 0 0 Z 0 0-1 H ""' 0 E-< rl U ~ 0 ril N H E-< ril Z N D H 0 .;:1 U p:; W '" \D W p:; ~ r-- rl 0 r- N 0 OJ") N N 0 tJ w '" OJ") rl OJ") 01 '" 01 N "" '" N N H W '" "" 01 rl rl " H ~ ~ ~ M H 0 "" 0 0 Z "" N rl rl U 0 N 0 N N '" rl \D N OJ") "" 0 N OJ") M 0 0'1 N U1 01 0 N 0 b rl M 0 0 0 r- "" 0:> \D 0 U1 \D N rl "" "" "" '" \D "" <Xl N U1 N 0 0:> rl U1 '" r- OJ") "" r- N OJ") 01 OJ") "" 0 0:> OJ") M \D \D 01 0:> 01 N rl rl C> "" ~ 0:> ~ 0:> 0 \D N rl rl "" Cl rl 0 W E-< W E-< U E-< Z H Z D a:: D 0 E-< 0 U E-< Ul U CO if: H Ul ~ 0 Ul E-< E-< :.: 0-1 U ~ Ul U H p., "" <r: z H Ul Z H 0"\ E-< H <IJ W H .:e r-- 0 U i: -"< 0- a:: U E-< 0 r.. E-< H r.:I +J ~ c: " w w 0 0-1 <r: p:; p:; W .,.., r... 0 z p:; 0 0:> <r: E-< 0 p., 0 c: p., p., ~ H 0 p., C> E-< 0 E-< Ul ~ ~ +J U n. 0 Ul 0 E-< ~ "" ~ ~ p., III <Xl D 0 W p:; E-< '" n. -'< ~ ~ Z S Z r- 0 rl E-< W W W E-< D Ul c: (f) "0 0"" (f) p., rl 0 .:e z E-< '" 0"" CQ U 'II 'II H H 0 E-< r- r.:I rl Cf) r.:I U p:; <r: .n k QJ .--j ;>, QJ QJ U H .:e p:; E-< a:: D E-< H ::r: ;oj -'< , <IJ ':> H Z 0 E-< :>< E-< Z E-< E-< 'H H 0"" c: Q) III Q) E-< 0"" I r.:I 'H H a:: .:e H Cf) 0 a:: 0 ~ 0 H III .,.., .:e <U -,.., .--j (f) [,J Cf) 3< :Ii 0 U H 0-1 W W Q) U "0 X c: U .n -'< H -..; E-< W <II [,J " 0-1 E-< E-< ... H c: <IJ H <II ;oj .n u III ~ H a:: ... 1:5 z p:; r.:I .:e 0 H 0 III <II .--j Q) ::l k 0 0"" .r:: Q) a:: n. 0 D "" a:: CQ ~ z ::: :.: :<: <r: CQ Cf) CQ CQ a:: U 1-1 ;<: r.:I ::: tJ) a:: D a:: Page 5 of 218 '" M 0 '" r-I o 0 0 r- '" '" <<> '" ro r- M r- <<> .n r-I r- ro 0 ro M r- <<> '" '" r- r-I .; '" o 0 '" ro r- '" M r- M '" N '" N ro r-I o U) <<> CO LO (p M r- N M N <<> '" N o r- N ro '" '" o CXJ \!) r-I :E ~ Cl p., ~ 0:; .c: u III o a: "0 >, o r-I H -" U III :E (!) ..-1 so: so: o u Ul (!) S C1l to N ,,; p., :z; (!) H ..-1 III .-l U ..... (/) -" U ..-1 H (!) :> <tl :E S <tl ..-1 .-l .-l ..-1 s: '" N E- H E-< ,,; E-< :z; tiI (/) tiI 0:; p., ~ 0:; rl H o 4-1 (!) ..... o :> M <<> r-I o 0 '" N '" M r-I ro M o 0 o 0 '" m N r- r-I N ~ O'l CO M \D rl \..D o;:;J" r- eo 0 r-I N ~ ~ -0 C> 0 0 m 0 O'l '-0 <TI M r- a .q< ...,. N ..;j+ '" {Y) 'q< r-- N r- <<;j' r- co m m N N -=::r U1 {Y) r-I r-I o::;r W \0 rl m M ...,. I..D "'J' (") Lf) O'l w Cl tiI E-< :z; ::> o o (/) E- ..-1 0:; "0 ..-1 :> <tl o :r: E-< H 3: :E tiI Cl p., s: r... <tl ..-1 U H III () (!) o to H Q) ..... H o p., tf> ..-1 <tl H U ,,; tiI E-< o on o H H ,,; >, .-l o 0:; 0:; o :z; 0:; tiI :> o () E-< ~ Z tiI E-< ::> tiI H H '"" 0:; o z 0:; tiI :> o () r-I H o 4-1 Q) ..... o :> CD r- 0 r-l 000 a '" N 000 C) 000 0 ro r-I ,;:, rl O'l \0 o:::r M co \.0 0 co r- <"1 ...,. rl o;;:f' (Y) (Y) '" <<> '" r- '" \!) o CXJ r-I <<> r-I <<> m r-I ,....- {Y) r-I 0 r-I ,.... rl r-I r-I '" ,.... '" r- 00 <<> N r-I r-I \0 0 \.0 \.!) Ll) N 00 LO M .-< o 0 C) 0 0 ONr-roO OMO"\roro r-I \0 rl qo m r- N r- ...,. en <<;f' r- .....-ION rl N '" N rl \!) M o co (T) IJ) w 0 m O'l 0'\ ...,. r- r-t W C"1 rl '" {Y) Cl ~ E-< :z; ::> o u (/) E-< U Z H U tiI 0:; p., '" '" r... o p., tiI 0:; :E ~ o '" '" ..... '-' o u Ul -" U '.-1 0:; -" so: ..-1 (/) X Q) .--< ~ :r: E-< H s: p., o H so: Q) .--< .--< .0:: H Q) ..... Q) p., .-< .,., r- N N ~ p., :z; ,,; p., :z; .c: ..... H ~ '.-1 H III :> <II .c: :,G "0 ..-1 H <II [L, tiI .--< Q) <II .c: U ..-1 :E o CXJ r-I ~ Z .0:: p., Z o '-' III H (!) 0. S H "0 (!) (!) 0:; u .-l Q) .... so: III o u '" '" N :z; H I tiI E-< H 0:; s: H .0:: 0:; tiI Z tiI () :>< ~ :z; 0:; o E-< E-< ,,; r-I H o 4-1 (!) '-' o :> '" 0 {Y) '" N 000 '" 0 '" o f'1 '" r- 0 '" m CXJ r-I N .,., {Y) ro .-< m .,., 0"1 ,.... o .n N '" o 0 .,., o f'1 0"1 ro N rl r-I {Y) o M rl f'1 .--< M ,.... 0 M 0"1 r- o '" N ,.... N '" '" ro .,., m 0 '" 0 r- o ,.... r- N N Cl W E-< Z ::> o u (/) E- ""' .--i o r- N ......! <.0 .--i ""' N <::> \D .--i o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 <::> <::> <::> C> <::> ""' '" \D '" '" \D <::> .--i <::> \D '" lJ) N r- '" ro .--i ro <.0 '" r- N C> ,.... r- N N r- r- <::> '" CO '" N CO '" ..; ",' ..; .--i '" .--i .--i rl '" 0 '" N <.0 CO (Y) '" <.0 N '" <.0 '" '" N 0 N '" '" <.0 CO '" \D C> lJ) N (Y) '" lJ) N '" '" '" \.0 C> (Y) 0 .,.;- ci; .,.;- ,...;- .--i .,.;- ,...;- N .--i C"1 r-t 0 0 '" <::> 0 C> C> <::> <::> C') <.0 <.0 .--i '" CO <.0 ",,' (Y) C> <::> .--i r- <.0 <.0 (Y) '" r- r- '" ro '" '" .--i C> <::> lJ) <.0 N '" <.0 r- '" .--i .--i (Y) <::> .--i 0 .--i rl .--i .--i 0 M '" .--i '" .--i .--i co rl N CO 0") N ill '" '" '" N CO (Y) 0 N (Y) '" <.0 '" lJ) '" 0 .--i CO (Y) '" .--i .--i <::> C') '" .--i lJ) '" '" (Y) r- N r- N '" (Y) r- N '" CO .--i '" ill 0") r- '" lJ) '" <::> r- N '" r- N <.0 '" .--i r- \D lJ) '" N '" 0 .--i (Y) '" '" '" lJ) '" N '" '" 0 '" .--i .--i ci; 0") '" .--i '" N <::> ..D r- N '" N N 0 0 0 r.l r.l r.l f-i E-< 0 f-i 0 Z Z r.l .--i Z N r.l D D lJ) E-< 0 ::> rl f-i 0 0 r- Z .--i 0 .--i Z U U D U ::> E-< 0 E-< E-< 0 (f) U) U U U U) U U f-i r.l H H H E-< H U 0:: U 0:: {f) ~ 0:: U 0:: {f) Z ::> Z f-i H H Z E-< H H E-< H U) U n, U) H U) U 0:: U H U H Z a. Z H U H Z W W ::> w 0 H W 0 W ;:c- O H U 0:: U 0:: U e:. 0:: U H a. :E: H a. p., ;:c- W W <1J ~ a. p., r.l W W W 0:: W :> 0:: ~ e :> 0:: w '" a. Cl ;:c- l'J '" e:. :E: ;:c- o.. H ll; '" 0 H N H ll; 0 '" ~ ~ o<r: '" r.l e E-< S H E-< N p., E-< n, 0 W '" ill !\S tJ) '" W C '" '" H u.. :>. ll; z w w ~ E-< E-< -n '" E-< W 0:: 0 E-< o<r: .--i 0 <1J e 0 .--i 0 C Z .--i u.. H 0 Z .--i 0 '" Z .--i W H H rl C >: 0 W 0 H U W x W 0 U '" <1J '" <Il 0:: '" +J 0 H +J U) -n U) N C 0 (f) ~ '" .+J ;:l (IJ c: w '" ;:l "U <IJ .-1 W ill ::< W N 0 U W '" !\S '" -n H Z a. "U .+J 'n 0:: 0 0:: '" .-1 0:: Z H :r: ~ N !\S 0 H :r: !\S <Il S p., H :r: p., H :r: "U 'n p., H :r: H 0 E-< .+J OJ N <IJ H 0 H :E: OJ !\S W 0 E-< ;,,:: C W 0 E-< ;:l ::< w 0 E-< W "-' H '" C !\S .+J (fl "-' H :r: .<:: :r: 0:: "-' H (IJ 0:: "-' H :r: 0:: 4-< H :;, C :z (fl (fl ~ +J U ~ -n .<:: ::< :>. ::< w OJ ..... !\S H <IJ S +J ""0 W <IJ "U 0. W <IJ +J H W <IJ W +J ..... H C S :z .+J !\S 0 !\S !\S E-< .+J ;:l <1J H +J +J H E-< .+J H 0 <1J 0 (IJ 0 :z 0 "U U H .<:: o<r: 0 H .+J o<r: 0 !\S III '" 0 :r: 2: '" H ;,,:: E-< 0 :> '" (fl H E-< E-< 2: E-< (f) E-< 2: :z H E-< 2: u u (fl {f) (fl Page 7 of218 '" N 0 l"'1 N ..... ..... en ""' ..... ..... '" ""' ..... '" N (V) N o 0 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 0 r- 0 U) C> ""' '" '" N l"'1 l.D '" r- CO r- N r- r- '" N ..... (V) '" ""' r- N N l"'1 CO l.D r- r- U) '"' r- N ~ "" cr:. M M ..... rl l"'1 CO N N CO '" U) 0 0 M M N CO r- l.D rl M U) N 0 N l.D CO N '" IV) U) N U) N U) rl '"' ~ '"' N cr:. "" ~ M M rl o 0 0 M 0 M rl N M rl N ""' CO '" M '" 0 '" '" N ""' N ~ M '" IV) U) M ""' l.D '" U) 0 (V) rl r- ..... U) M en CO N 0 l.D l.D ..... CO U) ..... rl '"' N ""' N rl N ..... N ..... r- N 0 '" ""' M r- U) U) M '" 0 CO M '" 0 l"'1 l.D U) '" U) '" M N '" U) '" '" C> l.D l"'1 0 '" l.D 0") '" l.D 0") '" ""' l.D 0") N U) rl ""' U) M N M "" '" (Y) ..... l.D '" 0 r- '" N N '" r- '" '" U) N eo CO '" U) r- eo CO U) N M' e;; r-' ~ '"' ~ cr; N N U) N ""' M ""' IV) 3 3 3 3 3 w w w w W E-< E-< E-< E-< E-< :z :z :z :z :z D D D D D 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 u u u >< CfJ ~ <fl :z E-< CfJ <fl 0 CJ:l U E-< Q E-< <L E-< >< E-< E-< E-< H U <>: u <>: u <L U CfJ U <L :z :z :z ~ :z <L :z H :z E-< H <>: H H W H 0 H Ul U U U ...:i U '" U '" U ;< H W ~ W W W Q <L W <L ~ 0:: o:r 0:: o:r 0:: '" '" '" '" 0 '" u '" u '" u '" ~ :z <L ~ H H H H <L ~ ~ co ~ E-< ""' E-< ""' E-< "<I' E-< '" :z M Ul 0"\ Ul '" CfJ '" <fl '" ~ Q) 0 D ::0 D D N Q E H [" >< OJ [" lJ [" OJ [" OJ [" Q) III CfJ rl 0 Q) M 0 ..... 0 ..... 0 M 0 a :z Ul M E-< E-< E-< E-< ::l N H co .-< 0: ""' <L '" <L "" <L "" :z "M c: ~ rl "M D 0"\ D '" D '" D '" ;:l III :r: 0 0 0 0 <IJ 0:: :> 0 >< :r: :z u >< :r: 0 k :r: 0 >< :r: u >< :r: .., u 0 E-< III H 0 E-< 0 E-< 0 E-< 0 E-< ~, .., III ..., 4-l H "M I ~ 4-l H H W 4-l H H W 4-l H H W 4-l H OJ >< >< >< ~ tr> ~ lE: ~ Ul lE: ~ Ul lE: ~ Ul :;:: :;: a '0 OJ E-< Q) >< E-< o:r Q) '- w OJ '- W Q) '- w OJ III c: .n :z ..., 0 H <L .., Ul 0:; .., U) 0:: .., U) <L .., OJ III 0 ::0 0 Q) 0:; '" 0 ~ 0 '" 0 ~ 0 '" 0 ~ 0 '" 0 OJ U) 0:: 0 2::- 0 :;: ::0 C- >< Z ::0 :> >< :z ::0 :> >< :z ::0 C- o Ul U) CfJ U) Page 8 of 218 <Xl '" M ..... <1' ..... M N N '" M ..... '" ..... N N N r- M .-I r- N o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o C> C> o 0 N N r- <!) U) r- .-l ..... r- N N \D '" <1' r- ..... ..... <1' .-I .-I N 0 <!) r- .-I \D <1' <Xl <Xl M <1' '" N N <1' U) (") <1' r- .-I M M U) "'. M <1' r- M '" .-I <Xl 00 ..... r- el") <!) 0 CO <1' <Xl '" <!) N ..... <!) <1' '" <1' CO 00 <Xl <!) '" '" r- '" \D r- 0 N '" <1' ,.0 (") ,.0 <1' .0- M ..; .; ..; M .-l M .-I ..... .-I M N N M .-I N .-I N ..... N .-I N CD r- el") .-I M N '" el") '" <1' 0 \D N 0 <!) 0 N '" N 0 0 00 '" 0 (") r- N M \D (") N r- oo <1' N' M N <1' .-I N N M .-I N N M N .-I N .-I N .-l N .-I N M r- r- M N <Xl M r- <!) <!) 0 0 '" N r- 0 '" \D M M <Xl <Xl 00 M el") <1' '" 0 '" <1' r- N \D \D M '" M \D M \D M \D M IJ) M '" M 00 r- M r- \D N N IJ) .-l N N N <!) ..... '" <Xl .-I <!) N \D ..... '" \D .-I M r- U) <Xl M "" U) ..; ..... r- "" "" 0 \D' .-l .0- ..... U) N <!) N '" N U) N '" N '" Q Q E-< Q ~ 0 0 .... r.1 r.1 ;";i r.1 r.1 ::> r.1 .... E-< E-< Ul .... U .... Ul Z >< Z N Z H Z :z: Z z ::> ...:l p P P 0: P .... P r.1 0 ...:l 0 0 0 0: 0 0: 0 0: U w U :z: u 0 u 0 u u :<: :<: :;:: z Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul W .... W .... W E-< r.1 E-< W .... 19 U 19 U 19 U t.9 U t.'J U 0 Z 0 Z 0 Z 0 Z 0 z ::> H ::> H p H P H P H I-J U I-J U I-J U I-J U I-J U r.1 r.1 r.1 r.1 r.1 ...:l 0: ...:l 0: ...:l 0: ...:l 0: ...:l 0: .0:: n. .0:: n. .0:: n. ~ n. .0:: n. w r.1 W w w n. "" n. "" n. "" n. "" n. '" n. '" n. '" n. '" n. '" n. <J\ .0:: .0:: .0: .0: .0:: c". c". c". c". c". c". .-I 0 c". .-I 0 ~ M 0 c". .-I 0 c". M 0 0 0 0 0 0 <1' <1' <1' '" "" E-< <J\ .... <J\ E-< <J\ .... <J\ f-i en cr; cr; cr; 0: cr; ::> k ::r: ::> k ::r: ::> k :z: p k ::r: ::> k :z: 0 0 .... 0 0 .... 0 0 f-i 0 0 E-< 0 0 H H U 4-1 H H U 4-1 H H U 4-< H H U 4-1 H H U 4-< H H Ul 3: Ul ~ Ul ~ Ul ~ Ul 3: Ul "- OJ "- OJ "- OJ "- OJ "- OJ "- Ul f-i ..., Ul f-i ..., Ul f-i ..., Ul f-i ..., Ul E-< .... Ul W 0 Ul 0 iLl 0 Ul 0 W 0 Ul 0 iLl 0 Ul 0 W 0 Ul 0 w :>-< z H :::. >< z H :::. :>< z H :> :>< z H :::. >< z H :::. >< Cl 0 0 0 0 Page 9 of 218 N N o r- C'l .-< r- N N N '" C'l N N \D "'" N N en .-< N N o o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 ...... 0 C'l 0 N '" N 0 ...... C'l .-< "'" r- \D CD .-< '" "'" en r- tf) 0 N 0 r- C'l C'l r- tf) O'l '" '" CO r- tf) ..; .; r- C'l 0"\ N cr; N en .-< .-< .-< .-< .-< rl r- r- O'l '" 0"\ \D '" N \D en N .-< ...... <'1 \D O'l C'l O'l CO 0 en C'l <'1 0 0 .-< O'l N r- t- O N ..; .; ..; .; ..; rvl N co N cr; .-< .-< .-< .-< .-< rl C'l .-< N .-< N .-< <'1 0 N 0 \D \D en N \D \D C'l t- O C'l '" ~i<' r- 0"\ t- O \D 0 '" "'" ro tf) <'1 en \D .-< .-< tf) 0 .-< CO .-< .-< "'" rl rvl .-< rvl .... rvl '" .-< '" 0 u) ...... N .-< N rl N .-< N rl N rl 0 0 0 CD N r- C'l '" .-< r- C'l N 0"\ .-< N r- C'l w '" tf) <'1 W f') 00 .-< r- N .-< CO O'l 0 W <'1 M \D M W C'l W M tf) '" tf) '" ..... w r- 0 tf) 0 tf) 0 t- <'1 tf) W .-< r- tf) W C'l '" W tf) '" tf) tf) .-< en tf) 0 CD '" \D '" \D U') u) M M .-<- tf) ~ .-< r- N '" '" N tf) N U') N tf) M '" <'1 '" M 1-1 Cl Q Q Q Cl f-l riI lil riI riI riI riI :z E- H ::> D ::> D H 0 H 0 0 0 0 1-1 U .0: u u u u :> :;. (/) (/) (/) (/) (/) riI E-< riI E-< E-< E-< E-< l'J u l'J U U U U Cl Z Cl :z z :z :z ::> H D H H H H ..., U IJ U .-. E-< O'l .,; .0: (/) c: (/) ., (/) rz, rz, H rz, -.... H r., ., H rz, r... .-< 0 r... .-< 0 Cl .-< 0 So Cl .-< 0 (l) Cl .-< 0 "0 0 0 01 >. ro '" '" Cl '" .-< (l) Cl '" Cl '" ., (l) !-< '" E-< '" ~ '" ..... (l) 0:: en c: ~ '" ., .c: 0:: ~ 0 H .0: 01 ro .0: (l) ill ::> ., :r: D ., :r: 0 ., :r: ., 0 ., :r: ;>, 0 ., :r: E-< ./J 0 0 E-< 0 0 E-< 01 0 E-< ., (l) 01 0 E-< ro ~ 01 0 E-< ..... ,~ U 'H H H U 'H H H 'H H <0 C 'H H ., 'H 1-1 .<:: e. (/) :;. (/) H ~ U C H So ro ;>, . H :;. :<: :;. ill --- ill --- 0 ill <0 0 (l) ..0 .<:: 0 (l) !-< ...., (/) E-< -l-l (/) 0 -l-l ./J rJ) 0 ...., ., -l-l 0 ./J ;>, (l) 0 (/) 0 W 0 (/) 0 lil 0 :r: 0 <0 0 :r: 0 <0 <0 :r: 0 0 0 :z 1-1 :> >-< :z H ::: >-< z u :> 0- 0:: U :> 01 :.: U :> ~ ..., Cl Cl U) U) (/) Page 10of218 v <l) N .-< 0) N .-< N N o '" .-< o o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 e- N .-< .-< N .-< '" '" <l) <!) '" e- e- N 0) '" <!) <l) 0 <l) e- '" e- <l) N M ex:> M N .-< 0 0) ~ cr; N .-< .-< .-< ex:> .-< 0 <!) 0 M .-< N e- O N N 0 M 0 '" v M <l) 0 0 0 e- N (T1 M '" <l) .-< ~ cr; cr; cr; c-? .-< .-< .-< N M 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 e- O (T1 N ex:> 00 ex:> <!) e- O) N .-! '" '" M '" ex:> ("') '" '" N '" 0 '" '" 0 e- O) .-! ... e- .n ill ",' .-< .; N .-< .-< .-< .-< .-< 0) '" .-< M e- v '" M e- ex:> .-< e- N 00 .-< ex:> .-< M '" N e- O '" 0 0) ("') '" '" .-< <!) '" <l) '" '" <!) '" ("') M '" e- O '" 0 .-< ... e- M 0 ... '" N <l) N M 00 0) ("') <l) N 0 0 <!) ... N e- N ex:> '" e- m '" ill '" .-< .-< ~ .n M M M M .-< ... 0.. :::> 0 e<: '-' a a a w ELI Q ELI Q E-t E-t E-t E-t U Z Z w Z ELI H :::> N t:> M E-t D E-t e<: 0 0 z 0 Z E-t U E-t U E-t :::> u t:> U) Ft: rJ 0 0 H U) ELI U) U U) U Q E-t U) E-t U) E-t U U U) U U) Z Z E-t Z ELI E-t Z E-t 0 H U H 0:: U H U H U H U H Z ... U Z E-t w 0:: ELI r... H w H :; p:; E-t p:; U 0 E-t p:; .-, 0:: .-; H Z p:; C W ~ E-t p:; -'< w ... .-; a M Ft: 0.. <tI C U) 0) (1) ..; 0.. (/) U) '" (1) 0) H .-; 0 N :>. ELI (1) Z .c H >, U) '" III -0 W 0 C U) M .-; 0 r... II 0 r... 0 H to: p:; r... III 0 0 u .-; 0 -iJ p:; .-< 0 ~ .-; .-< r... (1) 0 H .-< 0 UJ ELI .-; r... -rl E-t (1) .-; :;: 0 'rl S r... OJ 0:: 0 0:: '" (/) :E Z M '-' '" [iJ ~ '" '" .Q S H -rl W 0) C 0 0) -0 p:; '" '" .-< U) N 0 '" r.... M (1) -'< E-t OJ U C u :E 0.. [iJ 0:: ..., (1) U) ..; H :I: :> H ~ :I: a '" U) ~ :I: H ~ :I: w ~ :I: H :;: 0 E-t <tI 0 0 E-t 0:: :x: 0 E-t <tI 0.. 0 E-t ,.; W 0 E-t 4--l H ~ (1) E-t 4--l H -iJ p:; 4--l H -iJ :E ,:( 4--l H -iJ H 4--l H -iJ -0 '" ~ U -rl H :;: ~ -0 0 :;: -iJ Z :;: ~ ..; :;: ~ ~ (1) ~ t:> (1) (1) -rl U (1) (1) rl (1) (1) Q) :.: OJ (1) <tI H -iJ S ;:l a -iJ .Q :> -iJ '-' ::l E-t -iJ .Q .-; 0 -iJ .Q ;J: H 0 0 <tI U) 0 0 III '-' 0 0 III U) 0 0 :>. :E 0 .-< '0 0 > E-t H 0 2:- p:; a H 2:- H 0.. ..; 2:- p:; :.: :E > ,:( w U) :E III [iJ H Page 11 of 218 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 .--l .--l o 0 o 0 o Cl Cl Cl o Cl 00 Cl 0'\ .--l .--l C"') '" <l' <J) .--l <J) r- <l' <l' IJ) 0'\ <J) N '" C"') en C"') .--l .--l .--l N 0'\ r- .--l .--l rl IJ) .--l "" C"') C"') IJ) rl <J) IJ) C"l r- rl "" .--l .--l rl o 0 o 0 o Cl o 0 o 0 .--l N IJ) <l' 0'\ 0'\ <f) C"l .--l N to r- '" N <J) <J) "" <l' .--l en N .--l N en .--l 0'\ <f) IJ) 0'\ .--l N en r- N C"') <J) 0 0'\ N r- N r- .--l en <J) (Y) <f) <l' (J) 0 <J) r') IJ) "" '" M "" IJ) <f) "" <f) "" 0 "" C"l '" ..-i N l1) r- rl CJ\ '" N .--l <f) "" r- 0:> N <f) N N N C"') .--l .--l ..-i .--l ..-i IJ) <l' p C C p P r.:l r.:l r.:l r.:l r.:l E--t E-< E-< E-< E-< :z :z :z :z :z rl ::> N ::> ::> ::> ::> 0 0 0 0 0 E--t U E-:: w w (IJ W E-< r.:l E-< w ex: 0 w a: <:: 0 ex: ): 0 ex: .0: a: .0: :z '" '" :z '" 0 p '" .><: Cl '" <\l W '" W 0 1-1 0 1-1 '" U u >:: u 1-1 <Il <Il .--l (IJ rl (IJ +J rl <\l 0 rl <\l ..-i ;,G +J ;,G '" 1-1 <Il rl '" <Il >:: :> 0 0 W ..-i ~ ""0 OJ W .--l ~ 0 OJ :z .--l ~ ~ rl :z rl ~ <1l .... 0 rl ~ 1-1 0 W 0 C p., r.:l 0 8 .0 r.:l 0 OJ W 0 rl 0:: U 0 (IJ u ex: <\l a: 0> 0 r.:l ;; <1l W .r:: .r:: u .--l .--l U .--l 1-1 ex: ex: .--l .r:: ex: .--l 0> E-< .--l '" E-< 1-1 0 OJ \..'J u \..'J 0 :<: a: .... ex: <Il 1-1 :c ::l (/) 1-1 :r: ~ 1-1 :r: ""0 -... 1-1 :r: U 0 " :r: r... OJ 0 0 E-, ~ .r:: c 0:: 3: 1-1 a: H (IJ (IJ .c H OJ <1l OJ E--t OJ ""0 1-1 E-< OJ <Il <1l (IJ (IJ M Cl +J S U P +J 1-1 EO H +J 0 >:: H +J 1-1 N >-< +J .0 rl >-< Cl 0 <1l .... 0 0 (IJ <1l ex: 0 0 OJ a: 0 <1l ::l H 0 0 .... H H :> IJ 0:: H :> \..'J IJ r.:l :> :so :c w 2:- ::<: Ul w :> 0:: ~ w ~ ~ :c :c H H Page 12 of218 ...... ...... o 0 o 0 o 0 r- r- ""' N o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 r- ...... N .... CO 0 N ...... CO .... "" r- 0\ .... r- N \D '" <n CO ...... .... .... N 0) CO <n 0\' ...... l!"l .... <n r- 0\ N r- CO ""' <n N "" <n CO CO .... CO .... <n 0\ ...... .... N N ...... CO ".;- ;:; ...... o C> o C> o C> o 0 ""' .... '" r- 0\ <n <n "" \D CO 0\ 00 r- .... r- 0\ r- N \D ...... ""' N ...... N N ""' 0\ <n "" <n N .... \.0 "" '" \D .... 0\ ,.... ...... <n <n CO .... CO .... N r- '" <n ...... \D <n "" '" <n .... CO CO .... ...... CO "" <n '" <n CO .... \D ...... \D ...... 0\ C> \D ""' N \D lfl 0\ 0 N "" ""' N 0\ '" lfl .... 0\ 0\ ...... "" <n r- CO N N 0 ""' .; <n <n ...... 0 C riI 0 0 0 E-< Ii1 Ii1 Ii1 Ii1 Z E-< E-< E-< E-< :::> Z Z Z Z 0 :::> :::> N :::> '" ::> u 0 0 0 0 U U E-< U E-< U Ul <t: <t: E-< UJ UJ Ii1 UJ Ii1 Ul U E-< E-< UJ E-< UJ E-< Z U ""' U U U H Z Z 0 Z 0 Z U H E-< H 0 H 0 H Ii1 U ,:t; U U U 'M U U 0: Ii1 riI riI iii C riI p., 0: UJ 0: UJ 0: '" Ul 0: p., p., 0 p., :3 0 0.. 0 '" ~ 0 Z .;.J Z .-l 0\ .... '" 0 N '" ..... 0 '" ...... 0 :0- U C H Z H .;.J ~ .... ~ .M ..... r... '" UJ .... ~ UJ .... r... H ...... 0 .... 0 ...... :I:: 0 H H 0 H H 0 III ...... Ul H <lJ <lJ .-l (l1 '" .... N ::1 0: N 0 Ii1 .... .;.J -" Ii1 .... ...... <lJ .... 0\ N <lJ Ul ~ 1.9 ::r: {/) .M ::r: <lJ 0 H ::r: H H ::r: ...... E-< H ::r: ::1 ~ E-< H ::r: {/) E-< H ::r: E-< H 0 E-< ..-1 0 E-< ...... 0 E-: :r: 0 ~ -" ...... 0 ~ (l1 C Z ~ Ul Z <lJ 0: ...... U Q) :>, <lJ U '" <lJ '" 0 (lJ '- 0 "' .;.J ::l H .;.J H C E-< .iJ ::l 0- E-< .., "0 ...... Z .., Ul Z .., 0 ...... <1l H 0 <1l 0 0: 0 .c 0 0: 0 <lJ 0 Ii1 0 iii 0 Ii1 0 2:- <t: 0.. U1 2:- 1.9 0 0 2:- u 1.9 0 2:- E-< >< ~ 2:- >< z ~ :> 0.. p., p., Page 13 of218 o 0 <f) N co "'" N "'" r- M I"") I"") co 1.0 I"") N N .-< "'" N o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 r- r- CO 1.0 0 "'" 0 CO r- CO CO CO '" 1.0 CO 1.0 N I"") 1.0 CO CO 0) N r- 0 r- OO N N I"") ~ "",' 00 cr; <f) N '" N r- 0) N rl rl rl rl rl rl 0 0) 0) f'1 <f) I"") rl rl CO <f) I"") '" <f) 1.0 '" f'1 CO N CO "'" ..... 0 r- 0 00 CO CO U) N 0 ~ '" ~ U) ..; 00 ..; 00 ..; ;; N rl rl .--< ..... .--< "'" 0 o "'" o "'" N N N N rl CO I"") U) '" f'1 ..... U) 0) '" I"") r- CO "'" 0 I"") en 0 1.0 '" 0 CO 00 "'" r- 0 N I"") N '" ..; r- ~ rl '" '" '" 00 ..; <f) C'") rl M N .--< N rl N .--< f'1 r- '" rl N 00 0) rl r- I"") r- N "'" U) N r- OO rl "'" <f) N r- N r- OO .--< 00 rl I"") 1.0 CO .-< M 1.0 en '" <f) "'" 1.0 I"") N '" 00 N 1.0 r- N N 00 U) 0 I"") .-< N 1.0 1.0 0) '" 1.0 U) .--< '" 0) M 1.0 1.0 0) 0 00 "'" ,...;- ..0 .-< 1.0' ..0 ~ <f) cr; cr; "'" CO ..... C'") \.D Lf) "'" Lf) I"") Lf) C'") Q Q Q Q Q 0 r.J r.J r.J r.J r.J r.J <-< <-< <-< <-< <-< <-< :z: :z: :z: :z: :z: :z: ::> ::> ::> ::> ::> ::> 0 0 0 0 0 :;: 0 U U U U u ::> u 0 CJ) U) CJ) CJ) CJ) :z: CJ) <-< H H <-< H r.J H U U U U U 0:; U z :z: :z: :z: :z: r.J :z: H H H H H r... H U U U U U r.J U r.J W W r.J r.J 0:; r.J 0:; 0:; 0:; 0:; 0:; 0:; '" '" '" '" 0.. r.J 0.. 0 '" '" "'" "'" '" H "'" '" '" '" '" '" :;: '" r.J tu r... r... r... r... <-< r... 0 .--< 0 ..... 0 ..... 0 rl 0 .0: rl 0 H "'" "'" "'" "'" '" CJ) "'" 0) '" '" U) '" \.D '" 00 '" '" (9 ;r: <-< ... ;r: H ... ;r: H ... ;r: H ... ;r: :z: ... ;r: <-< :z: 0 H Z 0 H Z 0 H Z 0 H H 0 H H H W .... H H tiI .... H H tiI .... H H W .... H H 0 'H H :;: CJ) :E :;: CJ) :;: :;: U) :E :;: U) :E :;: U) :z; :;: '- 0 Q) '- 0 Q) '- 0 Q) '- 0 Q) '- H OJ (f) Z ..., U) Z ..., U) Z ..., en Z ..., en 0 CO ..., tiI 0 W 0 W 0 W 0 W 0 tiI 0 W 0 W 0 W Z 0 >-< Z ~ 2: >-< z ~ 2: >< z :ii :> >< z ~ :> >< z 0 :> z Page 14 of218 <0 r- "'" ..... '" ..... ..... a ....., a co '" ..... <0 a a a a a a a 0 o 0 a U1 "'" U1 co co \.D <0 N '" ....., ....., "'" ....., r- ..... "'" ....., ..... o U1 U") ..... U") N '" "'" \.D "" ..... r- co ..... r- M ..... '" r- ....., "" I"- "" '" "" r- U1 "" co U1 '" U") co ..... N \.D ....., N rl co ....., m "'" \.D m "" "" ....., ..... <0 ..... V> N '" en U1 M ...;- N rl "'" a o a o a o a o a a I"- "" a U1 U1 \.D co I"- '" N m co ..... <0 ..... I"- a a "" co m a "'" '" rl co "" "" ....., V> I"- a N 0 ..... ..... ...;- cO ....., .D "" ..... <0 "'" a a co N U") lf1 m ..... <0 lf1 "" U) U1 0 m "" lf1 N r- 0 <'"l \.D rl co <0 ....., 0 m l"- N ....., l"- N U1 '" <0 <'"l l"- N \.D "" I"- '" co r- ..... Cl <0 00 m a "'" l"- N r- '" rl ..... W N l"- e-- "" a N ....., a 00 co r- E-< ..... U1 "'" 0 <0 .-< U) en ;2 U) .D w '" rl .-< .-< N .-< W N E-< '" \.D N 0 H .-< >< M '" '" {!) ~ ~ 0 Z u w Z E-< Cl H H U) H Z U >< 0 :E ::> (Q w t9 :oJ I I I 0' I 0' Cl z Z Z Z z 0' 0 0 0' 0 w 0 w W H Cl H H E-< H E-< ~ W E-< W E-< W E-< Z E-< Z W E-< U) E-< U) E-< U) :oJ Ul :> !i. Z W Z w Z w 0 w 0 w :> :> :> :> :> :> u :oJ U p::; 0 a 0 a 0 a a u u u U) U) E-< Z Z Z E-< Z E-:: U E-< Z >< Z >:: Cl W H W H W H '" H '" p::; 0 I>:: 0 I>:: 0 0 w '" H Z Ul '" U) '" U) '" Ul l"- I>:: >< 0 z z Z N Z M H '" :> H 0 00 0 "'" 0 0 !i. 0 E-:: U rl !i. .-< r... .-< 0 .-< 0 :;:: 0 '" Ii! E-< 0 E-< 0 E-< E-< W '" IJ U U U '" U e-- I>:: "'" >< W H 00 H "",' H N H .-:: 0 E-< 0 I>:: U) 0 E-< U) 0 E-< U) 0 E-< Ul 0 E-< H 0:: 'H H !i. 0 H 'H H H H 'H H H H 'H H H H 'H H H U) 0 ~ !i. Cl ~ U) Cl 3: U) Cl :;:: Ul Cl :;:: U) '1 u OJ OJ "- OJ "- OJ "- OJ "- +-> U) Ii! .,., U) w .j.J U) w .j.J U) w .,., U) ..iI 0 t'J 0 W 0 I>:: 0 W 0 I>:: 0 W 0 0:: 0 w 0 I>:: 0 w >< Z H ::: >< z H :> >< z H ::: >< z H :> >< z H ::: >< (Q !i. !i. !i. !i. Page 15 of 218 "" .-i 0 00 '" .-i '" "" .-i '" .-i o o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 "" .-i N .-l m '" N U) N .-l '" m '" CO N r- 00 0 o \D M '" '" 0 o \D \D "" .-l I- N .-l M 00 N N ?- m I- '" m M m U) '" '" '" '" ,..;- '" '" r- 00 "" o '" .-l N N '" "" N N o o 0 o o 0 o 0 00 \D I- "" '" M 00 N co ~\ 0 '" I- .-l 0 0 0 m \D '" '" N <:I' .-< N l- I- 0 N ,; <:I' N ..; '" .-i .-l "" '" I- "" '" N 00 '" ?- m '" '" m 0 0 m U) "" '" m 0 '" '" "" '" 00 .-l N '" '" l- N N l- I- N N "" I- '" '" 00 m co "" N '" '" N '" 0 '" '" N \D I- "" Ul m .-i '" N 0 m .; ~ '" ",' H '" "" I- .-l ~ 0" N .-l ~ ~ H ~ Ul :r: ~ 0 H H :E: 0:; 0" ::E: 0 ..: H Z Z I I 0 0 Z Z H Z 0 0 0 ~ Ul ~ 0 H H H ..: H H Q H ~ H Z ~ Z H ~ C/) H Vl D D Ul f-< rLI Z ~ 0 Z 0 rLI Z D D D U 0 U D D CJl 0 QI H CJl 0 U Vl H Ul U Z Z H Vl f-< 0:; 0 C/) 0 U W U W C/) H H H Z D Z f-< f-< f-< U H H QI H Z U ..: z <( u U W Z Q H 0 W f-< W U H H U H 0:; 0 0:; U H W H 0" H 0" t9 W 0 0:; 0 H Z 0:; Vl 0" Ul .-< <( m H 0" Z Z '" ~ N 0.. 0 '" 0 0.. '" U U r,.. ~ r,.. 0 .-< r,.. .-< 0 .-l 0 ::r: .-l r,.. f-< 0 H Ul 0 U U .-l f-< m H '" H '" C/) N W '" 0:; 0:; H f-< >-I :r: H >-I :r; f-< >-I :r: BJ >-I :r: Ul 0 H Ul 0 f-< Ul 0 f-< 0 H _~1'1':. H 4-< H H H 4-< H H H 4-< H H 4-< H H Q s: Ul 0 ~ C/) Q ~ Ul Z ~ Ul QJ "- QJ "- QJ "- ~ QJ "- rLI .j..J Vl W .j..J C/) W .j..J Ul Q '-' C/) 0 0:; 0 W 0 0:; 0 W 0 0:; 0 W 0 H 0 W 0 Z H ::: >< z H ::: >< z H > >< Z 0 ::: :>< z r,.. r,.. r,.. t9 Page 16of218 Estates Shopping Center Public Outreach The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Comprehensive Plan amendment proposes to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to permit a phased grocery store anchored shopping center to be developed on a 41 acre site near the intersection of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The Subdistrict will permit a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial space, including a required full-service major grocery store component and other uses commonly found in neighborhood and community commercial centers such as banks, restaurants, phased general retail and personal services. The grocery store will be a minimum of 27,000 square feet and be the first use to receive a certificate of occupancy. The site is central to the northern Golden Gate Estates area residential population, and is located at one of the significant commercial node within Golden Gate Estates. This central location makes the site ideally situated to provide convenient shopping and service opportunities currently not available in this area of Golden Gate Estates. In addition, the proposed development intensity of 5,500 square feet per acre is less than the intensity of approximately 6,000 square feet per acre utilized by staff in its analysis for the current neighborhood centers. In addition it should be recognized that approximately 50% of this site will remain open space and extensive buffering will shield it from neighbors. The property owner has worked diligently over the last four years to enlist the input of area residents in determining their support for a shopping center at this location and to determine what uses are needed to best serve the residents of Golden Gate Estates. An extensive public outreach effort has occurred, pending Board of Collier County Commissioner review. The outreach effort has included mail surveys, independent newspaper surveys, public meetings and numerous focus group efforts. A summary of the community outreach effort is described below: · Two Focus Group Input (November 2007) The Petitioner invited a number of area residents to participate in two initial focus group meetings to share their ideas on what types of uses would be well received in a shopping center at this location. The participants identified several uses that were needed in their community such as a major grocery store, sit-down restaurant, hair salon, bank, etc. · Informal Meeting at fire station with Nearby Property Owners (January 15, 2008). Participants received an invitation by mail. · Golden Gate Estates Civic Association Meeting at fire station (January 16, 2008). The meeting was advertised in the newspaper. 1 Page 17of218 . County NIM Meeting (February 19, 2008). The meeting was advertised in the newspaper and property owners within 1000 feet were sent a mailed notice. At the NIM it was clear that there was a tremendous amount of misinformation pertaining to the project. In addition, at that NIM, the nearby residents requested that there be more details presented as part of the comprehensive plan amendment process. The Petitioner voluntarily withdrew from the 2007 amendment cycle and resubmitted its petition as part of the 2008 amendment cycle. After the petition was resubmitted to the County as part of the 2008 cycle, the Petitioner then continued to present the petition and solicit information through public outreach meetings and presentations. Results of the Fathom analysis (described below) and a more detailed comprehensive plan petition which included a conceptual master plan were presented to the public in several public information meetings. The process is outlined below. As a result of the outreach, the petition and site design has become more detailed than is typically found in other comprehensive plan amendments. . Fathom Study Interview Meetings (February 2-5 and February 28/29, 2008) The Fathom study consisted of over 30 ninety minute interviews with project neighbors and area property owners to determine how a center should function and feel. . Mail Survey (March 4, 2008) A survey was prepared by the marketing and research firm of Dolly Roberts and mailed to more than 5,500 property owners by a professional independent print and marketing company in our defined market area, with a response rate of approximately 28%. A highly respected independent accounting firm tabulated the results, in which 83% of the respondents indicated that they supported a community-sized shopping center at this location. Respondents also indicated their preference for prospective tenants to include a major grocer, post office, family restaurant, drug store, hardware store and ban1e . Immediate neighbors meeting (November 5, 2008). The immediate neighbors were mailed a written invitation to the meeting. . General area meeting (November 13, 2008). Notice of the meeting was advertised in the newspaper. . General area meeting in Spanish at Max Hasse Park (November 20, 2008). Notice of the meeting was advertised in the newspaper. 2 ~,., Page 18 of218 · General area meeting at Max Hasse Park (January 15, 2009). Notice of the meeting was advertised in the newspaper. · Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association meeting (January 21, 2009) · Collier County Fair, Community Outreach Booth (February 5-15, 2009) · Homeowners Organization of Golden Gate Estates (February 25, 2009) · Collier Citizen newspaper independent poll (March 6, 2009) February 2nd thru March 6th, 2009 , Yes or No For a 40 acre 225,000 square foot shopping center at the Northeast corner of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevard. 2.365 total vote YES 65% NO 34% · County NIM (September 14, 2009). Residents within 1000 feet received a mailed notice and notice of the meeting was advertised in the newspaper. · Meetings with representative of the First and Third group both prior to and after the September 14,2009 NIM. After the BCC decided to place the straw ballot question on the November 2, 2010 general election ballot, the following additional outreach activities occurred: · MAY 2010 Launched website Launched Facebook page Direct mail to existing supporters- letter with brochure English version (2,000) May 12 Spanish version (620) May 25 · JUNE 2010 Sent brochure to all registered voters (12,401 English/2,681 Spanish) Presentation - Realtors Luncheon June 2 3 Page 19 of218 1"< . JULY 2010 Community Candidate forum (Golden Gate Community Center) July 12 Community Yard Sale (Max Hasse Park) July 31 . AUGUST 2010 Community Center Yard Sale (Max Hasse Park) Aug. 28 Presentation - Big Cypress Elementary Aug. 31 . SEPTEMBER 2010 Election Yard Signs notifying supporters & non-supporters of upcoming vote Sept. 10 Community Yard Sale (Max Hasse Park) Sept. 25 Yard Sale (Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church) Sept. 11 Direct Mail Postcard # 1 Sept. 20 Registered voters 13,000 English! 3,000 Spanish . OCTOBER 2010 ,~~;, Taped interview with Naples Daily News Oct. 1 Editorial Board - posted online Presentation - Sable Palm Elementary Oct. 12 Community Yard Sale at Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church Oct. 9 Direct Mail to all registered voters Postcard #2 Oct. 4 Postcard #3 Oct. 11 Postcard #4 Oct 18 Postcard #5 Oct. 25 Advertising Full Page ad Collier Citizen Oct. 22 Full Page ad Collier Citizen Oct. 29 4 Page 20 of 218 Naples Daily News Online Poll Readers were asked to respond to a question regarding two proposed shopping centers in Golden Gate Estates. One located near Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road and the other is the subject center located at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. A total of 1,603 votes were cast in the poll and of those responding 53% supported just the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center and a total of 76% said they supported both the center at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard and the center at Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road. . NOVEMBER 2010 Election Nov. 2 The following the straw ballot question was presented to the registered voters in Golden Gate Estates: Golden Gate Area Master Plan Amendment - Wilson Boulevard/Golden Gate Boulevard Shopping Center Should the Golden Gate Area Master Plan be amended to permit a .:!:40 acre commercial shopping center, consisting of up to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area in single story buildings located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, that may include outparcels, inline stores, drive-through shopping services, and whose first occupant must be a minimum 27,000 square foot supermarket? Yes No A total of7,038 votes were cast in support of the proposed shopping center, which represented over 76% of the total certified votes on the question. 5 Page 21 of 218 ,~:%'T ~~. Page 22 of 218 II GradyMinor Civil Engineers · Land Surveyors · Planners · Landscape Architects December 6, 2010 Ms. Michele Mosca, AICP Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FI 34104 Re: CP2008-01, Golden Gate Estates Shopping Center; Green House Gas Reduction Al;lalysis Dear Ms. Mosca: As you are aware, the maximum commercial square footage proposed in the subject Golden Gate Estates Master Plan amendment application has been modified since the last Board of County Commissioner transmittal hearitig. The application now seeks a maximum of 190,000 square feet of conunercial uses. The original green house gas emission analysis was prepared by Keystone Development Advisors in November, 2009, and used 210,000 square feet of commercial development to analyze the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and green house gas reduction. Rather than prepare an entire new report to reflect the reduction in maximum commercial development, we will summarize the revised calculations in this correspondence as a supplement to the 2009 evaluation. The original report did understate the annual vehicle miles traveled attributable to employment due to an error in the calculation. The original calculation which had the math error was: 303 employees x 9.56 miles/trip x 5 trips/week = 11,945 (14,483 corrected)m.iles/week saved. The reduction in commercial square footage for the project results in a slightly lower number of full time employees from 303 to 269. The adjusted employment number equates to a weekly reduction in VMT with the proposed shopping center of: 269 employees x 9.56 miles/trip x 5 trips/week = 12,858 miles/week saved The revised annual reduction in VMT based on employment and the number of households in 2010 is 4,153,302 miles. There is also a significant reduction in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions due to the annual employee trip reduction. The revised volume of fuel conserved due to ff Grady Minor & Associates. P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey BonIta Springs, FL 34134 Ph. 239-947-1144. Fx: 239-947-0375 EB 0005151 · LB 0005151 · LC 26000266 www.gradyminor.com Ms. Michele Mosca, Alep Principal Planner Re: CP2008-01, Goldell Gate Estates Shopping Center; Green House Gas Reductioll AlIalysis December 6,2010 Page 2 of2 the annual trip reduction is 199,678 gallons. Using the figure of 19.6 pounds of carbon dioxide produced per gallon of gas as provided by Collier County, the revised annual reduction in green house gas would be 1,956 tons. Fuel savings in 2010 based on the average fuel price of$2.71/gallon would be $2.71 x 199,678= $541, 127. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, rv.~ D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Cc: Richard D. Yovanovich Page 24 of 218 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.E.l PUBLIC FACILITIES l.a. Potable Water Public facilities are not available in the immediate area and therefore the development of the parcel will require installation of a potable water well to be permitted consistent with the applicable provisions of the GMP, LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including FDEP and SFWMD and capacity will minimally meet the standards of the Florida Administrative Code. It is likely that the site will be developed with approximately 60,000 square feet of office space, 110,500 square feet of retail space and 19,500 square feet of restaurants. In this scenario, the following water demand may be anticipated: Water Demand: Office: Retail: Restaurant: 60,000 sq. ft. x 0.15 gpd/sf= 9,000 gpd 110,500 sq. ft. x 0.10 gpd/sf. = 11,050 gpd 19,500 sq. ft. x 0.5 gpd/sf= 9,750 gpd Total = 29,800 gpd Assumed incidental use for irrigation near seating areas per health code requirements: 3,000 gpd New Subdistrict Generation = 32,800 gpd Existing Residential: 17 units x 250 gpd/unit = 4,250 gpd Net Impact = (New Subdistrict - Existing Residential) = (32,800 - 4,250) gpd = 28,550 gpd Data Source: Tables in Chapter 64E-6 F.A.C. l.b. Sanitary Sewer Public facilities are not available in the immediate area and therefore the development of the parcel will require installation of a private sector package sanitary sewer or septic system treatment system permitted consistent with the applicable provisions of the GMP, LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including FDEP and SFWMD. Exhibit V.E.1 Revised February 2011 Page 1 of3 CP-2008-1 Page 25 of 218 It is likely that the site will be developed with approximately 60,000 square feet of office space, 110,500 square feet of retail space and 19,500 square feet of restaurants. In this scenario, the following water demand may be anticipated: Sewer Generation: Office: Retail: Restaurant: 60,000 sq. ft. x 0.15 gpdlsf= 9,000 gpd 110,500 sq. ft. x 0.10 gpdlsf. = 11,050 gpd 19,500 sq. ft. x 0.5 gpdlsf= 9,750 gpd Total = 29,800 gpd Existing Residential: 17 units x 200 gpdlunit = 3,400 gpd Net Impact = (New Subdistrict - Existing Residential) = (29,800 - 3,400) gpd = 26,400 gpd I.e. Arterial & Collector Roads Please refer to Exhibit V.E.lc, the Traffic Impact Statement. Project Transportation Consultant, TR Transportation Consultants, Inc., has prepared a Transportation Analysis for the conceptualized development program for the subject property . The proposed subdistrict is expected to result in a significant capture rate from pass by traffic as well as mitigating (reverse) directional flows (opposite of the rush hour directional pattern). The result shall be a more efficient use of the roadway capacity. This shall be one result of the satisfaction of community commercial need in the Estates. Another result will be the shortening of the trip lengths taken on the roadway system which is presently necessitated by the lack of commercial availability and services in the Estates. The roadway link LOS for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard is not ideal under 2013 background conditions, but all intersections and turning movements are shown to operate acceptably. Additionally, the shorter trip lengths as a result of the added commercial development in the Estates will improve the LOS conditions on Collier Boulevard and Immokalee Road as well. I.d. Drainage The proposed development will be designed to comply with the 25 year, 3-day storm standards and other applicable standards of the LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including the SFWMD. Exhibit V.E.l Revised February 2011 Page 2 of3 CP-2008-1 .-' ~ Page 26 of 218 I.e. Solid Waste The established Level of Service (LOS) for the solid waste facilities is two years of landfill disposal capacity at present fill rates and ten years of landfill raw land capacity at present fill rates. No adverse impacts to the existing solid waste facilities from the proposed project of 190,000 square feet of commercial uses. Solid Waste Generation: Office: 60,000 sfx O.Ollb/sf/day x 1 cy/250 lbs = 876 cy/yr Retail: 110,500 sfx 0.025 lb/sf/day x 1 cy/180 lbs = 5,602 cy/yr Restaurant: 19,500 sfx 0.05 lb/sf/day x 1 cy/300 lbs = 1,186 cy/yr New Subdistrict Generation = 7,664 cy/yr Existing Residential: 17 units x 25 cy/unit/yr = 425 cy/yr Net Impact = (New Subdistrict - Existing Residential) = (7,664 - 425) cy/yr = 7,239 cy/yr Data source: "Solid Wastes: Engineering Principles and Management Issues", Tchobangolous/Theisen and "Environmental Engineering and Sanitation", Salvato. l.f. Parks: Community and Regional The proposed development will not significantly increase the population density and therefore will have no effect on the community and regional parks beyond those mitigated by the payment of associated impact fees. The site, as presently allowed by the Future Land Use Element, Density Rating System and the Land Development Code, may be developed with up to 17 dwelling units. Using the average County household occupancy rate of 2.39 people per unit, this could represent 40-41 residents. Conversion to the proposed commercial subdistrict represents a slight reduction in the County population. The 2010 Annual Update and Inventory Report establishes two Level of Service Standards (LOSS) for Parks and Recreation. The Board of County Commissioners requires 1.2 acres of community park land per 1,000 residents and 2.7 acres of regional park land per 1,000 residents. If the subdistrict is approved, the County will be required to provide 0.05 acres less community park space and 0.11 acres less regional park land. In this case, the County would be required to account for an additional 0.22 acres of community park land and 0.49 acres of regional park land. In any event, these impacts are usually mitigated by the payment of impact fees during permitting. Exhibit V.E.I Revised February 2011 Page 3 of3 CP-2008-1 Page 27 of218 .