The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Agenda 09/20/2012 RCCPC MEETING AGENDA SEPTEMBER 20. 2012 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2012, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, THIRD FLOOR, 3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 16, 2012, 6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PL201 10000769 /CPSS- 2012 -2: A Petition requesting a Small Scale Amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series by amending the "Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict ", to add a 2.8 f acre parcel of land; add Senior Housing, including Independent Living Units, Assisted Living Facilities, Congregate Care Facilities, Continuing Care Retirement Communities, Skilled Nursing Facilities and similar uses, not to exceed a maximum F.A.R. of 0.45; retain medical office use, not to exceed a maximum of 5,000 square feet; revise setback and buffering standards; remove requirement for an outdoor patio; and revise the Subdistrict name to "Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict ". The subject property is located in the northwest quadrant of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard, in Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] 1 B. PUDZ-A- PL20120000303: Mirasol RPUD -- An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2009 -21, the Mirasol Residential Planned Unit Development, by increasing the permissible number of dwelling units from 799 to 1,121; by amending Ordinance Number 2004- 41, the Collier County Land Development Code by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 95± acres of land zoned Rural Agricultural (A) to the Mirasol RPUD; by revising the development standards; by amending the master plan; and adding deviations and revising developer commitments. The property is located on the north side of Immokalee Road (CR 846) bordered on the east by Broken Back Road and future Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Sections 10, 15 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 1,638.6± acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Kay Deselem, AICP, Principal Planner] 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows /jmp 2 Clerk's Office Copy COLLIER COUNTY SMALL SCALE ADOPTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN Ci ti y s K Y AMENDMENT Project: GMPA- PL20110000769 Petition: CPSS- 2011 -2 NMI I ■M1 I ■AE CCPC: September 20, 2012 BCC: November 13, 2012 y w ti r TABLE OF CONTENTS CCPC - Project: PL20110000769 /Petition: CPSS- 2011 -2 Small Scale Growth Management Plan (GMP) Adoption Amendment September 20.2012 Agenda 1) TAB: CPSS- 2011 -2 Staff Report. 2) TAB. Ordinance. 3) TAB: Legal Advertising. 4) TAB. Project /Petition DOCUMENT: Adoption CCPC Staff Report DOCUMENTS: Adoption Ordinance & Exhibit "A" Text & Map Changes DOCUMENT: CCPC Adoption Advertising DOCUMENTS: Project /Petition: PL20110000769 /CPSS- 2011 -2. CCPC STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 9A �✓U��rI�eY C07i1Vl.ty STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 20, 2012 RE: PETITION CPSS- 2011 -2, SMALL SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [ADOPTION HEARING] AGENT /APPLICANT /OWNERS Agents: Wayne Arnold Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey' Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Richard Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Applicant: Joseph A. Rosin Naples Venture II, LLC and Naples Venture III, LLC 4951 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 11 Naples, FL 34103 Owners: Naples Venture II, LLC 4951 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 11 Naples, FL 34103 (Tract 112, Unit 30, GGE) Marvin E. Smith 5715 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34116 (E. 180 ft. of Tract 98, Unit 30, GGE) GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject properties, comprising 9.64± acres, are located in Golden Gate Estates at the northwest corner of the Santa Barbara Boulevard /Golden Gate Parkway intersection, in Section Agenda Item 9A 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, located within the Golden Gate Planning Community. - CPUD OOLCAADES AT SANTA RORARA II. REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant seeks to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) text, Future Land Use Map and the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map by: 1. Expanding the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict within the Estates - Commercial District by 2.8± acres and providing for the proposed land use and development standards changes; 2. Amending Policy 5.2.3 to allow the subject request — the expansion of the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict by 2.8± acres; 3. Amending the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions Section, to provide for an exception for the subject Subdistrict; and 4. Revising the Future Land Use Map and the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map — to depict the expansion area and change in Subdistrict name. The proposed amended Subdistrict text is as follows: (Single underline text is added, single 6trikethro gI text is deleted — as proposed by the petitioner and as modified by staff. Staff and the petitioner are in agreement with the proposed text changes to the Subdistrict, with the exception of the double underlined and double s# text within provisions f) 4. and f) 8. 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION B. Estates — Commercial District 5. Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict [revised text, page 46] This Subdistrict consists of two infill areas. The two areas are located at the northwest corner of Collier Boulevard and Green Boulevard and at the northwest corner of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway. Due to the existing zoning and land use pattern in proximity to the Estates Commercial and Institutional In -fill Subdistrict (see 2 J 7 93 91 '10 f a: Q ~ y na U 91 roposefl P o'ect Site -� „OLDEV GATE PARK'W'AY 113 6 V PU 7 V 16 17 Cu43 n` Y N16 Vl 115 - CPUD OOLCAADES AT SANTA RORARA II. REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant seeks to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) text, Future Land Use Map and the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map by: 1. Expanding the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict within the Estates - Commercial District by 2.8± acres and providing for the proposed land use and development standards changes; 2. Amending Policy 5.2.3 to allow the subject request — the expansion of the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict by 2.8± acres; 3. Amending the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions Section, to provide for an exception for the subject Subdistrict; and 4. Revising the Future Land Use Map and the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map — to depict the expansion area and change in Subdistrict name. The proposed amended Subdistrict text is as follows: (Single underline text is added, single 6trikethro gI text is deleted — as proposed by the petitioner and as modified by staff. Staff and the petitioner are in agreement with the proposed text changes to the Subdistrict, with the exception of the double underlined and double s# text within provisions f) 4. and f) 8. 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION B. Estates — Commercial District 5. Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict [revised text, page 46] This Subdistrict consists of two infill areas. The two areas are located at the northwest corner of Collier Boulevard and Green Boulevard and at the northwest corner of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway. Due to the existing zoning and land use pattern in proximity to the Estates Commercial and Institutional In -fill Subdistrict (see 2 Agenda Item 9A Golden Gate Urban Commercial Infill Subdistrict and Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Map) and the need to ensure adequate development standards to buffer adjacent land uses, commercial uses shall be permitted under the following criteria: a) Commercial uses shall be limited to: • Low intensity commercial uses that are compatible with both residential and intermediate commercial uses, in order to provide for small scale shopping and personal needs, and • Intermediate commercial to provide for a wider variety of goods and services in areas that have a higher degree of automobile traffic. These uses shall be similar to C -1, C -2, or C -3 zoning districts outlined in the Collier County Land Development Code (Ordinance 91- 102), adopted October 30, 1991. b) Rezones shall be encouraged in the form of a Planned Unit Development (there shall be no minimum acreage requirement for PUD rezones except for the requirement that all requests for rezoning must be at least forty thousand (40,000) square feet in area unless the proposed rezone is an extension of an existing zoning district consistent with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan). c) Projects within this Subdistrict shall make provisions for shared parking arrangements with adjoining commercial developments when appropriate. d) Driveways and curb cuts for projects within this Subdistrict shall be consolidated with adjoining commercial developments. e) Access to projects shall not be permitted from Collier Boulevard. f) Any project located within this Subdistrict at the northwest corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard (properties include the East 180 feet of Tract 98, Unit 30 and Tract 112, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates), less and except an easement for Santa Barbara Boulevard right -of -way, shall be subject to the following additional development restrictions: The site shall he limiter) to thirty-five thou sand (35,000) sq aFe feet of building .ere 1 .2. Permitted Island uses shall be rest,�,;^t�� eases -enly limited to Group Housing for seniors including Independent Living Units, Assisted Living Units, Continuing Care Retirement Communities, Skilled Nursing Facilities, and similar uses, not to exceed a maximum F.A.R. of 0.45; and medical office use, not to exceed 5,000 square feet. 23. All principal structures shall be required to have a minimum setback of 9Re hie. 4W fifty (50) feet from the project's northern and southern boundary. 34. The ReFthern seveRty five (76) feet ef the 4A0P_J_;tP_FR 6*)dy (6Q) peFGeRt of the site shall be a green area (epee mane area) It shall he utilized for only water management fanilitiec• pe IandGGa buffers , and similar uses. Buffers: the following minimum project buffers, as rq7 F,.. set forth in Section 4.06.02 of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04 -41, as amended, in effect [as of the date of adoption of this amendmentl, shall be provided. West: 25' wide type C. North: 25' wide type C. East: 25' wide type D. South: 25' wide type D. Agenda Item 9A WON "N Ole- 4. Native vegetation shall be retained within the proiect buffers on the northern and western Project boundaries except as may be necessary for exotic vegetation removal, and for construction of the privacy wall All Requirod supplemental plantings required by the Land Development Code shall be native species. The northern buffer adjacent to the southern boundary of Tract 111, Golden Gate Estates Unit 30 may also be utilized for the native vegetation preservation requirements for the proiect and shall include a concrete or pre -cast concrete privacy wall at a minimum of 6 feet in height which shall be located on the southern boundary of the buffer /preserve No setback from the buffer /preserve shall be required for this wall. The North 330 feet of Tract 98, Unit 30 GGE shall be limited to native preserve and water management areas, except that a vehicular drive and /or wall may be located within this area. Native vegetation preservation areas may be utilized for water management purposes when it can be demonstrated that the use for water management will not be harmful to the native vegetation, as provided for in Policy 6.1.1 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. 7. A monmmum bu#eF of thiFty five (35) feet On width shall be pFevided alaRg the pFejerat's western bouRdaFy and along - the - easteFn fey (40) peFGen of the pFejeGt' nor -th ^r beundaFy. A. Mini.m.,Urn bu#eF Of fifty (50) feet On width shall be PFOVided along the westem sjA, (60) _ - - ant of the pFejeGt'S ReFthem boundaFy. VVheFe feasible, existing native vegetation shall be retained within there buffeFs along the PFejecA's weSteFn and nGFth beundaFmes. These buffeFs shall be supplemented with Gak 9F Mahogany tFees planted-a f tweRty (20) feet apaFt in a staggered maRRer; and a seven (7) feet wa4,- fence, 9r hedge that will, within twe(2) years of plaRtiRg, ^r^ to ^ MiniM m heig seven (7) feet and he a n•+inim„m of ninety five (95) nerrent opaque. 59. All buildings shall have tile or metal roofs, or decorative parapet walls above the roofline, and buildings shall be finished in light subdued colors except for decorative trim. 6-9. Building heights shall be limited to one (1) -story and a maximum of thirty -five (35) feet. 74-9. All lighting facilities shall be architecturally designed, and limited to a height of twenty -five (25) feet..., SUGh lightiRg faGilities shall be and shielded from neighboring residential land uses. 844. There shall be no ingress or egress on Santa Barbara Boulevard. However, this shall not preclude future access to Santa Barbara Boulevard via _a frontage road or access easement W the north of the subject site. Agenda Item 9A The proposed change to the Policy 5.2.3 is as follows: Policy 5.2.3: [revised text, page 12] Recognizing the existing residential nature of the land uses surrounding the planned 1 -75 interchange at Golden Gate Parkway, as well as the restrictions on conditional uses of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, there shall be no further commercial zoning for properties abutting Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. No new commercial uses shall be permitted on properties abutting streets accessing Golden Gate Parkway within the above - defined segment. This policy shall not apply to that existing peFtien of the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict, which is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard. The proposed change to the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions as follows: b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions [revised text, page 32] • Recognizing the existing residential nature of the land uses surrounding the 1 -75 interchange at Golden Gate Parkway, there shall be no further conditional uses for properties abutting Golden Gate Parkway, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard, except as permitted within the Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict; the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict; and, except as provided in subparagraph 1., below; and, except for essential services, as described in paragraph a), above. • Further, no properties abutting streets accessing Golden Gate Parkway, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard, shall be approved for conditional uses except as permitted within the Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict; the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict; and, except as provided in subparagraph 1., below; and, except for essential services, as described in paragraph a), above. This provision shall not be construed to affect the area described in Paragraph a), above. III. PURPOSE /DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner is requesting approval to expand the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict by 2.8+ acres; revise the Subdistrict name to "Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict "; allow Group Housing for seniors, including: Independent Living Units, Assisted Living Units, Continuing Care Retirement Communities, Skilled Nursing Facilities, and similar uses — not to exceed a maximum F.A.R. of 0.45; allow medical office use — not to exceed 5,000 square feet ;and, modify development standards. IV. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Existing Conditions: The subject request includes 2 parcels in Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates: • Tract 112 is approximately 6.84 acres and undeveloped; zoned PUD (Colonnades at Santa Barbara Commercial Planned Unit Development) with an approval for up to 27,000 square feet of office development, with a Corridor Management Overlay (CMO) on a portion of the site; and designated Estates — Commercial District, Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. Agenda Item 9A • Tracts 98 is approximately 2.8+ acres and developed with a single - family home; zoned E, Estates, with a CMO on a portion of Tract 98; and designated Estates Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. Surrounding Land Uses: North: Developed, single family residences; zoned E, Estates; and designated Residential Estates Subdistrict on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. South: Across Golden Gate Parkway, developed, single family residences and a church; zoned E, Estates, with a CMO on a portion of the properties, and with a Provisional Use for a church; and, designated Residential Estates Subdistrict on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. West: Developed, single family residence; zoned E, Estates, with a CMO on a portion of the property; and designated Residential Estates Subdistrict on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. East: Across Santa Barbara Boulevard, developed, shopping center; zoned C-4, General Commercial; designated Urban — Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict; and residential multi - family units, zoned RMF -6 and RMF -12, Residential Multi- family (6 and 12 units /acre); and designated Urban — Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. V. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: 1) Background: Previous Site Approvals /Denials — In 1999, a portion (6.84± ac.) of the site was the subject of a Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA) request (Petition CP -99 -2) for retail and office uses; the BCC did not approve the petition. In 2000, a revised version of the 1999 petition, with additional retail uses, was submitted (Petition CP- 2000 -7); the BCC approved the petition, but limited development to office uses only. (This 6.84+ acre parcel is presently zoned PUD, Colonades at Santa Barbara.) In 2005, the project site (plus Tracts 111 and the West 150 feet of Tract 98, Unit 30, GGE) was the subject of a GMPA request (Petition CP- 2005-5) to expand the Subdistrict by 11.6± acres, to allow up to 115,000 square feet of intermediate commercial and general office uses and allow residential uses at 15 dwelling units per acre; the BCC did not approve the petition. Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) — Locational criteria limiting commercial and conditional use development in the Estates designation were established with the adoption of the GGAMP in the Growth Management Plan in 1991: GGAMP— 1991 • Commercial development was limited to Estates Neighborhood Centers, site - specific commercial subdistricts, and existing commercially zoned lands. • Conditional use development, except essential services, was limited to Estates Neighborhood Centers, infill development on Golden Gate Parkway and on the west side of C.R. 951, and transitional areas — adjacent to certain non - residential uses. Agenda Item 9A I -75 Interchange and surrounding land uses Resulting from the State's approval to fund and construct the 1 -75 Interchange at Golden Gate Parkway, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved Resolution 2001- 56 establishing an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee to provide recommendations on the appearance and landscaping of the interchange. The Committee was specifically tasked with creating an "overlay" district for the interchange to, minimize impacts to property owners, preserve the residential character of the area, and establish landscaping provisions consistent with creating a "gateway" into Naples and Golden Gate. GGAMP Re -study Committee — GGAMP Policy 5.2.3 and revisions to the Estates, Conditional Uses Subdistrict: The GGAMP Re -study Committee was formed, in part, to study the land use needs of the Golden Gate Community, such as commercial, community facility and institutional uses. County staff worked with the Committee to identify appropriate areas to locate new commercial development and conditional uses within the Estates and Golden Gate City. Committee recommendations to the BCC included added provisions for conditional use development, expansion and creation of Neighborhood Centers within the Estates, and the expansion and creation of commercial /mixed -use subdistricts within Golden Gate City. The Re -study Committee also identified areas that were inappropriate for new commercial and conditional use development. One such area identified by the Committee was the Golden Gate Parkway corridor, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. In 2003, the Re -study Committee met with "I -75 /Golden Gate Parkway" Ad hoc Committee members to discuss desired land uses for the area surrounding the interchange. As a result, the Re -study Committee recommended to the BCC provisions that would prohibit new commercial and conditional use development along Golden Gate Parkway in the Estates. Committee recommendations for expanded commercial and conditional use opportunities and the restriction of these uses in certain areas governed by the Master Plan were adopted by the BCC in 2003 and 2004, as part of the Phased Re -study Amendments to the GGAMP. GGAMP — Present Commercial development is limited to Neighborhood Centers, site - specific commercial subdistricts, and existing commercially zoned properties. • Conditional use development, except essential services and model homes, is limited to Estates Neighborhood Centers, infill development on the west side of C.R. 951 and transitional areas — adjacent to certain non - residential uses or adjacent to Neighborhood Centers, and two site - specific locations — one on the west side of C.R. 951 and one on the south side of Golden Gate Parkway. Agenda Item 9A 2) Environmental Impacts: The environmental report prepared by Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. and submitted with this petition, dated April 20, 2011, indicates the following: The subject site consists of a residential use, pine flatwoods, Brazillian Pepper, drained Cypress wetlands, and disturbed lands. Vegetation on site includes slash pine (Pinus elliottii), cypress trees (Taxodium distichum), Dahoon holly, and cabbage palms (Saba) palmetto). The properties contain hydric and non - hydric soils. The subject site does not exhibit wetland characteristics. No hydrologic indicators were present onsite. The listed species survey conducted concluded that there were five potential Big Cypress Fox Squirrel day beds observed onsite. Prior to site clearing, the site will be resurveyed for stick nests to determine if Big Cypress Fox Squirrels are actively nesting on the property. If determined to be actively nesting, no clearing or construction shall occur within 125 feet of the tree or distance approved by the Florida Wildlife Commission (FWC) guidelines until the nesting is deemed completed and approved by the FWC or County staff. A Senior Environmental Specialist with the Collier County Surface Water and Environmental Planning Section reviewed the environmental report and provided the following comments: • No special environmental concerns are associated with the establishment of the Subdistrict on the proposed site. Native vegetation retention shall be determined at the time the property is rezoned, in accordance with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Additionally, a preserve management plan, including habitat management for listed species (Big Cypress fox squirrels), if required, shall be included with the Site Development Plan. Historical and Archeological Impacts: The Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Additionally, because of the project location and /or nature it is unlikely that any such [historic or archaeological] sites will be affected. The Florida Department of State is of the opinion that the proposed project will have no effect on historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places. 