-" Page 28 of 218 Exhibit IV.S Proposed Growth Management Plan Text a. Estates - Commercial District (VIII)1) Residential Estates Subdistrict - Sinale-familv residential development may be allowed within the Estates - Commercial District at a maximum density of one unit per 21/4 gross acres unless the lot is considered a legal non-conforming lot of record. 2) Estates Shoppina Center Subdistrict - Recoanizina the need to provide for centrallv located basic aoods and services within a portion Northern Golden Gate Estates. the Estates Shoppina Center Subdistrict has been desianated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Subdistrict is located at the NW corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard westward to 3rd Street NW and extendina northward to include the southern 180 feet of Tracts 142 and 106 of Unit 11 and the southern 255 feet of Tract 111 of Unit 11 of Golden Gate Estates. totalina approximatelv 41 acres. The Estates Shoppina Center Subdistrict is intended to provide convenient shoppina. personal services and emplovment for the central areas of Northern Golden Gate Estates. Commercial development in this Subdistrict will reduce drivina distances for many residents. assist in minimizina the road network reauired. and reduce traffic impacts in this area of Collier County. All development in this Subdistrict shall complv with the followina reauirements and limitations: a. Allowable Uses shall be limited to the followina: 1. Amusement and recreation Groups 7911 - Dance studios. schools and halls. excludina discotheaues 7991 - Phvsical fitness facilities 7993 - Coin-operated amusement devises 7999 - Amusement and recreation services. not elsewhere classified. includina onlv day camps. avmnastics instruction. iudo/karate instruction, sportina aoods rental and voaa instruction (excludes NEC Recreational Shootina Ranaes. Waterslides. etc.) 2. Apparel and accessory stores (no adult oriented sales) Groups 5611 - Men's and boys' clothina and accessory stores 5621 - Women's clothina stores Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 1 of 11 Exhibit IV.B Page 29 of 218 5632 - Women's accessory and specialty stores 5641 - Children's and infants' wear stores 5651 - Family c10thina stores 5661 - Shoe stores 5699 - Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores 3. Automotive dealers and oasoline service stations Groups 5531 - Auto and home supply stores 5541 - Gasoline service stations, without repair 4. Automotive repair, services and parkina (no outdoor repair/service. All repairs/services to be performed by authorized automotive technician.) Groups 7514 - Passenaer car rental 7534 - Tire retreadina and repair shops, includina only tire repair 7539 - Automotive Repair Shops, Not Elsewhere Classified, includina only minor service, lubricatina and diaanostic service 7542 - Carwashes, as an accessory to convenience stores only 5. Buildina materials, hardware, aarden supply, and mobile home dealers Groups 5231 - Paint. alass. and wallpaper stores 5251 - Hardware stores 5261 - Retail nurseries. lawn and aarden supply stores "",""",i" 6. Business services Groups 7334 - Photocopyina and duplicatina services 7335 - Commercial photoaraphy 7336 - Commercial art and araphic desian 7338 - Secretarial and court reportina services 7342 - Disinfectina and pest control services 7352 - Medical eauipment rental and leasina 7359 - Eauipment rental and leasina, not elsewhere classified 7371 - Computer proarammina services 7372 - Prepackaaed software 7373 - Computer intearated systems desian 7374 - Computer processina and data preparation and processina services 7375 - Information retrieval services 7376 - Computer facilities manaaement services 7379 - Computer related services, not elsewhere classified 7382 - Security systems services 7383 - News syndicates 7384 - Photofinishina laboratories Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 2 of 11 Exhibit IV.B Page 30 of 218 7389 - Business services. not elsewhere classified 7. Child day care services (Group 8351) 8. Communications Groups 4812 - Radiotelephone communications 4841 - Cable and other pay television services 9. Construction special trade contractors (office use only, no on-site equipment storaoe) Groups 1711 - Plumbino, heatino and air-conditionino 1721 - Paintino and paper hanoino industry 1731 - Electrical work industry 1741 - Masonrv, stone settino, and other stone work 1742 - Plasterinq, drywall. acoustical. and insulation work 1743 - Terrazzo, tile, marble, and mosaic work industry 1751 - Carpentry work 1752 - Floor layino and other floor work, not elsewhere classified industry 1761 - Roofinq, sidinq, and sheet metal work industry 1771 - Concrete work industry 1781 - Water well drillino industry 1791 - Structural steel erection 1793 - Glass and olazino work 1794 - Excavation work 1795 - Wreckino and demolition work 1796 - Installation or erection of buildino equipment. not elsewhere 1799 - Special trade contractors, not elsewhere classified 10. Depositorv institutions Groups 6021 - National commercial banks 6022 - State commercial banks 6029 - Commercial banks, not elsewhere classified 6035 - Savinos institutions, federally chartered 6036 - Savinos Institutions, not federally chartered 6061 - Credit unions, federally chartered 6062 - Credit unions, not federally chartered 6091 - Non-deposit trust facilities 6099 - Functions related to depository bankino, not elsewhere classified 11. Eatino and drinkino places (Group 5812, includino only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use. no outdoor amplified music or televisions) Exhibit IV S - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 3 of II Exhibit IV.S Page 31 of 218 12. Enaineerina. accountina. research. manaaement. and related services Groups 8711 - Enaineerina services 8712 - Architectural services 8713 - Survevina services 8721 - Accountina. auditina. and bookkeepinq services 8741 - Manaaement services 8742 - Manaaement consultina services 8743 - Public relations services 8748- Business consultina services. not elsewhere classified 13. Executive. leaislative. and aeneral aovernment. except finance Groups 9111 - Executive offices 9121 - Leaislative bodies 9131 - Executive and leaislative offices combined 9199 - General aovernment. not elsewhere classified 14. Food stores Groups 5411 - Grocery stores (minimum 27.000 square feet) 5421 - Meat and fish (seafood) markets. includina freezer provisioners 5431 - Fruit and veqetable markets 5441 - Candy. nut. and confectionery stores 5451 - Dairy products stores 5461 - Retail bakeries 5499 - Miscellaneous food stores. includina convenience stores with fuel pumps and carwash 15. General merchandise stores Groups 5311 - Department stores 5331 - Variety stores 5399 - Miscellaneous aeneral merchandise stores 16. Home furniture. furnishinqs. and equipment stores Groups 5712 - Furniture stores 5713 - Floor coverinq stores 5714 - Drapery. curtain. and upholstery stores 5719 - Miscellaneous home furnishinas stores 5722 - Household appliance stores 5731 - Radio. television. and consumer electronics stores 5734 - Computer and computer software stores 5735 -Record and prerecorded tape stores (no adult oriented sales) 5736 - Musical instrument stores Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 4 of 11 Exhibit IV.B Page 32 of218 17. Insurance carriers Groups 6311 - Life insurance 6321 - Accident and health insurance 6324 - Hospital and medical service plans 6331 - Fire. marine. and casualty insurance 6351 - Surety insurance 6361 - Title insurance 6371 - Pension. health and welfare funds 6399 - Insurance carriers. not elsewhere classified 6411 - Insurance agents 18. Justice. public order and safety Groups 9221 - Police protection 9222 - Legal counsel and prosecution 9229 - Public order and safety. not elsewhere classified 19. Meeting and banquet rooms 20. Miscellaneous retail (no adult oriented sales) Groups 5912 - Druq stores and proprietary stores 5921 - Liquor stores (accessory to grocery or pharmacy only) 5932 - Used merchandise stores 5941 - Sportinq goods stores and bicycle shops 5942 - Book stores 5943 - Stationery stores 5944 - Jewelry stores. including repair 5945 - Hobby. tOY. and game shops 5946 - Camera and photographic supply stores 5947 - Gift. novelty. and souvenir shops 5948 - Luqqage and leather qoods stores 5949 - Sewing, needlework. and piece goods stores 5992 - Florists 5993 - Tobacco stores and stands 5994 - News dealers and newsstands 5995 - Optical qoods stores 5999- Miscellaneous retail stores. not elsewhere classified (excludina aravestone. tombstones. auction rooms, monuments. swimmina pools. and sales barns) 21. Non-depository credit institutions Groups 6111 - Federal and federally-sponsored credit aaencies 6141 - Personal credit institutions Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 5 of II Exhibit IV.B Page 33 of 218 6153 -Short-term business credit institutions. except aQricultural 6159 - Miscellaneous business credit institutions 6162 - MortQaQe bankers and loan correspondents 6163 - Loan brokers 22. Offices and clinics of dentist (Group 8021) 23. Personal services Groups 7212 - Garment pressina. and aqents for laundries and drvcleaners 7221 - PhotoQraphic studios. portrait 7231 - Beautv shops 7241 - Barber shops 7251 - Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors 7291 - Tax return preparation services 7299 - Miscellaneous personal services. not elsewhere classified. excludinQ massaqe parlors. Turkish baths and escort services 24. Public finance. taxation. and monetary policv (Group 9311) 25. Real Estate Groups 6512 - Operators of nonresidential buildinqs 6513 - Operators of apartment buildinQs 6514 - Operators of dwellinas other than apartment buildinqs 6515 - Operators of residential mobile home sites 6517 - Lessors of railroad property 6519 - Lessors of real property. not elsewhere classified 6531 - Real estate aqents and manaaers 6541 - Title abstract offices 6552- Land subdividers and developers. except cemeteries 26. Schools and educational services. not elsewhere classified (Group 8299) 27. Security and commodity brokers. dealers. exchanaes. and services Groups 6211 - Security brokers. dealers. and flotation companies 6221 - Commodity contracts brokers and dealers 6231 - Security and commodity exchanqes 6282 -Investment advice 6289 - Services allied with the exchanae of securities or commodities. not elsewhere classified Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 6 of 11 Exhibit IV.B Page 34 of 218 28. Social services Groups 8322 - Individual and familv social services (adult day care centers onlv) 8351 - Child day care services 29. Travel aoencies (Group 4724) 30. Veterinary services for animal specialties (Group 0742) 31. Video tape rental (Group 7841. excludino adult oriented sales and rentals) 32. United states postal service (Group 4311. excludino maior distribution centers) 33.Anv other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foreooino list of permitted principal uses. as determined bv the Board of Zonino Appeals ("BZA") bv the process outlined in the LDC. b. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarilv associated with the permitted principal uses and structures. includino, but not limited to: a. Utilitv buildinos b. Essential service facilities c. Gazebos, statuary and other architectural features c. The followina uses shall be prohibited: 1. Amusement and recreation services. not elsewhere classified (Group 7999, NEe Recreational Shootina Ranoes. Waterslides, etc.) 2. Air and water resource and solid waste manaoement (Group 9511) 3. Business Services Groups 7313 - Radio. television. and publishers' advertisino representatives 7331 - Direct mail advertisino services 4. Correctional Institutions (Group 9223) 5. Drinkino places (alcoholic beveraoes) (Group 5813) Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 7 of 1 I Exhibit IV. B Page 35 of218 6. Educational services Groups 8211 - Elementary and secondary schools 8221 - Colleaes. universities. and professional schools 8222 - Junior colleaes and technical institutes 8231 - Libraries 7. Health services Groups 8062 - General medical and surQical hospitals 8063 - Psychiatric hospitals 8069 - Specialtv hospitals. except psychiatric 8. Miscellaneous Retail Groups 5921 - liquor stores 5961 - Cataloa and mail-order houses 5962 - Automatic merchandisinQ machine operators 9. Personal services Groups 7211 - Power Laundries. familv and commercial 7261 - Funeral service and crematories 10. Social services Groups 8322 - Individual and familv social services. excludina adult day care centers 8361- Residential care. includina soup kitchens and homeless shelters A~~j:; d. Development intensity shall be limited to 190.000 square feet of aross leasable floor area. e. One Qrocery use will be a minimum of 27.000 square feet. With the exception of one qrocerv use. no individual user may exceed 30.000 square feet of buildina area. f. Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the followina commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1. Riaht-of-Wav for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Riaht-of-Wav for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 120 days of a written request from the County. 2. The applicant will pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 8 of 11 Exhibit IV.B Page 36 of 218 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete. the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100.000 sauare feet of development. The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a qrocery store as part of this 100.000 sauare feet. and the arocery store must be the first C.O. obtained. q. Rezoninq is encouraqed to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). and the rezone ordinance must contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neiqhborinq residential uses. A conceptual plan. which identifies the location of the permitted development area and reauired preserve area for this subdistrict is attached. The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan shall satisfy all comprehensive plan reauirements for retained native veqetation. includinq but not limited to the reauirements of Policy 6.1.1 of the CCME. A more detailed development plan must be developed and utilized for the reauired PUD rezonina. h. Development standards. includinq permitted uses and setbacks for principal buildinas shall be established at the time of PUD rezoninq. Any future PUD rezone shall include at a minimum: (1) Landscape buffers adiacent to external riqhts-of-way shall be: · 1st/3rd Streets- Minimum 30' wide enhanced buffer · Wilson Boulevard- Minimum 25' wide enhanced buffer · Golden Gate Boulevard- Minimum 50' wide enhanced buffer (2) Except for the utility buildinq. no commercial buildinq may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern property boundary and within 300' of the 3rd Street NW boundary of this subdistrict. (3) Any portion of the Proiect directly abuttinq residential property (property zoned E-Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide. at a minimum. a seventy-five (75) feet wide buffer. except the westernmost 330' of Tract 106. which shall provide a minimum 20' wide buffer in which no parkinq uses are permitted. Twenty-five (25) feet of the width of the buffer alonq the developed area shall be a landscape buffer. A minimum of fifty (50) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained or re-planted native veaetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.05.07.H of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The native veqetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berm and be used for water manaqement detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be reveqetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.H of the LDC (native veqetation replantinq reauirements). Additionally. in Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 9 of 11 Exhibit IV. B Page 37 of218 order to be considered for approval. use of the native veQetation retention area for water manaQement purposes shall meet the followinQ criteria: (4) There shall be no adverse impacts to the native veaetation beinQ retained. The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro-period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existina veQetation. (5) If the proiect reauires permittinQ by the South Florida Water ManaQement District. the proiect shall provide a letter or official document from the District indicatinQ that the native veQetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water manaaement reauirements. If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter. then the native veQetation retention area shall not be used for water manaaement. (6) If the proiect is reviewed by Collier County. the County enQineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native veQetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storaQe of water in the water manaQement area. a. Estates - Mixed Use District (VI)2- Neiahborhood Center Subdistrict - Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents, Neighborhood Centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. (VI) a) The Collier County Land Development Code shall be amended to provide rural design criteria to regulate all new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers. (III)(V)(VI) b) Locations Neighborhood Centers are located along major roadways and are distributed within Golden Gate Estates according to commercial demand estimates, (See Map 9). The centers are designed to concentrate all new commercial zoning, and conditional uses, as allowed in the Estates Zoning District, in locations where traffic impacts can be readily accommodated and to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial and conditional use development. Four Neighborhood Centers are established as follows: . Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center. This center consists of all four three quadrants at the intersection of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards (See Map 10). The NE and SE quadrants of the Center consist of Tract 1 and 2, Unit 14, Tract 17, Unit 13 and the western half of Tract 18, Unit 13 Golden Gate Estates. The NE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately 8.45 acres. The parcels within the NE quadrant shall be interconnected and Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 100f11 Exhibit IV.B Page 38 of218 share access to Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard to minimize connections to these two major roadways. The SE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is 7.15 acres, allows 5.00 acres of commercial development, and allocates 2.15 acres to project buffering and right-of-way for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. +he N'/V quadrant of the Contor is approximately -1.98 acres in size and consists of Tract 144, Unit 11 of Golden G3te Estates. The SW quadrant of the Center is approximately 4.86 acres in size and consists of Tract 125, Unit 12 of Golden Gate Estates. Also revise as follows: TABLE OF CONTENTS, LIST OF MAPS [Page 1] Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict . add name of this inset map in FLUE where maps are listed. Policy 1.1.2: [Page 5] The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: 1.:. ESTATES - MIXED USE DISTRICT a. Residential Estates Subdistrict b. Neighborhood Center Subdistirct c. Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict d. Conditional Uses Subdistrict 2. ESTATES - COMMERCIAL DISTRICT a. Estates Shoppino Center Subdistrict . add the new Subdistrict in FLUE policy 1.1.2.2 that lists all Designations/Districts/Subdistricts. Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11-201 O.doc Page 11 of 11 Exhibit IV.B Page 39 of 218 C': S I Z < ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ c;l < Z < ~ == ~ ~ o c:z:: c;l c:z:: ~ ~ Z ~ U c;l Z ~ ~ ~ o == 00 00 ~ ~ f-; 00 ~ o " ~ :e -< ~ ~ .5 ,; ~ i. ::- ,; C ~ c:~ ;;:1 ,.:::::j > ,; -c~ ~~ <:.;;5 " o o C'l II '" i: '0 0. '" '" U U U '" ""' o '- Uc; .c > E 0 ::s '- !:: 0. 'O~ laQ l::::::J .9 p.. "'i;i""' u 0 ..9 IJ ~ "g E- U -=i3 '" .... .E '" 0.'0 U U u..c:: 5~ u.c IJ '" 8 ~ ~] 0;:= ~ .~ '" .... .s ~ 8."e- '" 0. ~~ u .... -<,9 o iIj ~ u r.r.J P ge40of218 Estates Shopping Center Sub district Commercial Needs Analysis April 15, 2008 Revised and Updated 2-1-11 Prepared for Mr. Rich Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. Mr. Wayne Arnold Q. Grady Minor & Associates, Inc. Prepared by Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 1415 Panther Lane, Suites 346/347 Naples, Florida 34109 (239) 254-8585 Page 41 of218 Table of Contents Executive Summary..................................................................................................................... 3 1.0 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 Purpose.................................................................................................................... 10 1.2 Overview of Needs Analysis..................................................................................... 10 1.3 Definition of the Market Area and Target Population ................................................ 11 1.4 Analysis Process ...................... ....................... ........ .................................. ............... 15 2.0 The Supply of Commercial Space................................................................................... 16 2.1 Estates Shopping Center Sub district's Market........................................................ 16 2.2 Additions to Supply from the Development of Receiving Lands ................................ 18 2.3 Functional Utility of the Project site ...........................................................................19 2.4 Functional Utility of the competing sites....................... ............................................. 20 3.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM for the Custom Trade Area 21 3.1 Overview.................................................................................................................. 21 3.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio .........................................................21 3.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment................................................. 25 4.0 Commercial-Office Uses ..... ..... ..................... .......... ........... ............................ .......... ........ 26 5.0 Conclusions for Custom Trade Area ...............................................................................29 6.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM for the TAZ Area....... 29 6.1 Overview.................................................................................................................. 29 6.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio .........................................................30 6.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment................................................. 34 7.0 Commercial-Office Uses.................................................................................................. 35 8.0 Conclusions for TAZ Trade Area.....................................................................................38 9.0 Conclusions for Comparison between Custom Trade Area in relation to the TAZ Trade Area 38 APPENDIX 1 .............................................................................................................................. 42 APPENDIX 2.............................................................................................................................. 51 APPENDIX 3.............................................................................................................................. 52 APPENDIX 4.............................................................................................................................. 53 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 2 Page 42 of 218 -- ~- -..., Executive Summary o Crown Management Services, Inc. ("Client") is proposing an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan ("Plan"). The proposal is for a 190,000 square foot grocery anchored shopping center on a 41 +/- acre site located at the Northwest corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard ("Project") in the Golden Gate Estates Area of Collier County ("County"). The Client has engaged Fishkind and Associates, Inc. ("Consultant") to prepare commercial needs analysis. o In the context of amending the adopted Plan, the applicant must demonstrate the need to amend the plan. As part of the analysis, typically there is a comparison of: · The supply of existing, vacant, and potential land/square footage planned for various commercial uses; · The demand for commercial land/square footage based on projected households in the market o Based on the current character of the region and proposed commercial development, the Consultant has analyzed the market need for additional neighborhood and community retail development within a custom 10-minute drive time market surrounding the Project. This trade area will be referred to throughout this report as the Custom Trade Area. An additional analysis was conducted utilizing the TAZ zones geography and corresponding demographic data prepared by the Collier County Compressive planning department. A map showing the two geographies is located below. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 3 Page 43 of 218 ESTATES SHOPANG CENTER SUBDISTRICT .'J ~ ~ !f <>\ 9 400 Oran tree z ~ '" " i "3fd Avoe NE "t :> w 15th AW: HE 9- ... " <;! '\ l. '" ~ 6OC-."'lCf'..'E 58;h A.~ HE ~ Aw. NE ib,ita &aa. *,d Sf '......-.Rd,s -, ;D. .. 15 I " m 5 41lr; Aw; "'E ~ ~ i: ~ !!1 Oil Well Rd o S~ ~ Lm." iii R I ,.. F L 0 A l- [ i l!i ~ :z ~'r- ~ Vanderbilt B....ch Rd t ~ ~ -< .Vineyaros l\ C 0 L I Pina Ridge Rd ;' M1' "-"T~" n !l, i\- ~ 217 'j Li I E ~_..ll/vot iil " ~8r::: ~ ]; .Gokfen Ga,(e ~ ~ ~ i Uj .s i 222 D .. '" Legend D Custom Trade Area D TAl Trade Area 22' " a: = ~ .~4.E""1lJI8des P~lOt 'II .. " ... ::::: 1m,e- . Golden Gate Estates is located in Collier County primarily east of 1-75. The majority of the Golden Gate Estates land and housing is east of CR 951. This area is semi-rural in nature and consists of lots ranging in size from 1.14 acres to over 5 acres. The sites that are currently 5 acres or more can be split to the minimum 2.5 acre site. The area east of CR 951 has very limited services for consumer support. This area of the county is expected to be the fastest growing in the future due to it affordability and supply of land for future development. o The metric utilized for the comparison of supply-to-demand is the allocation ratio. . The allocation ratio (supply/demand) measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to directly utilized acreage. The additional acreage is required in order to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints must be accounted for. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 4 Page 44 of 218 Consultant believes that to ensure proper flexibility in the Plan, this area should have a commercial allocation ratio of approximately 2.0 for the short-term. o Summary results of the retail needs analysis for each geography are shown in Table E1 and E2 below. Table E1. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. in Custom Trade Area General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 149,068 237,253 309,462 Existing Supply Net GLA (sq. ft) 94,506 94,506 94,506 Vacant Commerical 14,701 14,701 14,701 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand 0.73 0.46 0.35 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 322,139 463,089 Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand w/FLUI\i 0.82 1.36 1.50 Table E2. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. in T AZ Trade Area General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 249,333 344,845 413,175 Existing Supply Net GLA (sq.ft) 94,506 94,506 94,506 Vacant Commerical 14,701 14,701 14,701 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand 0.44 0.32 0.26 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 322,139 463,089 Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand w/FLUI\i 0.49 0.93 1.12 o Table E1 above indicates that currently the retail allocation for the custom trade area is below the minimum desired level of 2.0. By 2030, the allocation ratio for the custom trade area is expected to drop to 1.50, which supports good planning and economic policy to have a sufficiently high ratio to accommodate the expected demand in a meaningful fashion. Table E2 above indicates that currently the retail allocation for the TAZ trade area which is bigger in size. By 2030, the allocation ratio for the TAZ trade area is expected to drop to 1.12. Regardless of the trade area, there is adequate demand for retail space in this area of the county. As the situation currently stands, the lack of Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 5 Page 45 of 218 available retail choices creates a substantial impediment to proper market functioning. This market area can expect to increasingly experience: . Significantly higher than average travel costs for residents; . Impacted roadway networks needing higher than average operating and capital improvements; of which the burden of financing is apportioned County-wide; . Upward pressure on commercial land prices due to artificial restriction of supply; . Downward pressure on residential land prices due to a lack of support facilities. o Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this market. Any ratio less than 2.0 justifies the addition of land to the inventory of the market. Below is the analysis inclusive of both the Randall Center and the Proposed Estates Shopping Center Sub District for each geography. Table E3. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. with Inclusion of Project (Custom Trade Area) General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 149,068 237,253 309,462 Supply Net GLA (sq. ft) 109,207 109,207 109,207 Proposed Project Max Retail (sq.ft) 0 190,000 190,000 Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand 0.73 1.26 0.97 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 512,139 653,089 Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand w/FLUI'v 0.82 2.16 2.11 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 6 Page46of218 Table E4. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. with Inclusion of Project (T AZ Trade Area) General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 249,333 344,845 413,175 Supply Net GLA (sq. ft) 109,207 109,207 109,207 Proposed Project Max Retail (sq.ft) 0 190,000 190,000 Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand 0.44 0.87 0.72 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 512,139 653,089 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUI\i 0.49 1.49 1.58 o In 2020, the additional land in the custom trade area increases the allocation ratio from 1.36 to 2.16. For the T AZ area, additional land increases the ratio from 0.93 to 1.49. An allocation ratio of 2.16 or 1.49 provides a sufficient degree of flexibility for this market to meet future demand. It also would provide for sufficient supply as to limit the future applications for similar centers in the central Golden Gate Area, thus reducing the potential for commercial sprawl. The allocation ratios are more than reasonable with the inclusion of the Project in the FLUM. o Based on this analysis, there are insufficient lands designated for commercial uses in the market or the lands are not expected to be developed within the planning horizon of 2030. The under-allocation of suitable commercial land supports the need for the additional retail acreage proposed by the applicant. o Community and Neighborhood centers which are grocery anchored are most common as they provide goods and services to support a general trade area. Since the grocery use is the main catalyst and attraction to the center, grocery tenants pay significantly less in annual rent. In order for a developer to make the project financially and economically feasible, local tenant rents provides for the majority of the income to the owner therefore allowing sufficient cash flow for development financing. o Based on the economics of typical grocery anchored centers, it is not financially feasible to assume a grocery store can be a self sufficient facility on the site. As evidenced by the closure of several stand alone groceries, i.e. Albertsons on the Northeast Corner of Immokalee Road and Livingston Road and the Albertsons in Ft Myers. Considering the lack of standalone stores, and the fact they are not being developed more readily due to high land cost, it is unreasonable to assume this area can financially and economically support a standalone grocer. Also due to the limited services in the area, a grocery Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 7 Page 47 of218 cannot provide all the goods and services needed nor would the market expect one provider, they would expect a choice. a The Consultant has analyzed the demand for new office space in the County, on a per capita basis, as well as the implied need for additional office acreage within the custom trade area surrounding the Project site. a Using records provided by the Collier County Property Appraiser's office and information from the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department and County Clerk's Office the Consultant has determined there are 156,940 potential square feet of office space within the custom trade area surrounding the Project. a Also using updated records from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office, the Consultant has determined that, on average, the County needs 17.3 Sq. Ft. of office space per person. a Table E5 below shows the Consultant's population forecast for the market surrounding the Project for the custom trade area, followed by the TAZ Trade area. Additionally, Table E5 indicates the office needs associated with these historic and forecast population levels. Table E5. Historic & Forecast Population for Custom Trade Area W P dA d ithout the ropose men ment Per Capita Total Office Allocation Year Population Office Need Office Need Sqft Supplied Ratio Population (1990) 4005 17.3 69,388 156,940 2.26 Population (2000) 13684 17.3 237,081 156,940 0.66 Population (2010) 16100 17.3 278,935 156,940 0.56 Population (2015) 20212 17.3 350,182 156,940 0.45 Population (2020) 23917 17.3 414,379 156,940 0.38 Population (2030) 29119 17.3 504,499 156,940 0.31 Table EG. Historic & Forecast Population for T AZ Trade Area Without the Proposed Amendment Per Capita Total Office Allocation Year Population Office Need Office Need Sqft Supplied Ratio Population (1990) 4005 17.3 69,388 156,940 2.26 Population (2000) 13684 17.3 237,081 156,940 0.66 Population (2010) 27138 17.3 470,175 156,940 0.33 Population (2015) 31618 17.3 547,791 156,940 0.29 Population (2020) 35136 17.3 608,741 156,940 0.26 Population (2030) 39408 17.3 682,766 156,940 0.23 ~. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 8 Page 48 of 218 o According to the Consultant's analysis there is an immediate need for office uses in both the custom trade area and the TAZ trade area surrounding the Project. Unless the proposed amendment is added to the FLUM, by 2030 the allocation ratio for office land is expected to drop to 0.31 in the custom trade area and 0.23 in the TAZ trade area. There is insufficient land within this market designated for office use or potentially available for office use, which reduces the amount of sufficient choices for a developer to accommodate the demand. o The Randall Blvd Commercial Center was approved in 2010 and utilized an analysis to estimate market need for shopping in the general area of the subject. The concluding analysis is found in Appendix 4 of this report. Even though this methodology is different than that used by the consultant, its conclusions are the same, in that there is need for both centers in the Golden Gate Estates area of Collier County. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 9 Page49of218 REVISED AND UPDATED Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Project Commercial Needs Analysis (February 2, 2011) 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this report is to present a commercial needs analysis for the proposed change to Collier County's Golden Gate Area Master Plan ("Plan"). Crown Management Services, Inc. ("Client") is proposing an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan ("Plan"). The proposal is for a 190,000 square foot grocery anchored shopping center on a 41 +/- acre site located at the Northwest corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard ("Project") in the Golden Gate Estates Area of Collier County ("County"). The Client has engaged Fishkind and Associates, Inc. ("Consultant") to prepare commercial needs analysis. 