3) Transportation Element/Traffic Impacts: A Project Manager with the Collier County Transportation Planning Section reviewed the Transportation Impact Statement (TIS) and TIS Addendum, and provided the following comments: Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) addendum and has determined that the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment proposes a less intense use than what is currently allowed by the Growth Management Plan. As such, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5 year planning period, and the subject application can be deemed consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) without mitigation. Agenda Item 9A Golden Gate Parkway Impacts: The first concurrency link that is impacted by this project is link 21, Golden Gate Parkway, between Santa Barbara Boulevard and 1 -75. The project generates 31 PM peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 0.8% impact. This segment of Golden Gate Parkway currently has a remaining capacity of 1,882 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2011 AUIR. This roadway segment is located within the East Central TCMA, in which 90% of the lane miles currently meet the minimum standard. There are no subsequent links significantly impacted. 4) Additional Public Facilities Impacts: • Water and Wastewater: The subject project will be served by Florida Government Utility Authority. The anticipated demand for potable water and wastewater for the project is 14,685 gallons per day. • Solid Waste: The service provider is Collier County Solid Waste Management. The 2011 AUIR identifies that the County has sufficient landfill capacity up to the year 2041 for the required lined cell capacity. The project construction time line is approximately 12 to18 months. • Drainage: The Subdistrict is located in Flood Zone X. Future development is expected to comply with the SFWMD and /or Collier County rules and regulations that assure controlled accommodation of storm water events by both on -site and off -site improvements. • Parks and Recreational Facilities: No adverse impact to park facilities is expected as a result of this project. • Schools: There will be no students generated from the proposed development. • EMS, Fire, Police and County Jail: The subject project is located within the Golden Gate Fire District. The nearest fire station and EMS services and sheriff's substation are located on Golden Gate Parkway, approximately one mile east of the project site. The expansion of the Subdistrict with the proposed group housing units is anticipated to have minimal impacts on these safety services and jail facilities. 5) Appropriateness of Change, Justification, Needs Analysis, and Compatibility: • Appropriateness of Change: Estates designated properties located along collector and arterial roadways are increasingly being targeted for non - residential development — commercial, community facilities and institutional uses. County staff regularly receives inquiries about changing the Growth Management Plan to allow these land uses on properties located within the Estates Mixed Use District, Estates Residential Subdistrict — primarily intended for low density residential development. As demand for these non - residential uses increases, local government must be responsive to the community's needs while preserving the community's overall vision as expressed through the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP). Relevant to the subject Petition, the I- 75 Interchange at Golden Gate Parkway was, in part, approved and constructed to alleviate traffic congestion at other interchanges in the County. The resulting impacts from the approval — noise, increased traffic volumes, right -of -way acquisition, and potential commercialization of Golden Gate Parkway — was realized immediately by surrounding residents. The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) responded by establishing a committee to provide recommendations on the appearance and landscaping of the interchange with the intent of preserving the residential character of the area and minimizing Agenda Item 9A impacts to property owners. Additionally, County staff worked with the community via the GGAMP Re -study Committee to recommend provisions be added to the Plan to prohibit the approval of any new commercial zoning and conditional uses along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. The BCC approved these prohibitions in 2004. Although these prohibitive provisions exist in the GGAMP, staff acknowledges that it would be appropriate to consider any unforeseen changes in conditions that have occurred since 2004 that would warrant a modification of, or exception to, Policy 5.2.3 and /or the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the Estates — Mixed Use District. Subsequent to the adoption of the referenced prohibitive provisions, the Board of County Commissioners, in 2007, approved a Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA) that allowed the David Lawrence Center (located along Golden Gate Parkway, approximately % mile west of the subject site) to expand their site by approximately 5 acres; add new institutional uses and associated medical offices; and expand the existing institutional uses and community facility uses. The petitioner provided data and analysis to demonstrate need for those uses at that location. Similar to the above referenced GMPA approval, the petitioner for the subject GMPA has provided a statement of justification and a needs analysis to demonstrate that the proposed Assisted Living Facility and Alzheimer's Care Units are warranted at the subject location. • Justification: Justification for the proposed amendment is located within the Explanation /Justification for Proposed Amendment document and Exhibit V.D., Market Feasibility Study, as provided by the applicant/agent. The applicant's justification is summarized below (Numbers 1 — 4) in italicized text, followed by staff comments within brackets: 1) The proposed land use change from office uses to Group Housing for seniors [and up to 5,000 square feet of office uses], including the addition of approximately 2.8 acres, will result in an overall lessening in intensity of development. [Generally, a group housing use for seniors is considered a less intense use than commercial development within the standard zoning land use hierarchy. However, a project should be further evaluated for public facility impacts and compatibility with surrounding land uses in order to determine the overall increase or decrease in a project's intensity. The public facilities analysis completed for the subject GMPA, comparing the existing land uses (approved for office development but not built) to those proposed, identifies that the group housing use will require a greater demand on water and sewer services (project is served by Florida Governmental Utility Authority), a decrease in solid waste generation, and a decrease in traffic generation. Finally, the compatibility assessment of the existing and proposed uses with the surrounding land uses reveals the following. a. Noise: (1) Office development (existing) — Hours of operation for typical office use are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday /Saturday; minimal activity occurs outside those hours. Traffic volumes may peak during various intervals throughout the day. (2) Group Housing (proposed) — Hours of operation are 24 hours a day, 7 days per week. Traffic is limited to employees, guests, deliveries to the facility and those seeking services within the facility. Generally, such institutional uses are viewed as being residential in nature. Though traffic volume is less, some traffic noise would be experienced during the day and nighttime hours. 10 Agenda Item 9A b. Light/glare: (1) Office development (existing) — Since hours of operation are typically during day light hours, most lighting would be for security purposes, i.e. lights around perimeter of building and some parking lot lighting. (2) Group Housing (proposed) — In addition to security, parking lot, and perimeter building lighting, some lighting /glare from vehicle traffic would occur during nighttime hours. C. Buffering: (1) Office development (existing) — The northern property line buffering varies from 35 feet to 75 feet; western property line buffering is 35 feet; and the buffering along Santa Barbara Blvd. and Golden Gate Parkway frontage is 25 feet. (2) Group Housing (proposed) — All property line buffering is 25 feet, except that the north and west buffers require additional plantings. d. Setbacks: (1) Office development (existing) — Building setback requirements are 100 feet from the northern property line and 40 feet from Golden Gate Parkway. (2) Group Housing (proposed) — Building setback requirement is 50 feet from the northern and southern property lines. e. Building mass: (1) Office development (existing) — Limited to 1 -story and a maximum of 35 -feet, and up to 35,000 square feet of developable space on 6.84+ acres. (2) Group Housing (proposed) — Limited to 1 -story and a maximum of 35 -feet, and up to 5,000 square feet of office development, 120 ALF /Alzheimer's units for a total square footage of 69,500 on 9.64± acres. f. Aesthetic considerations: (1) Office development (existing) — Development must adhere to the County's Architectural Guidelines. The existing development (approved but not built) is required to provide a minimum 500 sq. ft. of park area with patio and benches. (2) Group Housing (proposed) — Proposed project will provide preserve area in northwest portion of the site. 2) The property addition (2.8± acre tract) is unique in that it is the only Estates zoned property adjacent to commercially zoned property on Golden Gate Parkway. [The applicant's statement is correct; however, the current commercial designation on the property was approved through a Comprehensive Plan change in the year 2000, which resulted in the current condition. Regardless, the expansion of the existing site to include the requested acreage would provide a viable site for the development of the proposed Group Housing use. Further, the approval of this proposed use would provide a complimentary institutional use adjacent to residential development, and may also discourage the expansion of additional non - residential uses immediately north and west of the subject site.] 3) The property is proximate to its targeted demographic, area hospitals and major transportation routes. [The subject site is located proximate to 1 -75 (approximately 1- mile), which provides convenient access to area hospitals — North Collier Hospital, and Physicians Regional Hospital (both the Pine Ridge and Collier Blvd. locations). Additionally, based on the applicant's needs analysis the aging population (65 +) within the market area is estimated at 27,065 and anticipated to exceed 31,000 by year 2015. 