1.2 Overview of Needs Analysis In the context of amending the adopted Plan the applicant must demonstrate the need to amend the plan. As part of the analysis typically, there is a comparison of: o The supply of existing land/square footage currently planned for various commercial uses o The demand for land/square footage based on projected population in the market Historically, these comparisons have focused their studies County-wide. This analysis studies the market for commercial retail demand around the project and portions of the County within a custom trade area based on driving distances from the site and adjacent areas unserved by retail uses. There are two related reasons for this type of analysis. First, consumers are assumed to maximize benefit over all goods and services consumed subject to their income. This type of analysis requires that travel costs are either explicitly or implicitly accounted for during the consideration of the consumers' income constraint. This analysis requires the Consultant to narrow the scope of the analysis from the county level down to a local market level. Second, the Consultant considers whether the choice of location is a Pareto improvement for consumers. (Pareto improvement means that no consumers are made worse off, and at least one is made better off.) That is, the Consultant asks the "~, Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 10 Page 50 of 218 question whether additional retail space makes at least one local market better off, without reducing the welfare of all others. An analysis of commercial retail space over the whole of a county may lead to the wrong conclusion of where to develop new space. That is, the county as a whole may appear to need more retail space to support the aggregate level of demand generated by its residents. With many County-wide choices of commercially-zoned lands available, the development of one site over another may lead to an oversupply in one location and an under supply in another. This is precisely the outcome the County wants to avoid. Therefore: o By narrowing the focus of this study to the local market, the Consultant determines if this market has a need for additional retail space; o The Consultant can replicate a competitive outcome, and ensure that the welfare of all other local markets is improved or unchanged. 1.3 Definition of the Market Area and Target Population According to the Urban Land Institute 1, "A neighborhood center's typical size is about 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from 30,000 to 100,000 or more square feet." Neighborhood centers sell convenience goods, groceries and personal services to the immediate neighborhood community. The typical market area for a neighborhood center is a 10- minute drive time. "A community center's typical size is about 150,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from 100,000 to 500,000 or more square feet. Centers that fit the general profile of a community center but contain more than 250,000 square feet are classified as super community centers." Community centers sell a wider range of products that includes apparel, hardware and appliances. The typical market area for a community retail center is a 20-minute drive time. Utilizing the above information as a guide, the proposed retail component of the Project is classified as a hybrid combination of both neighborhood and community serving. 1 Beyard, Michael D., W. Paul O'Mara, et al. Shopping Center Development Handbook. Third Edition. Washington, D.C.: ULI-the Urban Land Institute, 1999. p.ll Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 11 Page 51 of218 Community and Neighborhood centers which are grocery anchored are most common as they provide goods and services to support a general trade area. Since the grocery use is the main catalyst and attraction to the center, grocery tenants pay significantly less in annual rent. In order for a developer to make the project financially and economically feasible, local tenant rents provide for the majority of the income to the owner therefore allowing sufficient cash flow for development financing. Based on the economics of typical grocery anchored centers, it is not financially feasible to assume a grocery store can be a self sufficient facility on the site. As evidenced by the closure of several stand alone groceries, ie Albertsons on the Northeast Corner of Immokalee Road and Livingston Road and the Albertsons in Ft Myers. Considering the lack of standalone stores, and the fact they are not being developed more readily due to high land cost, it is unreasonable to assume this area can financially and economically support a standalone grocer. Also due to the limited services in the area, a grocery cannot provide all the goods and services needed nor would the market expect one provider, they would expect a choice. The project is proposed for 190,000 square feet of commercial retail space of which some of the ancillary supportive uses will be office in nature. These office uses desire a retail exposure, however do not impact the parking as heavily as more traditional retail uses might. These uses may include offices for real estate, insurance and mortgage companies, banks, governmental offices, federal, state and local, securities firms, etc. The inclusion of some office uses in this area will help to further support the area. The Consultant concurs with County Staffs assessment that analysis of a 10-minute drive time market area surrounding the Project would be supportive in terms of determining the need for additional retail development. This is because the region surrounding the Project is generally semi-rural in nature with a limited transportation network. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 12 Page 52 of 218 Located below, is a map showing the 10-minute drive time with the addition of those sections of Golden Gate Estates located south of Golden Gate Blvd, hereafter called the "Custom Trade Area". The map also illustrates 3-mile trade area buffers surrounding the existing center at Vanderbilt Beach Road and Collier Blvd to the west, and the planned centers at Immokalee Road and Orange Blossom and at Big Cypress, to the north and north east respectively. As we can see from this map, the Estates Shopping Center Sub District serves the Central and southeastern units of Golden Gate Estates which cannot be effectively served by any other areas. (Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank) Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 13 Page 53 of 218 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT RaE RUE R28 E &.....-:.l'Qlt5.;.:R-;l-~ PlANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, COMMERICAL AND INDU STRIAL ZONING '5 C Leg end C]PUD PUD COMMERCIAL _ PUD INDUSTRI.4L _ INDUSTRIAL _ COI.! MERCLAL l~nd c:::::J.~1Cf.tl"O'\l~~__GG'E . 0':'.eI'~1S . S.l9:'=S~ c::::J "".............., c:J ~~Ct,,-~..r"C'ri Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis w r-- ~ ~ w (D ~ ~ . w 0) ~ ~ w o l() ~ w l() ~ .......... 14 Page 54 of 218 Although the Project is classified as a community center with a 20-minute drive time market area per the ULI guidelines above, the "Custom Trade Area" will be utilized for this analysis due to the semi-rural nature and limited roadway network of Golden Gate Estates. This Custom Trade Area consists of a 10-minute drive time surrounding the site and the addition of the units of Golden Gate Estates located along Everglades Blvd south of Golden Gate Blvd. The proposed center falls within the threshold of community serving centers and will sell a wider range of goods than a neighborhood center, therefore the Consultant has accounted for a portion of the trade area's community center expenditures in addition to neighborhood expenditures. Therefore, the need for additional retail development is based on an analysis of: o A 10-minute drive-time with the additional southeast GGE units market surrounding the Project; "Custom Trade Area" o The "Custom Trade Areas" need for additional nei~hborhood goods and services and a portion of community goods and services. Estimates of existing and projected housing units and households for the Custom Trade Area are provided for years 2010, 2020 and 2030 in Table 3. These figures were estimated using parcel data from the Property Appraiser and occupancy rates for the trade area from 1- Site, Census-based Demographics package. 1.4 Analysis Process The process of determining the need for additional retail land is a four-step process, as outlined below. o Inventory existing supply of commercial space in the market area; o Inventory vacant commercial space and parcels designated as having the potential for commercial space by the Future Land Use Map (FLUM); o Project future housing units/households to determine future commercial land needs and compare against commercial land allocation ratios; o Determine impact of the Project's proposed commercial land on land allocation ratio within the market area. 2 See Appendix A 1, 'Index of Sales by Center Type' for details Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 15 Page 55 of218 2.0 The Supply of Commercial Space 2.1 Estates Shopping Center Sub district's Market The analysis begins with the supply of existing, vacant, and potential commercial square feet in the market area. The site is located at the northwest corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard in the Golden Gate Estates area of the County. The Custom Trade Area, or market serving the Estates Shopping Center Sub district, is an aggregation of a 10-minute drive time radius surrounding the site and the addition of those units of Golden Gate Estates located east and south of the drive time radius surrounding the subject site (map in Appendix 2). Table 1 provides the current inventory of commercial space based on the Property Appraiser's ('PA") data, as well as data provided by the Comprehensive Planning Department ("CPO"). These data provide an estimate of 596,313 (rounded) square feet of existing, vacant, and potential commercial-retail space. This includes the approved 340,950 sqft Randall Blvd Commercial Sub district. Table 1. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial-Retail Space in Mixed Use Project's Custom Trade Area Vacant Commercial Folio 37280040002 kres 2.41 Potential Commercial Folio 37745120001 37280080004 40629000001 40680004000 40930760001 40930720009 kres 16 2.12 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 39.96 ExistinQ Commercial Folio 37221120101 37169520009 37280040109 37744040001 37745180009 kres 5.00 4.19 2.65 2,53 1.14 15.51 Sqft* 14,701 Description N. of E's Country Store Sqft* 340,950 12,932 33,306 33,306 33,306 33,306 487,106 Description Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. E. of E's Country Store Everglades Blvdl Golden Gate Blvd Center Sqft Description 42,000 Wilson Blvd Center 15,000 Walgreen's (SW Quadrant) 11,224 E's Country Store 21,926 Randall Blvd 4,356 Randall Blvd 94,506 Total Inventory 57.88 596,313 *Assumed 6,100 Square feet per Acre (94,506 SQFT /15.51) = 6,093, Rounded to 6,100 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis '-", 16 Page 56 of 218 The potential commercial includes the four separate corners that make up the Everglades Blvd/Golden Gate Blvd center. These parcels fall in the Neighborhood Center Sub district designation of the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. This neighborhood designation states the following; liThe neighborhood center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning", The fact these parcels of land are located the furthest from the existing concentration of households, and are not of similar functional utility to the subject project, suggest the probability of commercial development is very limited before the end of the planning horizon used in this report. The inclusion of these sites increases the potential commercial supply by 27 percent, which is a substantial amount considering their inferior location and functional utility. Based on these factors, it is the Consultant's opinion these parcels not be included especially considering we have included the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub district. The reasoning for including the demand of existing households in this area is to account for limited population which currently resides there. Future households are anticipated to be located closer to the employment centers of Collier County, which supports the increase in demand calculated in this report. Located below we have recalculated the allocation ratio assuming that none of the parcels within the Everglades Blvd/Golden Gate Blvd Center parcel are included. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 17 Page 57 of 218 Table 2. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial-Retail Space NOT INCLUDING THE EVERGLADES BLVD/GOLDEN GATE BLVD CENTER in Mixed Use ~" Project's Custom Trade Area Vacant Corrmercial Folio 37280040002 kres 2.41 Potential Commercial Folio 37745120001 37280080004 40629000001 40680004000 40930760001 40930720009 kres 16 2.12 5,46 5.46 5.46 5.46 18.12 Existing Commercial Folio 37221120101 37169520009 37280040109 37744040001 37745180009 kres 5.00 4.19 2.65 2,53 1.14 15.51 Total Inventory 36.04 Sqft* 14,701 Description N. of E's Country Store Sqft* 340,950 12,932 33,306 33,306 33,306 33,306 353,882 Description Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. E. of E's Country Store Everglades BI..:Jj Golden Gate BI..:J Center Sqft Description 42,000 Wilson Blvd Center 15,000 Walgreen's (SW Quadrant) 11,224 E's Country Store 21,926 Randall Blvd 4,356 Randall Blvd 94,506 463,089 *Assumed 6,100 Square feet per Acre (94,506 SOFT /15.51) = 6,093, Rounded to 6,100 The exclusion of four parcels located in the Everglades Blvd/Golden Gate Blvd Center reduces the total inventory by 133,224 sqft. The remaining inventory of 463,089 sqft of commercial inventory is considered reasonable within the planning horizon of 2030. 2.2 Additions to Supply from the Development of Receiving Lands County Staff has indicated two Rural Villages ranging in size from 300 to 1,500 acres are permitted in the Receiving Lands to the north and south of the Project. Portions of these Receiving Lands are within the periphery of the Custom Trade Area market surrounding the Project. According to the Collier County Future Land Use Element, these Rural Villages must include a Village Center and several Neighborhood Centers which would yield additional commercial development in the region. To date, landowners in these Receiving Lands have not given any indication of action or intent on initiating the lengthy permitting and review process necessary for development. However, the Consultant has not included potential commercial development within these Receiving Lands as supply for two additional related reasons: Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis ~~ 18 Page 58 of218 o First, commercial development within Rural Villages is intended to be self- sustainable and serve the residents of the Village. According to the Collier County Future Land Use Element, "Rural Villages may be approved.....to reduce the need of residents of the District and surrounding lands to travel to the County's Urban area...... Village Centers shall be designed to serve the retail, office, civic, government uses and service needs of the residents of the village." o Second, development of Rural Villages in the Receiving Lands will generate a substantial increase in the number of households in the region. This information indicates the region's demand for commercial space would also substantially increase. Therefore, commercial development within the Rural Village would likely accommodate the incremental increase in demand generated by new, internal households and have a net neutral effect to the surrounding markets. 2.3 Functional Utility of the Project site Functional Utility is defined as: The ability of a property or building to be useful and to perform the function for which it is intended according to the current market tastes and standards; the efficiency of a building's use in terms of architectural style, design and layout, traffic patterns and the size and type of roomS3. The Estates Neighborhood Centers were established as a means to direct new commercial development to areas where traffic impacts could be readily accommodated. The Project is located at the Northwest quadrant of the Wilson Boulevard/Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center. The Plan designates 4.98 acres for commercial development at this quadrant. The size of this parcel is not of adequate functional utility to develop a shopping center that fulfills a diverse set of commercial needs for the immediate area for three reasons: o Bufferina/Setback Requirements - In order to preserve the rural character of the region, a buffer of 75 feet is required for projects abutting residential property which is consistent with the typical lot frontage of sites in this area. By minimizing developable area, this stipulation significantly reduces the ability of the 4.98 acre quadrant to accommodate commercial need in a meaningful fashion; o Utilities - There are no sewer/water connections available on the NW quadrant of the Neighborhood Center. New development must utilize a package plant 3 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition @ 2002, Appraisal Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 19 Page 59 of218 system to provide utilities. This requirement minimizes developable area, thus even further reducing the ability of the 4.98 acre quadrant to accommodate commercial need in a meaningful fashion; o Financial Feasibilitv - A grocery store is proposed as part of the Project. It is not financially feasible for a tenant of this type, or any anchor tenant, to locate at this site without supporting periphery uses. The 4.98 acre size of the NW Neighborhood Center quadrant, coupled with the buffering and utility implications, does not provide adequate functional utility for a grocery store or other anchor tenant to be financially feasible. The Project is situated at the most optimum location for access at two arterial roadways in the center of Golden Gate Estates. The site's proposed 41 +/- acre size provides for adequate functional utility to develop a shopping center that fulfills a diverse set of commercial needs for the immediate area. 2.4 Functional Utility of the competing sites A review of sites within the Custom Trade Area reveals that no parcels are over 20 acres in size, which in the consultant's opinion, offers adequate physical and functional utility to accommodate a grocery anchored center, adequate buffers between residential uses, and additional land to accommodate central utilities. Access to the site is also considered, as no other sites offer similar ease of access from heavily traveled roadways. ~~J)ct" Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 20 Page 60 of 218 3.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM for the Custom Trade Area 3.1 Overview As noted above, the need for amendments to the adopted FLUM revolves around whether or not the FLUM contains a sufficient degree of flexibility to satisfy the future projected level of demand for land. The applicant must demonstrate that the amount of land allocated in the FLUM to neighborhood and community retail uses is insufficient to accommodate future demand while providing for a reasonable degree of market flexibility. For this study, the supply of land with existing commercial-retail development, vacant commercial designated land and the supply of lands having the potential for commercial as designated by the FLUM were compared to the demand for commercial-retail land as generated by the projected households growth of the market area. The discussion below provides this analysis. 3.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio Table 3 provides Fishkind & Associates, Inc's housing unit projection for the Custom Trade Area. Parcel data from the Collier County Property Appraiser formed the basis for the forecast. Table 3. Housing Unit Projection for Project's Custom Trade Area Housing Housing Unit Year Units Growth GrowthNear 2010 5,026 2020 7,466 2,440 244 2030 9,090 1,624 162 Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser; I-Site, Census-based Demographics Package; Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Occupied household growth data was used as the basis of projecting demand for commercial land. The housing unit projection above was used to project occupied households. According to I-Site Census-based Demographics Package, the occupancy rate within the Custom Trade Area is 94.9%. Considering the foreclosures in this area, it is the consultant's opinion the occupancy rate should be lowered to 90%. The household projection is shown in Table 4. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 21 Page 61 of218 Table 4. Housina Unit and Household Projections Housing Year Units Households Growth Growth I Year 2010 5,026 4,523 2020 7,466 6,719 2,196 220 2030 9,090 8,181 1,461 146 Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser; I-Site, Census-based Demographics Package; Fishkind & Associates, Inc. This new information indicates that the market's demand for commercial space will also increase. The Consultant has developed a retail demand model to project the demand for retail space based on the number of households and their income and demographic characteristics in the relevant market area. The documentation for the model along with the model projections is rather voluminous. This information is reproduced here as Appendix A 1. Table 5 provides the projected retail demand and compares demand to the supply of commercial space and land available to accommodate commercial demand in the future. The comparison of retail demand to current retail supply and available supply converts all vacant and potential acres and assumes full development within the market. For purposes of analysis, we have delineated the existing supply and the sites currently zoned commercial to determine the total supply of commercial square footage which is expected to be developed within the Custom Trade Area. Based on this demand, the current allocation ratio is near a one-to-one allocation. Below that analysis, we isolated the FLUM Potential Supply which is estimated at 12,932 in year 2010,212,932 in 2020 (200,000 square feet developed of Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District) and 353,882 in 2030 which includes all of the 340,950 sqft of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District. With this added to the supply above, the supply-to-demand ratio increases from .82 in 2010 to 1.50 in 2030. It is the Consultant's opinion this FLUM potential be separately analyzed in order to illustrate its percentage of the total supply. ,-"" Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 22 Page 62 of 218 Table 5. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 149,068 237,253 Existing Supply Net GLA (sq.ft) 94,506 94,506 Vacant Commerical 14,701 14,701 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand 0.73 0.46 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 322,139 Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand w/FLUI\i 0.82 1.36 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 309,462 94,506 14,701 109,207 0.35 353,882 463,089 1.50 As noted in Table 1, the supply of existing commercial space totals 94,506 square feet. As shown by Table 5, based on the demand projection estimates there is sufficient demand for 149,068, 237,253, and 309,462 square feet of commercial space in the Custom Trade Area for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. Also shown in Table 5, there are 109,207 square feet of total commercial square footage in existing and commercially approved projects. With the addition of the FLUM potential, including the phasing of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District, to include 200,000 sqft in 2020 and the total build out of 340,950 in 2030, the supply increases to 463,089. Therefore, the ratio of the total supply of land designated for commercial use, excluding the FLUM lands is 0.73,0.46, and 0.35 and with the FLUM lands is 0.82, 1.36, and 1.50 for the years 2010,2020, and 2030 respectively. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing and to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for development during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. Growth management practices suggest that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the commercial allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market. It is the Consultant's opinion that to ensure proper flexibility in the Comprehensive Plan of an area like that of the Project, a commercial allocation ratio of a minimum of 2.0 is necessary in the short-term. As the time Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 23 Page 63 of218 horizon increases, the allocation ratio must increase as well. (Please refer to Appendix #3 for a detailed memo on the use of Allocation Ratios) Table 5 above indicates that currently the retail allocation is sufficiently below the minimum desired level of 2.0. By 2030, the allocation ratio is expected to be 1.50. As the situation currently stands, the lack of available retail choices creates a substantial impediment to proper market functioning. This market can expect to increasingly experience: · Significantly higher than average travel costs for residents; · Impacted roadway networks needing higher than average operating and capital improvements; of which the burden of financing is apportioned County-wide; · Upward pressure on commercial land prices due to artificial restriction of supply · Downward pressure on residential land prices due to the lack of access to support facilities. Figure 1 illustrates the trend of commercial allocation ratios. Figure 1. Commercial Allocation Ratio for Estates Shopping Center Sub District Project Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUM Potential 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 2010 2020 2030 -t-Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand w/FLUM Potential Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this Custom Trade Area market. As noted here, this market's commercial ratio will reach 1.50 by 2030. It is just these Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 24 Page64of218 types of situations that make it good planning policy to have a sufficiently high ratio to accommodate the expected demand in a meaningful fashion. 3.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment As noted above, the proposal for the Project would add a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial-retail land to the market. The following Table 6 displays the impacts of adding this additional land to the inventory. In 2030, the additional land increases the allocation ratio from 1.50 to 2.11. An allocation ratio of 2.11 provides a sufficient degree of flexibility for this market to meet future demand. It also would provide for sufficient supply as to limit the future applications for similar centers in the central Golden Gate Area, thus reducing the potential for commercial sprawl. The allocation ratios are more than reasonable with the inclusion of the Project in the FLUM. This is illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2. Allocation Ratios with the Inclusion of the Proposed Additional Commercial Acreage for Estates Shopping Center Sub District Project Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUM Potential and Project 2.50 1.50 2.00 1.00 0.50 2010 2020 2030 ~Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand w/FLUM Potential and Project Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 25 Page 65 of 218 Table 6. Analysis of Adding the Mixed Use Project's Proposed Land Use Plan Change to the Inventory of Commercial Space General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 -#~, Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 149,068 237,253 309,462 Supply Net GLA (sq.ft) 109,207 109,207 109,207 Proposed Project Max Retail (sq.ft) 0 190,000 190,000 Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand 0.73 1.26 0.97 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 512,139 653,089 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUrv 0.82 2.16 2.11 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc, 4.0 Commercial-Office Uses The commercial office analysis utilized the same Custom Trade Area as the retail analysis because the office uses proposed cater to a wide market and are convenience oriented in nature. These office uses would include Real Estate, Insurance, etc, which accommodate the growing population of this affordable, lower density part of our community. Using records provided by the Collier County Property Appraiser's office and information from the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department and County Clerk's Office the Consultant has determined: o There are two planned unit developments within the custom trade area surrounding the Project. 1) The Wilson Blvd PUD on the Southeast Quadrant of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard has been approved to consist of 42,000 square feet of retail and/or office uses. To date, a 35,856 sqft retail strip center is complete. The bank is approximately 3,000 square feet and will compete with the Project in terms of office space. 2) The Snowy Egret Plaza CPUD is located at the southwest quadrant of the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center. This CPUD consists of a single parcel owned by Walgreen Co. and is designated to comprise of 15,000 square feet of commercial development on 4.19 gross acres. Currently there is a 14,232 square feet Walgreens drug store on the site. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 26 Page 66 of 218 o There is one vacant commercial parcel on the Northeast quadrant of Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards, folio 37280040002. This parcel is 2.41 acres in size located adjacent and to the north of E's Country Store and is under the same ownership. o There are three parcels totaling 6.92 acres on the Southeast quadrant of 1st SW and Golden Gate Boulevard approved to consist of approximately 60,000 square feet of office space. The folio numbers for these parcels are: 37169480000,37169440008, and 37169560108. Utilizing a County-wide average density of 11,000 square feet of office space per acre as determined by Property Appraiser Records, there are 156,940 potential square feet of office space within the Custom Trade Area surrounding the Project. Located below is a Table showing the parcels and their potential or approved square feet. Table 7. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial-Office Space in Mixed Use Project's Market Vacant Comme rcial Folio 37280040002 37221120208 Acres 2.41 2.08 Potential Commercial Folio 37745120001 37280080004 37169440008 37169480000 37169560108 Acres 4.01 2.12 2.34 2.81 2.34 Total Office Supply Sqft* 26,510 3,000 Sqft* 44,110 23,320 20,000 20,000 20,000 156,940 Description N. of E's Country Store Liberty Gold LLC Description Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. E. of E's Country Store CP 2005-2** CP 2005-2** CP 2005-2** County Office Acreage 435 4,900,920 County Office Coverage Area 11,266 *Rounded to 11,000 ** Ordinance Number 08-44 is approved for 60,000 sqft of commerical office uses. When determining the demand for office uses, the Consultant utilized the Collier County Property Appraiser's database to determine the total square footage of all existing office uses as of 2010. This includes the total square footage of all office space regardless of its current occupancy. This total was then divided by the 2010 Collier County total permanent population as determined by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) to arrive at an implied per capita office need. Total square footage of office space was utilized in the per capita calculation because the comparison of supply-to-demand is done utilizing the total supply of office space - Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 27 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 67 of 218 assuming full occupancy. Table 8, indicates the total office development in Collier County, corresponding population, and per capita office need. Office Type One-Story Professional Class A Medical and Professional Total Table 8. Collier County Per Capita Office Need 2010 Bldg Sqft 2010 Collier Pop. Per Capita 1,075,840 4,163,144 502,737 5,741,721 331,405 17.3 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraiser; BEBR Population Studies Through our analysis, the Consultant has determined that, on average, the County needs 17.3 Sq. Ft. of office space per person. This per capita estimate accounts for all office space currently existing in the county, including occupied and vacant space. In our opinion, the trade area analysis prepared below best illustrates need for office space in this area of limited support facilities. Within the Custom Trade Area the Consultant has determined that by the year 2030, the permanent population will reach approximately 28,253 persons. The Consultant's population forecast for the Custom Trade Area is shown in Table 9. Additionally, Table 9 indicates the office needs associated with these historic and forecast population levels. Table 9. Historic & Forecast Population for Custom Trade Area Without the P dA d t ropose men men Per Capita Total Offi ce Allocation Year Population Office Need Office Need Sqft Supplied Ratio Population (1990) 4005 17.3 69,388 156,940 2.26 Population (2000) 13684 17.3 237,081 156,940 0.66 Population (2010) 16100 17.3 278,935 156,940 0.56 Population (2015) 20212 17.3 350,182 156,940 0.45 Population (2020) 23917 17.3 414,379 156,940 0.38 Population (2030) 29119 17.3 504,499 156,940 0.31 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraiser's Office, Collier County Comprehensive Planning; Collier County Clerk's Office Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 28 Page 68 of 218 According to the Consultant's analysis there is an immediate need for office uses in the Custom Trade Area surrounding the Project. Unless the proposed amendment is added to the FLUM, by 2030 the allocation ratio for office land is expected to drop to 0.31. There is insufficient land within this market designated for office use or potentially available for office use, which reduces the amount of sufficient choices for a developer to accommodate the demand. 5.0 Conclusions for Custom Trade Area Taking into account all developed, vacant and FLUM designated commercial land in the market; there is currently an insufficient degree of flexibility in the market's ability to accommodate future demand. The 2030 retail allocation ratio, including the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District, Estates Shopping Center sub district and excluding the subject is estimated at 1.50 indicating a tight relationship between the demand for, and the supply of, retail space in the future. The 2030 office allocation ratio also indicates a tight relationship between the demand for, and supply of, office space. The commercial retail and commercial office components of this Project are designed to serve the community and neighborhood demand for commercial space. The location provides the access and visibility that are required for this type of development. The size and functional utility of the site offers the development of sufficient retail offerings which will limit future sprawl. The under-allocation of suitable commercial property supports the need for the additional commercial acreage. Based on the map located earlier in the report, we can see the central Golden Gate Estates area would not be served at all would it not be for this project. There is current demand for retail uses and the demand will continue to grow at a rate higher than supply, which is why this project fulfills sufficient commercial need. 6.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM for the T AZ Area 6.1 Overview Prior we prepared an analysis for the custom trade area which includes the southeastern units of Golden Gate Estates. The TAZ areas selected are those which intersect with the custom trade area. Located below is a map showing the custom trade area and the intersecting T AZ areas. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 29 Page 69 of 218 ESTATES SHOPANG CENTER SUBDISTRICT j '" i 60In Ave NE 6&h A'it6 HE 561hA'IflNE I 41'1hAYCNi' z ~ '" " t .c~......NE t w 35th Ave rE q. ... " <;! '\ l. __""Sf JJ: i , !!1 400 ~ "\ 9 'cr~"""'C' [ i ~ :z' o SIoni1 ~ L""" iii RIO A"' ..:"0' ";'::r";':;:::'<"",:".~c"_,,,~;f':'~~",-_._ O. Weli Rd F L 0 ';1 ""':!:.' . ;; ; 8 Vaiilerbill B....ch Rd t i ~ -< .Vineyaros r ..;~~' ~ {\" ~ 217 215 214 213 , d f E ilwm.-, iil l!! Green } ~ Can,,; (3 .s .Q)kj~ G~e ! ;.. ; n5 2>4 -g iij .. a! € 222 223 Legend D Custom Trade Area D TAl Trade Area ~ a: 5 ~ ,Ili, ~.EWItgIlides~lOtAley ... 48th Aw; SE SOUt A~ SE l1i The same analysis will be prepared for the T AZ area as was prepared for the custom trade area. 6.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio Table 10 provides Fishkind & Associates, Inc's housing unit projection for the T AZ Area. The data for this projection is based on the TAZ updated report provided from the county for the specific T AZ area identified above. Table 10. Housing Unit Projection for Project's Custom Trade Area Year Housing Units Housing Unit Growth Growth/Year 2010 7,846 2020 10,356 2,511 251 2030 11,738 1,382 138 Sources: Collier County Comprehensive Planning; I-Site, Census-based Demographics Package; Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 30 Page 70 of 218 Occupied household growth data was used as the basis of projecting demand for commercial land. The housing unit projection above was used to project occupied ~ households. According to I-Site Census-based Demographics Package, the occupancy rate within the Custom Trade Area is 94.9%. Considering the foreclosures in this area, it is the consultant's opinion the occupancy rate should be lowered to 90%. The household projection is shown in Table 11. Table 11. Housing Unit and Household Projections Year Housing Units Households Growth Growth I Year 2010 7,846 7,061 2020 10,356 9,321 2,260 226 2030 11,738 10,564 1,244 124 Sources: Collier County Comprehensive Planning; I-Site, Census-based Demographics Package; Fishkind & Associates, Inc. This new information indicates that the market's demand for commercial space will also increase. The Consultant has developed a retail demand model to project the demand for retail space based on the number of households and their income and demographic characteristics in the relevant market area. The documentation for the model along with the model projections is rather voluminous. This information is reproduced here as Appendix A 1. Table 12 provides the projected retail demand and compares demand to the supply of commercial space and land available to accommodate commercial demand in the future. The comparison of retail demand to current retail supply and available supply converts all vacant and potential acres and assumes full development within the market. For purposes of analysis, we have delineated the existing supply and the site's currently zoned commercial to determine the total supply of commercial square footage which is expected to be developed within the TAZ Trade Area. Based on this demand, the current allocation ratio is near a one-to-one allocation. Below that analysis, we isolated the FLUM Potential Supply which is estimated at 12,932 in year 2010,212,932 in 2020 (200,000 square feet developed of Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District) and 353,882 in 2030 which includes all of the 340,950 sqft of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District. With this added to the supply above, the supply-to-demand ratio increases from 0.49 in 2010 to 1.12 in 2030. It is the Consultant's opinion this FLUM potential be separately analyzed in order to illustrate its percentage of the total supply. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 31 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 71 of 218 Table 12. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 249,333 344,845 Existing Supply Net GLA (sq. ft) 94,506 94,506 Vacant Commerical 14,701 14,701 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand 0.44 0.32 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 322,139 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUI\i 0.49 0.93 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 413,175 94,506 14,701 109,207 0.26 353,882 463,089 1.12 As noted in Table 12, the supply of existing commercial space totals 94,506 square feet. As shown by Table 12, based on the demand projection estimates there is sufficient demand for 249,333, 344,845, and 413,175 square feet of commercial space in the TAZ Trade Area for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. Also shown in Table 12, there are 109,207 square feet of total commercial square footage in existing and commercially approved projects. With the addition of the FLUM potential, including the phasing of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District, to include 200,000 sqft in 2020 and the total build out of 340,950 in 2030, the supply increases to 463,089. Therefore, the ratio of the total supply of land designated for commercial use, excluding the FLUM lands is 0.44, 0.32, and 0.26 and with the FLUM lands is 0.49, 0.93, and 1.12 for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing and to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for development during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. Growth management practices suggest that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the commercial allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market. It is the Consultant's opinion that to ensure proper flexibility in the Comprehensive Plan of an area like that of the Project, a commercial Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 32 Page 72 of218 allocation ratio of a minimum of 2.0 is necessary in the short-term. As the time horizon increases, the allocation ratio must increase as well. ".-, Table 12 above indicates that currently the retail allocation is sufficiently below the minimum desired level of 2.0. By 2030, the allocation ratio is expected to be 1.12. As the situation currently stands, the lack of available retail choices creates a substantial impediment to proper market functioning. This market can expect to increasingly experience: · Significantly higher than average travel costs for residents; . Impacted roadway networks needing higher than average operating and capital improvements; of which the burden of financing is apportioned County-wide; · Upward pressure on commercial land prices due to artificial restriction of supply . Downward pressure on residential land prices due to the lack of access to support facilities. Figure 1 illustrates the trend of commercial allocation ratios. Figure 3. Commercial Allocation Ratio for Estates Shopping Center Sub District Project Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUM Potential 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 2010 2020 2030 ~Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand w/FLUM Potential Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this Custom Trade Area market. As noted here, this market's commercial ratio will be 1.12 by 2030. It is just these Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 33 Page 73 of 218 types of situations that make it good planning policy to have a sufficiently high ratio to accommodate the expected demand in a meaningful fashion. 6.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment As noted above, the proposal for the Project would add a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial-retail land to the market. The following Table 13 displays the impacts of adding this additional land to the inventory. In 2030, the additional land increases the allocation ratio from 1.12 to 1.58. An allocation ratio of 1.58 provides a sufficient degree of flexibility for this market to meet future demand. It also would provide for sufficient supply as to limit the future applications for similar centers in the central Golden Gate Area, thus reducing the potential for commercial sprawl. The allocation ratios are more than reasonable with the inclusion of the Project in the FLUM. This is illustrated in Figure 4. Figure 4. Allocation Ratios with the Inclusion of the Proposed Additional Commercial Acreage for Estates Shopping Center Sub District Project Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUM Potential and Project 1.80 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 2010 2020 2030 -+-Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand w/FLUM Potential and Project Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 34 Page 74 of 218 Table 13. Analysis of Adding the Estates Shopping Center Sub District Proposed Land Use Plan Change to the Inventory of Commercial Space --, General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 249,333 344,845 413,175 Supply Net GLA (sq.ft) 109,207 109,207 109,207 Proposed Project Max Retail (sq.ft) 0 190,000 190,000 Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand 0.44 0.87 0.72 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 512,139 653,089 Allocation Ratio SupplylDemand w/FLUr-v 0.49 1.49 1.58 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 7.0 Commercial-Office Uses The commercial office analysis utilized the same TAZ Trade Area as the retail analysis because the office uses proposed cater to a wide market and are convenience oriented in nature. These office uses would include Real Estate, Insurance, etc, which accommodate the growing population of this affordable, lower density part of our community. Using records provided by the Collier County Property Appraiser's office and information from the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department and County Clerk's Office the Consultant has determined: o There are two planned unit developments within the custom trade area surrounding the Project. 3) The Wilson Blvd PUD on the Southeast Quadrant of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard has been approved to consist of 42,000 square feet of retail and/or office uses. To date, a 35,856 sqft retail strip center is complete. The bank is approximately 3,000 square feet and will compete with the Project in terms of office space. 4) The Snowy Egret Plaza CPUD is located at the southwest quadrant of the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center. This CPUD consists of a single parcel owned by Walgreen Co. and is designated to comprise of 15,000 square feet of commercial development on 4.19 gross acres. Currently there is a 14,232 square ,~ feet Walgreens drug store on the site. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 35 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 75 of 218 o There is one vacant commercial parcel on the Northeast quadrant of Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards, folio 37280040002. This parcel is 2.41 acres in size located adjacent and to the north of E's Country Store and is under the same ownership. o There are three parcels totaling 6.92 acres on the Southeast quadrant of 1st SW and Golden Gate Boulevard approved to consist of approximately 60,000 square feet of office space. The folio numbers for these parcels are: 37169480000,37169440008, and 37169560108. Utilizing a County-wide average density of 11,000 square feet of office space per acre as determined by Property Appraiser Records, there are 156,940 potential square feet of office space within the TAZ Trade Area surrounding the Project. Located below is a Table showing the parcels and their potential or approved square feet. Table 14. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial-Office Space in Mixed Use Project's Market Vacant Comme rcial Folio 37280040002 37221120208 Acres 2.41 2.08 Potential Commercial Folio 37745120001 37280080004 37169440008 37169480000 37169560108 Acres 4.01 2.12 2.34 2.81 2.34 Total Office Supply Sqft* 26,510 3,000 Sqft* 44,110 23,320 20,000 20,000 20,000 156,940 Description N. of E's Country Store Liberty Gold LLC Description Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. E. of E's Country Store CP 2005-2** CP 2005-2** CP 2005-2** County Office Acreage 435 4,900,920 County Office Coverage Area 11,266 *Rounded to 11,000 ** Ordinance Number 08-44 is approved for 60,000 sqft of commerical office uses. When determining the demand for office uses, the Consultant utilized the Collier County Property Appraiser's database to determine the total square footage of all existing office uses as of 2010. This includes the total square footage of all office space regardless of its current occupancy. This total was then divided by the 2010 Collier County total permanent population as determined by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) to arrive at an implied per capita office need. Total square footage of office space was utilized in the per capita calculation because the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 36 Page 76 of218 comparison of supply-to-demand is done utilizing the total supply of office space - assuming full occupancy. Table 15, indicates the total office development in Collier County, corresponding population, and per capita office need. Office Type One-Story Professional Class A Medical and Professional Total Table 15. Collier County Per Capita Office Need 2010 Bldg Sqft 2010 Collier Pop. Per Capita 1,075,840 4,163,144 502,737 5,741,721 331,405 17.3 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraiser; BEBR Population Studies Through our analysis, the Consultant has determined that, on average, the County needs 17.3 Sq. Ft. of office space per person. This per capita estimate accounts for all office space currently existing in the county, including occupied and vacant space. In our opinion, the trade area analysis prepared below best illustrates need for office space in this area of limited support facilities. Within the TAZ Trade Area, the Consultant has determined that by the year 2030, the permanent population will reach approximately 53,276 persons. The Consultant's population forecast for the TAZ Trade Area is shown in Table 16. Additionally, Table 16 indicates the office needs associated with these historic and forecast population levels. A~, Table 16. Historic & Forecast Population for Custom Trade Area Without the Proposed Amendment Per Capita Total Office Allocation Year Population Office Need Office Need Sqft Supplied Ratio Population (1990) 4005 17.3 69,388 156,940 2.26 Population (2000) 13684 17.3 237,081 156,940 0.66 Population (2010) 27138 17.3 470,175 156,940 0.33 Population (2015) 31618 17.3 547,791 156,940 0.29 Population (2020) 35136 17.3 608,741 156,940 0.26 Population (2030) 39408 17.3 682,766 156,940 0.23 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraiser's Office, Collier County Comprehensive Planning; Collier County Clerk's Office Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 37 Page 77 of 218 According to the Consultant's analysis there is an immediate need for office uses in the Custom Trade Area surrounding the Project. Unless the proposed amendment is added to the FLUM, by 2030 the allocation ratio for office land is expected to drop to 0.23. There is insufficient land within this market designated for office use or potentially available for office use, which reduces the amount of sufficient choices for a developer to accommodate the demand. 8.0 Conclusions for T AZ Trade Area Taking into account all developed, vacant and FLUM designated commercial land in the market; there is currently an insufficient degree of flexibility in the market's ability to accommodate future demand. The 2030 retail allocation ratio, including the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District, Estates Shopping Center sub district and excluding the subject is estimated at 1.12 indicating a tight relationship between the demand for, and the supply of, retail space in the future. The 2030 office allocation ratio also indicates a tight relationship between the demand for, and supply of, office space. The commercial retail and commercial office components of this Project are designed to serve the community and neighborhood demand for commercial space. The location provides the access and visibility that are required for this type of development. The size and functional utility of the site offers the development of sufficient retail offerings which will limit future sprawl. The under-allocation of suitable commercial property supports the need for the additional commercial acreage. 9.0 Conclusions for Comparison between Custom Trade Area in relation to the T AZ Trade Area Above we have analyzed the commercial retail and commercial office demand for both the custom trade area and the T AZ trade area. The T AZ Trade area encompasses the Custom Trade Area and is the main source for planning in Collier County throughout the Comprehensive Planning Department. Analysis of both areas indicates a need for additional retail and office uses, Located below we have prepared summary comparing the findings from each trade area. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 38 Page 78 of218 Table 17. Comparison of Allocation Ratios between the Custom Trade Area and the T AZ Trade Area. ~, General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) TAZArea 249,333 344,845 413,175 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) Custom Trade Area 149,068 237,253 309,462 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand TAZ Area 0.44 0.32 0.26 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand Custon Trade Area 0.73 0.46 0.35 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential (including Randall Center) 122,139 322,139 463,089 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUM Potential TAZ Area 0.49 0.93 1.12 Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUM Potential Custom Trade Area 0.82 1.36 1.50 Estates Shopping Center Sub district 190,000 190,000 Allocation Ratio Supply and Demand TAZArea 0.49 1.49 1.58 Allocation Ratio Supply and Demand Custom Trade Area 0.82 2.16 2.11 The comparison between both trade areas indicates a need for commercial retail uses. This area of the county is expected to experience the highest rate of growth over the next 20 years. The analysis above quantifies the demand based on the projected increases from the county. The practical consideration for this retail supply is also evident by the support of the residents during the straw vote done during the November election. Located below are graphs to illustrate the comparison in allocation ratios between the custom trade area and the TAZ trade area. The last graph shows the comparison of the allocation ratios including both the Randall Center and the Estates Shopping Center sub district. ..-.,. ~ Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 39 Page 79 of218 o o o Figure 5. Commercial Allocation Ratio for Estates Shopping Center Sub District with existing commercial uses only. 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 General Commerical Existing ~ - ............... -= 2010 2020 2030 -Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand TAZ Area -Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand Custon Trade Area Figure 6. Comparison of Allocation Ratios for Estates Shopping Center Sub district with existing and FLUM uses. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis General Commercial w/FLUM 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 2010 2020 2030 -Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUM Potential TAZ Area - Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w/FLUM Potential Custom Trade Area 40 Page80of218 Figure 6. Comparison of Allocation Ratios for Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict with existing and FLUM uses. Inclusive of Both Centers 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 1 2 3 - Allocation Ratio Supply and Demand TAZ Area - Allocation Ratio Supply and Demand Custom Trade Area Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 81 of 218 . o () 41 APPENDIX 1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRCT MARKET DEMAND ANALYSIS RETAIL DEMAND METHODOLOGY 1.0 Methodology The methodology employed in the analysis of the demand for retail space at this site is based on a consumer expenditures model. This model can estimate the aggregate market demand for retail space, the demand for retail space at a specific location, and the effective supply of competing retailers in the area. The net demand for retail space at the location being studied is determined as the difference between the site demand and the effective supply of competition. 2.0 Aggregate Market - Retail Demand Fishkind & Associates, Inc. ("Fish kind") has developed an in-house model to determine retail demand. This model estimates retail demand by square footage, shopping center type and store type. The model incorporates multiple data sources. These sources are census based ("1_ Site") local area households, local area household income data, and local area consumer expenditure profiles from the U.S. Department of Labor, Department of Revenue Gross Sales data, and Urban Land Institute shopping center tenant profiles, square footage requirements and average sales per square foot by store type from the publication Dollars and Cents of Shoppinq Centers. The model operates by first determining retail household expenditures for market area households. Expenditures are determined through application of the results of the 2000 Consumer Expenditure Survey, conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor. This survey of over 30,000 households nationwide provides detailed information on average dollar expenditure amounts and the expenditure percent of household income, for all household expenditures. The income expenditure percentage is determined for the specific market area and then applied to the average local area household income and multiplied by the number of households to determine market area spending potential for retail store goods. Next, the historic Department of Revenue (OaR) Sales data (for the county in question) is indexed by tenant classification4, from the Dollars and Cents of Shoppinq Centers. The expected expenditures on retail goods are then applied to this county specific (DOR) index to determine an estimate of spending by major store type (tenant classification). The determination of sales by retail center (neighborhood, community, regional, super-regional) is determined through the construction of an index of surveyed sales by center type (also located in the Dollars and Cents of Shoppinq Centers). Supportable square feet of a retail center is determined by applying the average sales per square foot of GLA, found in Dollars and Cents of Shoppinq Centers, to the expected sales by store type (tenant classification). In addition to determining the supportable square feet of retail 4 Tenant Classification are: general merchandise, food, food service, clothing and accessories, shoes, home furnishings, home appliances/music, building materials and hardware, automotive, hobby/special interest, gifts/specialty, jewelry, liquor, drugs, other retail, personal services, entertainment/community. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 42 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 82 of 218 space, Fishkind & Associates has determined the expected sales by OOR retail classification, which is a subset of the individual store types (tenant classifications). Provided below are income and expenditure data utilized in the analysis. Custom Trade Area - Households & Incomes Year HHs Median HH Income Total Income 2010 4,523 $59,839 $270,651,480 2020 6,719 $64,109 $430,762,613 2030 8,181 $68,683 $561,867,214 T AZ Trade Area - Households & Incomes Year HHs Median HH Income Total Income 2010 7,717 $58,527 $451,654,548 2020 9,991 $62,521 $624,670,106 2030 11,206 $66,788 $748,446,266 Source: Collier County PA; I-Site Census-based Demographics Package Note: HH Income figures are inflation adjusted; not nominal Note: Calculations in figure reflect rounding Income Expenditure Percentages I INCOME EXPENDITURE % ON RETAIL I 32.49% I Source: I-Site, Census-based Demographics Package For Project's Custom Trade Area Retail Expenditures and Square Foot Supportability Total Experditure 2010 2020 2030 $1,264,511 $2,012,566 $2,625,100 $9,928,427 $15,801,854 $20,611,221 $4,267,764 $6,792,474 $8,859,795 $599,541 $954,216 $1,244,636 $48,837 $77,728 $101,385 $2,328,478 $3,705,952 $4,833,875 $840,755 $1,338,126 $1,745,391 $3,184,524 $5,068,415 $6,611,010 $10,244,303 $16,304,594 $21,266,973 WllH GIFT/SPECIALTY $456,232 $726,128 $947,129 $68,498 $109,021 $142,201 WllH FOOD SERVICE $494,890 $787,655 $1,027,381 $488,314 $777,190 $1,013,731 $288,688 $459,470 $599,312 $773,823 $1,231,598 $1,606,441 $35,277,585 $56,146,985 $73,235,581 GENERAL MERCHANDISE FOOD FOOD SERVICE CLOlHlNG & ACCESSORIES SHOES HOME FURNISHINGS HOME APPLIANCES/MUSIC BUILDING MATERIALS/HARDWARE AUTOMOTIVE HOBBY/SPECIAL INTEREST GIFT/SPECIALTY JEWLERY LIQUOR DRUGS OlHER RETAIL PERSONAL SERVICERS ENTERTAINMENT TOTAL Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis SQFT Supportable 2010 2020 2030 8,904 14,172 18,485 28,901 45,999 59,999 16,592 26,408 34,445 3,119 4,964 6,474 253 403 525 11,966 19,045 24,841 3,626 5,771 7,527 19,678 31,319 40,851 38,383 61,089 79,681 WllH GIFT/SPECIALTY 2,929 4,661 167 266 WllH FOOD SERVICE 1,260 2,005 2,407 3,830 2,036 3,240 8,848 14,082 149,068 237,253 6,080 347 2,615 4,996 4,226 18,368 309,462 43 Page 83 of 218 For Project's T AZ Trade Area Retail Expenditures and Square Foot Supportability Total Expenditures SQFT Supportable 2010 2020 2030 2010 2020 2030 GENERAL MERCHANDISE $2,115,041 $2,925,251 $3,504,879 14,894 20,599 24,681 FOOD $16,606,449 $22,967,891 $27,518,897 48,341 66,859 80,107 FOOD SERVICE $7,138,332 $9,872,816 $11,829,080 27,752 38,383 45,989 CLOll-HNG & ACCESSORIES $1,002,802 $1,386,946 $1,661,765 5,216 7,215 8,644 SHOES $81,686 $112,977 $135,363 423 585 701 HOME FURNISHINGS $3,894,651 $5,386,576 $6,453,907 20,015 27,682 33,167 HOME APPLIANCES/MUSIC $1,406,261 $1,944,958 $2,330,344 6,065 8,388 10,050 BUILDING MATERIALS/HARDWARE $5,326,487 $7,366,908 $8,826,634 32,913 45,521 54,541 AUTOMOTNE $17,134,788 $23,698,621 $28,394,419 64,199 88,792 106,386 HOBBY/SPECIAL INTEREST WllH GIFT/SPECIALlY WllH GIFT/SPECIALlY GIFT/SPECIALlY $763,101 $1,055,423 $1,264,551 4,899 6,775 8,118 JEWLERY $114,572 $158,461 $189,859 279 386 463 LIQUOR WllH FOOD SERVICE WllH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS $827,760 $1,144,851 $1,371,699 2,107 2,914 3,491 OlHER RETAIL $816,763 $1,129,640 $1,353,475 4,025 5,567 6,671 PERSONAL SERVICERS $482,865 $667,836 $800,166 3,405 4,709 5,642 ENTERTAINMENT $1,294,309 $1,790,120 $2,144,826 14,799 20,468 24.524 TOTAL $59,005,866 $81,609,276 $97,779,863 249,333 344,845 413,175 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shoppinq Centers - Urban Land Institute Distribution by Store Type DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% FOOD 15.27% FOOD SERVICE 10.73% CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 4.48% SHOES 0.37% HOME FURNISHINGS 7.10% HOME APPLIANCES/MUSIC 3.67% BUILDING MATERIALS/HARDWARE 11.73% AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% HOBBY/SPECIAL INTEREST WITH HOBBY/SPECIAL GIFT/SPECIALTY 1.86% JEWLERY 0.56% LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 0.87% OTHER RETAIL 1.44% PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shoppinq Centers - Urban Land Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 44 Page 84 of218 Index of Sales by Center Type INDEX OF SALES BY CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD *COMMUNITV GENERAL MERCHANDISE 1.0804% 17.7493% FOOD 50.1268% 47.9941% FOOD SERVICE 16.2423% 58.1773% CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 1.7763% 26.9659% SHOES 2.1635% 25.4356% HOME FURNISHINGS 4.8325% 65.0722% HOME APPLIANCES/MUSIC 4.5826% 43.0018% BUILDING MATERIALS/HARDWARE 8.3074% 45.2640% AUTOMOTIVE 0.0000% 100.0000% HOBBY/SPECIAL INTEREST With Gifts and Specialty GIFT/SPECIAL TV 7.06% 41.68% JEWLERY 2.0271% 11.8288% LIQUOR 34.2238% 65.7762% DRUGS 36.8476% 56.2922% OTHER RETAIL 11.3333% 54.8145% PERSONAL SERVICERS 22.9793% 49.1430% ENTERTAINMENT 8.7526% 34.4114% ~ Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shoppinq Centers - Urban Land Institute *Note: Consultant has utilized only 50% of Community Center Sales Shown Above to Account for Projects Outside of the Trade Area that Will Capture a Portion of Retail Spending from Households within the Periphery of the Market. '-" Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 45 Page 85 of 218 Median Sales per Square Foot of GLA NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY MED $/SF MED $/SF GENERAL MERCHANDISE $103.01 $148.87 FOOD 347.1 336.3 FOOD SERVICE 224.28 280.19 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 167.96 195.97 SHOES 165.39 198.66 HOME FURNISHINGS 147.35 204.32 HOME APPLIANCES/MUSIC 137.85 271.31 BUILDING MATERIALS/HARDWARE 143.3 169.9 AUTOMOTIVE n/a 266.9 HOBBY/SPECIAL INTEREST 163.15 201.46 GIFT/SPECIALTY 186.32 147.58 JEWLERY 280.09 445.74 LIQUOR 254.1 321.25 DRUGS 408.4 374.26 OTHER RETAIL 159.18 228.9 PERSONAL SERVICERS 127.73 158.14 ENTERTAINMENT 86.41 88 Dollars & Cents of Shoppinq Centers - Urban Land Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 46 Page 86 of 218 Retail Demand Calculation Guide ~'!tl::5(i, Calculated figures are highlighted in yellow. Please note, this guide reflects calculations for year 2010 retail demand only. Repeat the same steps below for each year covered in the analysis. Figure 1 A B C D E Total Market Income Exp. Income Avail. for Year HHs AVG HH Income Income % Retail 2010 4,523 $59,839 $270,651,797 32.4198% $87,744,771 Source: I-Site Census-based Demographics Package & Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Please note not all figures above are whole numbers, and as such may yield slightly different results if hand-calculated. Figure 1 above: Column 'c' (Total Market Income) = Column 'A' (x) Column 'B' Figure 1 above: Column 'E' (Income Available for Retail) = Column 'c' (x) Column '0' Figure 2 A B DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE (All CENTER TYPES) (%) Allocation Expenditures ($) GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $12,702,238 FOOD 15.27% $13,394,416 FOOD SERVICE 10.73% $9,414,700 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 4.48% $3,929,033 SHOES 0.37% $328,176 HOME FURNISHINGS 7.10% $6,231,130 HOME APPLIANCES/MUSIC 3.67% $3,223,329 BUILDING MATERIALS/HARDWARE 11.73% $10,292,805 AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% $20,488,659 HOBBY/SPECIAL INTEREST WITH GIFTS/SPECIALTY GIFT/SPECIALTY 1.86% $1,635,358 JEWLERY 0.56% $494,847 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 0.87% $761 ,443 OTHER RETAIL 1.44% $1,260,476 PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% $607,117 ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% $2.981.033 Total 100.00% $87,744,771 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shoppinq Centers - Urban Land Institute; Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 47 Page 87 of218 Figure 2 above: Column '8' (Expenditures by Store Tenant Classification) = Column 'E' from Figure 1 allocated along the distribution in column 'A' Figure 2. Figure 3 A B C D E INDEX OF SALES BY CENTER Neighborho Community Neighborhood Center .Community Center od Center Center Allocation Allocation (%) Exoenditures ($) Exoenditures ($) TOTAL (%l GENERAL MERCHANDISE 1.08% 17.75% $137,231 $ 1,127,279 $1,264,510 FOOD 50.13% 47.99% $6,714,168 $ 3,214.258 $9,928.426 FOOD SERVICE 16,24% 58.18% $1,529,160 $ 2,738,603 $4,267,763 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 1.78% 26.97% $69,792 $ 529,749 $599,541 SHOES 2.16% 25.44% $7,100 $ 41,737 $48,837 HOME FURNISHINGS 4.83% 65.07% $301,117 $ 2,027,360 $2,328.477 HOME APPLIANCES/MUSIC 4.58% 43.00% $147,711 $ 693,044 $840,755 BUILDING 8.31% 45.26% MATERIALS/HARDWARE $855,061 $ 2,329.462 $3,184,523 AUTOMOTIVE 0.00% 100.00% $0.00 $ 10,244,303 $10,244,303 HOBBY/SPECIAL INTEREST GIFT/SPECIALTY JEWLERY LIQUOR WITH GIFTS/SPECIALTY 7.06% 41.68% 2.03% 11.83% WITH FOOD SERVICE WITH GIFTS/SPECIALTY $115.421 $ $10,031 $ WITH FOOD SERVICE 340,810 58.467 $456,231 $68.498 DRUGS 36.85% 56.29% $280,573 $ 214,316 $494,889 OTHER RETAIL 11.33% 54.81% $142,853 $ 345.461 $488,314 PERSONAL SERVICERS 22.98% 49.14% $139,510,89 $ 149,178 $288,689 ENTERTAINMENT 8.75% 34.41% $260,916.20 $ 512,907 $773,823 TOTAL $10,710,650 $24,566,934 $35,277,584 .Reflects only 50% of total community center expenditures Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shoppinq Centers - Urban Land Institute. In some instances figures may not match exactly due to rounding. Figure 3 above: Columns 'c' & 'D' (Expenditures by Store Center Type) = Expenditures by each tenant classification (each row item in Figure 2, Column 'B') allocated across the distributions in both Columns 'A' and 'B' in Figure 3. Please note Column '0' in Figure 3 above reflects a reduction of 50% of the calculated total for community center expenditures (see full report for further information). Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 48 Page 88 of218 Figure 4 A B C D E NEIGHBORHOO COMMUNIT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY TOTAL SITE D Y SQFT SQFT SQFT MED $/SF MED $/SF SUPPORTABILlT SUPPORTABILlT SUPPORTABILlT Y Y Y GENERAL MERCHANDISE $103.01 $148.87 1,332 7572 8904 FOOD 347.1 336.3 19,344 9558 28901 FOOD SERVICE 224.28 280.19 6,818 9774 16592 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 167.96 195.97 416 2703 3119 SHOES 165.39 198.66 43 210 253 HOME FURNISHINGS 147.35 204.32 2,044 9922 11966 HOME APPLIANCES/MUSIC 137.85 271.31 1,072 2554 3626 BUILDING 143.3 169.9 MATERIALS/HARDWARE 5,967 13711 19678 AUTOMOTIVE n/a 266.9 0 38383 38383 HOBBY/SPECIAL INTEREST 163.15 201.46 -- GIFT/SPECIAL TV 186.32 147.58 619 2309 2929 JEWLERY 280.09 445.74 36 131 167 LIQUOR 254.1 321.25 -- DRUGS 408.4 374.26 687 573 1260 OTHER RETAIL 159.18 228.9 897 1509 2407 PERSONAL SERVICERS 127.73 158,14 1,092 943 2036 ENTERTAINMENT 86.41 88 3,020 5828 8848 TOTAL 43,386 105,682 149,068 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shoppina Centers - Urban land Institute, In some instances figures may not match exactly due to rounding. Figure 4 above: Columns 'c' & 'D' (Square Feet Supportability) = Expenditures by center type (each row item in Figure 3, Column 'C' and Column '0') divided by the respective median sales/sqft in both Columns 'A' and'S' in Figure 4. Figure 4 above: Columns 'E' (Total Site Square Feet Supportability) = Figure 4, Column 'C' plus column '0.' 3.0 Determination of Expected Location Sales & Impacts to Competition ~. .-"'. The determination of sales is a multi part process. Sales to be made at the location of a proposed retail project are based on the constant sales per square foot measure used in the determination of the demand for retail space, and an estimate of excess spending at the existing and proposed retailers. Potential location specific expenditures are determined in accordance with Sections 3.1 and 3.2. From the potential expenditures and demanded space, a determination of "base-line" spending per square foot can be made for each store type. Spending per square feet of store space is -"""",,- Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 49 Page 89 of 218 then applied to the estimate of existing store space to determine a total "base-line" sales estimate. This "base-line" estimate will be less than the total potential expenditures. Therefore, an estimate of excess spending can be made from the difference between the estimated total expenditures and the "base-line" estimate. After the determination of "base-line" sales per square foot and excess sales per square foot, the proposed project needs to be added to the supply of retail space. At this point adjusted total sales can be determined from the "base-line" sales per square foot and the adjusted supply of retail space (existing plus proposed). The adjusted excess spending, as a result of the proposed retail project, is determined by the difference between the (adjusted) "base-line" expected spending and the estimate of total expenditures. An estimation of the expected sales for the proposed project is determined by the size of the project and the total estimated spending per square foot, which is the "base-line" sales per square foot plus the adjusted excess spending per square foot as a result of the project. The final impact to sales per square foot of competing retailers in the market surrounding the proposed project is calculated as the difference between the excess sales per square foot, with and without the proposed project. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 50 Page 90 of218 APPENDIX 2 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT R~E RVE R28 E W .r--. '<t' I- - I . I I w OJ '<t' I- . w Cl:l '<t' I- "'~~""'-~~'bi PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, COMMERICALAND IN DU STRIAL ZONIN G w o 1.0 I- Leg end C]PUD ~"lfi,11J PUD COMMERCIAL _ PUD INDUSTRiAl _ INDUSTRIAL _ COMMERCIAL legend c:::::J ~'Cf.ttO'1Iei:l-Je'A'5E...GG E . o:'IIrc.r::e'5 . AlC',e:.s.i2 [=:J"3~' c=J Ne,CtJ_lb.J"cJr, .. W ~ 1.0 I- ~. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 51 Page 91 of218 APPENDIX 3 Letter to Mr. Mark Strain, Chairman of the Collier County Planning Commission explaining the 2.0 allocation ratio methodology. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 52 Page 92 of218 FISHKIND & ASSOCIATES 1111I11 Ii 111111 lIa -. MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Mark Strain Chairman Collier County Planning Commission FROM: G. Russell Weyer Senior Associate SUBJECT: Explanation of 2.0 allocation ratio DATE: October 2,2008 VIA: E-Mail At your request, the following is an explanation of the 2.0 allocation ratio used in the data and analysis reports we provide to the County during Comprehensive Plan land use changes. The explanation begins with the data and analysis requirements in Rule 9J-5 (2). The rule states the following (with our emphasis added): "(2) Data and Analyses Requirements. (a) All goals, objectives, policies, standards, findings and conclusions within the comprehensive plan and its support documents, and within plan amendments and their support documents, shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and the analyses applicable to each element. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. Data or summaries thereof shall not be subject to the compliance review process. However, the Department will review each comprehensive plan for the purpose of determining whether the plan is based on the data and analyses described in this chapter and whether the data were collected and applied in a professionally acceptable manner. All tables, charts, graphs, maps, figures and data sources, and their limitations, shall be clearly described where such data occur in the above documents. Local governments are encouraged to use graphics and other techniques for making support information more readily useable by the public. 1 Page 93 of 218 (b) This chapter shall not be construed to require original data collection by local government; however, local governments are encouraged to utilize any original data necessary to update or refine the local government comprehensive plan data base so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. (c) Data are to be taken from professionally accepted existing sources, such as the United States Census, State Data Center, State University System of Florida, regional planning councils, water management districts, or existing technical studies. The data used shall be the best available existing data, unless the local government desires original data or special studies. Where data augmentation, updates, or special studies or surveys are deemed necessary by local government, appropriate methodologies shall be clearly described or referenced and shall meet professionally accepted standards for such methodologies. Among the sources available to local governments are those identified in "The Guide to Local Comprehensive Planning Data Sources" published by the Department in 1989. Among the sources of data for preliminary identification of wetland locations are the National Wetland Inventory Maps prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (d) Primary data sources such as United States Census reports, other government data documents, local computerized data, and original map sheets used to compile required maps need not be printed in their entirety within either the support documents or the comprehensive plan. Summaries of support documents shall be submitted to the Department along with the comprehensive plan at the time of compliance review to aid in the Department's determination of compliance and consistency. As a local alternative to providing data and analyses summaries, complete data and analyses sufficient to support the comprehensive plan may be submitted to the Department at the time of compliance review. The Department may require submission of the complete or more detailed data or analyses during its compliance review if, in the opinion of the Department, the summaries are insufficient to determine compliance or consistency of the plan. (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. If the local government chooses to base its plan on the figures provided by the University of Florida or the Executive Office of the Governor, medium range projections should be utilized. If the local government chooses to base its plan on either low or high range projections provided by the University of Florida or the Executive Office of the Governor, a detailed description of the rationale for such a choice shall be included with such projections." A variety of studies are used when we undertake a needs analysis within the State of Florida. They are basically broken down into three categories depending on the type of land use being studied. They are residential needs analysis, commercial needs analysis and a peculiar needs analysis that economically does not fit the standard residential and commercial models. Our analysis has evolved over time with input primarily coming from County Staff with regard to the analysis at hand. In looking at comprehensive plan changes, we first must collect the data that goes into the analysis. That data includes population estimates, existing inventory, approved inventory and potential inventory. 