4) There is current and future demand for group housing uses in central Collier County and within the Golden Gate area. [As noted in the applicant's Needs Analysis document, the 11 Agenda Item 9A area is currently underserved by as many as 442 ALF units and 429 Alzheimer's care units. • Needs Analysis: The market feasibility /needs study submitted by the petitioner in support of the proposed amendment was prepared by Province Valuation Group. Below is a summary of the preparer's findings and conclusions in italicized text, followed by staff comments within brackets. • Competing ALF and Alzheimer's care facilities within the project's market area (The table below reflects the applicant's data as consolidated by staff): [The table above identifies the four competing assisted living /Alzheimer's care facilities within the project's market area. The total available units have been adjusted to account for occupancy rates and rollover rates. The total adjusted supply of potential units within the petitioner's market area is 190 assisted living units and 74 Alzheimer's care units.] • Demonstrated need over the planning period (The tables below reflect the applicant's data as consolidated by staff): 12 Agenda Item 9A [The tables above identify the current and projected demand for assisted living /Alzheimer's care units within the project's market area. The targeted age for the ALF units is 65+ and 75+ for the Alzheimer's care units and the income qualifications were set at $35,000 /year and $50,000 /year for ALF and Alzheimer's care units respectively. The data and analysis contained within the market study for the proposed Group Housing use, specifically Assisted Living Facility (ALF) Units and Alzheimer's Care Units, indicate that the project's market area is presently underserved by as many as 442 ALF and 429 Alzheimer's units; and the projected demand will be approximately 612 ALF and 613 Alzheimer's units by year 2015. Further, other similar competing facilities located within the project's market area are currently operating, on average, at 90% capacity. Based on the provided data, it appears that demand exceeds supply in this area. Additionally, in 2012, GIS staff inventoried properties similar in size to the project acreage, within the same market area, to determine if other properties could accommodate a similar facility without an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Staff determined that there were approximately 9 potential qualifying properties. However, these properties were not centrally located within the defined market area, as is the subject site, and did not have similar roadway access. The map on page 14, prepared by the GIS staff in 2011, depicts all existing and proposed /approved, not yet built, ALFs (PUD zoning only) in western Collier County, including Ave Maria. Based on the review of this map, and review of approved conditional uses for ALF use, it appears that there are no approved ALFs located within the Golden Gate Urban area or elsewhere within the immediate vicinity of the project site.] 13 `` 65 -74 75 -84 85+ Total 65 -74 75 -84 85+ Total .: 9,761 3,040 27,065 17,052 10,375 3,637 31,064 14,264 z "'' 686 856 P Y44 244 "z 442 612 [The tables above identify the current and projected demand for assisted living /Alzheimer's care units within the project's market area. The targeted age for the ALF units is 65+ and 75+ for the Alzheimer's care units and the income qualifications were set at $35,000 /year and $50,000 /year for ALF and Alzheimer's care units respectively. The data and analysis contained within the market study for the proposed Group Housing use, specifically Assisted Living Facility (ALF) Units and Alzheimer's Care Units, indicate that the project's market area is presently underserved by as many as 442 ALF and 429 Alzheimer's units; and the projected demand will be approximately 612 ALF and 613 Alzheimer's units by year 2015. Further, other similar competing facilities located within the project's market area are currently operating, on average, at 90% capacity. Based on the provided data, it appears that demand exceeds supply in this area. Additionally, in 2012, GIS staff inventoried properties similar in size to the project acreage, within the same market area, to determine if other properties could accommodate a similar facility without an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Staff determined that there were approximately 9 potential qualifying properties. However, these properties were not centrally located within the defined market area, as is the subject site, and did not have similar roadway access. The map on page 14, prepared by the GIS staff in 2011, depicts all existing and proposed /approved, not yet built, ALFs (PUD zoning only) in western Collier County, including Ave Maria. Based on the review of this map, and review of approved conditional uses for ALF use, it appears that there are no approved ALFs located within the Golden Gate Urban area or elsewhere within the immediate vicinity of the project site.] 13 Agenda Item 9A co CoCourrty EXISTING & PENDING ALF PROJECTS IN COLLIER COUNTY AVE MA I SCRIA INSET _ CORRREw RD Z IMMOKALEE RD O � RM DRI °rv� j 59 j i -- RITA BEACH RD VAAT CANTERBURY LLC L„ — M — _ —___— LEE COUNTY LINE Bat OLEN ATARBORTRACE \ ENnEV LRL40E ADDIE `, �;\• wQ E ORA NBE IEEE PUT 115 NPERYLLADEATNAPLEB NMBOR k1EMOKY CAPE OF NORTX COLTER I5 �»'�Ji O /UAI 'U. puD BAY 11 THAVE 41 INMOKALEE RD THE A0.6TOLMT _ -- RNLT BEACH - - - -- ASTON OAR.ENSAT PELRAN MARSH LLC � ` -- � i A151ffED LNWO ROME I. L CAN ANSI UG;;- NMBONCXASE OF NAPLE6 I A.—A OAKd PUD D� I CH RD -- _ VA ER MERRRL GARDENS ATNAPLES BD BILTB AIDE 15\ D ,� tl ISIENS VTRUSTR P UT AP 1IACNU ii6i O GOLDEN GATE BLVD IN Y RC OF NAPLES THECOVEATIAARBELU NAPLES CLUB LLC NORTH UNITED APB G E RD wMEi PODl N CHURCH UT > m MCMD TERRACE CNURC OF DI S° � U CMRISi N PUO GREEN BLVD" S O D IPNUD PAR GOLDEN GAT S p PARK P OUMERCE RW O.OR PLACE D CE GOLDEN OAS CPSS- I0ii -2 UO \ T 3ARECINO PUD NOMELWODRFSIOEMCE {T_`( i _ R�DIO AT MAPLES li — _____�-- -- 41 / TERMCWAORNIO 11 � MANORCAREAT IELY PALMS I Rl�l Nf i COOT TURN '\ E E PUD O \ �� L� � RATTLES KE K RD 6VUWOTOP TERRACE OF NAPLES LELY REdORI _... PUD ... LANDS NSCAXY VIl1AOF NAPLES `� � E 0 Legend • Existing ALF Facilities Approved A pp PUD with ALF Use PUD Currently Under Review ft� with ALF Use k - Major Roads 1 ;� 9 O ]� O NAME INTENSITY AdBIBB Carty PIID FAR: DAO M GMB Arbor Tram 211 beds Ahn CDab d Ley P.M 50 bah N Gadens At Po Rss, Marsh AY. M.M DR! 120 b.h A. Ostle propmM EBnipbn T— d N.Pbs Bentley V " Bfth O.rhns 135 bah 72 beds, SkRed NUlsiv 100 133 bsh FYM B.p4Y CI.I Of N.PYS SO beds .Ika.d Cnben G.b CamMlc. Perk PUD Good T— C-. PUD 200 bah db—d 200 bah I sdc Lek.. PUD FM: 0.50 H.rDCr M.rmry C.IB H.rk.Be B.y PUD 75 b.h 200 b.h H.rbvdu.e Of N.O. 40 bed. HanwwOd RMidanoB I N,,W 112 bah ARlpa VISW at N.pba IW..[ Cr,.Wbay LLC 70 bad. 35 beh Lando End RA le bah .BOrd Awwl . LL.y ft- FAR: n D hkMMb PU FAR. DBO MMrD Galan .t N.Pbs 25 beds Moakps Palk PIA NapNB CIMah d CMi.I PUD "' = 200 NspMs Mb LLC 110 beds OrM1BB T' . PUD FAR: DIW ORM Tatum P.ft. MMeh PUD 10D beds 53 W. D.B K RID 350 beds wwDssd 9.reeklo PUD lakes RID 3arlm� 0.1. RA 'M 0" 00 beds, 340 kdepMdaX Lwft UNb 455 bah TRaciM G— 200 bah The Adpoaal 50 bah The Cev..1 MarbasB Tuwy N4 d N.PwS 12 bNs 150 bah 11tlab! BsBeh M ALF Hang 13 bads I.WdaM Tngt RID W.dsa PMm 200 bah aBpm.B 54 beds RD E Agenda Item 9A • Existing and potential office square feet proximate to subject site: As previously noted, a portion of the subject site (6.84+ acres) is zoned and designated for up to 35,000 square feet of office space (C -1 intensity). Staff previously inventoried the existing and potential supply of office square feet located in the Golden Gate Urban area, within the vicinity of the subject site. The inventory includes an estimated 975,000 square feet of existing and potential office space within the general area of the subject site. Of this, approximately 700,000 sq. ft. is designated and /or zoned to allow office uses, including potential acreage within the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict (22± acres) and the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict (52± acres); and, southeast of the site, across Santa Barbara Boulevard, is the Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict with a potential net supply of approximately 275,000 sq. ft. of office space. Based on staff's analysis, it appears that there is an adequate supply /opportunity for office development proximate to the subject site. However, based on the project submittal and staff review, there is an unmet need for group housing uses for the aging population within the project's defined market area. • Project Compatibility: The four quadrants at the intersection of the Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard are zoned and /or designated for non - residential development. The northeast quadrant is designated Urban; zoned C -4, general commercial; and is developed with a shopping center, consisting of neighborhood commercial uses. The southeast quadrant is designated Urban — Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict - limited to office development; undeveloped (and is County- owned). The southwest quadrant is designated Estates with a Provisional Use; zoned E, Estates; and is developed with a church and private school with related facilities. The northwest quadrant (the 6.8 -acre parcel that is part of this petition) is designated Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict; zoned CPUD, Commercial Planned Unit Development, approved for office uses only; and is undeveloped. The proposed group housing use is generally residential in nature, complimentary to the surrounding residential development, and does not generate significant traffic. The subject property is currently, and will remain after construction, buffered from the adjacent residential development north and west of the site, and along Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard. Additionally, the proposed group housing facility will be sized to an appropriate scale — limited to one -story (35 feet), with a floor area ratio of 0.22 (based on the conceptual plan and square feet identified within the market feasibility study) — ensuring that offsite impacts (i.e. noise, visual, etc.) are negligible. VI. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) NOTES: The Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was held on May 1, 2012, after the applicant/agent duly noticed and advertised the meeting, as required by the Collier County Land Development Code. Approximately 9 people attended the NIM, held at the Golden Gate Community Center, located at 4701 Golden Gate Parkway. 15 Agenda Item 9A • The following is a synopsis of the meeting: D. Wayne Arnold, agent for the applicant opened the meeting at 5:40 p.m. Representatives for the project in attendance were Richard Yovanovich with Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A., Brandt Henning and Rey Pezeshkan with PK Studios, Anthony Mansolillo representing Naples Venture II and III, LLC. Michele Mosca representing Collier County also attended. A sign -in sheet was provided at the entrance of the meeting room. At the time the meeting began, seven members of the public were in attendance. Six of those individuals signed in. Mr. Arnold began the information meeting by introducing the Owner /Developer representatives and County Staff. He then explained the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Petition request and described that the developer was proposing an amendment to the Golden Gate Master Plan to add a 2.8t acre parcel and amend the permitted uses to permit a variety of senior housing types and medical office uses. Mr. Arnold displayed a conceptual color rendering of the proposed development and proceeded to describe the exhibit. He then explained the history of the site and described the location, type and size of the buffers and where the access point would be located. The Comprehensive Plan process was explained and the tentative hearing dates were provided to the meeting attendees. Mr. Arnold concluded his presentation and asked for comments or questions from the meeting attendees. Questions asked were regarding the maximum height of the structures, total square footage of building and total number of units. Mr. Arnold explained that the proposed development would consist of a total of 120 beds with a 5,000 square foot inpatient/outpatient rehabilitation center with a maximum height of 2 stories at 35 feet. Adjacent property owners to the north expressed concern over the building square footage and the height of the proposed buildings. There was a lengthy discussion between the owners and project representatives which culminated in all parties agreeing to have a follow - up meeting to discuss their concerns and to determine whether site and building changes could be made to address their concerns. Mr. Arnold invited anyone with further questions to call his office or to contact Ms. Mosca. Copies of the strikethrough and underline version of the proposed language changes were offered and distributed to the meeting attendees. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:10 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by the Applicant and supplemented by M. Mosca, Principal Planner] VII. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: The proposed request to expand the existing Subdistrict by 2.8± acres to allow group housing uses and the retention of up 5,000 square feet of commercial development is inconsistent with Policy 5.2.3 of the GGAMP, which prohibits new conditional (and commercial) uses on properties abutting Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. However, according to the applicant the inclusion of the 2.8+ acres is needed in order for the Group Housing development to be viable at the proposed location. Additionally, approximately 1.63 acres of the subject tract is dedicated to water management, preserve and landscape buffer areas. Further, staff concurs with the applicant that there is a demonstrated need for the proposed group housing use within this area. • The market analysis submitted with the application indicates that the project's market area is presently underserved by as many as 442 ALF and 429 Alzheimer's units; and the projected demand will reach approximately 612 ALF and 613 Alzheimer's units by year 2015. 16 Agenda Item 9A • The proposed development of approximately 120 ALF (98) and Alzheimer's care units (28) will meet a portion of the unmet senior group housing need within the area proximate to the site, and afford area residents an opportunity to house aging family members in close proximity to their primary residences. • There are other similar -sized parcels within the project's market area, however none are centrally located like the subject site. • The proposed facility's location proximate to existing residential will likely reduce vehicular trips on the surrounding roadways, and provide additional professional medical employment and service personnel jobs within the area. • The proposed group housing use is generally residential in nature, complimentary to the surrounding residential development, and does not generate significant traffic. VIII. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's office. IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CPSS- 2011 -2 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for adoption and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. Prepared By: Date: Michele R. Mosc , AI P, Principal Planner Comprehe�/ Planning Section, Land Development Services Department Reviewed B Y �� Date: Z 12 David Weeks,'AICP, Growth Management Plan Mana er Comprehensive Planning Section, Land Development Services Department Reviewed By: Michael Bosi, AICP, Interim Planning and Zoning Director Lan velopment Se es Department Approved By: Date: g �1 � ✓ I Z' Nic asalanguida, d in rator Growth Management Division Petition Number: CPSS- 2011 -2 Staff Report for September 20, 2012 CPCC meeting NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 13, 2012 BCC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: Mark P. Strain, CHAIRMAN 17 31ioril IOL110[il- k I EXHIBIT'A'TEXT & MAPS ORDINANCE NO. 12- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT BY CHANGING THE NAME TO GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL SUBDISTRICT, BY ADDING 2.8 ACRES TO THE EXISTING 6.8 t ACRE INFILL PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD AND GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; BY ADDING GROUP HOUSING FOR SENIORS AND REVISING STANDARDS; AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Focal Government Comprehensive Plam-iing and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Cormnissioners adopted the Collier Count), Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Collier County staff requested amendments to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map and Map series; and WHEREAS. pursuant to Subsection 163.31.87(1); Florida Statutes, this amendment is considered a. Small Scale Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Subdistrict property is not located in an area of critical state concern or an area of critical economic concern; and CPSS -201 1 -2\ Golden Gate Estates Commercial Page I of 3 and Institutional Infill District Rev. 8!21112 Words underlined are added; words stt -flir-eue1} have been deleted; * * * indicates break in pages WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) on September 6; 2012 considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan and recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and held public hearings concerning the proposed adoption of the amendments to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan on October 23, 2012; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this small scale amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Plan Use Map and Map Series in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text and map amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment; if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining, this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits; or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the state land planning agency. CPSS -201 1 -21 Golden Gate Estates Commercial Page 2 of 3 and Institutional Infill District Rev. 8121112 Words underlined are added; words ti-tiek thfaugh have been deleted; * * * indicates break in pages PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of . 2012. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: D. PA% Heidi Ashton -Cicko ]Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER. COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: FRED W. COYLE, Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Proposed Amended Text and Maps CP\ 12 -CMP- 00846\9 CPSS -20I 1 -2\ Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional 1nfill District Rev. 8!21/12 Words underlined are added; words stFaek thFeHl-h have been deleted; * * * indicates break in pages Paoe 3 of 3 Exhibit A 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION B. Estates - Commercial District CPSS- 2011 -2 5. Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict [revised text, page 46] This Subdistrict consists of two infill areas. The two areas are located at the northwest corner of Collier Boulevard and Green Boulevard and at the northwest corner of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway. Due to the existing zoning and land use pattern in proximity to the Estates Commercial and Institutional In -fill Subdistrict (see Golden Gate Urban Commercial Infill Subdistrict and Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Map) and the need to ensure adequate development standards to buffer adjacent land uses, commercial uses shall be permitted under the following criteria: a) Commercial uses shall be limited to: • Low intensity commercial uses that are compatible with both residential and intermediate commercial uses, in order to provide for small scale shopping and personal needs, and • Intermediate commercial to provide for a wider variety of goods and services in areas that have a higher degree of automobile traffic. These uses shall be similar to C -1, C -2, or C -3 zoning districts outlined in the Collier County Land Development Code (Ordinance 91- 102), adopted October 30, 1991. b) Rezones shall be encouraged in the form of a Planned Unit Development (there shall be no minimum acreage requirement for PUD rezones except for the requirement that all requests for rezoning must be at least forty thousand (40,000) square feet in area unless the proposed rezone is an extension of an existing zoning district consistent with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan). c) Projects within this Subdistrict shall make provisions for shared parking arrangements with adjoining commercial developments when appropriate. d) Driveways and curb cuts for projects within this Subdistrict shall be consolidated with adjoining commercial developments. e) Access to projects shall not be permitted from Collier Boulevard. f) Any project located within this Subdistrict at the northwest corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard (properties include the East 180 feet of Tract 98, Unit 30 and Tract 112, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates), less and except an easement for Santa Barbara Boulevard right -of -way, shall be subject to the following additional development restrictions: ATST r= 121. Permitted ILland uses shall be r,ted to e#*ses -enly limited to Group Housing for seniors, including Independent Living Units, Assisted Living Units, Continuing Care (Words underlined are added, words strask thr -eugIi are deleted) Retirement Communities, Skilled Nursing Facilities, and similar uses, not to exceed a maximum F.A.R. of 0.45: and medical office use, not to exceed 5,000 square feet. 23. All principal structures shall be required to have a minimum setback of one huRdFed 400) fifty 50 feet from the project's northern and southern boundary. 34. The neFtheFn seveRty five (75) feet of the %ges-te-Fn sm)dy (60) eFGent of the sate shall be a landSsape- buRers and filar uses. Buffers: the following minimum project buffers, as set forth in Section 4.06.02 of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04 -41, as amended, in effect fas of the date of adoption of this amendmentl, shall be provided. West: 25' wide type C. North: 25' wide type C. East: 25' wide type D. South: 25' wide type D. 5. The westeFR SiXty (60) peFGeRt of the site shall have an eutdoer pedestFiaR friendly patie(s), that total at least five hundFed (500) square feet in aFea and *nGGFPGFat shading, and a Min4P-rfa4'I 9F wateF feaiur feast one h„ndFed (100) SquaFe feet 4iR aFea, and bFmGk pavers. 6. A twenty five (25) feet wide land6Gaped stFip shall be ppevided along the entiFe fteRtage 4. Native vegetation shall be retained within the project buffers on the northern and western project boundaries, except as may be necessary for exotic vegetation removal, and for construction of the privacy wall. All supplemental plantings required by the Land Development Code shall be native species. The northern buffer adjacent to the southern boundary of Tract 111, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 30, may also be utilized for the native vegetation preservation requirements for the project and shall include a concrete or pre -cast concrete privacy wall at a minimum of 6 feet in height, which shall be located on the southern boundary of the buffer /preserve. No setback from the buffer /preserve shall be required for this wall. The North 330 feet of Tract 98, Unit 30, GGE, shall be limited to native preserve and water management areas, except that a vehicular drive and /or wall may be located within this area. Native vegetation preservation areas may be utilized for water management purposes, when it can be demonstrated that the use for water management will not be harmful to the native vegetation, as provided for in Policy 6.1.1 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. -- - - - - .. Ily MAIN- - - (Words underlined are added, words StF Gk thFo gh are deleted) 58. All buildings shall have tile or metal roofs, or decorative parapet walls above the roofline, and buildings shall be finished in light subdued colors except for decorative trim. 6.9. Building heights shall be limited to one (1) -story and a maximum of thirty -five (35) feet. 74-9. All lighting facilities shall be architecturally designed, and limited to a height of twenty -five (25) feet -1 SUGh lighting faGili +,es shall he and shielded from neighboring residential land uses. 844. There shall be no ingress or egress on Santa Barbara Boulevard. However, this shall not preclude future access to Santa Barbara Boulevard via a frontage road or access easement to the north of the subject site. Policy 5.2.3: [revised text, page 12] Recognizing the existing residential nature of the land uses surrounding the planned 1 -75 interchange at Golden Gate Parkway, as well as the restrictions on conditional uses of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, there shall be no further commercial zoning for properties abutting Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. No new commercial uses shall be permitted on properties abutting streets accessing Golden Gate Parkway within the above - defined segment. This policy shall not apply to that existing pert;^^ of the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict, which is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard. b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions [revised text, page 32] Recognizing the existing residential nature of the land uses surrounding the 1 -75 interchange at Golden Gate Parkway, there shall be no further conditional uses for properties abutting Golden