2 Page 94 of 218 With regard to population estimates, we generally try to use the population data that is used by the County when and where it is available. Our second source is the population data from the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) at the University of Florida. Our third source is I-Site, Site Selection Software, produced by GeoVue, Inc. These estimates and projections are compiled by Applied Geographic Solutions, Inc. AGS uses historic Census data from 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; USPS and commercial source ZIP+4 level delivery statistics; Census Bureau population estimates and projections at varying levels of geographic detail; Internal Revenue Service statistics on tax filers and year-to-year migration; as well as the Census Bureaus Current Population Survey. The next required data set pertains to the particular land use we are analyzing. We primarily utilize the Collier County Property Appraiser data to determine the existing inventory of that particular land use, the approved inventory of that land use and finally all of the lands on the Future Land Use Map that have potential for that particular land use. We have also used data sources provided by Collier County staff such as the commercial inventory list and the planned unit development list. We then use a variety of models from retail demand gravity models to office employment demand models to determine the current and future demand for the land use type in the designated market area. The future demand generally looks out to the Comprehensive Plan's horizon year, which is currently either 2030 or 2035 depending on the jurisdiction's comprehensive plan and growth management plan horizon year requirements. It is at this point of the analysis that has caused an anomaly in determining a true economic supply and demand result. On the supply side, it is relatively easy to determine the amount of existing and approved supply from the property appraiser data. The difficulty lies in the vacant non-approved potential lands. The staff has required us to take all of those lands that have a commercial or residential overlay on them and include them as supply by putting a floor area ratio figure to the acreage. The issue becomes apparent when all of the lands that are not in the existing or approved category are included in the particular land use analysis. By putting all of the potential lands in the supply category, the assumption is that all of that land would be developed as that particular land use and nothing else. For example in the case of the Airport-Corradi parcel, there were 117 potential commercial parcels totaling 270.68 acres in the 20 minute drive time market (Table 1 on the next page). Those parcels represent a potential of 1,469,723 square feet of office space. 3 Page 95 of 218 Table 1. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial-Office Space in Project's Market Existina # of Parcels 340 Acres 457.97 Square Feet 2,549,138 Vacant # of Parcels 523 Acres 1092.59 Square Feet 6,075,006 Potential # of Parcels 117 Acres 270.68 Square Feet* 1,469,723 Total # of Parcels 980 Acres 1821.24 Square Feet 10,093,867 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser *Assumed 5,430 square feet per acre based on market average There are a number of flaws in the representation of total capacity (supply) which suggest a greater number of acres be designated in the Comprehensive Plan than would be indicated simply by an analysis of forecast demand. First, all of those vacant approved parcels and parcels designated by the Future Land Use Map ("FLUM") as having the potential to be developed as office, in reality, also have the potential to be retail space or some other commercial use. The same parcels are also counted as competing supply when a commercial needs analysis is performed for another commercial use. To include these lands in both retail and office analyses would be double counting the supply. These lands will actually be developed as the market demand dictates, with some lands used for office and the remainder for retail and other permissible uses. A general economic principal states that all markets are efficient and that supply for the most part is generated as demand dictates. It is a rare situation where supply generates demand. Second, though the lands in question are designated with a FLUM category, this does not mean that 100% of these lands are developable. Within these lands there may be wetland areas, conservation areas, water bodies, incompatible adjacent uses, policy setback requirements, drainage and road requirements and infrastructure or access constraints. As a result of these and other myriad conditions, the maximum density/intensity of lands designated through the FLUM does not represent the holding capacity of these lands. Typically, development thresholds are found to be from 50% to 75% of maximum allowable density due to the physical characteristics of the land. 4 Page 96 of 218 Third, while lands are designated with a FLUM land use, there is no requirement they be used at all over the planning horizon. Many properties are held in land bank trusts, held by absentee owners, held in estate transfer litigation or held in family ownership with no intent or desire to use or sell the land. Florida and Collier County in particular have very large tracts of land held in long term family trusts where lands are not developed or are purposefully held off the market. In these and other similar instances, a land use designation on the FLUM does not assure the capacity allocated to these lands will be available to accommodate future growth within the planning horizon of the Comprehensive Plan. ~ Fourth, even if all the lands designated were developable and available it would be inappropriate to limit supply to exactly the level of forecast demand, represented by a ratio of 1: 1 where there is one acre of land supply allocated for every acre of land demand identified. Doing so would limit choices, limit market flexibility and constrain the market. Constraining supply will drive prices artificially high and decrease the attractiveness of the market due to price. For example in choosing a new home one does not typically look at only one house in the selection process. The selection process may involve multiple properties, perhaps a dozen or more. So too for commercial land investments, choice and flexibility are required in the selection process. Fifth, the supply of land is determined and allocated such that it will accommodate the forecast demand. The forecast demand is most often based on population forecasts provided by the University of Florida Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BEBR). Research has shown the BEBR forecasts to be highly accurate in locations where the local economic structure does not change substantially over time. In locations where structural change does occur, the error rate for BEBR medium forecasts can be from 30% to more than 100% too low in terms of forecasting population levels over a 25 year forecast period. Rapidly growing locations, locations which benefit from major highway or interstate expansions, locations which benefit from enhanced airport facilities and locations which benefit from major employer locations are all examples of conditions which represent structural change and tend to result in faster population growth than is forecast in the BEBR projections. Collier County is subject to these structural change forces, and as such, it can be expected that BEBR forecasts will have a comparatively higher degree of error than in other locations across the State. This supports the need for additional flexibility in the allocation of developable land to accommodate a higher probability of population forecast error. Table 2 on the next page documents the analysis of forecast error findings. >~J~"'t. 5 Page 97 of 218 Table 2. Comparison of Long-Term Population Projections. Counties with Structural Shift 1975 BEBR Year 2000 projections for 2000 Actual Variance Flagler 21,700 49,832 -129.6% St. Johns 71,000 123,135 -73.4% Lake 143,300 210,527 -46.9% Marion 191,000 258,916 -35.6% St. Lucie 149,800 192,695 -28.6% DeSoto 36,700 32,209 12.2% Highlands 81,400 87,366 -7.3% Polk 471,300 483,924 -2.7% Pasco 343,600 344,768 -0.3% Counties with Shift Total 576,800 835,105 -44.8% Counties without Shift Total 933,000 948,267 -1.6% Source: Projections of Florida Population Bulletin 33, June 1975, U. FL and US Census 2000 Counties without Structural Shift These conditions have been well documented and supported in administrative hearings. In the course of the evolution of Florida's comprehensive planning process, allocation of land in the FLUM often exceeds the 1:1 ratio. In general, the allocation ratio of between 2.0 and 2.5 has been determined to be a reasonable level, has been supported in administrative legal hearings and has been implicitly adopted in comprehensive plans across the State. To account for the conditions described above, comprehensive plan FLUMs typically represent an allocation of acres for land use by category in excess of a 1: 1 allocation ratio. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage over the course of development in the jurisdiction to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. For the reasons discussed, the additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing, to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, and that the property will develop at historic average densities, not maximum allowable densities, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. As a result of these discussions, analyses and rulings, growth management practices have evolved such that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the residential acreage allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market as shown in the discussion regarding population forecasts and structural change. Fishkind believes that to ensure proper flexibility in the comprehensive plan of a rapidly growing county like Collier, a commercial allocation ratio in the range of 2.0 is necessary to maintain planning flexibility and to account for the multiple sets of conditions which might otherwise restrict land usage. 6 Page 98 of 218 Although the allocation ratio figure has fluctuated over time depending on who is reviewing the amendment at the state level, Fishkind's recent experience with the Florida Department of Community Affairs indicates that the DCA has seen and approved allocation ratios in the 1.8 to 2.4 range and in some cases even larger allocation ratios for longer forecast horizons. Otherwise, if allocation ratios are not used in the analysis, the likely outcome is the Comprehensive Plan will fail to adequately accommodate growth resulting in higher than normal land prices, constrained economic development and a less efficient pattern of growth which results from market inflexibility due to lack of investment choices. ~ ~l!, 7 Page 99 of218 FISHKIND & ASSOCIATES 11111i1l 111111 1111 a MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Mark Strain Chairman Collier County Planning Commission FROM: G. Russell Weyer Senior Associate SUBJECT: Examples of 2.0 Allocation Ratio Acceptance DATE: October 2,2008 VIA: E-Mail Mark, You have asked for specific examples where the Allocation Ratio measurement has been used elsewhere. Here is one example of a legal case and two other examples in Florida where is has been approved and accepted by both the local jurisdiction and in some cases the Department of Community Affairs. Panhandle Citizens Coalition Inc. versus Department of Community Affairs In the matter Panhandle Citizens Coalition Inc. (PCC) vs. Department of Community Affairs (DCA), a petition was filed by PCC to challenge DCA's finding that the West Bay Detailed Specific Area Plan (WB DSAP) was in compliance as an amendment to the County Comprehensive Plan. The findings of fact in this case include item #92 which reads: "In addition to projecting population growth and assessing capacity to accommodate growth an allocation needs ratio (or multiplier) is necessary to ensure housing affordability and variety in the market; otherwise, the supply and demand relationship is too tight, which may cause a rapid escalation of housing prices. Because the farther in time a local government projects growth, the less accurate those projections tend to be, actual need is multiplied by an allocation needs ratio to produce an additional increment of residential land to accommodate this potential error." 1 Page 100 of 218 Finding #93 states: "Small Counties that experience above-normal growth rates may use allocation ratios as high as three more in order to realistically allocate sufficient buildable land for future growth. The County's allocation ratio of 2.2 before the WB DSAP and FLUM amendments was low from a long term forecasting perspective. When the WB DSAP amendments are factored into the allocation ratio, such growth would raise the allocation ratio to 2.3, which is still relatively low." Further, in finding #94 it is stated: "A land use plan should allow for sufficient inventory to accommodate demand and to provide some choice in order to react to economic factors." The Administrative Law Judge found the proposed land use amendments in compliance with section 163.3184 (1) (b) in part because the demonstration of need with respect to the allocation ratio indicated the allocation ratio of 2.3 was too low to properly accommodate projected future growth over the planning horizon. Acceptance of 2.0 Allocation Ratio in the case of Newberry Village Retail in Alachua County Newberry Village is a development of approximately 250,000 square feet of retail space in unincorporated Alachua County. A comprehensive plan change was required to allow for this use in the County. The applicant performed a commercial needs analysis as a requirement for their data and analysis portion of their application. The analysis is attached as Exhibit A. The Florida Department of Community Affairs found the plan amendment compliant with no requests for further data analysis. We have attached the notification of compliance as Exhibit B. City of Leesbura. Florida implicit Allocation Ratio The City of Leesburg, Florida has an adopted comprehensive plan where the implicit residential allocation ratio of 2.5 is embedded in the plan. The estimated land requirement projections are found in the approved 2003 Housing Element of the Leesburg Comprehensive Plan on page 111-17. The Housing Element of the Leesburg Comprehensive Plan indicates an allocation ratio of 2.5 in the following passage: "Based on figures provided by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, a total of 8,295 dwelling units will be needed to serve the household population of the City by year 2010......the City will be able to accommodate approximately 13,292 additional units, for a total of 21,031 residential units by 2010." ~ 2 Page 101 of218 Given the 2010 demand for 8,295 units and 21,031 unit capacity, the empirical allocation ratio found is 2.5 in the current and approved 2003 Leesburg Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. Allocation Ratios of other Florida Counties with updated Comprehensive Plans Allocation ratios are not only used in analyzing commercial comprehensive plan amendment changes. The ratios are also used in analyzing residential comprehensive plan amendment changes as noted here and in the City of Leesburg, Florida above. In reviewing a number of needs analysis reports submitted for residential comprehensive plan amendment changes around the state, Fishkind has discovered that there are number of counties across the state that have substantial allocation ratios that are embedded in their comprehensive plans. Fishkind has analyzed allocation ratios in counties across the state with recently updated comprehensive plans that have been approved by the Department of Community Affairs. As shown in Table 5.6.1, the future land use maps of these counties contain allocation ratios that are consistent with those suggested by Fishkind. Table 5.6.1. Allocation Ratios in other Florida Counties County Hendry St. Johns Nassau Martin Indian lIi..er Source: Fishkind and Associates, Inc. Allocation lIatio 5.38 3.18 4.54 3.9. 4.61 lIorecast Horizon (years) 15 15 15 15 .1 The counties noted above have incorporated significant allocation ratios into their comprehensive plans to adequately accommodate growth and limit higher than normal land prices, constrained economic development and less efficient patterns of growth which result from market inflexibility due to lack of investment choices. 3 Page 102 of218 ~~'~t EXHIBIT A Newberry Village Retail Needs Analysis ~i4t."" Page 103 of218 Newberry Village Retail Needs Analysis Prepared For: NewUrban WORKS Development Prepared By: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 12501 Corporate Blvd. Orlando, Florida 32817 (407) 382-3256 October 25, 2005 Page 1040f218 Table Of Contents Section Title Page 1.0 Introduction.. .......... .............. .... ... ....... .... .... .......... .......... ... .... 1 2.0 Current market Conditions..................................................... 2 3.0 Community-Type Retail Allocation Ratio ................................ 3 4.0 Need for Additional Community-Type Retail Zoning ............... 3 5.0 Conclusion ............................................................................ 4 Appendix 1 - Existing Competitive Supply Appendix 2 - Vacant Future Supply Appendix 3 - 20 Minute Drive Time Demographics II ."""...... Page 105 of218 Newberry Village - Retail Needs Analysis 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose This report analyzes the need to amend the Alachua County Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the proposed Newberry Village development. The development program calls for development of approximately 250,000 square feet of retail space in unincorporated Alachua County. 1.2 Overview of needs analysis In the context of amending the adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Alachua County the applicant must demonstrate the need to amend the plan. Typically, this takes the form of a comparison of: · The supply of existing land currently planned for retail uses · The demand for retail lands based on market conditions The applicant must determine whether there is sufficient supply of retail land in the Plan to accommodate future retail space demand. The analysis was conducted based on a 20 minute drive time market area surrounding the project site, comparing demand and supply, both existing and future, within the project market area. The retail market study further considered both demand and supply for community-type retail space only. Figure 1 shows the 20 minute drive time market area. 'r I I , \ i- / ! ...,1 -~J 1 >'-~'''\" FlSHICIN) a-i\.<.:>:;C;A:~ ...... ..... ... iii Page 1 of 8 Page 106 of 218 Newberry Village - Retail Needs Analysis 2.0 Current Market Conditions 2.1 Existing Supply The community-type retail supply in the market was determined using the US Shopping Center directory, listing community type retail centers in Alachua County. Based on a gravity model of retail shopping patterns, calibrated for local market conditions, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. determined the effective competitive retail square footage surrounding the site, applicable to the subject location. Of 1.6 million square feet of community type retail space within 20 minutes of the site, Fishkind determined 1.3 million square feet of this existing supply directly competes with community type retail space at the subject site. Appendix 1 lists the existing competitive community-type shopping centers within 20 a minute drive time of the site, the square feet associated with each center, and its competitive characteristics based on the market conditions. 2.2 Future Supply To determine future supply, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. examined all vacant commercial parcels within the 20 minute market area. Vacant commercial parcels as designated by the Property Appraiser were then checked for current zoning. Parcels with current zoning of Business (BR), highway oriented business (BH), and Automotive (BA) were determined to represent competitive vacant supply. The analysis showed there are 38 vacant parcels meeting the criteria for future competitive supply. The criteria include, vacant parcels having the required zoning, and of sufficient size to accommodate community-type retail space, meaning parcels generally greater than 10 acres and less than 30 acres in size. Parcels with proper zoning in excess of 30 acres were excluded, as these more appropriately accommodate regional-type retail demand. Parcels with proper zoning under 10 acres were excluded as these more appropriately accommodate neighborhood-type retail demand. Numerous parcels under 10 acres were also included in the analysis as these are parcels with adjacency allowing combined parcel sizes of approximately 10 acres or greater. The sum total of competitive sites is 215 acres. An additional 57.7 acres were added to the supply based on further planning analysis of properties which appear to qualify for community type capacity. The vacant competitive supply is 272.7 acres. At .18 FAR this translates to potential future community-type retail supply of 2.1 million square feet, within the Newberry Village market area. The combined existing competitive supply plus future supply equals 3.4 million RSlICIID itA.':I'~C-J.:;~ ...... ..... .... .. Page 2 of 8 Page 107 of218 Newberry Village - Retail Needs Analysis square feet of Community-type retail space capacity in the Newberry Village market area, through year 2020. Appendix 2 shows the list of parcels designated for future community type supply. No representations are made as to the availability for sale or whether there is owner intention to develop the vacant lands at any time in the future. Because there is no assurance as to whether these lands will be developed, a market flexibility factor (allocation ratio) must be included to assure proper supply over the long term. 2.3 Community-Type Retail Space Demand The market analysis shows there are 76,090 households within the 20 minute drive time surrounding the site, as of 2005 (see appendix 3). Average household income is $45,260. This generates community-type retail demand of 1.6 million square feet of space as of year 2005. Household growth to year 2020 is expected to raise market area households to 96,208 households and 2.0 million square feet of demand by year 2020. 3.0 Community-Type Retail Allocation Ratio The community-type retail allocation ratio in the Newberry Village market area is 1.7. This is determined by dividing the 3.4 million square feet of supply/capacity by the 2.0 million square feet of demand, through the planning horizon year of 2020. The addition of 250,000 square feet of retail space through the proposed Newberry Village retail land use change results in a marginal increase in the overall Plan allocation ratio from 1.7 to 1.8. Fishkind & Associates believes an allocation ratio of under 2.0 leaves insufficient flexibility to accommodate long term retail space needs. Table 1 shows the supply/demand calculation and resulting allocation ratio. Table 1- 2020 Summary Community Retail Market Conditions Vacant Community Retail Acres 272.7 Future Community SO FT. Supply 2,138,043 Existing Competitive Supply 1,266,947 TOTAL SUPPLY 3,404,990 Proposed Newberry Village 250,000 Total Demand 2,045,865 Community Commercial Allocation Ratio 1.8 FISIIaI'D A~Y:::J<;''' ....... ..... .... .. Page 3 of 8 Page1080f218 Newberry Village - Retail Needs Analysis 4.0 Need for Additional Community-Type Retail Zoning With the revised allocation ratio so low in the Newberry Village market area, there is a need for additional retail capacity to be allocated for the long-term. 4.2 Acceptable Over-Allocation Ratio The Department of community Affairs has indicated an acceptable over- allocation rate for future land use planning purposes is 2.0. Many communities have considerably higher allocations for retail land uses. The Newberry Village market area has a current allocation ratio of 1.7. The addition of 250,000 square feet of community-type retail space in the proposed project will increase the allocation ratio to 1.8, leaving the market below 2.0 and only slightly above the original County allocation. 5.0 Conclusion Newberry Village has petitioned Alachua County to revise the Comprehensive Plan to allow the inclusion of 250,000 square feet of additional community-type retail space in the Newberry Village market area. The current analysis of available community-type retail lands indicates a need for additional retail acres in the market area by year 2020, in order to provide proper long range planning flexibility. This report concludes there is an under-allocation of available community-type retail lands in the Newberry Village market area. The conversion of lands to retail uses will still provide the ability of the remainder of the site to reach 80% of the maximum residential density allowed under the existing zoning and land use. However, by including the mixed use component, needed additional retail capacity is provided while still achieving a high proportion of the maximum residential capacity. Based on this finding, there is justification to include the Newberry Village lands in the Future Land Use Map as inventory of future retail lands. FJSlI(N) l'lN>;/';::'A,,~ ..... .... ... .. Page 4 of 8 ,-~. -, _'C Page 109 of218 Newberry Village - Retail Needs Analysis APPENDIX 1 - Existing Competitive Supply SITE % CENTER NAME GLA DIST COMPETING SF COMPETING NEWBERRY SQUARE 180,524 0.63 98.01 % 176,939 NEWBERRY CROSSING 111,010 1.37 95.68% 106,217 OAKS SQUARE 119,000 1.37 95.68% 113,862 OAKS MAll PLAZA 105,252 1.55 95.12% 100,111 TOWER CENTRE 165,000 1.92 93.95% 155,018 CENTRAL PLAZA 132,000 10.00 68.97% 91,043 GAINESVillE SHOPPING CENTER 186,173 10.08 68.73% 127,959 GAINESVillE MAll 289,850 11.02 65.92% 191,077 WAl-MART PLAZA 177,766 11.33 65.00% 115,552 WINN DIXIE MARKETPLACE PLAZA 139,337 11.67 64.00% 89,171 TOTAL 1,605,912 1,266,947 FISHKIl'O AA.":f:X::.A;1~ ....... ....... ... iii Page 5 of 8 Page 110 of 218 Newberry Village - Retail Needs Analysis APPENDIX 2 - Future Vacant Supply ^""',"'. OBJECTID_1 ZONEDISTRI ZONEDEFIN PIN CALCACRES SOFT 200 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06041-003-001 21.8 0.000000 89 BP Business and Professional (BP) 06041-002-005 9.3 0.000000 135 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331-002-003 6.0 0.000000 142 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06800-028-000 1.0 0.000000 277 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344-005-003 1.5 0.000000 278 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344-005-005 4.0 0.000000 117 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344-005-003 1.5 0.000000 118 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344-009-000 1.1 0.000000 119 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345-003-000 0.5 0.000000 120 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345-004-000 1.0 0.000000 121 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345-006-000 6.2 0.000000 122 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345-010-000 0.5 0.000000 354 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344-001-000 8.6 0.000000 355 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345-006-000 6.2 0.000000 313 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04350-005-000 9.0 0.000000 132 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06038-022-000 10.5 0.000000 353 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345-006-000 6.2 0.000000 59 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04344-001-000 8.6 0.000000 205 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06233-006-001 1.3 0.000000 100 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331-002-003 6.0 0.000000 101 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331-005-000 2.9 0.000000 102 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331-006-000 1.0 0.000000 315 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04350-005-000 9.0 O.OOO~ 284 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04345-006-000 6.2 0.0001. 124 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344-009-000 1.1 0.000000 285 BA Automotive Oriented Business (BA) 04344-001-000 8.6 0.000000 286 BA Automotive Oriented Business (BA) 04345-006-000 6.2 0.000000 160 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 07251-017-000 1.2 0.000000 10 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 06655-002-003 29.4 0.000000 116 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344-009-000 1.1 0.000000 312 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344-009-000 1.1 0.000000 314 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04350-005-000 9.0 0.000000 134 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06655-015-000 4.9 0.000000 263 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06656-002-008 3.4 0.000000 152 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331-002-003 6.0 0.000000 153 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331-005-000 2.9 0.000000 154 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331-006-000 1.0 0.000000 316 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04350-005-000 9.0 0.000000 215.0 ~. FI5I<<I'O l'I N:>~';'::Ki.!i .... .... .. .. Page 6 of 8 Page 111 of218 Newberry Village - Retail Needs Analysis Appendix 3 - Newberry Village 20 Minute Drive Time Demographics FJSIlI(N) i...;.~ .11.11 "II. .. Page 7 of 8 Page 112 of218 Site Location: Lat: 29.661634 Lon: -82.430144 Prepared By: FISH KIND AND ASSOCIATES, INC. SITE NAME: TRADE AREA SIZE: Traffic Settings: Heavy, Travel Speeds: 30,50,65,20,30.40 Population Population (1990) Population (2000) Population (2005) Population (2010) Pct Population Growth ('90-'00) Pct Population Growth ('00-'05) Pct Population Growth ('05-'10) Geographic Area Size Population Density (2005) Daytime Marketplace (2005) Total Business Establishments Total Daytime Employment Households Households (1990) Households (2000) Households (2005) Households (2010) Married Couple Family With Children (2005) Gender (2005) Male (2005) Female (2005) Race & Ethnicity (2005) Race: White (2005) Race: Black (2005) Race: Asian or Pacific Islander (2005) Race: Other Race (2005) Race: Two or More Races (2005) Ethnicity: Hispanic (2005) Age Distribution (2005) Age 0-4 (2005) Age 5-9 (2005) Age 10-13 (2005) Age 14-17 (2005) Age 18-24 (2005) Age 25-34 (2005) Age 35-44 (2005) Age 45-54 (2005) Age 55-64 (2005) Age 65-74 (2005) Age 75-84 (2005) Age 85+ (2005) Source: AGS Page A-1 10/25/05 Household Trend Report .~ 143,256 172,121 174,990 177,778 20.15 1,67 1.59 221.5974 789.68 7,406 112,110 57,054 70,015 76,090 81,946 11,417 15.0% 85,523 48.9% 89,466 51.1% 128,502 73.4% 31,825 18.2% 7,914 4.5% 3,122 1.8% 3,627 2.1 % 11,907 6.8% 9,448 5.4% 8,564 4.9% 7,049 4.0% 8,516 4.9% 30,904 17.7% 40,035 22.9% 19,947 11.4% 19,857 11.3% 13,756 7.9% 8,384 4.8% 5,839 3.3% 2,288 1.3% ~~k<R ~, Report Created with iSITE, Version: 2005.01.16 Page 113 of218 Site Location: Lat: 29.661634 Lon: -82.430144 Prepared By: FISH KIND AND ASSOCIATES, INC. SITE NAME: TRADE AREA SIZE: Traffic Settings: Heavy, Travel Speeds: 30.50,65,20,30,40 Median Age Median Age (2005) Median Household Income Median Household Income (1990) Median Household Income (2000) Median Household Income (2005) Median Household Income (2010) Per Capita Income Per Capita Income (1990) Per Capita Income (2000) Per Capita Income (2005) Per Capita Income (2010) Average Household Income Average Household Income (1990) Average Household Income (2000) Average Household Income (2005) Average Household Income (2010) Median Disposable Income Median Disposable Income (2005) Aggregate Income Aggregate Income ($MM) (2005) Income Distribution (2005) HH Inc. $ 0 - $ 15k (2005) HH Inc, $15 - $ 25k (2005) HH Inc. $25 - $ 35k (2005) HH Inc. $35 - $ 50k (2005) HH Inc. $50 - $ 75k (2005) HH Inc. $75 - $100k (2005) HH Inc. $100k - $150 (2005) HH Inc. $150 - $200k (2005) HH Inc. $200K+ (2005) Employment By Industry (2000) Employment Status: Total Labor Force Employment Status: Employed Industry: Agriculture (2000) Industry: Mining (2000) Industry: Construction (2000) Industry: Manufacturing (2000) Industry: It\Iholesale Trade (2000) Industry: Retail Trade (2000) Industry: Transport. and Warehousing (2000) Industry: Utilities (2000) Source: AGS Page A-2 10/25/05 Household Trend Report 31.31 24,711 34,389 37,442 41,571 12,221 17,795 20,389 23,469 30,686 43,960 45,268 49,184 32,082 3,567.80 20,657 27.1% 10,641 14,0% 8,865 11.7% 10,143 13,3% 10,976 14.4% 6,092 8.0% 5,471 7.2% 1,608 2.1% 1,637 2.2% 90,720 52.7% 83,786 48.7% 505 0.6% 12 0.0% 3,550 4,2% 2,804 3.3% 1,237 1.5% 9,348 11,2% 1,444 1.7% 714 0.9% Report Created with iSITE, Version: 2005.01.16 Page 114 of 218 Site Location: Lat: 29.661634 Lon: -82.430144 Prepared By: FISHKIND AND ASSOCIATES, INC. SITE NAME: TRADE AREA SIZE: Traffic Settings: Heavy, Travel Speeds: 30,50,65,20,30,40 Employment By Industry (2000) Industry: Information Services (2000) Industry: Finance and Insurance (2000) Industry: Real Estate (2000) Industry: Professional Services (2000) Industry: Management (2000) Industry: Admin. Services And Waste Mgmnt (2000) Industry: Educational Services (2000) Industry: Health Care and Social Assist. (2000) Industry: Arts, Entertainment and Recreation (2000) Industry: Food and Hospitality Services (2000) Industry: Other Services, except public (2000) Industry: Public Adminstration (2000) Housing (2000) Housing Units (2000) Housing Units, Occupied (2000) Housing Units, Vacant (2000) Housing Units, Owner-Occupied (2000) Housing Units, Renter-Occupied (2000) Median Rent (2000) Median Home Value (2000) Consumer Expenditures (2005, $/HH) Total Consumer Expenditures (2005) Total Retail Expenditures (2005) Educational Attainment (2000) Education: Less than 9th Grade (2000) Education: Some High School (2000) Education: High School Graduates (2000) Education: Some College (2000) Education: Associate's Degree (2000) Education: Bachelor's Degree (2000) Education: Graduate School (2000) Population, Age 25+ (2000) Source: AGS Page A-3 10/25/05 Household Trend Report 2,640 3.2% 3,076 3.7% 1,635 2.0% 4,721 5.6% 16 0.0% 2,296 2.7% 18,924 22.6% 13,505 16.1% 1,567 1.9% 7,821 9.3% 3,815 4.6% 4,156 5.0% 76,020 70,015 92.1% 6,005 7.9% 33,624 48.0% 36,391 52.0% 441 99,302 40,661.64 17,708.70 2,903 3.1% 6,492 7.0% 15,973 17.2% 17,634 19.0% 9,039 9.7% 20,404 22.0% 20,408 22.0% 92,852 53.9% <~l<, ~. Report Created with iSITE, Version: 2005.01.16 Page 1150f218 EXHIBIT B Newberry Village Retail Comprehensive Plan Amendment Florida Department of Community Affairs Notice of Compliance Page 116 of 218 Ie",' ""'- IlL STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS ~Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call homen CHARLIE CRIST Govemor THOMAS G. PELHAM Secretary July 22. 2008 The Honorable Rodney J. Long Chairman. Board of County Commissioners Alachua County . P.O. Box 2877 Gainesville, FL 32602-2877 RE: Alachua County Adopted Amendment 08-RI Dear Chairman Long: The Department has completed its review of the adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Ordinance Number 08-10; DCA Amendment Numbers 06-2 and 08-RI) for Alachua County. as adopted on August 17. 2006 and June 10,2008, and determined that it meets the requirements of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, for compliance, as defined in Subsection 163.3184(l)(b). Florida Statutes. The Department is issuing a Cumulative Notice of Intent to find the plan amendment in compliance. The Cumulative Notice of Intent was sent to the Gainesville Sun for publication on July 23, 2008. The Department's cumulative notice of intent to find a plan amendment in compliance shall be deemed to be a final order if no timely petition challenging the amendment is filed. Any affected person may file a petition with 'the agency within 21 days after the publication of the notice of intent pursuant to Section 163.3184(9), Florida Statutes. No development orders. or permits tor a development, dependent on the amendment may be issued or commence before the plan amendment takes effect. Please be advised that Section 163.3184(8)(c)2. Florida Statutes, requires a local government that has an internet site to post a copy of the Department's Notice of Intent on the site within 5 days after receipt of the mailed copy of the agency's notice of intent. Please note that a copy of the adopted County Comprehensiye Plan Amendment. and the ;-..Iotice of Intent must be available for public inspection Monday through Friday, except tor legal holidays, during normal business hours. at the Alachua County Gro""1h Management Office. 10 SW 2nd Avenue. Third Floor. Gainesville. Florida. 32601-6294. ...., 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD. TALLAHASSEE. FL 32399.2100 850-488-8466IPI . 850-921-0731 (f) . Webslte' :VI"t{ (~C'l ,:.J:" t: .".; . COMMUNITY PLANNING :5C.4~"~;3:;; 'Pi .,>,;0-:>3&.3309.'J. . HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT oSO-4aB.;956 'Pi e!O()-~22.~;:3 Ifi . Page 117 of 218 The Honorable Rodney J. Long July 22. 2008 Page 2 If this in compliance detennination is challenged by an atlected person. you \\iill have the option of mediation pursuant to Subsection t 63.3 t 89(3)(a). Florida Statutes. If you choose to attempt to resolye this matter through mediation. you must file the request tor mediation with the administrative law judge assigned by the Division of Administrative Hearings. The choice of mediation will not affect the right of any party to an administrative hearing. If you have any questions. please contact Ana Richmond, Planner. at (850) 922-1794. Sincerely. )~7uL f't } :L:{J Mike McDaniel Chief, Office of Comprehensive Planning MM/ar Enclosure: Notice of Intent cc: Mr. Scott Koons. AICP. Executive Director. North Central Florida RPC Mr. Steven Lachnicht, AICP. Director of Gro~1h Management Mr. C. David Coffey Mr. Bradley Stith Page 118 of 218 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COM..\lUNllY AFFAIRS CUMULATIVE NOTICE OF INTENT TO FIND THE ALACHUA COUNlY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Ai'lD REMEDIAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT(S) IN COMPLIANCE DOCKET NO. 08-RI-NOI-OI02-(A)-(I) 'The Department issues this cumulative notice of intent to find the Alachua County Comprehensive Plan Amendment adopted by Ordinance No. 06-26 on August 17, 2006 and the remedial amendment(s) adopted by Ordinance No. 08-10 on June 10, 2008 IN COMPLIANCE, pursuant to Sections 163.3184, 163.3187 and 163.3189, F.S. The adopted Alachua County Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Department's Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report. (if any), are available for public inspection Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays, during normal business hours, at the Alachua County Growth Management, 10 S.W. 2oc1 Avenue, Third Floor, Gainesville, Florida 32601-6294. Any affected person, as defined in Section 163.3184, F.S., has a right to petition for an administrative hearing to challenge the proposed agency determination that the Remedial Amendments are In Compliance, as defined in Subsection 163.3184(1), F.S. The petition must be filed within twenty-one (21) days after publication of this notice, and must include all of the information and contents dcscn"bed in Unifonn Rule 28-106.201, F.A.C. The petition must be filed with the Agency Clerk, Department of Community Affairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 and a copy mailed or delivered to the local government. Failure to timely file a petition shall constitute a waiver of any right to request an administrative proceeding as a petitioner under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S. Ifa petition is filed, the purpose of the administrative hearing will be to present evidence and testimony and forward a recommended order to the Department. If no petition is filed, this Notice of Intent shall become final agency action. If a petition is filed, other affected persons may petition for leave to intervene in the proceeding. A petition for intervention must be filed at least twenty (20) days before the final hearing and must include all of the information and contents described in Uniform Rule 28-106.205. F.A.C. A petition for leave to intervene shaJl be filed at the Division of Administrative Hearings, Department of Administration, 1230 Apalachee Parkway, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060. Failure to petition to intervene within the allowed time frame constitutes a waiver of any right such a person has to request a hearing under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S.. or to participate in the administrative hearing. After an administrative hearing petition is timely filed, mediation is available pursuant to Subsection 163.3 1 89(3)(a), F.S., to any affected person who is made a party to the proceeding by filing that request with the administrative law judge assigned by the Division of Administrative Hearings. The choice of mediation shall not affect a party's right to an administrative hearing. P1(L1;tvdJ&<J Mike McDaniel, Chief Division of Community Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee. Florida 32399-2100 Page 119 of 218 APPENDIX 4 Need for Commercial Space utilizing Estates as Market Area (With Inclusion of the Proposed Estates Shopping Center Sub district) 2007 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Estates (2 Miles E of 951) Population 30,404 33,348 40,297 49,808 58,996 65,217 Community Demand (7.48 sqft/Per) 227,422 249,443 301,422 372,564 441,290 487,823 Neighborhood Demand (8.45 sqft/Per) 256,914 281,791 340,510 420,878 498,516 551,084 Total Trade Area Demand 484,336 531,234 641,931 793,441 939,806 1,038,907 Community sqft Supply Randall Commercail Subdistrict 100,000 340,950 340,950 340,950 Orange Blossom Ranch PUD 100,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Estates Shopping Center Sub District 100,000 190,000 190,000 190,000 Total Community sqft 300,000 730,950 730,950 730,950 Trade Area Supply 300,000 730,950 730,950 730,950 Surplusf(Deficit) Commerical Supply (484,336) (531,234) (341,931) (62,491) (208,856) (307,957) The data above is from the Randall Blvd Commercial Center market study and represents a different methodology than what the consultant in the above analysis. The Collier County planning department asked that this format be used as an alternative to estimate the demand for commercial space. The Estates Shopping Center sub district was included in the calculations to illustrate the surplus of deficit commercial supply. Based on this methodology, there is a commercial need throughout the time horizon. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 53 Page 120 of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT FOR ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (PROJECT NO. F0801.31-20) PREPARED BY: TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. 2726 Oak Ridge Court, Suite 503 Fort Myers, Florida 33901-9356 (239) 278-3090 REVISED December 6, 2010 Page 121 of 218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION II. EXISTING CONDITIONS III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IV. TRIP GENERATION V. TRIP DISTRIBUTION VI. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ~.. VII. PROJECTED CONCURRENCY AND IMPROVEMENTS VIII. CONCLUSION ~, Page 122 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. I. INTRODUCTION TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. has conducted a traffic impact statement for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment submittal for the +/- 41-acre Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict site located along the north side of Golden Gate Boulevard between its intersections with 3rd Street NW and Wilson Boulevard in Collier County, Florida. This report has been completed in compliance with the guidelines established by the Collier County Transportation Planning Division for developments seeking approval for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The site location is illustrated on Figure 1. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would modify the existing land use designation on the subject site to allow a total of 190,000 square feet of commercial floor area on the subject site. However, pursuant to discussions with County Staff, this analysis was conducted based upon a total of 225,000 square feet of commercial floor area consistent with the analysis previously submitted for the proposed Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict. This report examines the impact of the development on the surrounding roadways. Trip generation and assignments to the area intersections will be completed and analysis conducted to determine the impacts of the development on the surrounding intersections. An initial methodology meeting was held with Collier County Staff on February 21, 2007 to discuss the parameters required as a result of this analysis. No methodology notes were created in 2007 since none were required at the time of this meeting, however, this Traffic Impact Statement is consistent with the items discussed at that meeting, such as trip generation, pass-by trip reduction and trip distribution. Page 1 Page 123 of 218 i ;-- '\ \~~ I I '; [,it ! ! i I I: '."'i'u .~~c.'. ' . . . q:'Q:. . - ',- C.:.ir-:-~'-' ,j!: . -:ff '_ "-"-1t~:~ i : . . -'jr---m I ~ I! i I Ii P H- I : 1 : ! i 1 ., .,."or.tm f:li l.' ! I ht,....r.- !!--Tm. -- -- .. '-T- l~ I \'A.'J~AIo i I I , .......... 1: TRANSPORTATION H CONSULTANTS, INC. i . ! . I . ! -=..,: ~ ~.,t .1 , "". i ;: ! \, ',: i ~ i j ':. ~;~ \..1{' : i 1< II L Ii !i: - -r,; · r 11 .1:1 ....1. .. 11-.------ " . WH - ~i ~-"'Irflj . J ' - 'ii ._~M~h \ -...,~. --:~. Ito.t.lOo"~ I' '--7;:':~~7_:'-'..o.:' ~- PROJECT LOCATION MAP ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 1 Page 124 of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject site currently contains vacant land and some single family dwelling units. 15t Street NW divides the subject site into two parcels. The site is bordered to the north by vacant land and additional single family dwelling units. To the east of the subject site is Wilson Boulevard. Golden Gate Boulevard borders the site to the south. To the west of the site is 3rd Street NW. Golden Gate Boulevard is an east/west four-lane divided arterial roadway to the south of the subject site. The intersection of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard allows full turning movements under signalized conditions. Currently, the intersections of Golden Gate Boulevard with 3rd Street NW and 15t Street NW allow full turning movements under unsignalized conditions. Golden Gate Boulevard has a posted speed limit of 45 mph and is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. The Level of Service Standard on this section of Golden Gate Boulevard from Collier Boulevard to Wilson Boulevard is LOS "D", or 2,350 vehicles. Wilson Boulevard is a north/south two-lane roadway that borders the subject site to the east. Wilson Boulevard's intersection with Golden Gate Boulevard currently provides full turning movements operating under signalized conditions. Wilson Boulevard is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. Wilson Boulevard has a Level of Service Standard of LOS "E", or 920 vehicles. 1 st Street NW is a north/south two-lane local roadway that divides the subject site into two parcels. The intersection of 151 Street NW and Golden Gate Boulevard currently provides full turning movements under unsignalized conditions. l5t Street NW is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. Concurrency is not currently measured on 15t Street NW. Page 3 Page 125 of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. 3rd Street NW is a north/south two-lane local roadway that borders the subject site to the west. The intersection of 3rd Street NW and Golden Gate Boulevard currently provides full turning movements under unsignalized conditions. 3rd Street NW is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. Concurrency is not currently measured on 3rd Street NW. In order to gain a better understanding of the traffic conditions in the vicinity of the subject site based on the methodology meeting held with County Staff, AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts were performed at the intersections of Golden Gate Boulevard with Collier Boulevard, 3rd Street NW, 1st Street NW, and Wilson Boulevard as well as the Wilson Boulevard/Immokalee Road intersection. These turning movement counts were performed during the peak season of the adjacent street in March based on the information contained within the 2006 FDOT Traffic Information CD, so no peak season adjustment was required. Figures 2A and 2B indicate the resultant 2007 peak season turning movements at the subject intersections. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict site will amend the current future land use designation on the subject site to allow commercial retail uses. The property owner has agreed to cap the maximum amount of retail uses at 190,000 square feet of floor area. However, as previsouly discussed this analysis was based upon a total of 225,000 square feet of commercial floor area consistent with analysis previously conducted for the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict. Table 1 summarizes the uses for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the subject site. Table 1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Pro osed Use Page 4 .-, ,- Page 126 of218 ~ Z I- W w 0::: I- en o ~ ~ Z I- W w 0::: I- en I- (f) .,- o ~ , ~ ~ o co o u.. J'''''. .....-. -- I I I I Eoc;) ~3 (7) I ~e:~ "-3 (6) ~;;;; +1,112 (877) I 0>00 +1,092 (881) ~ + ~ k_2_(1.~~.... ...... ...... .m._.. ........ ....._. .......... ..t. +-.~ .r-..~ (~L.. (18)8j~+~ GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD (9)Oj~+~ (1,068) 395+ ~~~ (1,052)404+ ~~~ (22) 6~ ~2-!::::- (17) 1 ~ ~2-~ -- -- -- -- -- -- ~ Z I- W w 0::: I- en o % ~ Z I- w w 0::: I- en I- (f) .- o 0::: ~ W -l ::) o (D z o en -l ~ ............ .............1 I -- co C') ~ N O,A. -,.-..,~ ~ <D 1'-........ 42 (46) ~;;~ +714 (645) .....t. +~ .r 1 (5) (167) 147 j + ~ (878) 255+ ~ ~:!. (18) 4~ e~~ o 0::: ~ W -l ::> o (D z o en -l ~ LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2007 PEAK SEASON 1: TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS KCONSULTANTS,INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 2A Page 127 of218 """""^' --- ...-0...- (',1...-(',1 --- IMMOKALEE ROAD o'<tCO o ~ , ~ VANDERBILT g BEACH ROAD o u.. ~, N_ 01'- (',IC"') ~~ ~392 (144) + ~ ,f" 864 (373) +~ o C"')(D cr: LO N <( C"') '<t > -- ill 0><0 ....J f2~ ::>-- o :s. CD 0::: ill :::J ....J o () GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD r..... "'1 L_ _.._ J o cr: <( (ij ....J ::> o CD z o (J) ....J ~ LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2007 PEAK SEASON 1: TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS KCONSULTANTS,INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT ~, Figure 28 Page 128 of 218 "L TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. At the map amendment stage, a detailed site plan has not been prepared. Therefore, it is difficult to asses the access that will be provided to the subject site. Preliminary discussions with the County were held regarding access. It is understood that access is not specifically approved at the Comprehensive Plan Amendment stage, but rather at the Planned Development stage and even as much at the Site Plan Approval stage. Therefore, a "conceptual" access plan was developed in order complete the traffic impact analysis. Access to the subject site must ultimately be approved by the Department of Transportation and the Board of County Commissioners. For this analysis, assumptions were made regarding the proposed access to the subject site. It was assumed access would be provided directly to Golden Gate Boulevard via a full access, to Wilson Boulevard via a full access and additional access drives on 3rd Street NW and 1 sf Street NW. The access points to 1 sf Street NW were shown to provide access to the subject site on both sides of the roadway. Again, this is a conceptual access plan that will be further developed as the project proceeds through the re-zoning and site plan approval process. IV. TRIP GENERATION Trip generation calculations were perfonned for the proposed uses as a part of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the site. Upon approval of this Amendment, as conditioned, the Comprehensive Plan allocation on the subject site will allow a total of225,OOO square feet of various mixed commercial floor area. The site will be analyzed based upon the use that indicates the highest trip generation in order to perform a "worst case" analysis on the County Roadway network. The resultant trip generation for each use was determined by referencing the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) report, titled Trip Generation, 7th Edition. A comparison of the 8th Edition to the 7th Edition of the ITE report, included in the Appendix, indicates that the total weekday P.M. peak hour trip generation would increase by a total of 25 vehicles (in and out) and the peak direction would only increase by one (1) vehicle during this same time period. Therefore, the trips generated for the project based on the ill Edition trip Page 7 Page 129of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. generation, as previously utilized in the studies submitted to Collier County in January 2008, remained in this report as the resultant change to the 8th Edition would make no appreciable difference in the analysis conducted herein. Land Use Code 820 (Shopping Center) was utilized in order to perform the necessary trip generation on the subject parcel. According to the land use description for the shopping center use, "A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned, developed, owned and managed as a unit. A shopping center's composition is related to its market area in terms of size, location and type of store. A shopping center also provides on-site parking facilities sufficient to serve its own parking demands." The retail floor area proposed as a part of this development will function most similarly as a shopping center based on the ITE land use description. Table 2 indicates the trip generation of the retail use proposed as a part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the site. The trip generation equations utilized to calculate the trip generation can be found within the Appendix of this report for reference. Table 2 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Tri Generation ITE estimates that a shopping center use of comparable size may attract a significant amount of its traffic from vehicles already traveling the adjoining roadway system. This traffic, called "pass-by" traffic, reduces the development's overall impact on the surrounding roadway system but does not decrease the actual driveway volumes. Collier County allows a maximum "pass-by" traffic reduction of 25% for shopping centers. However, as a part of the methodology meeting held with County Staff, there was discussion 011 the fact that the site would primarily serve the Golden Gate Estates area, Page 8 -'. ~r~ Page 130 of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. which is currently lacking in commercial goods and services. A retail center in this area would attract a higher percentage of "pass-by" trips due to the fact that there are very few commercial services available to the residents within a five mile radius of the subject site. Therefore, a "pass-by" rate of 35% was approved for the site by Staff in the methodology meeting. In addition, a greater pass-by reduction is reasonable (beyond the 25%) for the subject site due to the significant amount of commuter traffic experienced during the peak hours of the adjacent street along Golden Gate Boulevard. For this analysis, the "pass-by" traffic was accounted for in order to detennine the number of "new" trips the development will add to the surrounding roadways. Table 3 summarizes the pass-by reduction percentages utilized. Table 4 summarizes the development traffic and the breakdown between the total project trips and the net new trips the development is anticipated to generate after the pass-by reduction is applied. It should be noted that the driveway volumes are not reduced as a result of the "pass-by" reduction, only the traffic added to the surrounding streets and intersections. Table 3 Pass-by Trip Reduction Factor Estates Sho in Center Subdistrict Table 4 Trip Generation - New Trips Estates Sho in Center Subdistrict Total Tri s Less Retail Pass-by (35% ass,b ) 110 55 165 326 370 696 7,478 Page 9 Page 131 of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. The Level of Service analysis and the intersection analysis at Golden Gate Boulevard/Collier Boulevard and lmmokalee Road/Wilson Boulevard performed within this report is based solely on the new trips generated as a result of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the subject site. The intersection analysis at the intersections surrounding the subject site was performed based on the total trips. v. TRIP DISTRIBUTION The new trips based on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment indicated within Table 4 were then assigned to the surrounding roadway system based on the anticipated routes the drivers will utilize to approach the site. The resultant traffic distribution is indicated in Figure 3 as approved within the methodology meeting held with Staff. Based on the traffic distribution indicated within Figure 3, the new development traffic was distributed to the surrounding roadway network. FigUloe 4A and 4B indicates the site traffic assignment to the conceptual site access plan utilized in this analysis and previously described. The assignment was also carried to the external intersection beyond the site boundary and within the Study area. The new site related traffic was assigned to the significantly impacted roadway links as a part of the net new project trips graphic identified as Figure 4C. Furthermore, an assignment of the pass-by traffic generated as a result of the subject site can also be found within the Appendix of this report for referenceo Page 10 -""". Page 132 of218 OIL WELL ROAD IMMOKALEE ROAD +5%+ +5%~ + 10% + VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD + 10% + 10% DROP OFF TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS o ~ , ~ ;; ro o LL o 0:: ~ w :5 +30%+ o en GOLDEN GATE 0:: BOULEVARD w -l -l o o 10% DROP OFF TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS r L. +40%+ + 20% TO RESIDENTIAL .: ~ + +30%+ AREAS +15%+ 15% DROP OFF + 4% + +2%+ + 10% + + DROP OFF TO RESIDENTIAL 4 % AREAS li! + ~ -l ::l o en C/) w o 4:: -l CD 0:: W > W +5%+ PINE RIDGE ROAD + 20% + 5% DROP OFF TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS + 10% + o 0:: 4:: > W -l ::l o co z o (f) -l ~ * 10 % OF THE PROJECT TRAFFIC WAS ASSUMED TO TERMINATE AND ORIGINATE BETWEEN COLLIER BOULEVARD AND THE SITE ALONG GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND BETWEEN IMMOKALEE ROAD AND THE SITE ALONG WILSON BOULEVARD. LEGEND +20%+ PERCENT DISTRIBUTION 1:. TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 3 Page 133 of218 ~ Z I- UJ UJ 0:: I- (f) o ~ f..... .-.. -- 1 o ~ , ~ '" c; co o LL ~ ~5 (10) ;; +35 (198) .~ I,.. 0 (0) .... "'__A_. ~._..__ (30) 10J ~ (175) 51 + ;:. (0) 0 ""\. 2- ~ Z I- UJ UJ 0:: I- (f) o 0::: c<) 1: TRANSPORTATION K (ONSULTANTS,INC. ~ Z I- UJ UJ 0:: I- (f) I- (f) .,.... -- -- -- -- -- -- COM ~~ I ~ '-15 (64) ~ g ."'-52 (145) ~ +~7(~j55) ...__~.~ ~J.5 E,92. . __... __,_._ ...L ~. .. .... (115) 35 J GOLDEN GATE (60) 16 J ~ (60) 16+ BOULEVARD (203) 30+ ;:. (0) O""\. 2- s: Z I- UJ UJ 0:: I- (f) I- (f) .,.... LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ~ o 0:: ~ UJ -1 :J o co z o (f) -1 ~ MO _.~@.. .,....0 ....-N ~~ (7-;;1;~~ ~ t (60) 15 ;: ~ , .--.0 co,""" I ~- I -, 0.--.101. ~~ ~ ""7 (34) ~;;~ +40 (120) .-..1. *-._~ .r 0 (0) (40) 5J~ t ~ (122) 20+ N '<t 0 (41) 5, S-~ 2- . ~- o 0::: ;; UJ -1 :J o co z o (f) -1 ~ ~ SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 4A Page 134 of 218 o o ~ VANDERBILT g BEACH ROAD o u.. ........ ('f) ........('f) e-::- ~ 6 (37) 0..- +~,("11(74) +~ o ON 0::: ........N <( 0........ > ~LO W ~ ...J :::l o en 0::: W ::i ...J o () 1: TRANSPORTATION H CONSULTANTS, INC. s IN.T.S.I 888 ~o (0) 000 + 0 (0) ., + ~,("6 (16) RANDALL (0) 0 .? ~ + ~ BOULEVARD (0) 0 + ('f) 0 ('f) (16) 6'"\. ~8~ IMMOKALEE ROAD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD f' -_.. -'1 L __.-1 LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC o 0::: ~ ...J :::l o en z o (f) ...J ~ SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 48 Page 135of218 o ~ , ~ ~ o <Xl o u.. o 0::: ~ LU ...J ~ o OJ 0::: LU ::J ...J o () IMMOKALEE ROAD o 0::: ~ LU ...J ~ o OJ z o (f) ...J ~ .~, RANDALL BOULEVARD VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD to + ~ 0 N .. N ~ + t:.. +22 (148) r' I GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD L. . ---' +33 (98) (130) 44+ (111) 17+ ~ + ~ .. .. to cry + ~ LEGEND + 000 AM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC +(000) PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC ~", ~~, 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. NET NEW PROJECT TRAFFIC ON SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED ROADWAYS F 4C ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT igure Page 136 of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. VI. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS In order to determine which roadway segments surrounding the site will be significantly impacted, Table lA, contained in the Appendix, was created. This table indicates which roadway links will accommodate an amount of project traffic greater than the 2%-2%-3% Significance Test. The new project related traffic from Table 4 was compared with the corrected 10-month Level of Service Standard for Peak Hour - Peak Direction traffic conditions in order to determine the project impact percentage. Based on the information contained within Table lA, Golden Gate Boulevard from Collier Boulevard to Everglades Boulevard, Wilson Boulevard from south of Golden Gate Boulevard to Immokalee Road, and Collier Boulevard from Golden Gate Boulevard to Pine Ridge Road are shown to experience a significant impact as a result of the added project traffic associated with the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Comprehensive Plan Amendment in accordance with the Collier County 2%-2%-3% Significance Test. Therefore, Level of Service analysis is only required on these roadway links as a result of the proposed development. In addition to the significant impact criteria, Table 1A also includes a buildout consistency analysis on the Collier County Roadway network. The Collier County TIS Guidelines require analysis of the adjacent roadway network based on the buildout of the project or the five (5) year planning window, whichever is longer. It is likely that this project will be constructed prior to the end of the year 2014 due to the need for commercial services in the Golden Gate Estates. Therefore, it was necessary to analyze the surrounding roadway network based on the 2015 traffic conditions. The total volume indicated within the 2010 Collier County Concurrency Spreadsheet reflects the current remaining capacity on the adjacent roadway network. The remaining capacity was subtracted from the 10-month service volume on each roadway in order to determine the 2010 peak season, peak hour, peak direction traffic volume on the adjacent roadway network. The appropriate annual growth rate for these roadways was taken by Page 15 Page 137 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. comparing information from the 2006 Annual Inventory Update Report (AUIR) to data in the 2010 AUIR. An example of the calculations to determine the annual growth rates can be found within the Appendix of this report for reference. These annual growth rates were then used to factor the 2010 peak season, peak hour, peak direction traffic volume to 2015 peak season, peak hour, peak direction background traffic conditions. The resultant 2015 peak season, peak hour, peak direction traffic volume was subtracted from the Level of Service Standard in order to determine the remaining capacity in the year 2015. The project generated traffic was then subtracted from the remaining capacity in order to determine the remaining 2015 capacity after the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict traffic is added to the surrounding roadway network. Figure 5 indicates the results of the capacity analysis along Collier Boulevard, Golden Gate Boulevard, and Wilson Boulevard. VII. PROJECTED CONSISTENCY AND IMPROVEMENTS Based upon the information contained within Table 1A and Figure 5, a Level of Service deficiency is projected on Golden Gate Boulevard east of Wilson Boulevard based upon the 20 14 traffic conditions both with and without the proposed development traffic. Several road improvements are shown in either the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) or the 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan in this area of Golden Gate Estates that will specifically address this deficiency. Golden Gate Boulevard is shown on the 2030 Needs Plan as a 4 lane roadway from Collier Boulevard to Everglades Boulevard. A parallel facility is planned (the Vanderbilt Beach Road extension) but funding for the segment between Collier Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard has not been identified. The Developer has committed to provide the right-of-way along the project frontage to accommodate the future widening of Golden Gate Boulevard, should it be necessary in the future. In addition, the Developer has also committed to provide the necessary right- of-way to develop intersection improvements at the Golden Gate Boulevard/Wilson Boulevard intersection, which will improve the capacity of the link due to the added Page 16 ,,- Page 138 of218 S IN.T.S.I Oil WEll ROAD IMMOKAlEE ROAD 0.5% 532 (521 ) 0 [495] ~ 4.0% 532 , VANDERBilT ~ ~ (510) 0 BEACH ROAD co [458] 0 0 u.. 0::: 8.0% 1.6% ~ LU 532 ...J 1.1% :J (497) 0 [!) [412] 0.7% 0::: 13.0% LU GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD ::i ...J 0 0 () 94 0::: (72) 378 378 ~ [20] (345) (334) -186 ill ...J PINE RIDGE ROAD 3.0% [267] [230] (-202) :J 1.6% 4.7% 6.3% [-241] 0 [!) 892 5.5% en (881 ) ill 0 1.5% [855] <( ...J 0.7% 4.0% C> 0::: ill > ill LEGEND 000 2015 REMAINING CAPACITY (000) 2015 REMAINING CAPACITY WI AM PROJECT TRAFFIC [000] 2015 REMAINING CAPACITY WI PM PROJECT TRAFFIC 0.0% PROJECT IMPACT PERCENTAGE 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. 2015 TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 5 Page 139 of 218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. capacity created at the intersection. The impacts to the Long Range Transportation Plan as a result of this amendment would be minimal since the parallel corridor of Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension is included in that plan and will accommodate a large volume of east/west commuter traffic in the Estates area. Additionally, the Developer has also committed to provide the necessary right-of-way at no cost to the County for the future widening of Wilson Boulevard along the frontage of the project site. The proposed Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development is the first commercial development of its kind proposed within the Golden Gate Estates area. Therefore, it is likely that the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development will have a positive impact on the traffic conditions in the area. The Developer has committed, through the Text of the Growth Management Plan Amendment, to include a Grocery Store in the first 100,000 square feet of development that is constructed on the site. The nearest grocery shopping opportunity for residents of Golden Gate Estates is along Collier Boulevard to the north and south of Golden Gate Boulevard, a distance of approximately six (6) miles. The addition of a grocery store and other neighborhood commercial uses in this area would significantly shorten trip lengths that are related to this purpose as well as potentially reduce traffic volumes on Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard due to the fact that the retail trip would be intercepted prior to reaching these roadways. In addition, further analysis of the future traffic conditions in this area will be required at the re-zoning and SDP phase for the proposed development. Intersection analysis was performed as a result of the added Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict traffic. Based on the methodology meeting, intersection analysis was required on Golden Gate Boulevard at its intersections with Collier Boulevard, 3rd Street NW, the site access, 1 sl Street NW, and Wilson Boulevard as well as at the intersections of Wilson Boulevard with the site access and Immokalee Road. It should be noted that the intersection analysis was completed based on the assumption that the existing through lane capacity currently in place on Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard would remain (four lanes on Golden Gate Parkway and two lanes on Wilson Boulevard). Page 18 ~i!'r;; ~ Page 140 of 218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. In order to perform the required intersection analysis, it was necessary to determine the 2014 background peak hour turning movements at these intersections. Therefore, the background turning movements indicated within Figures 2A and 2B were factored by the appropriate annual growth rates over a seven (7) year period. The calculation to determine the background turning movements is indicated below: . (. ) ( )(2014-2007) 2014 Turmng Movement = 2007 Turmng Movement * 1 + AGR 2014 Turning Movement = (1,112 veh)* (1 + 0.0242)<7) 2014 Turning Movement = (1,112 veh)* (1.182) 2014 Turning Movement = 1,372 vehicles The above illustrated calculation was applied to all of the turning movements indicated within Figures 2A and 2B in order to determine the 2014 background turning movements. It should be noted again that the access to the subject site assumed as part of this analysis is conceptual and has not yet been approved by the Collier County Department of Transportation or the Board of County Commissioners. The Growth Management Plan Amendment process does not specifically identifY turning movements permitted at site access drives to projects within the Sub-district. This will be further analyzed and access determined in the re-zoning and SDP process The resultant 2014 background turning movements are illustrated within Figures 6A and 6B. The site traffic indicated within Figures 4A and 4B was then added to the 2014 background turning movements in order to determine the 2014 buildout turning movements at the area intersections. The resultant 2014 buildout turning movements are indicated within Figures 7 A and 7B. It is important to note that the pass-by traffic assignment contained within the Appendix of this report was subtracted from the volumes within Figure 4B prior to adding those volumes to the 2014 background turning movements at the Collier Boulevard/Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard/Immokalee Road intersections. This was done in an effort to back out the pass-by traffic at the external intersections because the pass-by traffic is already Page 19 Page 141 of 218 ~ Z I- LU LU 0:: I- (f) o ~ ...- ~ Z I- LU LU 0:: I- (f) I- (f) ..- o 0:: :;; LU ....J ::> o (I) z o (f) ....J ~ o , "1 o <0 o LL r---- -- I I I I -- -- LO 00 ~ .o~ ~(") o l{) .,+ -- (0) 0 ;; ~ + (0) 0 ~ ~~ ~oo l{) ~ -- -- -- -- ~ ~5 (10) ~ +1,372 (1,089) .J 1,5 (15) ..,.. 9':-..-. --- --- "..--...-."," (21) 10'; ~ (1,257) 439+ g (26) 10 "'\. ~ '-' e:e: I ~ -\.5 (10) 00 .-\. 0 (0) ~ +1,367 (1,097) . ..~ ~ +1.,3~2.L1,11.1l .t. ~~ (5)..... (0) 0'; GOLDEN GATE (15) 5'; ~ (1,276) 469+ BOULEVARD(1,241) 459+ N (20) 5 "'\. ~ ~ ..- N~_ (,,)O~I" ;;s~ I '-51 (56) 0>0..- +864 (781) ~..-(") .. ~ +..~ -#5 (10) (197) 174 ~ + ~ (1,038) 301 + ~ ~~ (21) 5 "'\. ~~~ ~ ~1~~~7. ~ Z I- LU LU 0:: I- (f) o 0::: (") ~ Z I- LU LU 0:: I- (f) I- (f) ..- o 0:: <( > LU ....J ::> o (I) z o (f) ....J ~ LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BACKGROUND 1: TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS K CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT ...- Figure 6A Page 142 of 218 IMMOKALEE ROAD c;)L()M ~ ~::s~ '-17 (29) ~;::~ +1,456 (710) ~ -+ ~ +245 (287) RANDALL (59) 10..1 ~ .. ~ BOULEVARD (1,033) 302+ ~ ~~ (78) 18, o~:: .. "'t ~m ~ co ~ o '<"" , ~ VANDERBILT o ~ BEACH ROAD u.. mM mo NN ~i -\..463 (170) M...... -+ ~ +1.021 (441) t~ o NM 0:: "'t M <( "'t LO > -- w LOCO ...J ~~ => ~ . o ::s co 0::: W :J ...J o () GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD ,.. .... ....1 L_ mo.... _-' o 0:: <( > W ...J => o co z o C/) ...J ~ LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BACKGROUND 1: TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS H (ONSULTANTS,INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 68 Page 143 of218 A"" ~ Z I- UJ UJ 0::: I- (J) o ~ ~ Z I- UJ UJ 0::: I- (J) f- U1 ..- s IN.T.S.I o 0::: ~ UJ ....I ::J o (0 z o (J) ....I ~ -- l!) c;)~ '<;j'~ ~'<;j' ..- LO ..- LO .,~ (7;1~~ + (60) 15~ ::.~ <0_ I '<;j' co ~O) I ~ r-o '. .-.., I -- -- -- o ~ , "< ~ o co o u.. -- -- -- I ~ I roM ro~~ N .. rt) 0 I'- .. rt) LO 0) I .. ~ 1'-10(20) s~ I t:::. '-20(74) ;;~~I '-58(90) ~ +1,407 (1,287) ~ g .'-52 (145) ~ +1,424 (1,252) U;~~ +904 (901) ., ~ ~ (1.5~ . ._.....,_..,~ ~_1 ,~~IJ1 !~) .___... _..t. ~,5 ~l._ __'.... ..~ i..Y .r 5 (10) (51)20; ~ (115)35;GOLDENGATE (75)21; ~ (237)179;~+~ (1,432)490+ g (1,336)485+ BOULEVARD (1,444)489+ N (1,160)321+ ~~~ (26) 10 ~ ~ (20) 5~ S' (62) 10~ *~~ ~" I ~ Z I- UJ UJ 0::: I- (J) o ~ ~ Z I- UJ UJ 0::: I- (J) f- U1 ..- o 0::: ~ UJ ....I ::J o (0 z o (J) ....I ~ LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BUILD-OUT 1:. TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS K CONSULTANTS,INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 7 A Page 144 of 218 IMMOKALEE ROAD MLOM .. ~S~ '-17 (29) ~ ~ ~ +1,456 (710) ~ ... ~ -1"251 (303) RANDALL (59) 10'; ~ + ~ BOULEVARD (1,033) 302+ f6~~ (94) 24 "" m~ ::.. ... LO........CO ........ co ~ o ~ , ~ VANDERBILT al BEACH ROAD o u.. m(O 0)(') ~~ ~ ~ '\.. 469 (207) + ~ -1"1,032 (515) +~ o C\l LO 0::: '<t LO <( '<t LO > -- w LO (f) ....J ~~ ::::> ........ - o 0 OJ 0::: w ::i ....J o U GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD j' pm. "'I L... _.., __J o 0::: ;; W ....J ::::> o OJ Z o (jJ ....J ~ LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BUILD-OUT 1: TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS HCONSULTANTS,INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 78 Page 145 of 218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. ..-* accounted for within the 2014 background conditions. However, the intersections surrounding the site were analyzed as if no pass-by traffic reductions were taken. The appropriate lane arrangements and the turning movements indicated within Figures 7A and 7B were inputted into the HCS+ software in order to perform the necessary intersection analysis at the previously mentioned intersections. The lane arrangements utilized in this analysis can be found in graphical format in the Appendix. It should be noted that no truck factors were applied to turning movements into and out of the subject development at the site access intersections. The results of the intersection capacity analyses can be found within Table 5 below. Table 5 Intersection Analysis Results Estates Sho in Center Subdistrict EB Left Golden Gate Blvd @3rdStNW WB Left NB Approach ~" EB Left LOSB LOSB LOSB 12.8 see) (13.7 see (I 1.2 see) WB Left LOS A LOS A LOSB Golden Gate Blvd (8.4 see) (8.5 see) (12.0 see @ IstStNW NB Approach LOS A LOS A LOSB (9.9 see (10.0 see) 14.! see) SB Approach LOSe Lose LOSB (Is.! see) (16.0 see) (I3.! see) Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Blvd LOSe Lose LOS e (25.1 see) (26.0 see) (20.8 see) NB Left LOS A Wilson Blvd @ (8.7 see) Site Access EB Approach LOSB (14.3 see lmmokalee Rd @ Wilson Blvd LOSB LOSB Lose (18.0 see) (18.1 see) (23.2 see) ~. Page 24 Page 146of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. Based on the results of the intersection analysis listed above, all intersections and turning movements at the subject intersections are shown to operate acceptably. Based on the conceptual access plan analyzed as part of this report, the site access driveway to Golden Gate Boulevard was analyzed both with and without a traffic signal. The analysis of this intersection without a traffic signal showed Level of Service deficiencies on the site access approach to Golden Gate Boulevard during only the PM peak hour, but no Level of Service deficiencies on the public roadway. Regardless, this intersection is shown to function acceptably after the addition of a traffic signal, which is approved, would be installed at the sole expense ofthe Developer. Therefore, beyond the potential additional traffic control improvements to the site access intersection to Golden Gate Boulevard, no additional intersection improvements will be required as a result of the proposed Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Comprehensive Plan Amendment. However, as previously noted, the Developer has agreed to stipulations as part of the text of the Growth Management Plan Amendment that state the following: Development within this Sub-district shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified time frames: 1. Right-of-Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right-of-Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 120 days of a written request from the County. 