Gate Parkway, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard, except as permitted within the Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict; the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict; and, except as provided in subparagraph 1., below; and, except for essential services, as described in paragraph a), above. Further, no properties abutting streets. accessing Golden Gate Parkway, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard, shall be approved for conditional uses except as permitted within the Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict; the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict; and, except as provided in subparagraph 1., below; and, except for essential services, as described in paragraph a), above. This provision shall not be construed to affect the area described in Paragraph a), above. (Words underlined are added, words 6tFUGk through are deleted) - e. iee - i-9 58. All buildings shall have tile or metal roofs, or decorative parapet walls above the roofline, and buildings shall be finished in light subdued colors except for decorative trim. 6.9. Building heights shall be limited to one (1) -story and a maximum of thirty -five (35) feet. 74-9. All lighting facilities shall be architecturally designed, and limited to a height of twenty -five (25) feet -1 SUGh lighting faGili +,es shall he and shielded from neighboring residential land uses. 844. There shall be no ingress or egress on Santa Barbara Boulevard. However, this shall not preclude future access to Santa Barbara Boulevard via a frontage road or access easement to the north of the subject site. Policy 5.2.3: [revised text, page 12] Recognizing the existing residential nature of the land uses surrounding the planned 1 -75 interchange at Golden Gate Parkway, as well as the restrictions on conditional uses of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, there shall be no further commercial zoning for properties abutting Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. No new commercial uses shall be permitted on properties abutting streets accessing Golden Gate Parkway within the above - defined segment. This policy shall not apply to that existing pert;^^ of the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict, which is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard. b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions [revised text, page 32] Recognizing the existing residential nature of the land uses surrounding the 1 -75 interchange at Golden Gate Parkway, there shall be no further conditional uses for properties abutting Golden Gate Parkway, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard, except as permitted within the Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict; the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict; and, except as provided in subparagraph 1., below; and, except for essential services, as described in paragraph a), above. Further, no properties abutting streets. accessing Golden Gate Parkway, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard, shall be approved for conditional uses except as permitted within the Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict; the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict; and, except as provided in subparagraph 1., below; and, except for essential services, as described in paragraph a), above. This provision shall not be construed to affect the area described in Paragraph a), above. (Words underlined are added, words 6tFUGk through are deleted) E F EXHIBIT A LEGEND URBAN DESIGNATION ESTATES DESIGNATION AGRICULTURAL /RURAL DESIGNATION - 11T OR [xeT[R:T . RMRU sF,n£MFxT AREA Dls,mtT AMENDED — JULY 28, 2010 ORD. NO. 2010 -31 7w[ ❑ UR[AU acv° un Ismmc, w 151 REV°cxn.0 W8DIS,RCT ❑ RcslDEUnu EsATES surolsmlcT c m xAl uses swDlsmlcr OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES AMENDED — OCTOBER 27, 1997 ■ CCwTOxx cEVrzR c°w D—L wwo,R¢* ❑ x Icx90Rx00m cEx,ER wrolsmlc, ® E XRll PRCSCnOU AREA 01tR.AY AMENDED — SEPTEMBER Be 1998 COMa1GAL --T - s�1 °, DAVIS BOULEVARD waDl.�. �ER u1—, IAL T DExs [ 0 S.R. 84 IMTA [ RBARA DmMxERa4 11[aS -1 ; u� E C ADCE M_' wM0, UsE E Ix D T AMENDED — JANUARY 25, 2007 ORD. N0. 2007 -19 001 P EO.AE -0 COMMERCIAL w901 —T " E R100E RDAD -ED USE 9Uro1 :,RIa w ■ ROD&L B9ulevuro CDAM Ai ..—CT m wsm lCT E-1 Iw° a [w U GOLDEN GATE ❑ Iu°mu,1wAL Ix LL wrols,mcT "D z z F xorz OB[cn.x -C1ES AID IM u0 Mmmuaun°x oe — E ADOPTED — FEBRUARY, 1991 AMENDED — DECEMBER 4, 2007 MD. NO 2007-77 Q IMMOKALEE ROAD AMENDED — JJLY 27. 1993 AMENDED — JULY 28, 2010 ORD. NO. 2010 -31 E. z z AMENDED — JULY 2S. 2010 ORD. NO. 2010 -32 d AMENDED — OCTOBER 27, 1997 AMENDED — SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 ORD. NO 2011 -29 AMENDED — APRIL 14, 1998 AMENDED — OCTOBER 23, 2012 AMENDED — SEPTEMBER Be 1998 AMENDED — FEBRUARY 23, 1999 DAVIS BOULEVARD m VANDERBILT S.R. 84 m AMENDED — OCTOBER 26, 2004 ORD. NO. 2004 -71 BEACH ROAD a AMENDED — JANUARY 25, 2007 ORD. N0. 2007 -19 w w o m ,m U GOLDEN GATE z z F T9r O Q U PINE RIDGE RD, 0 WHITE BLVD. SUBJECT SITE ¢ m 0 CPSS - 2011 -2 FUTURE LAND USE MAP F z J — m J a G.G. PKWY. E. a m ¢ a ¢ INTERSTAT. E ADOPTED — FEBRUARY, 1991 AMENDED — DECEMBER 4, 2007 MD. NO 2007-77 Q AMENDED — OCTOBER 14, 2008 MD. NO. 2006 -59 AMENDED — MAY 25, 1993 AMENDED — JJLY 27. 1993 AMENDED — JULY 28, 2010 ORD. NO. 2010 -31 E. z z AMENDED — JULY 2S. 2010 ORD. NO. 2010 -32 AMENDED — MARCH 14, 1995 AMENDED — OCTOBER 27, 1997 AMENDED — SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 ORD. NO 2011 -29 AMENDED — APRIL 14, 1998 AMENDED — OCTOBER 23, 2012 AMENDED — SEPTEMBER Be 1998 AMENDED — FEBRUARY 23, 1999 DAVIS BOULEVARD AMENDED — MARCH 13. 20W AMENDED — MAY 14, 2002 S.R. 84 m AMENDED — OCTOBER 26, 2004 ORD. NO. 2004 -71 AMENDED — JANUARY 25, 2005 DID. N0. 2005-3 a AMENDED — JANUARY 25, 2007 ORD. N0. 2007 -19 w o m F T9r O T� 9rt GOLDEN GATE FUTURE LAND USE MAP E ADOPTED — FEBRUARY, 1991 AMENDED — DECEMBER 4, 2007 MD. NO 2007-77 AMENDED — MAY 19, 1992 AMENDED — OCTOBER 14, 2008 MD. NO. 2006 -59 AMENDED — MAY 25, 1993 AMENDED — JJLY 27. 1993 AMENDED — JULY 28, 2010 ORD. NO. 2010 -31 AMENDED — APRIL I!1_1! 94 AMENDED — JULY 2S. 2010 ORD. NO. 2010 -32 AMENDED — MARCH 14, 1995 AMENDED — OCTOBER 27, 1997 AMENDED — SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 ORD. NO 2011 -29 AMENDED — APRIL 14, 1998 AMENDED — OCTOBER 23, 2012 AMENDED — SEPTEMBER Be 1998 AMENDED — FEBRUARY 23, 1999 AMENDED — MAY 9, 2000 AMENDED — MARCH 13. 20W AMENDED — MAY 14, 2002 AMENDED — SEPTEMBER 10. 2003 ORE. NO. 2003 -44 AMENDED — OCTOBER 26, 2004 ORD. NO. 2004 -71 AMENDED — JANUARY 25, 2005 DID. N0. 2005-3 AMENDED — JANUARY 25, 2007 ORD. N0. 2007 -19 R26E C a a D 0 m z 0 J 3 PETITION CPSS- 2011 -2 IDS S GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP BOULEVARD S.R. 84 O SCALE 0 1 MI. 2 MI. 3 MI. 4 MI. 5 MI. PREPARED BY: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION / PLANNING k REGULATION DATE: 8/2D12 FILE: GGFLU- 2012OWG R27E IMMOKALEE ROAD OIL WELL ROAD RANDALL 1BOULEVA4 z a w a °m W O a 0 w w q m a > J 5 2 O a R28E EXHIBIT A PETITION CPSS- 2011 -2 GOLDEN GATE URBAN COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT AND GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT 2 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA s 00 F �n W V N S H r K N vi w w wjNo z 7 N < N n m w N 6) oo 2 Rf �z w� < <o F I U W N d d N �o< n 'M 15 8£ S 3ELL T. m O o 2 N O I ajU © w 0 J O 0 �O u- O O O Lq O O �0 D c V) U O J a wL DO O ND a 0 (n O w J o�-Z Z � 0 c z L 1U a �L) w I- �2V) LLJ T—n 0 oom Z J -j m -, Oa'w t 3 3 u� 11 LU Y N F N 0 N' 12 co) ca IL �v M M n OJ N N N N N � N � � � N � w I r � � mM m� wm w W N �� Z O N O NZ �Z OZ O I I I 00 ° w w z W w Q Q Q Q CCPC ADOPTION ADVERTISING PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) will hold a public meeting on Thursday, September 20, 2012 at 9:00 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL. The purpose of the hearing is to consider recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) the adoption of a Small Scale Growth Management Plan amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series. The ordinance title is as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 12- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLD- EN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY AMEND- ING THE GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT BY CHANGING THE NAME TO GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL SUBDISTRICT, BY ADDING 2.8 ACRES TO THE EXISTING 6.8 * ACRE INFILL PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD AND GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; BY ADD- ING GROUP HOUSING FOR SENIORS AND REVISING STANDARDS; AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DE- PARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVID- ING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PL20110000769 /CPSS- 2012 -2, A Petition requesting a Small Scale Amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series by amending the "Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict ", to add a 2.8 ± acre parcel of land; add Group Housing for Seniors, including Independent Living Units, Assisted Living Facilities, Congregate Care Facilities, Continuing Care Retirement Communities, Skilled Nursing Facilities and similar uses, not to exceed a maximum F.A.R. of 0.45; retain medical office use, not to exceed a maximum of 5,000 square feet; revise setback and buffering standards; remove requirement for an outdoor patio; and revise the Subdistrict name to "Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict ". The subject property is located in the northwest quadrant of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard, in Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] - R 3 3 _ `^ crsso++a � � R x All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Department, Comprehen- sive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, Fourth floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Suite 401 Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Com- prehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thursday, September 20, 2012, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Mark P. Strain, Chairman Naples, FL No. 240192944 A g-!st 31 2012 PROJECT PL20110000769 CPSS=201 1 =2 COPY GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL AND, INSTITUTIONAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SECTION 29 TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH RANGE 26 EAST PREPARED FOR: Joseph A. Rosin 1249 Waggle Way Naples, FL 34110 D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 And Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 April 2011 Revised August 10, 2011 Revised August 2012 Revision 2 Explanation /Justification for Proposed Amendment CP- 2011 -1 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict The amendment pertains to properties located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard, and proposes to modify the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict. The amendment will add approximately 2.8 +/- acres to the Subdistrict, eliminate the commercial office uses and add senior housing including Independent Living Units, Assisted Living units, Continuing Care Retirement Communities, Skilled Nursing and similar uses as permitted uses. A majority of the site is zoned as the Colonnades PUD, which allows a maximum of 27,000 square feet of medical office use. The 2.8 acre parcel which is being added to the Subdistrict is zoned E, Estates and is developed with an occupied single - family dwelling. Although the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan prohibits new conditional uses on Golden Gate Parkway, we believe that the redesignation of the property as part of the Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict will allow for the unified development of the proposed group housing uses, resulting in an overall lessening of intensity of development within the Subdistrict. The 2.8 acre Estates zoned parcel will be rezoned and incorporated into a PUD encompassing all of the property within the Subdistrict. The property is unique in that it is the only Estates zoned property adjacent to commercially