2. The applicant will pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete, the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100,000 square feet of development. The applicant must obtain a c.o. for a grocery store as part of this 100,000 square feet, and the grocery store must be the first C. 0. obtained. Page 25 Page 147 of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. Specific site related turn lanes and improvements to the Golden Gate BoulevardlWilson Boulevard intersection will be analyzed further at the re-zoning and SDP phase of the project. VIII. CONCLUSION The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development is not anticipated to create any Level of Service deficiencies in the vicinity of the subject site. However, Golden Gate Boulevard east of Wilson Boulevard is projected to operate below acceptable Level of Service conditions in 2015 both with and without the trips from the proposed development. Collier County has plans to widen Golden Gate Boulevard between Wilson Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard but funding for this improvement is not currently identified in the 5-year work program. The Developer has agreed to provide right-of-way along the project frontage and commit to proportionate fair share payments for intersection improvements at the Wilson Boulevard/Golden Gate Boulevard intersection in order to mitigate any Level of Service deficiencies. Additionally, the Developer of the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict has agreed to phase the project until specific improvements have been completed. Furthermore, with the addition of a commercial development such as the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict in this area, significant impacts to trip lengths will occur based on the fact that residents in the area will travel much shorter distances to obtain the same goods and services that are now only available on Collier Boulevard or along lmmokalee Road. Therefore, the proposed development will provide a significant benefit to the public within the Golden Gate Estates area. Page 26 ~c .,,,",,,,,, Page 148 of 218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. Based on a conceptual access plan for the project, intersection analysis was performed as a part of this report at the Golden Gate Boulevard intersections with Collier Boulevard, 3rd Street NW, the proposed site access, 1 sl Street NW, and Wilson Boulevard along with the Wilson Boulevard intersections with the site access and lmmokalee Road. These intersections and approaches are shown to operate acceptably after the addition of the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development related traffic after the addition of a traffic signal at the site access driveway to Golden Gate Boulevard. Turn lane analysis will be performed in depth at the SDP phase for the proposed development. Page 27 Page 149 of 218 APPENDIX . i.o/'~. Page 150 of218 TABLE lA&2A Page 151 of218 tJ) ~ <C z <C ~ o <C zll. 0<C _u I-~ ~<C 0:::- _0::: OW ~~!:: W<CO::: ..JWU COll.I- ~ o:::-~ ::::lll. 0:2: ::x:- ~I- <cZ w<C ll.~ u. Z C) u; ::,g c.;, ~ N . ~ N o .,.... o N 0::: W CO :2: W u W o o W I- <C o ll. ::::l w ~ ffi t ~ w 1;1 ~ j i: u.. 0- ~~C3~ ~ CI) I W >- ~~o::ti~1 ~ <3 ~ !:!:j ~ ~ "-< 0::0 - => o 0 Q 0:: 0 In < t- o 0 N ....I Z (t') ;:: In ~ ~ M II II ~ ~ >- I ~I ~ 0:: :r: :r: n.. n.. > > '" "' "' a> "' II II U () LL u: u.. u.. ~ ~ f- f- f- f- () () W W ..., ..., a 0 0:: 0:: n.. n. 0:: 0:: => => a 0 :r: :r: '" '" l5 l5 n.. n. ::;: ::;: < n. ...J ...J < <C f- f- a a f- f- f- Z ~~g~~ W In ~ 5! w iD -0 Q) Q) 0:: 16 16 Q) ~ (!l .g iH~ '0 15 i cr.i 'E ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ o 15 0:: () CI) In (/) 0 0 ~ ~ ~ z z o N ro~~~~. N N '1"" N .... U? ;;; co en ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ v a> co co aJ <0 to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "' M 'C;f '<:f 'It C") ('I') f8 fB m f'J "'i "' '" M N (\J N N to 1.0 f'-. ,.... ,.... en Ol ot ~ ~ ~ o o N ~ ~ ~ ~ rft. o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 N N N c-.l N V M N to co (0 c? ("') co co co co co ......1'--. ,..... q q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '::!!. ~ ?ft. ~ ~ t-- M "! q 1.0 f:.. -i cD I.4i c:i ~ ~ re ~ ~ to- ~ :j: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 M V ~ ~ ~ ~ lO N o 0 '" '" v v N N 000 '" '" '" M M M N N N 000 q o. o. Q Cl ...J ...J ~ :t o 0 ...J ...J "' '" o 0 Q => => ::> ..J ...J ..J ...J ..J ...J V o:;t ...,. N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -0 -ri > > as en -g ~~~~ mt1l(Qco~~ <D<~5i'~ 8 ~ ~ ~ w ~ '00-5-'00'0 u.i 3 0: uj 3 uj '0 > iO Q) 1ii (!l c Q) '0 15 (!l (f) (J) en en w w w w >- >- >- >- IOCOC\lLO ~~:;~ ~ ~ ~ i N N N N f2~f6~ Ol lJ) CJ) 1.0 1.0 to CD en II) LO I.C) co co co co co ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ g g g g N N N N u:; U; ":;j LO M ("') C") N o 0 z z (I) en en (I) U1WWW >- >- >- >- rft. '# '" '" ci 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cO coi -i ~ ~ ~i!~~ ;:~~~ ~ ~ '" '" ~ ~ ~ o 0 0 N o 0 a> r-- r-- "' c>i M o 0 0 0 N N N N CD c> en en o 0 ...J ...J to "' => :::l ::> => ....J ..J ...J ..J N N N N v '" " " ~ ~ ~ -g $l ffi co c c ~ g ;;:: ~ '5 '5 ~ uj '" Q) Cl '" c e u.. '0 '" o c: Q) Q) (ij -" o E .s 1! ~ :; o en c o ~ => => ...J ...J N N o 0 z z 'f!. '#- ~ ~ ~ ~ v v ~ ~ ::- ~ C> C> o 0 a> m ~ ~ -g -g ffi ro Q) Q) 10 Cii (!l (!) c c:: Q) Q) '0 '0 "5 "5 (!l (!l '0 '5 i cr.i -ci > 1li ., '0 '" c;, :v > w o z ai Q) .c '0 '" ~ 0- (/) >> " c Q) !5 " c o () o ;; N Q) ,s c ;S 'ji '" 1ii '0 '0 -" " !l! '" g Q) ~ '0 t: o 0- ~ Q) ,s '0 <C N ~ ~ Li: ~ C :J ;S ~ .~ c: j * ~ .g ~ -g ~ ~ ~ UJ c Q 2l Q.) C c E Q) Q) Q) E ~ ~ 5 UJ 0'1 "~ >> C '" g "E ~ Q) ..2 < $ to -g ~ ~ .[ .x: iIi CD ~ CD -5 >.. ro en ~ G g ~ ij ro e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) 0 .s ~ ~ € ~ ~ ~ ,s ~ (3 .9 -g OJ -e < .E .~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ o c u w ~ Q) ~ B '[ Q) ., Q) F F F " '" ,l!, .... o ~ ;f!, '" o o 00 N o ...J V '" ~ ~ 1li ~ 15 () '0 3 -ci 0:: Q) Cl '0 ii Q) C 0: ~. ""'l!!Ii>" Page 152 of218 en I-W O~ 0::::::J I-I--! zenO we> ~m~ z:::Jl1.. C)enl1.. -0:::< enwO::: <enl-I- N<ZW wOWI- ...Ji:i:OU5 D)l1..C)~ <<z< I-O:::-w 1-0..0. 1-0., oOl1.. wJ:l1.. -,enO Oene O:::Wz 0..1-< ~~ en< ww a. o "l'"" o N 0::: W D) :i: w o w e e W ~ e a. :::J ID ID II I- ::> o a ~ ~ II Z I 0.. > ID <0 ~ I- o w -, o 0:: 0.. 0:: ::> o I ;,,:: <l: W 0.. :2 <l: ...J j:: o I- a r-- C') II I- ::> o <0 N C') II ~ I 0.. > <0 (J) <0 I- o w -, o 0:: 0. 0:: ::> o I ;,,:: <l: W 0. ::2 0.. ...J j:: o I- u ii: u. r2 l- I- U W .., lE 0.. :E <l: o I- lIJ I- lIJ III 0 ~ ...J :I: ~ I- W ::> :E o ::> lIJ ...J o > o I- lIJ Ii; lIJ <l: 0 W ...J :I: tft Ii o z u ii: LL r2 l- I- U W .., o 0:: 0.. :E <l: o Z ::l o 10 Z I- Z W U 0:: W 0.. w :E ::> ..J o > o l- I- lIJ lIJ lIJ W 0 ~ ..J :J: t;!. I- W ::> :E o ::l lIJ ..J o > o I- lIJ lIJ o ..J rfl. I- lIJ <l: w :r: Ii o z w :E ::l ..J o > z o i= u w 0:: o I- lIJ W ~ ~ u. :I: r2 !:i I- ~ I- I- o lIJ W <( a w 0:: :r: 0.. I- 0:: o Z o l- I/) lIJ o ..J u ii: u. r2 I- I- Z ~ 91 ~ w lIJ "" o C') ~ r-- C') "" o C') ~ r-- C') "" o r-- ~ ci <0 "" ~ ~ ci <0 I I- ::> o I/) I- Z w :E (!) w I/) ~ o <( o 0:: rfl. N a M v r-- "" o <0 <0 N ID <0 ?F- ID v ci ~ ~ ?F- a (J) ci N N I ~ o z "" o ~ "" o N "" o a ~ "" o a N a a 0 r-- ID ID N .... '<t <'i N N -: "! ~ ~ C') C') ~ in 2 C1l (!) l: Q) "0 o (!) '0 :i ~ in 2 C1l (!) l: Q) "0 o (9 ..... o en 'E C1l > Q) "5 o CO .... ~ o () ;,R o ~ .q r-- C') ?F- C') C":! C') C') ;,R ~ N ci <0 ;,R o ID '<t ci ~ ~ I I- 0:: o Z ;,R o ,... ;,R o a ~ -0 0:: (j) 0> "0 a:: (j) l: i:i: ..... o en >I< o N r-- - in .... ~ o o ..... o ui "0 > in 2 C1l (!) l: (j) "0 o (!) ;,R o a C') cO 0:> '<t ..-- ?F- a C') cO 0:> '<t ~ ?F- '<t OJ ci N N >I< ~ (J) ci N N l- I/) w ?; ?F- a '<t ?F- a '<t r-- ~ ~ 'E C') ... o :i ;,R o a a ci ?F- a a ci cf... cF. a C') q ~ a rfl. "#. a r-- a N ci M "" o (J) OJ ci ~ ;,R o a r-- cri ~ ~ ~ 0:> (J) "" o 0:> <0 cri ?F- 0:> .q 0:> (J) <0 ~ >I< l'o N -4- r-- ,.... C') '<t rfl. (J) <0 ci C') C') r-- I- lIJ <l: w l- I/) <l: w >I< o a C') ?F- LO ,.... rfl. a C') ;,R o ID ..-- a a ID ~ C') q N a 0 ,... ,.... q q r-- ..-- C') N ,.... '" '<t N N ..-- ~ (j) "0 0> > S m l: l: o 0 u: J!l U ~ Q) .~ 0.. u.i ~ ~ in in <fJ <fJ (j) Q) "0 '0 C1l ro ~ e> ~ (j) W > ... W o '0 :i ui ..... o ;,R o C') r-- ci r-- ?F- LO <D ci r-- >I< o ~ ~ ci "" o N N ci N I- ~ W "" o N ;,R ~ ?F- (J) '<t ci OJ ,.... ;,R o C') '<t ci <0 ~ ;,R o r-- o ci C') ;,R o LO ..-- ci <D l- I/) <l: w >I< o LO ?F- LO a 0 OJ r-- r-- <D <'i <'i '<t '<t '0 > in l: o !!!. ~ '0 :i "0 C1l &. Q) Q) ~ o E ~ "" o ID ci (J) ~ ?F- a ID ci (J) ~ ?F- r-- a ci C') "" ~ a ci C') l- I/) w ?; >I< :b ;,R o LO ID '<t '0 > in l: o !!!. ~ '0 u.i ;,R o N a -4- r-- (') "" ~ a - o I/) ;,R o a ..-- "" o a ~ a N (J) 0:> ,.... ~ -0 0:: Q) (j) ro .:<:. o E ~ '0 en '0 m > Q) "5 o CO l: o !!!. ~ "" ~ a <Xi ?ft. cf?!. o N o a ci - o I/) ;,R o N ;,R o o N a N (J) a 0 N N (J) (J) 0:> ,.... ..-- 0:> ,.... ~ 2 i:ii '0 :i ~ in Q) (j) tV g> (!) 'E l: e ~ u. 0 U (9 Q) "e- o. en r-- (') (') (') "" o a (0 ci co "" o a "! ~ ~ I I- 0:: o Z "" o ~ "" o a ~ ..... o >I< ~ ~ ID ~ ?F- '<t ~ ID ,.... "" o '<t N ci ;,R ~ ~ LO ~ rfl. '<t ~ LO ,... ;,R ~ N ci N N ;,R o '<t N ci ;,R ~ N ci N N I I- ::> o I/) l- I/) w ?; "" ~ E III E c: Cl 'Iii (/) <( u IE ~ I- 2 i7i III ;; E ,g '0 III c: ~ o '" ~ >- ~ '0 rn e '" ~ .g '" III E '" o > u g u OJ 'Q' Q. III III C/) ;,R ~ ;,R ~ ;,R ~ a o (J) o o Ol LO (') ..-- '<t (') ,... -0 > in 2 C1l (!) l: (j) "0 o (!) '0 :i ~ in 2 C1l (!) c: Q) "0 '0 (!) ... o en "C > iii <fJ Q) "0 rn Cl :u > w Page 153 of218 SUPPORTING INFORMATION GRAPHICS ~, .~..w, Page 154of218 ~ Z f- UJ UJ e::: f- (f) o ~ ~ Z f- UJ UJ e::: f- (f) I- (f) ..- o e::: ~ -I ::::> a co z a (f) -I ;:; o ~ , ~ ~ ;; 0:> o u.. f'.'''' .....,. -- I I I I ~ ~ a:-.. .....-... .-_.... ~~ =t .' ........ .............,-,.... .........,.. _....." ......... ........-. .. . .... , ......-... .. ..._..... ,......... .........1 ~~ --<I~ I I I~ ~ I~ 1+ ... k..1 ... ......_~_~ ~,om... ".."__ ...-.1. ~... .--.., ..._om' ...._-~:t.'J.r ,; GOLDEN GATE ,; ~ ,; ........ .. BOULEVARD.. .. Y .. =t t -- -- -- -- -- -- Cl e::: ~ ~ ~ UJ Z Z -I f- f- ::::> UJ UJ a UJ UJ en e::: e::: z f- f- a (f) (f) (f) 0 I- -I 0::: (f) ;:; ('f) ..- 2014 LANE ARRANGEMENTS ""[ TRANSPORTATION AT ANALYZED INTERSECTIONS HCONSULTANTS,INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 155 of 218 ~." ~ .- .- ~~f ='4~ .. =t IMMOKALEE ROAD o , ~ VANDERBILT ~ g BEACH ROAD o u. '\.. +++~~ f ttt~~ o a:: <( > UJ .....J ::) o co a:: UJ :J .....J o U GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD I' .-'- "1 L _ ._.J o 0:: <{ > UJ .....J :::l o co z o if) .....J ~ RANDALL BOULEVARD ~i:~i':, ~, R 2014 LANE ARRANGEMENTS TRANSPORTATION AT ANALYZED INTERSECTIONS CONSULTANTS,INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 156 of218 o ~ , ~ VANDERBILT o ~ BEACH ROAD u. - -00 ~;; ~ 4 (19) + ~ ../"9 (37) +~ o 00> 0:::-- <{ 000 > ~8 w ...J :) o en 0::: w :J ...J o U 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. e;e;e: ~ 0 (0) o 0 0 + 0 (0) ~ + ~../"2 (10) RANDALL (0) 0 .? ~ + ~ BOULEVARD (0) 0+ ~~~ (10) 2'"\. ~e.~ I MMOKALEE ROAD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD r-- ..\ I..... om. .J LEGEND + 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC +(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC o 0::: ~ W ...J :) o [() z o en ...J ;;: PASS-BY SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 157 of 218 .#!~"'< TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT RESULTS ~ ~" Page 158 of 218 1:.. TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: March 1,2007 THURSDAY 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER. 15 M1N BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND TO~ WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT -FT THRU RIGHT LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 0 79 107 186 26 86 0 112 0 0 0 0 372 0 106 478 776 7:15AM 0 66 121 207 7 69 0 76 0 0 0 0 212 0 109 321 604 7:30 AM 0 93 105 19B 34 35 0 69 0 0 0 0 157 0 96 253 520 7:45 AM 0 95 93 188 10 3B 0 4B 0 0 0 0 123 0 Bl 204 440 8:00 AM 0 107 88 195 23 41 0 64 0 0 0 0 96 0 76 172 431 8:15AM 0 75 94 169 25 61 0 86 0 0 0 0 133 0 104 237 492 8 :30 AM 0 124 93 217 27 61 0 88 0 0 0 0 120 0 67 187 492 8:45 AM 0 101 82 183 23 49 0 72 0 0 0 0 99 0 69 168 423 TOTAL: 0 760 7B3 1,543 175 440 0 615 0 0 0 0 1,312 0 70B . 2,020 417B HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY HOUR COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER- BEGIN NORTHeOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT FT THRU RIGHT LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 0 353 426 77 228 0 0 0 0 0 864 0 392 1,256 2,340 7:15AM 0 381 407 788 74 183 0 257 0 0 0 0 5BB 0 362 950 1,995 7:30 AM 0 370 380 750 92 175 0 267 0 0 0 0 509 0 357 866 1,8B3 7:45 AM 0 401 36B 769 B5 201 0 286 0 0 0 0 472 0 32B BOO 1,855 8:00 AM 0 407 357 764 98 212 0 310 0 0 0 0 44B 0 316 764 1,83B PEAK HOUR SUMMARY COLLIER BOULEVARD NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT o 353 426 779 77 228 0 305 0 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL o 0 0 864 0 392 1,256 INTER. SECTION TOTAL 2,340 Page 159 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 1,2007 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 8:00 AM INTERSECTION: COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY COLLIER BOULEVARD 1,050 45% t 1 305 745 N l t 0 228 77 .J . ... GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY 1- 392 ..... ~ .... 0 0 ...... .j r 864 1,256 0 0 .... 0% ... 0 ... 1,759 .... 75% ~~ 0 0 .,. 503 ~ t ,.. 0 353 426 Note: Totallnterseclion Traffic Percents ('/oj represent movement volumes 2,340 divided by the lotallntersecUon traffic l t 1,092 779 t 1,871 80% ~,. Page 160 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: March 1, 2007 THURSDAY 4:00 PM . 6;00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU. RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 0 137 243 380 37 66 0 103 0 0 0 0 64 0 57 121 604 4:15 PM 0 98 307 405 23 75 0 98 0 0 0 0 116 0 60 176 679 4:30 PM' 0 148 299 447 23 93 0 116 0 0 0 0 119 0 26 145 708 4:45 PM 0 122 315 437 20 46 0 66 0 0 0 0 69 0 42 111 614 5:00 PM 0 118 313 431 24 95 0 119 0 0 0 0 109 0 24 133 683 5:15PM 0 123 383 506 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 37 82 sa8 5:30 PM 0 151 368 519 43 51 0 94 0 0 0 0 92 0 41 133 746 5:45 PM 0 147 372 519 70 56 0 126 0 0 0 0 127 0 42 169 814 TOTAL: 0 1,044 2600 3,644 240 482 0 722 0 0 0 0 741 0 329 1,070 5,436 HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY HOUR COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT THRU RIGHT T THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 0 505 1,164 1,669 103 280 0 0 0 0 185 553 2,605 4:15PM 0 486 1,234 1,720 90 309 0 0 0 0 413 0 152 565 2,684 4:30 PM 0 511 1,310 1,821 67 234 0 0 0 0 342 0 129 471 2,593 4:45 PM 0 514 1,379 1,893 87 192 0 0 0 0 315 0 144 459 2,631 5:00 PM 0 539 1,436 1,975 137 202 0 0 0 0 373 0 144 517 2,831 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND n SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND U WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTALU LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU . RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 15:00 PMI 0 539 1,436 -1 1,975 II 137 202 0 I 339 0 0 0 1 0 373 0 144 I 517 2,831 Page 161 of 218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY ~ 0 ..... .J 0 0 0% .... 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ Percents (%) represent movement volumes divided by the total intersection traffic DATE: March 1. 2007 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM. 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 5:00 PM .6:00 PM INTERSECTION: COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY COLLIER BOULEVARD 1,022 36% t 1 339 683 N l t 0 202 137 .J ! '* t.. 144 ~ 0 .- r 373 517 ..... 2,090 .... 74% -"CO, 1.573 ~ t ,. 0 539 1,436 T otallntersection Traffic 2,831 l t 575 1,975 t 2,550 90% Page 162 of218 ~ TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: March 13, 2007 TUESDAY 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RO STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT THRU RIGHT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 3 0 0 3 1 0 9 10 3 99 2 104 1 319 2 322 5AM 4 0 2 6 1 0 6 7 1 87 4 92 0 287 0 287 7:30 AM 5 0 4 9 0 0 3 3 2 103 0 105 0 241 0 241 7:45 AM 6 0 1 7 1 0 6 7 2 106 0 108 1 265 1 267 8:00 AM 8 0 0 8 0 0 5 5 2 79 2 83 1 230 1 232 8:15AM 9 0 1 10 0 0 6 6 2 72 3 77 0 135 0 135 8:30AM 2 0 0 2 1 1 1 3 1 65 7 73 0 174 0 174 8:45AM 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 87 4 93 0 160 1 161 TOTAL: 41 0 8 49 4 1 36 41 15 698 22 735 3 1,811 5 1.819 HOURL Y SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD HOUR 3RO STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER. NORTHBOUND ~ SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOT i LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 18 o 7 25 3 0 24 27 8 395 6 409 2 1,112 3 1,117 1,578 7:15AM 23 0 7 30 2 0 20 22 7 375 6 388 2 1,023 2 1,027 1,467 7:30 AM 28 0 6 34 1 0 20 21 8 360 5 373 2 871 2 875 1,303 7:45 AM 25 0 2 27 2 1 18 21 7 322 12 341 2 804 2 808 1.197 8:00 AM 23 0 1 24 1 1 12 14 7 303 16 326 1 699 2 702 1,066 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER. BEGIN NORTHBOUND II SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND II WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL II LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL II LEFT THRU RIGHT 1 TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 18 0 7 I 25 II 3 0 24 I 27 8 395 6 409 Ii 2 1,112 3 I 1.117 1,578 Page 163 of218 1:. TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 8:00 AM INTERSECTION: 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD .-" 3RD STREET 38 2% t I 27 11 N l t 24 0 3 ."J l '* GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD +- "'- 3 1.154 .. 1,112 +- ~ .1 .r 2 1,117 1,563 8 ~ 99% ..... 395 ~ 1,522 ~ 96% 409 6 ~ ~ 405 ~ t r 18 0 7 ~ Total Intersection Traffic Percents (%) represent movement voiumes 1,578 divided by the totallntersecUon traffic l t 8 25 t 33 2% Page 164 of 218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: March 13, 2007 TUESDAY 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER. 15MIN BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 3 0 1 4 0 0 5 ' , '5 4 252 4 260 1 270 1 272 541 4:15 PM 1 0 1 2 2 0 4 6 6 271 10 287 3 272 2 277 572 4:30 PM 5 0 3 8 0 0 1 1 2 286 6 294 6 183 0 189 492 4:45 PM 0 0 2 2 1 0 1 2 6 259 2 267 0 152 4 156 427 5:00 PM 1 0 2 3 0 0 3 3 3 320 3 326 2 117 2 121 453 5:15PM 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 7 344 1 352 3 104 1 108 463 5:30 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 441 6 448 1 135 1 137 587 5:45 PM 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 6 364 4 374 1 134 0 135 512 TOTAL: 14 0 10 24 3 0 17 20 35 2,537 36 2,608 17 1,367 11 1.395 4,047 HOURL Y SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD HOUR 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER. NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 9 0 7 16 3 0 11 14 18 1,068 22 1,108 10 877 7 894 2.032 4:15PM 7 0 8 15 3 0 9 12 17 1,136 21 1.174 11 724 8 743 1,944 4:30 PM 8 0 7 15 1 0 6 7 18 1,209 12 1,239 11 556 7 574 1,835 4:45PM 3 0 5 8 1 0 6 7 17 1,364 12 1,393 6 508 8 522 1,930 5:00 PM 5 0 3 8 0 0 6 6 17 1469 14 1,500 7 490 4 501 2,015 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR I 3RD STREET I GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER. BEGIN NORTHBOUND II SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL II LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL II LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 14:00 PM'II 9 0 7 I 16 II 3 0 11 I 14 18 1,068 22 1,108 II 10 877 7 894 2032 Page 165 of 218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM . 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:00 PM . 5:00 PM INTERSECTION: 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RD STREET 39 2% t 1 14 25 N l t 11 0 3 .J l '* GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD t. 7 ... ... 877 ... 897 ~ j r 10 894 2.005 18 ~ 99% ~ 1,068 ... 1,972 ... 97% 1,108 ~v"" 22 ~ 1,078 .. t (t 9 0 7 ~ Tolallnlersection Traffic Percents (%) represent movement volumes 2.032 divided by the total Intersection traffic l t 32 16 t 48 2% Page 166 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: March 13,2007 TUESDAY 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 1ST STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER. 15MIN BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 5 0 1 6 0 0 3 3 0 100 0 100 1 314 3 318 427 7:15AM 2 0 0 2 0 0 3 3 0 90 0 90 1 282 0 283 378 7:30 AM 5 0 1 6 0 0 1 1 0 106 1 107 1 235 0 236 350 7:45 AM 4 0 0 4 0 0 2 2 0 108 0 108 1 261 0 262 376 8:00 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 4 4 0 78 1 79 1 227 0 228 312 8:15AM 4 0 1 5 0 0 1 1 0 73 0 73 1 130 1 132 211 8:30 AM 4 0 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 64 2 66 1 167 1 169 244 8:45 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 85 2 87 1 160 0 161 250 . TOTAL: 25 0 6 31 0 0 18 18 0 704 6 710 8 1,776 5 1789 2548 II HOURL Y SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD HOUR I 1ST STREET I GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND II SOUTHBOUND II EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL U RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 16 0 2 18 0 0 9 9 0 404 1 405 4 1,092 3 1,099 1,531 7:15AM 12 0 1 13 0 0 10 10 0 382 2 384 4 1,005 0 1,009 1.416 7:30 AM 14 0 2 16 0 0 8 8 0 365 2 367 4 853 1 858 1,249 7:45 AM 13 0 3 16 0 0 10 10 0 323 3 326 4 785 2 791 1.143 8:00 AM 9 0 4 13 0 0 9 9 0 300 5 305 4 684 2 690 1,017 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 16 o 2 EFT 18 0 SOUTHBOUND THRU RIGHT o 9 T GOLDEN GATE BOUL AR EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU RIGHT LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 1 4 1.092 3 1.099 SECTION TOTAL 1,531 HOUR BEGIN 1ST STREET NORTHBOUND Page 167 of 218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: - March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM . 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 8:00 AM INTERSECTION: 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 1ST STREET 12 1% t I 9 3 N l t 9 0 0 .J 1- '* GOLDEN GATE B.OULEVARD t.. 3 .- ... 1,092 ... 1,117 ...... j r 4 1,099 1,522 0 ... 99% .... 404 ~ 1,505 -+ 98% 405 ~, ~ 406 ... t r 16 0 2 ~ Total Intersection Traffic Percents (%) represent movement volumes 1,531 divided by the total intersection traffic l t 5 18 t 23 2% Page 168 of 218 R TRANSPORTATION DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY CONSULTANTS,INC. COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM . 6:00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 1ST STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER. NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL M 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 5 247 1 253 1 269 2 272 528 M 1 0 0 1 2 0 5 7 1 267 6 274 0 271 1 272 554 4:30 PM 2 0 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 279 9 289 2 186 2 190 484 4:45 PM 0 0 6 6 1 0 1 2 2 259 1 262 1 155 1 157 427 5:00 PM 4 0 1 5 1 0 0 1 7 312 3 322 0 117 4 121 449 5:15 PM 3 0 0 3 0 0 2 2 4 338 2 344 2 103 2 107 456 5:30 PM 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 4 5 436 1 442 1 133 0 134 582 5:45 PM 4 0 1 5 2 0 0 2 1 360 3 364 0 131 2 133 504 TOTAL: 17 0 8 25 10 0 13 23 26 2.498 26 2,550 7 1,365 14 1,386 3,984 HOURl Y SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD HOUR 1ST STREET I GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD I INTER. BEGIN NORTHBOUND II SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL II LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 4 0 6 10 5 0 9 14 9 1,052 17 1,078 4 881 6 891 1,993 4:15PM 7 0 7 14 6 0 7 13 11 1,117 19 1,147 3 729 8 740 1,914 4:30 PM 9 0 7 16 4 0 4 8 14 l,18B 15 1,217 5 561 9 575 1,816 4:45 PM 9 0 7 16 4 0 5 9 18 1,345 7 1,370 4 508 7 519 1,914 5:00 PM 13 0 2 15 5 0 4 9 17 1.446 9 1.472 3 484 8 495 1991 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR 1ST STREET II GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND II SOUTHBOUND II EASTBOUND II WESTBOUND SECTION I lEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTALII LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTA RIGHT TOTAL II LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM I 4 0 6 I 10 5 0 9 I 14 II 9 1052 17 1,078 II 4 881 6 I 891 1993 Page 169 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM INTERSECTION: 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 1ST STREET 29 1% t I 14 15 N l t 9 0 5 .J l '* GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD t. 6 ~ ... 881 ~ 894 ... .J r 4 891 9 ... 1,972 99% ..... 1,052 -* 1,954 ... 98% 1,078 -~";,, 17 .,. 1,063 ... t ,. 4 0 6 ~ T otallntersection Traffic Percents (%) represent movement volumes 1,993 divided by the lotallntersectlon traffic l t 21 10 t 31 2% Page 1700f218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: March 13, 2007 TUESDAY 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARO INTER- 15 MIN BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOT . ~~T THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 6 0 0 6 6 3 106 115 32 68 1 101 0 206 8 214 436 7:15AM 8 2 2 12 3 0 92 95 33 55 2 90 0 183 17 200 397 7:30 AM 4 0 2 6 13 3 73 89 36 70 1 107 1 159 11 171 373 7:45 AM 1 0 0 1 1 0 95 96 46 62 0 108 0 166 6 172 377 8:00 AM 4 0 0 4 4 7 87 98 18 59 1 78 2 137 12 151 331 8:15AM 3 3 2 8 6 2 19 27 8 65 1 74 0 110 15 125 234 8:30 AM 2 0 0 2 4 0 56 60 5 60 1 66 1 111 16 128 256 8:45 AM 1 2 0 3 7 2 67 76 24 62 0 86 1 93 11 105 270 TOTAL: 29 7 6 42 44 17 595 656 202 501 7 710 5 1,165 96 1,266 2,674 HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD LEFT 19 17 12 10 10 WILSON BOULEVARD NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT 2 4 25 23 6 366 2 4 23 21 10 347 3 4 19 24 12 274 3 2 15 15 9 257 5 2 17 21 11 229 TOTAL 395 378 310 281 261 LEFT 147 133 108 77 55 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD EASTBOUND WESTBOUND THRU RIGHT FT THRU RIGHT 255 4 1 714 42 246 4 3 645 46 256 3 3 572 44 246 3 3 524 49 246 3 4 451 54 TOTAL 757 694 619 576 509 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD I GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD I INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND II SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND II WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHTTTOTALII LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL 1\ LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL \I LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 19 2 4 T 25 II 23 6 366 T 395 II 147 255 4 I 406 II 1 714 42 I 757 1583 Page 171 of 218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13,2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM. 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 8:00 AM INTERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD WILSON BOULEVARD 586 37% t I 395 191 N ! t 366 6 23 .J l '* GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD t.. 42 .... ~ 714 .... 1,099 ...... j r 757 1,505 147 ... 95% .... 255 -* 1,039 ~ 66% 406 ,.....'~: 4 ~ 282 .., t ,. 19 2 4 ~ Totallnterseclion Traffic Percents (%J represent movement volumes 1,583 divided by the total Intersection traffic l t 11 25 t 36 2% Page 172 of 218 1: TRANSPORTATION K (ONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: March 13, 2007 TUESDAY 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER. NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION IGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOT FT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 1 1 4 13 3 91 107 43 199 5 247 1 179 11 191 549 0 1 4 9 4 75 88 44 222 3 269 2 194 23 219 580 0 1 2 12 0 37 49 49 228 4 281 2 152 4 158 490 0 1 3 6 0 35 41 31 229 6 266 0 120 8 128 438 0 0 4 4 0 32 36 63 248 3 314 0 85 4 89 443 1 2 3 13 1 53 67 73 262 3 338 1 54 3 58 466 0 1 2 12 1 43 56 131 304 3 438 1 90 4 95 591 1 0 2 8 2 51 61 109 253 1 363 0 81 2 83 509 3 7 24 77 11 417 505 543 1,945 28 2,516 7 955 59 1,021 4,066 HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER- NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND I WESTBOUND SeCTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I W- I lEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 8 1 4 13 40 7 238 285 167 878 18 I, 5 645 46 696 2,057 4:15PM 10 0 3 13 31 4 179 214 187 927 16 1,130 4 551 39 594 1.951 4:30 PM 7 1 4 12 35 1 157 193 216 967 16 1,199 3 411 19 433 1,837 4:45 PM 7 1 4 12 35 2 163 200 298 1, 043 15 1,356 2 349 19 370 1,938 5:00 PM 6 2 3 11 37 4 179 220 376 1,067 10 1,453 2 310 13 325 2,009 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR I WILSON BOULEVARD I GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER- BEGIN NORTHBOUND M SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND II WESTBOUND SeCTION LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL II LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL II LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 14:00 PM! 8 1 4 13 II 40 7 238 I 285 167 878 18 I 1,063 II 5 645 46 I 696 2,057 Page 173 of218 k TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13,2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM INTERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD WILSON BOULEVARD 499 24% t 1 285 214 N l t 238 7 40 .J l '* GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 1- 46 ... ... 645 +- 891 ..-.. j .r 5 696 1,954 167 ..... 95% ~ 878 ... 1,618 ..... 79% 1,063 18 ." 922 ... t r 8 4 ~ Total Intersection Traffic Percents (%) represent movement volumes 2,057 divided by the total intersection traffIC l t 30 13 t 43 2% Page 174 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: February 28, 2007 WEDNESDAY 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD WILSON BOULEVARD IMMOKALEE ROAD INTER- 15MIN BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL lEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 20 1 65 86 12 4 20 36 1 65 6 72 82 273 4 359 553 7:15AM 6 0 15 23 3 2 22 27 2 60 2 64 23 294 3 320 434 7:30 AM 4 0 35 39 11 3 9 23 2 66 3 71 46 324 2 372 505 7:45 AM 3 0 28 31 10 5 19 34 1 46 3 50 41 250 4 295 410 8:00 AM 9 1 38 48 11 1 8 20 2 39. 4 45 31 260 8 299 412 8:15AM 2 0 21 23 6 4 6 16 2 34 3 39 25 235 6 266 344 8:30 AM 4 0 20 24 4 6 12 22 5 51 8 64 21 196 7 224 334 8:45 AM 2 0 24 26 3 2 12 17 1 54 4 59 37 178 6 221 323 TOTAL: 52 2 246 300 60 27 108 195 16 415 33 464 306 2,010 40 2,356 3,315 HOURl Y SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD WILSON BOUL IMMOKALEE ROAD NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION THRU RIGHT TO FT THRU RIGHT TOTAL lEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 35 1 143 179 36 14 0 120 6 237 14 257 192 1,141 13 1,346 1,902 7:15AM 24 1 116 141 35 11 58 104 7 211 12 230 141 1,128 17 1,286 1,761 7:30 AM 18 1 122 141 38 13 42 93 7 185 13 205 143 1,069 20 1,232 1,871 7:45 AM 18 1 107 126 31 16 45 92 10 170 18 198 118 941 25 1,084 1,500 8:00 AM 17 1 103 121 24 13 38 75 10 178 19 207 114 869 27 1,010 1,413 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY IMMOKALEE ROAD 120 LEFT 6 EASTBOUND THRU RIGHT 237 14 WESTBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT 192 . 1141 13 TOTAL 1,346 INTER- SECTION TOTAL 1902 Page 175 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: February 28,2007 DAY: WEDNESDAY~, COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 8:00 AM INTERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD WILSON BOULEVARD 140 7% t 1 120 20 N l t 70 14 36 .J -l '* IMMOKALEE ROAD t.. 13 +- ... 1,141 ... 1,246 +-+ j r 192 1,346 1,503 6 ~ 79% ... 237 ~ 1,762 ..... 93% ~, 257 14 ~ 416 ... t ,. 35 143 ~ Total Intersection Traffic Percents (%) represent movement volumes 1,902 divided by Ihe lolal intersection traffic l t 220 179 t 399 21% Page 176 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K (ONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: DAY: COUNT TIME: February 28, 2007 WEDNESDAY 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD 15 MIN I WILSON BOULEVARD I IMMOKALEE ROAD INTER. BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 6 1 29 36 0 3 2 5 11 51 4 66 57 150 7 214 321 4:15PM 8 4 77 89 2 1 9 12 10 111 9 130 54 149 6 209 440 4:30 PM 6 4 86 96 1 4 5 10 12 163 9 184 69 158 4 231 521 4:45 PM 6 5 86 97 4 1 4 9 13 189 21 223 66 140 6 212 541 5:00 PM 2 4 64 .. 70 6 3 7 16 12 193 8 213 72 140 4 216 515 5:15PM 7 3 28 38 7 1 5 13 8 202 10 220 34 141 6 181 452 5:30 PM 15 1 96 112 4 5 5 14 13 226 22 261 53 136 7 196 583 5:45 PM 5 2 80 87 2 3 1 6 8 176 27 211 28 129 5 162 466 TOTAL: 55 24 546 625 26 21 38 85 87 1,311 110 1,508 433 1,143 45 1,621 3,839 HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD INTER. BEGIN N SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT TH TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 26 14 278 318 7 9 20 36 46 514 43 866 1,823 4:15PM 22 17 313 352 13 9 25 47 47 656 47 750 868 2,017 4:30 PM 21 16 264 301 18 9 21 48 45 747 48 840 840 2,029 4:45 PM 30 13 274 317 21 10 21 52 46 810 61 917 .805 2,091 5:00 PM 29 10 268 307 19 12 18 49 41 797 67 905 755 2016 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD BEGIN NORTHBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT 14:45 PMj 30 13 274 o IMMOKALEE ROAD NO WESTBOUND IGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 1 917 225 557 23 805 INTER. SECTION TOTAL 2,091 Page 177 of218 1: TRANSPORTATION K (ONSULTANTS,INC. DATE: February 28.2007 DAY: WEDNESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:45 PM - 5:45 PM INTERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD WILSON BOULEVARD 134 6% t I 52 82 N l t 21 10 21 .J . '* IMMOKALEE ROAD t. 23 ... ... 557 .... 608 ~ j r 225 805 1,525 46 +-+ 73% .... 810 .. 1,910 -+ 91% 917 61 ~ 1,105 ~ t ,. 30 13 274 ~ Total Intersection Traffic Percents (%) represent movement volumes 2,091 divided by the total intersection traffic l t 296 317 t 613 29% ~I Page 178 of 218 2006 FDOT TRAFFIC INFORMATION CD-PEAKSEASONFACTORS Page 179 of 218 II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II ...:I II :;j '" co II II 0 II W II ~ II r<.r<. II E-< UU U OUl II ..... ;:<:p., II .... II 0 II p. II Ol II I>: II II II II ..... II .... II 0 II P. II .Ol ~ II I>: Ul II .a II :>'Cl II ....H II g,~ II WE-< II .....Z "'0 UO U .... 01>: .....'.a UH "'...:I ~H tIl 0 Ol c::U ..... 0 '" tIl Cl me Ole I UlM II 0 II .!<: II '" II Ol :>, II p., H II 0 Ii ill tJl II e W .!<: Ii 0..... W II N '" Ol II U :;: Ii ~~o~~Mmoo~~~~OOOM~~OOOM~~DNNNMM~~~~~~~~~~~~~~NrlOOW~~~~~MD rlrlrlOODmmm~mmmOODODrlrlrlrlNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNrlrlrl~rlrlrlrlrl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rlMMrlrlrlDOOOOOOrlrlrlrlrlrlMrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrl qrlro~MDoo~W~~W~mrlM~~rooN~WoooorommOrlrlNMMMMMMNrlrloro~~M~~~~NOro oom~mmoooorowrorororommm~moOOODOOOOrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlOOOOOOOOOO~ rlrlDDOOOOOOOOOOOODOOrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlO ~~~~w~~~wwwwww~www~w~www~~wwwwwwwww~~ww~wwwwwwwwwwww~ 00000000000000000000000000000000009000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN """""""""""""""""""""""""'" ~~rlOO~rlOO~~MOO~n~~Nm~MO~MO~~rlro~N~~N~~N~~MO~~MOO~rlOOmNffi~~oM OriNNOrlrlNOMMNOOrlNNOnNNOrlrlNOOrlNNOrlnNOOnNMDrlNNOrlrlNOOrlNMM """""""""""""""""""""""""'" MrlrlrlNNNNMMM~~~~~~~~~m~ww~~~~~~oooooooo~mmmmoOOOrlrlrlrlNNNNNN oOOOOOODOOOOOOooooooaooooDoOOOOOoOOOOOOrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlrlnrlrlrlrl I I I I I I 1'1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w~~w~~~~~~~w~w-~www~wwwww~wwww~w~wwwwwwwwwwwww~wwwwwww 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN """""""""""""""""""""""""'" rlro~Nm~N~w~NmwN~WMD~~rlOO~rlOO~N~WMOWMO~MO~~rlro~Nm~NmWMO~~rl OO~NNO~rlNO~~NOD~NMO~NNO~~NDD~NMOrlNNO~~NOOrlNNO~~NOrlrlNM """""""""""""""""""""""""'" MrlnrlMNNNNMMMM~~~~~~~~m~www~~~~~rorom~~mmffiOOOOOrlrlrlMNNNNN oooooooooOOOOOODDODOOOOODDOODOOOOOODDOOrlrlrlrlrlMMMMrlrlMrlrl rlNM~~~~OOffiOrlNM~~~~roffiOMNM~~w~romOrlNM~~~~romOrlNM~~~~OOmOrlNM rlrlrlrlrlMrlrlrlMNNNNNNNNNNMMM~~MMMMM~~~~~~~~~~~~m~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ . ~ + ,....., I I c:: 0 III <- m Ol 'H ~ Ul 0 .!<: rl '" Ol W n. tJl m ~ p., Page 180 of218 ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULATIONS Page 181 of 218 ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULATIONS BASED ON AUIR HISTORICAL DATA 2006 2010 ANNUAL ACTUAL CURRENT AUIR AUIR YRS OF GROWTH GROWTH ROADWAY SEGMENT ID# VOLUME VOLUME GROWTH RATE RATE Collier Boulevard S. of Vanderbilt Beach Rd 30.2 2,012 2,388 4 4.38% 4.38% S. of Golden Gate Blvd 31.1 2,938 2,134 4 2.00% -7.68% S. of Pine Ridge 32.1 2,400 2,170 4 2.00% -2.49% Immokalee Road E. of Collier Blvd 44 2,027 2,094 4 2.00% 0.82% E. of Wilson Blvd 45 1,773 1,947 4 2.37% 2.37% Golden Gate Blvd E. of Collier Blvd. 17 2,018 1,786 4 2.00% -3.01 % W. of 3rd Ave 17 2,018 1,786 4 2.00% -3.01 % Project Frontage 17 2,018 1,786 4 2.00% -3.01 % E. of Wilson Blvd 123 1 ,480 1,083 4 2.00% -7.51% W. of Everglades Blvd. 123 1 ,480 1,083 4 2.00% -7.51% 4 Wilson Blvd S. of Immokalee Rd. 2.00% N. of Site 4 118 2.00% Project Frontage 304 118 2.00% -;; S. of Golden Gate Blvd 2 118 2.00% . All traffic volumes were taken from the 2006 & 2010 Annual Update Inventory Report (AUIR) .. In instances where the historical data indicates a reduction in traffic or insufficient data was available to calculate a growth rate due to construction, a minimum annuai growth rate of 2.0% was assumed. , A 2% growth rate was assumed for Wilson Blvd. due to the lack of data in the AUIR report SAMPLE GROWTH RATE CALCULATION Annual Growth Rate (AGR) = 2010 AUIR 2006 AUIR ^(1fYrs of Growth) -1 AGR (Collier Blvd.) = 2,388 2,012 ^(114) -1 AGR (Collier Blvd.) = 4.38% Page 182 of 218 HCS+ INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Page 183 of218 COLLIER BOULEVARD @ GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD ,-~, Page 184 of218 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd@Collier Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County . Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and TiminCl Input EB WB N8 S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 1 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume (vph) 1021 463 442 533 114 337 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parki ng/Grade/Pa rking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq WB Only 02 03 04 SB Only Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G - 65.0 G= G= G= G = 10.0 G = 25.0 G- G= Y= 7 y= y= y= Y= 6 Y = 7 y= Y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Lenqth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 1075 414 465 561 120 355 Lane Group Capacity 1862 857 1057 2266 286 1734 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.48 0.44 0.25 0.42 0.20 Green Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.21 0.81 0.08 0.34 Uniform Delay d1 18.3 17.1 41.4 2.8 52.2 28.0 Delay Factor k 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.4 0.4 .0.3 0.1 1.0 0.1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 18.8 17.5 41.7 2.8 53.2 28.0 Lane Group LOS B B 0 A 0 C Approach Delay 18.4 20.4 34.4 Approach LOS B C C Intersection Delay 21.7 Intersection LOS C Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:02 AM file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k20E.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 185 of 218 Short Report t'age 1 or 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd@Col/ier Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timinq Input E8 WB N8 SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 1 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume (vph) 1032 469 442 555 125 337 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 P a rki ng/G rad e/P arki ng N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq WB Only 02 03 04 S80nlv Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G = 65.0 G= G= G= G = 10.0 G = 25.0 G= G= y= 7 y= Y= Y= Y = 6 Y = 7 y= y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Lenath C = 120.0 L~ne Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 1086 420 465 584 132 355 Lane Group Capacity 1862 857 1057 2266 286 1734 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.49 0.44 0.26 0.46 0.20 Green Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.21 0.81 0.08 0.34 Uniform Delay d1 18.4 17.2 41.4 2.8 52.4 28.0 Delay Factor k 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.1 1.2 0.1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 18.9 17.6 41.7 2.8 53.6 28.0 Lane Group LOS B B 0 A 0 C Approach Delay 18.5 20.1 35.0 Approach LOS B C C Intersection Delay 21.7 Intersection LOS C ..... . Copyright @ 2005 Uni\lerslty of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:02 A, file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k21 F .tmp 4/24/2008 Page 186 of 218 Ll110n Kepon .1 u5'"" L V.l. .1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd@collier Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Jate Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timing Input E8 WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 1 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume (vph) 441 170 675 1798 203 299 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pa rking/Grade/Pa rking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq WB Only 02 03 04 SB Only Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G = 44.0 G= G= G= G = 11.0 G = 45.0 G= G= y= 7 y= y= Y= Y = 6 Y= 7 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Lenqth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 464 153 711 1893 214 315 Lane Group Capacity 1260 580 1903 2242 315 2622 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.26 0.37 0.84 0.68 0.12 Green Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.80 0.09 0.52 Uniform Delay d1 27.8 26.6 27.3 7.4 52.8 14.9 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.38 0.25 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.2 0.1 3.2 5.8 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 28.0 26.9 27.4 10.6 58.6 15.0 Lane Group LOS C C C B E B Approach Delay 27.7 15.1 32.6 Approach LOS C B C Intersection Delay 19.7 Intersection LOS {3 Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/2412008 '9:02 AM file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k230.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 187 of218 Short Keport ~ aD'"" 1 V.L J. SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd@Collier Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timin~ Input EB WB N8 S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 1 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume (vph) 515 207 675 1863 236 299 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pa rki ng/G rad e/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 ~ Phasinq WB Only 02 03 04 SB Onlv Thru & RT 07 08 .....,"" Timing G= 44.0 G= G= G= G = 11.0 G = 45.0 G= G= y= 7 Y= Y= y= y= 6 Y = 7 y= Y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Lenath C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 542 192 711 1961 248 315 Lane Group Capacity 1260 580 1903 2242 315 2622 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.33 0.37 0.87 0.79 0.12 Green Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.80 0.09 0.52 Uniform Delay d1 28.6 27.4 27.3 8.0 53.4 14.9 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.40 0.33 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.3 0.1 4.2 12.5 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 28.8 27.7 27.4 12.2 65.9 15.0 Lane Group LOS C C C B E B Approach Delay 28.5 16.2 37.4 Approach LOS C B 0 Intersection Delay 21.5 Intersection LOS C I' <>""'. Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:02 A file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k241.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 188 of218 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ 3rd STREET NW Page 189 of 218 Two- W ay Stop Control .l db" ! VI: ! TWO-WA Y STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 3rd St Aqency/Co. TR Transportation Consultants NW Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Dallier County Analysis Time Period AM Peak Hour nalvsis Year 2014 Backaround Proiect Description F0801.31-10 - Estates Shoooina Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North/South Street: 3rd Street NW/SW Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Maior Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 10 439 10 5 1372 5 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 462 10 5 1444 5 'veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configu ration L T R L T R Upstream Siqnal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 30 32 <"""< Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 31 0 0 33 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delav, Queue LenClth, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh/h) 10 5 31 33 C (m) (veh/h) 463 1086 771 369 v/c 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.09 , 95% queue length 0.07 0.01 0.13 0.29 Control Delay (s/veh) 12.9 8.3 9.9 15.7 LOS B A A C Approach Delay (s/veh) -- - 9.9 15.7 IApproach LOS -- -- A C .., Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4124/2008 9:01 file://C:\Docurnents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\u2klF5.tmp 4/24/2001 Page 190 of218 Two-Way Stop Control rage 1 Vi 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information L\nalyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 3rd Sf NW ,qency!Co. TR Transoortation Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County 'Date Performed 4/23/2008 I^ nalysis Year 2014 Buildout l!Analysis Time Period 14M Peak Hour Proiect Description F0801.3,1-10 - Estates ShoDDina Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North/South Street: 3rd Street NW/SW I ntersection Orientation: East-West StudY Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Maior Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 7veh/h) 20 490 10 5 1407 10 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 21 515 10 5 1481 10 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream SiClnal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 30 37 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 31 0 0 38 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delay, Queue Len!:lth, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh/h) 21 5 31 38 C (m) (veh/h) 446 1038 741 359 v!c 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.11 95% queue length 0.15 0.01 0.13 0.35 Control Delay (s/veh) 13.5 8.5 10.1 16.2 LOS B A B C Approach Delay (s!veh) - -- 10.1 16.2 ~pproach LOS -- -- B C Copyright@ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:01 A~ file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\u2klF8.tmp 4/24/200! Page 191 of 218 Two- W ay Stop Control .L '-'4-6...... J.. v..... J,. TWO-WA Y STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information !Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 3rd St !Aqency/Co. TR Transportation Consultants NW ~ Jurisdiction Collier County Date Performed 4/23/2008 nalysis Year 2014 Backaround '". !Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Proiect Description F0801.31-10 - Estates ShODDinq Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North/South Street: 3rd Street NW/SW Intersection Orientation: East-West StudY period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Maior Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R lVolume (veh/h) 21 1257 26 15 1089 10 . Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 22 1323 27 15 1146 10 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Siqnal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 19 17 .-. Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1<' (veh/h) 0 0 20 0 0 17 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 ' 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delav, Queue Lenqth, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh/h) 22 15 20 17 C (m) (veh/h) 600 506 404 463 v/c 0.04 0~03 0.05 0.04 95% queue length 0.11 0.09 0.16 0.11 ,Control Delay (s/veh) 11.2 12.3 14.4 13.1 LOS B B B B lApproach Delay (s/veh) -- - 14.4 13.1 Approach LOS - -- B B ,.....,., Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:02 file:/ /e :\D ocuments and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\ Temp \u2k 1 FB. tmp 4/24120Of Page 192 of218 TWQ-WA Y STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information \Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 3rd Sf NW t\qencv/Co. TR Transportation Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County Date Performed 4/23/2008 nalysis Year 2014 Buildout \Analvsis Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description F0801.31-10 - 1=states Shoppina Center Subdistrict EasUWest Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North/South Street: 3rd Street NW/SW Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Malor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R I'v'olume (veh/h) 51 1432 26 15 1287 20 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0;95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 53 1507 27 15 1354 21 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Config uration L T R L T R Upstream Siqnal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 19 42 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 20 0 0 44 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Confiquration R R Delav, Queue LenQth, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh/h) 53 15 20 44 C (m) (veh/h) 495 430 352 395 v/c 0.11 0.03 0.06 0.11 95% queue length 0.36 0.11 0.18 0.37 Control Delay (s/veh) 13.1 13.7 15.8 15.3 LOS B B C C Approach Delay (s/veh) -- - 15.8 15.3 iApproach LOS -- -- C C 1 WO-VY1:lY 0lUP ~Ul1l1Ul Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved fiIe:l/C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\u2klFE.tmp ~ ~b- . ~. . HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:02 AM 4/24/2008 Page 193 of218 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @SITE ACCESS ~~;r:~k .-. "" Page 194 of218 Short Keport I ab", I VI I SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Site Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultant Access Area Type All other areas Jate Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timimt Input E8 WB N8 S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 1 1 Lane Group L T T R L R Volume (vph) 35 485 1397 52 30 25 % Heavy Vehicles 0 2 2 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 15 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 1.2.0 12.0 Pa rking/G rade/Pa rki ng N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq EB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Onlv 06 07 08 Timing G = 8.0 G = 72.0 G= G= G = 20.0 G= G= G= Y = 6.5 Y = 7 y= Y= Y = 6.5 y= y= Y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Lena.th C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 37 511 1471 34 32 11 Lane Group Capacity 242 2557 2128 969 301 269 vIe Ratio 0.15 0.20 0.69 0:04 0.11 0.04 Green Ratio 0.73 0.72 0.60 0.60 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay d1 10.7 5.5 16.4 9.8 42.4 42.0 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.26 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 11.0 5.5 17.4 9.8 42.6 42.0 Lane Group LOS B A B A 0 0 Approach Delay 5.9 17.2 42.4 Approach LOS A B 0 Intersection Delay 14.8 Intersection LOS B Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4124/2008 9:03 AM file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k252.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 195 of218 ;)l1Ull I\.C!-'Ull SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP In te rsection Golden Gate Blvd @ Site Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultant Access Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Comer County ~ Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input EB W8 NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 1 1 Lane Group L T T R L R Volume (vph) 115 1336 1184 145 203 138 % Heavy Vehicles 0 2 2 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 15 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 P a rking/G rad e/P a rking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq EB Only EW Perm 03 04 S8 Onlv 06 07 08 G = 8.0 G = 72.0 G= G= G == 20.0 G= G= G= j' Timing y= 6.5 y= 7 y= y= y = 6.5 y= y= y== Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Lenqth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination E8 WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 121 1406 1246 132 214 129 Lane Group Capacity 304 2557 2128 969 301 269 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.55 0.59 0.14 0.71 0.48 Green Ratio 0.73 0.72 0.60 0.60 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay d1 9.2 7.7 14.8 10.5 47.3 45.3 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.15 0.18 0.11 0.27 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.1 7.6 1.3 PF Fqctor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 10.1 8.0 15.2 10.5 54.9 46.6 Lane Group LOS B A B B 0 0 Approach Delay 8.2 14.8 5fB Approach LOS A B 0 Intersection Delay 15.6 Intersection LOS B L..,~ -\, ~ Copyright@ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:03 I file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k263.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 196 of 218 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ 1st STREET NW Page 197of218 1 wo-way ;)WP L-omruJ - -0- ~ -~ ~ TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 1st St Aoencv/Co. TR Transportation Consultants NW urisdiction Collier County Date Performed 4/23/2008 .nalysis Year 2014 Backaround Analysis Time Period ~M Peak Hour Proiect Description F0801.31-10 - Estates ShoDDing Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North/South Street: 1st Street NW/SW Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudv Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Maior Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 5 459 5 5 1367 5 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 483 5 5 1438 5 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Siqnal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 21 15 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 22 0 0 15 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delav, Queue LenClth, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh/h) 5 5 22 15 C (m) (veh/h) 466 1071 759 371 v/c 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.04 95% queue length 0.03 0.01 0.09 0.13 Control Delay (s/veh) 12.8 8.4 9.9 15.1 LOS B A A C IApproach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 9.9 15.1 Approach LOS -- -- A C ,+ - Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:00! file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\u2klE9.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 198 of218 1 wo- way :::itop Lontrol J.. ""'"6...... .... VJ.. J. TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information l\Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 1st St NW \qency/Co, TR TransDortation Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County 'IDate Performed 4/23/2008 nalysis Year 2014 Buildout !Analvsis Time Period AM Peak Hour Proiect Descriotion F0801.31-10 - Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North/South Street: 1st Street NW/SW Intersection Orientation: East-West Studv Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R i\/olume (veh/h) 21 489 5 5 1424 20 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 22 514 5 5 1498 21 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- - 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Siqnal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 21 25 ,::leak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 . 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 22 0 0 26 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 , Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delav, Queue Length, and Level of Service V\pproach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement. 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh/h) 22 5 22 26 C (m) (veh/h) 435 1043 742 354 v/c 0.05 0.00 0,03 0.07 95% queue length 0.16 0.01 0.09 0.24 Control Delay (s/veh) 13.7 8.5 10.0 16.0 LOS B A A C Approach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 10.0 16.0 IApproach LOS -- -- A C '::opyright@ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:00 AM file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\u2klEC.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 199 of 218 1 WO- way '::>LUp \.-Ulll1UJ TWO-WA Y STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 1st St Aqency/Co. TR Transportation Consultants NW urisdiction Collier County Date Performed 4/23/2008 ,nalysis Year 2014 Backaround Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Proiect Description F0801.31-10 - Estates ShoDDina Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North/South Street: 1st Street NW/SW Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Maior Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 15 1241 20 5 1097 10 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 1306 21 5 1154 10 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 - - 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Sianal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 15 17 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 15 0 0 17 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delav, Queue Len~thJ and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh/h) 15 5 15 17 C (m) (veh/h) 596 516 410 460 vIe 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.04 95% queue length 0.08 0.03 0.11 0.11 Control Delay (s/veh) 11.2 12.0 14.1 13.1 LOS B B B B Approach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 14.1 13.1 Approach LOS -- -- B B ~, ~ Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:01 r file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\ Temp\u2klEF .tmp 4/24/200g Page 200 of 218 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information l!I\nalyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 1 st St NW ,gency/Co. TR Transportation Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County 'Date Performed 4/23/2008 nalysis Year 2014 Buildout IA"nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Proiect Descriotion F0801.31-10 - Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict EasUWest Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North/South Street: 1st Street NW/SW Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudy Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments Maior Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 75 1444 20 5 1252 74 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 78 1520 21 5 1317 77 'veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- - 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Siqnat 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 , 12 L T R L T R 'volume (veh/h) 15 77 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 15 0 0 81 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delay, Queue Len~th, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh/h) 78 5 15 81 C (m) (veh/h) 487 427 349 407 v/c 0.16 0.01 0.04 0.20 95% queue length 0.57 0.04 0.13 0.73 Control Delay (s/veh) 13.8 13.5 15.8 16.0 LOS B B C C Approach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 15.8 16.0 Approach LOS - -- C C Two- Way Stop Control Copyright@ 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 file://C:\Docurnents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\u2klF2.tmp L -b~ . ~~ - Generated: 4/24/2008 9:01 Af 4/24/200: Page 201 of 218 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ WILSON BOULEVARD ~~ ~ ,.,.",,' Page 202 of 218 Short Report 1. aD""" 1. VJ. J. SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas .Jate Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 BackgIound Volume and TiminCllnput EB WB NB 88 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume (vph) 174 , 301 5 5 864 51 20 5 5 31 10 493 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 75 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grad e/P arking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq Excl. Left EB Onlv EW Perm 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G = 8.0 G = 24.0 G = 42.0 G= G = 26.0 G= G= G= y= 6 y= 0 y= 7 y= y= 7 y= y= y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cvcle Lenoth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 183 317 0 5 909 48 31 44 440 Lane Group Capacity 662 1951 871 483 1241 554 325 319 937 v/c Ratio 0,28 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.73 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.47 Green Ratio 0.73 0.55 0.55 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.22 0.22 0.59 Uniform Delay d1 9.9 13.3 12.1 20.5 34.1 26.1 37.6 38.0 13.9 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.29 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 PFFactor 1.000 ,1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 10.1 13.4 12.1 20.5 36.4 26.2 37.7 38.1 14.2 Lane Group LOS B B B C 0 C 0 0 B Approach Delay 12.2 35.8 37.7 16.4 Approach LOS B 0 0 B Intersection Delay 25.1 Intersection LOS C Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:04 AI file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k27 A.tmp 4/24/200 Page 203 of 218 :::il1ort Keport . ~b- . ~. . SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timin~ Input EB W8 NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume (vph) 179 321 10 5 904 58 32 9 5 41 15 513 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 75 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pa rki ng/Grad e/P arking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 - Phasina Excl. Left EB Onlv EW Perm 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G = 8.0 G = 24.0 G = 42.0 G= G = 26.0 G= G= G= Y = 6 y= 0 Y = 7 y= Y = 7 Y= y= y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle LenQth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination E8 WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 188 338 5 5 952 56 48 59 461 Lane Group Capacity 649 1951 871 476 1241 554 310 311 937 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.77 0.10 0.15 0.19 0.49 Green Ratio 0.73 0.55 0.55 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.22 0.22 0.59 Uniform Delay d1 10.7 13.4 12.2 20.5 34.7 26.3 38.1 38.4 14.1 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.32 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.000 ' 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 11,0 13.5 12.2 20.5 37.6 26.4 38.3 38.7 14.5 Lane Group LOS B B B C 0 C 0 0 B Approach Delay 12.6 36.9 38.3 17.3 Approach LOS B 0 0 B Intersection Delay 26.0 Intersection LOS C ~ Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:04 ,~'" file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k28B.tmp 4/24/2008 Page204of218 0hort Keport .I.. I..4bv .I. v.&. .L SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas ~" Jate Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timin~ Input EB WB N8 SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume (vph) 197 1038 21 10 781 56 10 5 5 54 10 321 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 70 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pa rki n gIG rad e/P arkin g N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq Excl. Left EB Only EW Perm 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G = 5.0 G = 25.0 G = 45.0 G= G = 25.0 G= G= G= y= 6 y= 0 Y= 7 Y= Y= 7 y= Y= y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cvcle Lenqth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 207 1093 17 11 822 54 21 68 264 Lane Group Capacity 682 2069 923 257 1330 594 328 289 897 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.53 0.02 0.04 0.62 0.09 0.06 0.24 0.29 Green Ratio 0.73 0.58 0.58 0.42 0.38 0.38 0.21 0.21 0.57 Uniform Delay d1 8.3 15.1 10.5 20.5 30.5 24.3 38.1 39.5 13.5 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 8.5 15.3 10.5 20.6 31.4 24.3 38.2 40.0 13.7 Lane Group LOS A B B C C C 0 0 B Approach Delay 14.2 30.8 38.2 19.1 Approach LOS B C 0 B Intersection Delay 20.8 Intersection LOS C Copyright@ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:04 AW file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k29C.tmp 4/2412008 Page 205 of 218 ~non KepUn SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timinq Input E8 WB N8 SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume (vph) 237 1160 62 10 901 90 49 17 5 99 25 381 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 70 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 P arking/Grade/Parki ng N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq Excl. Left EB Onlv EW Perm 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 5.0 G = 25.0 G = 45.0 G= G = 25.0 G= G= G= " Timing y= 6 y= 0 y= 7 y= y= 7 y= y= y= Duration of Analysis (hrS) = 0.25 Cycle Lenqth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 249 1221 60 11 948 89 75 130 327 Lane Group Capacity 641 2069 923 235 1330 594 222 282 897 vlc Ratio 0.39 0.59 0.07 0.05 0.71 0.15 0.34 0.46 0.36 Green Ratio 0.73 0.58 0.58 0.42 0.38 0.38 0.21 0.21 0.57 Uniform Delay d1 11.1 15.9 10.8 20.5 32.0 24.8 40.5 41.6 14.2 Delay Facto'r k 0.11 0.18 0.11 0.11 0.28 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.1 1.8 0.1 0.9 1.2 0.3 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 11.5 16.3 10.9 20.6 33.8 25.0 41.4 42.8 14.5 Lane Group LOS B B B C C C 0 0 B Approach Delay 15.3 32.9 41.4 22.5 Approach LOS B C 0 C Intersection Delay 22.9 Intersection LOS C ""h ~"i ~, Copyright@2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:04 I file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2AD.tmp , 4/24/2008 Page 206 of 218 WILSON BOULEVARD @ SITE ACCESS Page 207 of 218 ~ VVV- YY UJ U'-Vl! ,"-,VU.L-J.\J.l TWO-WA Y STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Wilson Blvd @ Site Access AQency/Co. TR Transportation Consultants lJurisdiction Collier County Date Performed 4/23/2008 !Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Analysis Time Period lAM Peak Hour Proiect Description F0801.31-10 - Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Site Access INorth/South Street: Wilson Boulevard Intersection Orientation: North-South IStudy Period hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adiustments Maior Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R lVolume (veh/h) 11 235 554 11 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0,95 0,95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR , (veh/h) 11 247 0 0 S83 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Siqnal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R lVolume (veh/h) 15 15 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 0 15 0 0 0 Itveh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Delay, Queue LenClth, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R v (veh/h) 11 15 15 C (m) (veh/h) 992 329 516 v/c 0.01 0.05 0.03 95% queue length 0.03 0.14 ' , 0.09 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.7 16.5 12.2 LOS A C B Approach Delay (s/veh) -- - 14,3 Approach LOS -- - B ~, Copyright@ 2005 Universily of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5,21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:05 AM .<"",0'."'; file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\u2k2F5.tmp 4/2412008 Page 208 of 218 1 wo- W 1:1Y ~lUp L-Ul1L1Ul - -~o - - - - - TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information l!Analvst RLP Intersection Wilson Blvd @l Site Access IIi\qency/Co. TR Trans/Jortation Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County Jate Performed 4/2312008 ~nalysis Year 2014 Buildout IJ\nalvsis Time Period PM Peak Hour Proiect Description F0801.31-1O - Estates Sho/Jpinq Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Site Access North/South Street: Wilson Boulevard Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.2S lVehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 46 298 445 43 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.9S 0.95 0.95 0.9S 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 48 313 0 0 468 45 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 Config u ration L T T R Upstream Siqnal 0 0 Minor street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 71 60 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.9S 0.9S 0.9S 0.95 0.95 0.95 dourly Flow Rate, HFR 74 0 63 0 0 0 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Delav, Queue Len~th, and Level of ServIce Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R v (veh/h) 48 74 63 C (m) (veh/h) 1063 307 599 vIe 0.05 0.24 0.11 95% queue length 0.14 0.92 0.35 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.5 20.4 11.7 LOS A C B Approach Delay (s/veh) -- - 16.4 Approach LOS -- -- C Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:05 AM file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\u2k2F8.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 209 of218 ~, WILSON BOULEVARD @ IMMOKALEE ROAD ~, Page210of218 ':'Don KepUn 1 a/Sc; 1 Vl 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Immokalee Rd @ Wilson Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Jate Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and TiminQ Input E8 WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 10 302 18 245 1456 17 47 5 193 39 11 75 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 Pretimed/ Actuated(P / A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 35 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pa rki ng/G rad eiP a rking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq Excl. Left WB Onlv Thru & RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G = 7.0 G= 37.0 G = 38.0 G= G = 18.0 G= G= G= y= 6 Y= 0 Y = 7 y= y= 7 y= Y= y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cvcle Lenath C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 11 318 14 258 1533 13 54 166 41 86 Lane Group Capacity 103 1607 501 1432 3171 989 191 989 202 243 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.03 0.18 0.48 0.01 0.28 0.17 0.20 0.35 Green Ratio 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.42 0.63 0.63 0.15 0.63 0.15 0.15 Uniform Delay d1 53.5 29.9 28.3 22.1 12.1 8.5 45.3 9.4 44.7 45.8 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.5 0.9 PF Factor 1.000 ,1.000 - 1.000 1,000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 54.0 30.0 28.3 22.1 12.2 8.5 46.1 9.5 45.2 46.7 Lane Group LOS 0 C C C B A 0 A 0 0 Approach Delay 30.7 13.6 18.5 46.2 Approach LOS C B B 0 Intersection Delay 18.0 Intersection LOS B ';opyright@ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:04 AM file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2BE.tmp 4/24/2008 Page211of218 ...HIUll l\..'-'}'Ull .... ....0.... .. ......... .. SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Immokalee Rd @ Wilson Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timin~ Input EB W8 N8 S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 10 302 24 251 1456 17 50 5 196 39 11 75 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 35 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pa rki n gIG rade/Pa rkin g N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq Exci. Left WB Only Thru & RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G - 7.0 G - 37.0 G = 38.0 G= G = 18.0 G= G= G= ~, Timing Y = 6 Y = 0 Y = 7 y= Y = 7 y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) - 0.25 Cycle Lenqth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB 5B Adjusted Flow Rate 11 318 20 264 1533 13 58 169 41 86 Lane Group Capacity 103 1607 501 1432 3171 989 191 989 201 243 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.04 0.18 0.48 0.01 0.30 0.17 0.20 0.35 Green Ratio 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.42 0.63 0.63 0.15 0.63 0.15 0.15 Uniform Delay d1 53.5 29.9 28.4 22.1 12.1 8.5 45.4 9.4 44.7 45.8 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.5 0.9 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1. 000 Control Delay 54.0 30.0 28.4 22.2 12.2 8.5 46.3 9.5 45.2 46.7 Lane Group LOS 0 C C C B A 0 A 0 0 Approach Delay 30.6 __13.6 18.9 46.2 Approach LOS C B B 0 Intersection Delay 18.1 Intersection LOS B -" ..-, ~, Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Ver~ion 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:05 At file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2CF.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 212 of 218 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Immokalee Rd @ Wilson Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas )ate Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County lime Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timinq Inout E8 WB N8 S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 59 1033 78 287 710 29 40 18 369 23 15 23 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 10 0 0 5 0 0 50 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12,0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 ParkinglGrade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasina Excl. Left WB Only Thru & RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G = 9.0 G = 24.0 G = 48.0 G= G = 19.0 G= G= G= y= 6 Y = 0 y= 7 Y= Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Lenath C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination E8 WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 62 1087 72 302 747 25 61 336 24 35 Lane Group Capacity 133 2030 633 1117 3044 950 228 857 212 271 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.54 0.11 0:27 0.25 0.03 0.27 0.39 0.11 0.13 Green Ratio 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.32 0.60 0.60 0.16 0.54 0.16 0.16 Uniform Delay d1 53.2 27.5 22.6 30.0 11.3 9.8 44.4 16.0 43.3 43.4 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 2.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 '1.000 1.000 Control Delay 55.8 27.8 22.7 30.1 11.3 9.8 45.0 16.3 43.5 43.6 Lane Group LOS E C C C B A 0 B D 0 Approach Delay 28.9 16.6 20.7 43.6 Approach LOS C B C 0 Intersection Delay 23.2 Intersection LOS C :::>l101't Keport Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2EO.tmp Generated: 4/24/2008 9:05 A~ 4/24/2001 Page 213 of 218 ullUl L 1\..CpUl L - --0 - - ~ - - SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection Immokalee Rd @ Wilson Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Af#!i~+ Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period PM Peak Hour Analysis year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timinq Input EB WB NB S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 I 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 59 1033 94 303 710 29 59 18 388 23 15 23 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 10 0 0 5 0 0 50 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Pa rki ng/G rade/Parki ng N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq Excl. Left WB Only Thru & RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 9.0 G = 24,0 G = 48.0 G= G = 19.0 G= G= G= I" Timing y= 6 y= 0 y= 7 y= Y = 7 y= y= y= Duration of Analvsis (hrs) = 0.25 Cycle Lenath C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB S8 Adjusted Flow Rate 62 1087 88 319 747 25 81 356 24 35 Lane Group Capacity 133 2030 633 1117 3044 950 222 857 208 271 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.54 0.14 0.29 0.25 0.03 0.36 0.42 0.12 0.13 Green Ratio 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.32 0.60 0.60 0.16 0.54 0.16 0.16 Uniform Delay d1 53.2 27.5 22.9 30.1 11.3 9.8 45.1 16.3 43.3 43.4 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 2.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 PF Factor 1.900 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Co n,tro I Delay 55.8 27.8 23.0 30.3 11.3 9.8 46.1 16.6 43.5 43.6 Lane Group LOS E C C C B A 0 B 0 0 Approach Delay 28.8 16.8 22.1 43.6 Approach LOS C B C 0 Intersection Delay 23.4 Intersection LOS C - ~, Copyright @ 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS+™ Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:05 A file://C:\Documents and Settings\rlp\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2F 1. tmp 4/24/2008 Page 214 of 218 COLLIER COUNTY 2030 FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page215of218 2030 LRTP Minor Updare 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan Figure 12-5 2030 Constrained Financially Feasible PI"" Volume-ta-Capacity Ratio " , ~:v -~~ I '. " V-'~.. . .~ - \-- rr-- ff-:l~1 '-+~ LL- L", I r't1 I. J- j'j i~~ ' I i ~! ,:-1 I l", illl illj l!wJ'l- I ~:::l _I /' I I \11/ lL-1T'~ !': --- rL (~1) ~[-' L 'U'I --- \ L.-. '\ '-,- , '..., , 1...,:, / \\ / " I \ , -. '- VOLIJME-TO-CAPACITY p.fine, J - - ~Efl;&:<~! i ~ ~,-;MTLEE oo, -~,! / ~.,~~ "r -" ; ~_ I 'LL-/'''--'' 12- ]4 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , 1---1/ I " ""., 1,;;,.loo,oo'P ,i!J, ~~I_liJ'~, . Adopted June 8. N II ~ ! !) ,..,..",.,. Page 216 01218 TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS Page217of218 TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT ITE TRIP GENERATION REPORT, ih EDITION Land Use Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Shopping Center Ln (T) = 0.60 Ln (X) + 2.29 Ln (T) = 0.66 Ln (X) + 3.40 Ln (T) = 0.65 Ln (X) + 5.83 (LUC 820) (61% In/39% Out) (48% In/52% Out) T = Trips, X = 1,000's of square feet ofGLA TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT ITE TRIP GENERATION REPORT, 8th EDITION Land Use Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Shopping Center Ln (T) = 0.59 Ln (X) + 2.32 Ln (T) = 0.67 Ln (X) + 3.37 Ln (T) = 0.65 Ln (X) + 5.83 (LUC 820) (61 % In/39% Out) (49% In/51 % Out) T = Trips, X = 1,000's of square feet ofGLA Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Tri Generation Based on 7th Edition of ITE Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Tri Generation Based on 8th Edition of ITE Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Chan e in Tri Generation from ih Edition to 8th Edition of ITE o Shaded Box indicates peak direction utilized for LOS calculations Page218of218