zoned property on Golden Gate Parkway. The Estates zoned parcel is important to the overall plan for the group housing uses. These uses require specific design standards which tend to orient the buildings in linear dimensions. The addition of the parcel also permits the project to retain a single access point on Golden Gate Boulevard at a location further west from the Santa Barbara Boulevard intersection which will benefit traffic flow on Golden Gate Parkway. The parcel will also function to provide an appropriate buffer and transition to properties located west of the Subdistrict boundary. The applicant has also provided a market study, which discusses the current and future demand for these types of group housing uses in central Collier County and the Golden Gate area. The study also highlights the central location and proximity of this property to the target demographic, but also to area hospitals and major transportation routes available to serve the proposed group housing uses. APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER DATE RECEIVED PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Comprehensive Planning Department, Suite 400, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239 -252- 2400 (Fax 239 - 252 - 2946). The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97 -431 as amended by Resolution 98 -18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239 - 252 -2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Name of Applicant Joseph A Rosin Company Naples Venture II, LLC and Naples Venture III, LLC Mailing Address 4951 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 11 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 847.804.7066 Fax Number B. Name of Agent* Wayne Arnold • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company /Firm Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. Mailing Address 3800 Via Del Rey City Bonita Springs State FL Zip Code 34134 Phone Number 239.947.1144 Fax Number 239.947.0375 Email Address warnold(d-)gradyminor.com Company /Firm Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq, Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A. Mailing Address 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239.435.3535 Fax Number 239.435.1218 Email Address ryovanovich(c)-cyklawfirm.com C1. Name of Owner(s) of Record Naples Venture II, LLC Mailing Address 555 Skokie Blvd Suite 350 City Northbrook State IL Zip Code 60062 -2854 C2.Name of Owner(s) of Record Marvin E. Smith Mailing Address 5715 Golden Gate Parkway City Naples State FL Zip Code 34116 -7460 D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. EXHIBIT LD JRGN PA Page 1 of 5 11. DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST INFORMATION: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Folio Number 38168800004 Marvin E. Smith 5715 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34116 -7460 100% B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each, and provide one copy of the Articles of Incorporation, or other documentation, to verify the signer of this petition has the authority to do so. Name and Address, and Office Percentage of Stock C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and /or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Folio Number 38170000009 100% Naples Venture II, LLC 4951 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 11 Naples, FL 34103 Joseph A. Rosin, Manager Paul Zampell, Manager E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contact purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners, and provide one copy of the executed contract. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Naples Venture III, LLC 100% 4951 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 11 Naples FL 34103 Joseph A. Rosin, Manager Paul Zampell, Manager F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership or trust. Name and Address JRGNWA Page 2 of 5 G. Date subject property acquired ( 01/1989, 10/2007) leased ( ): _Terms of lease_ yrs /mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: September 2008 and date option terminates: N/A , or anticipated closing: N/A H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRACT 112, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO. 30 ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7 PAGE 58 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA AND THE EAST 180 FEET OF TRACT 98, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO. 30 ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7 PAGE 58 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA B. GENERAL LOCATION Subject property is located on the northwest quadrant of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard. C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Golden Gate D. TAZ 193 E. SIZE IN ACRES 9.6± F. ZONING Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD (Ord. 04 -35), E (Estates) G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN Estates Residential Subdistrict, Urban Residential Subdistrict, ZONING: RMF- 12 -SBCO RMF- 6 -SBCO RMF -3 RMF -6 RMF -12 C -4 PUD AND E H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION (S) Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict and Residential Estates Subdistrict IV. TYPE OF REQUEST A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) OR SUB - ELEMENTS) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Traffic Circulation Sub - Element Aviation Sub - Element Sanitary Sewer Sub - Element Solid Waste Sub - Element Capital Improvement Element Future Land Use Element Immokalee Master Plan Recreation /Open Space Mass Transit Sub - Element Potable Water Sub - Element NGWAR Sub - Element Drainage Sub - Element CCME Element ✓ Golden Gate Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE(S) 40 - 42 OF THE Future Land Use ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Stpike thrGugh to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: Please see Exhibit IV-13 C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM Residential Estates Subdistrict and Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict TO Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map and Golden Gate Urban Commercial Infill Subdistrict and Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map E. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A JRGMPA Page 3 of 5 V. REQUIRED INFORMATION NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN 1" = 400'. At least one copy reduced to 8%z x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and /or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit V.A.1 Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI'S, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Exhibit V.A.2 Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exhibit V.A.2 Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Exhibits V.131 & V.132 Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibit V.C. Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT- FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. Exhibit V.C. Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and /or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.) Identify historic and /or archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J- 11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 1. INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)(5),F.A.C.) If so, identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? (Reference W- 11.006(1)(a)7.1b, F.A.C.) Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County -wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. Y- Exhibit V.D.4 Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and /or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? JRGMPA Page 4 of 5 (Reference Rule 9J- 5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J- 11.007, F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES Provide the existing adopted Level of Service Standard (LOS, and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Exhibit V.E Potable Water Exhibit V.E Sanitary Sewer Exhibit V.E.1c Arterial & Collector Roads: Name of specific road and LOS Golden Gate Parkway Santa Barbara Boulevard Exhibit V.E Drainage Exhibit V.E Solid Waste Exhibit V.E Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and /or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. Exhibit V.E.2Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools, and emergency medical services.) 3. Exhibit V.E Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: Exhibit V.F Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N/A Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable. N/A Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable. N/A High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION X $16,700.00 non - refundable filing fee, made payable to the Board of County Commissioners, due at time of submittal. $9,000.00 non - refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment, made payable to the Board of County Commissioners, due at time of submittal. X Plus Legal Advertisement Costs (Your portion determined by number of petitions and divided accordingly. Exhibit V.G. Proof of ownership (Copy of deed). Exhibit V.G. Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (see attached form). X 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments, including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1" =400' or at a scale as determined during the pre - application meeting. JRGMPA Page 5 of 5 COPY EXHIBIT I.D. PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS Revision 2 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Exhibit I.D. Professional Consultants Planning /Project Management: Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. D. Wayne Arnold, AICP 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 (239) 947 -1144 (239) 947 -0375 fax warnold @gradyminor.com Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A. Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 (239) 435 -3535 (239) 435 -1218 fax ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com Transportation: Omega Consulting Group Reed Jarvi 11338 Bonita Beach Road SE. Suite 103 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 (239) 470 -4156 (239) 948 -6689 fax rjarvil 234@comcast.net Environmental: Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Rae Ann Boylan 11000 Metro Parkway, Suite #4 Fort Myers, FL 33966 (239) 418 -0671 (239) 418 -0672 fax raeann @boylanenv.com EXHIBIT I.D. - Page 1 of 6 D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Principal, Director of'Planning Education Master of Urban Planning, University of Kansas, Lawrence Bachelor of Science, Urban and Regional Planning /Geography, Missouri State University Professional Registrations/ Affiliations • American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) • American Planning Association (APA) • Urban Land Institute, S.W. Florida Chapter, Board of Directors 1996 • Collier County Rural Fringe Committee, Chairman, 1999 • Collier County Streetscape Ad hoc Committee, 1999 • Leadership Collier, Class of 2000 • Bonita Springs Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs Committee • Collier Building Industry Association, Board of Directors • Collier County Jr. Deputy League, Inc., Board of Directors 0 GradyMinor Mr. Arnold is a Principal and co -owner of the firm and serves as the Secretary/Treasurer and Director of Planning. As Director of Planning, Mr.. Arnold is responsible for and oversees services related to plan amendments, property rezonings, expert witness testimony, ROW Acquisition, public participation facilitation, and project management. Mr. Arnold previously served as the Planning Services Director at Collier County, where he oversaw the County's zoning, comprehensive planning, engineering, platting and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) functions. Mr. Arnold also has prior Florida planning experience with Palm Beach County Government and the South Florida Water Management District. Mr. Arnold has been accepted as an expert in land planning matters in local and state proceedings. Relevant Projects • Collier County Growth Management Plan • Marco Island Master Plan • Immokalee Area Master Plan • Collier County Land Development Code • Logan Boulevard Right -of -Way Acquisition Planning Analysis • U.S. 41 Right -of -Way Expansion Planning Analysis • Copeland Zoning Overlay • Collier County Government Center Development of Regional Impact (DRI) • Winding Cypress DRI • Pine Ridge /Goodlette Road Commercial Infill District • Lely Lakes PUD Rezoning • Henderson Creek Planned Development/Growth Management Plan Amendment • Orangetree (Settlement Area) Growth Management Plan Amendment • Mercato Mixed Use Planned Development • North Point DRI/IV1PD • Vomado RPUD • Orange Blossom Ranch MPD • Palermo Cove RPD Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Civil Engineers • Surveyors 9 Land Planners • Landscape Architects EXHIBIT I.D. - Page 2 of 6 Richard D. Yovanovich Rich Yovanovich is one of the firm's shareholders. He moved to Naples in 1990 and was an Assistant County Attorney for Collier County from 1990 -1994. As an Assistant County Attorney he focused on land development and construction matters. Since entering private practice in 1994, Mr. Yovanovich has represented property owners through the entitlement process before local and state agencies. His representation includes project ranging from small residential and commercial projects to large developments of regional impact. Professional Activities/ Associations The Florida Bar Collier County Bar Association Civic/ Charitable Activities/ Associations Member, Furman University Trustees Council, 2007 - Chairman, Leadership Collier Foundation Alumni Assoc. Member, Board of Directors, Holocaust Museum 2007 — Member, Leadership Collier, Class of 2000 Member, Board of Directors, CBIA (Director 2004 -2008, Vice President 2006 -2007) Member, Board of Director, Immokalee Friendship House Member, Board of Director, Avow Hospice 2011 - Member, Florida Trend Legal Elite Elder, Vanderbilt Presbyterian Church Bar & Court Admission Florida, 1988 U.S District Court, Middle District of Florida U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit Education University of South Carolina J.D., 1987 J. Ed., 1986 Furman University B.A., cum laude, 1983 EXHIBIT I.D. - Page 3 of 6 Reed K. Jarvi Principal Mr. Jarvi has over 26 years of project management and infra- structure design and permitting for a broad range of complex residential, commercial, and institutional projects in Southwest Florida. He has special emphasis, training and experience in transportation engineering, transportation planning and traffic engineering. Representative Projects: Saba[ Bay PUD, Collier County, FL Traffic Impact Statement and access analysis for a development consisting of 1,999 resi- dential du's, 176,000 sf of retail land uses and 48,000 sf of office land uses. Airport Plaza at Regional Southwest Airport, Lee County, FL Traffic and Access studies for mixed use shopping/gas/ convenience center on the entrance road to the airport. Respon- sibilities Included Traffic Impact Statement and Access study. Mercato Shopping Center Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis, Collier County, Bonita Springs, FL Analysis of Traffic Signal Warrants for the project's access on Vanderbilt Beach Road. US 41/SR 951 Developers Consortium, Collier County, FL Led group of 10 -12 separate developers (some 1,500 du's and over 600,000 sf of commercial) to address traffic mitigation of projects on US 41 and the US 41 /SR 951 intersection. Inter- acted with FDOT and County staff to generate a solution that was acceptable. . Mirasol PUD, Collier County, FL Traffic and Access studies for 799 du residential development. Responsibilities included Traffic Impact Statement and Access studies. These involved analysis of over 10 intersections, including timing plans and intersection geometry, existing and proposed. SR 951,/lsle of Capri Boulevard Traffic Signal, Collier County, FL Traffic Signal Design for adding a fourth leg to an existing three leg intersection Qmega Consulting Group EDUCATION: Bachelor of Science in Engineering United States Naval Academy R EGISTRAT10NS: Professional Engineer Florida #40156 AFFILIATIONS: Institute of Transportation Engineers Florida Section ITE Southwest Florida ITE BOARDS AND COMMITTEES: Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee Collier County Land Development Regulation Sub - Committee Former Chairman of the Collier County MPO CAC Former Chairman of the Collier County MPO Transit Advisory Committee SPECIAL RECOGNITION: US Naval Reserve, Retired 1998 — Commander EXHIBIT I.D. - Page 4 of 6 CURRENT RESPONSIBILITIES Ms. Schlachta is responsible for project management, and assisting in the management and technical supervision of environmental staff. The Clientele Ms. Schlachta works with include the private and public sectors. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Since 1998, Ms. Schlachta has managed projects, conducted fieldwork, and produced reports and applications for environmental land use planning, permitting and development. These projects include due diligence assessments for land acquisition purposes, assistance with environmental land planning, coordination on permitting and mitigation design for wetlands and wildlife, and compliance monitoring of projects during and after construction. PROTECT EXPERIENCE • Artesa MPUD: Corps and SFWMD Permitting, FWS/FWC coordination on Florida Panther impacts, Gopher Tortoise relocation and wetland mitigation design in Collier County • Bonita 75 CPD: Commercial Land Use Permitting in the City of Bonita Springs • Camp Keais and Shaggy Strand: Wetland Monitoring for Collier Enterprises in Collier County • Coconut Point/Simon Suncoast Mall: Environmental Permit Compliance and Monitoring o Lee County Halfway Creek Water Quality Improvements: DEP and Corps Permitting for a Restoration Plan in Lee County • Imperial Marsh: Permit Compliance and Monitoring for Lee County Mitigation Site in Lee County • Pine Ridge Center: Corps and SFWMD Permitting, coordination on RCW habitat, Monitoring and Compliance in Collier County • S.R. 31 Improvements: Caracara Survey and Monitoring for FDOT project in Charlotte County. • SR 78 & SR 29 Realignment: SEIR and Environmental Permitting for FDOT in Hendry • Tamiami Crossing CPD: Land Use Permitting and Environmental Permitting in Collier County • Wulfert Point Estates: SFWMD Permitting and Wildlife Coordination on Gopher Tortoise and Bald Eagle on Sanibel. Wetland & Wildlife Surveys, Environ ental Permitting, Impact Assessment Kimberly Schlachta, CSE Senior Environmental Scientist Experience: o 12+ years Education; o Auburn University, BS 1997 Professional Affiliations: • Florida Association of Environmental Professionals • National Association of Environmental Professionals • Certified Senior Ecologist - Ecological Society of America • Soils and Water Conservation Society • Association of Southeastern Biologists Certification: o FWC — Permit GTA -09 -00021 Gopher Tortoise Authorized Agent Areas of Expertise: • Vegetation and Habitat Mapping utilizing ACAD, GPS • Corps and State Wetland Delineation • Impact Assessment • Wildlife Surveys and Relocations • Gopher Tortoise Surveys, Bucket Trapping, Excavation & Relocation • Wildlife Habitat Management Planning and Permitting • Habitat Restoration and Mitigation Design • Environmental Land Use Permitting and Rezoning • Local, State and Federal Environmental Permitting • Post Permit Compliance and Monitoring • Planning and Management of Gopher Tortoise Relocation Sites Contact Information: Boylan Environmental Consultants 11000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4 Fort Myers, Florida 33966 Telephone: (239) 418 -0671 Fax: (239) 418 -0672 Email: kims a,boylanenv.com Web: www.boylanenv.com EXHIBIT I.D. - Page 5 of 6 CURRENT RESPONSIBILITIES Wetland & Wildlife Surveys, Environ ental Permitting, Impact Assessment As president of Boylan Environmental Consultants, Rae Ann Boylan, CSE Inc., Ms. Boylan is responsible for all management President facets of the firm and supervision of all professional and technical staff. The Clientele Ms. Boylan works with include the private and public sectors. Experience: o 28f Years RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Since 1989, Ms. Boylan has managed many Education: environmental projects. These projects include due o Stetson University, BS 1979 diligence assessments for land acquisition purposes, o University of Florida, MS 1982 assistance with environmental land planning, coordination on pennitting for wetlands and wildlife Professional Affiliations: and compliance monitoring of projects after o National Association of construction. Environmental Professionals o Ecological Society of America PROJECT EXPERIENCE o Society of Wetland Scientists • North Fort Myers Restoration: Design, permitting and construction coordination for a hydrological Certifications: and environmental restoration project in Lee o Ecological Society of America County. Certified Senior Ecologist • Madden Research: Wetland and wildlife permitting for an office development at SWFIA in Lee Areas of Expertise: County. o Ecological Sciences • Deer Fence Grove and Farm: Impact assessment o Impact Assessment for agricultural permitting in Collier and Hendry o Restoration and Mitigation Counties. Design o Panther Mine Expansion - Impact assessment and o Wildlife Habitat Management permitting for a inine expansion in Charlotte Planning and Permitting County. o Enviromnental Land Use • Popash Creek Restoration: Design and permitting Permitting for a hydrological restoration project in Lee o Local, State and Federal County. Permitting • Chapel Creek: Bald eagle, gopher tortoise and o Post Permit Compliance and wetland permitting for a mixed use development in Monitoring Lee County • A tesa: Coordination on impacts to Florida panther and gopher tortoise habitat; wetland mitigation Contact Information: design for a commercial mixed use development in Boylan Environmental Consultants Collier County 11000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4 • South Lee County Watershed Study: Fort Myers, Florida 33966 Enviromnental Assessment in Lee and Collier Telephone: (239) 418 -0671 Counties. Fax: (239) 418 -0672 • DeSoto 480: Wetland impact and mitigation design Email: raeann@boylanenv.com for a commercial mixed use golf course community Web: www.boylanenv.com with gopher tortoise and scrub jay permitting in DeSoto County. EXHIBIT I.D. - Page 6 of 6 COPY EXHIBIT II.B. ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION Revision 2 2011 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ANNUAL REPORT FILED Jan 11, 2011 DOCUMENT# L07000050266 Secretary of State Entity Name: NAPLES VENTURE II, LLC Current Principal Place of Business: New Principal Place of Business: 4951 TAMIAMI TRAIL N. SUITE 11 NAPLES, FL 34103 Current Mailing Address: 4951 TAMIAMI TRAIL N. SUITE 11 NAPLES, FL 34103 FEI Number: FEI Number Applied For ( ) Name and Address of Current Registered Agent: BOURGEAU, DAVID C ESQ. 2375 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH SUITE 308 NAPLES, FL 34103 US New Mailing Address: FEI Number Not Applicable (X) Certificate of Status Desired ( ) Name and Address of New Registered Agent: The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date MANAGING MEMBERS /MANAGERS: Title: MGR Name: ROSIN, JOSEPH A adress: 1249 WAGGLE WAY -St-zip: NAPLES, FL 34108 Title: MGR Name: ZAMPELL, PAUL Address: 4951 TAMIAMI TRAIL #100 City -St -Zip: NAPLES, FL 34103 I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under oath; that I am a managing member or manager of the limited liability company or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 608, Florida Statues. - 'GNATURE: JOSEPH A. ROSIN MGR 01/11/2011 Electronic Signature of Signing Managing Member, Manager, or Authorized Representative / Date EXHIBIT II.B. - Page 1 of 2 2011 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ANNUAL REPORT DOCUMENT# L08000090977 Entity Name: NAPLES VENTURE III, LLC Current Principal Place of Business: 555 SKOKIE BLVD. SUITE 350 NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 US Current Mailing Address: 555 SKOKIE BLVD. SUITE 350 NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 US FEI Number: FEI Number Applied For( ) Name and Address of Current Registered Agent: BOURGEAU, DAVID 2375 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH SUITE 308 NAPLES, FL 34103 US FILED Jan 04, 2011 Secretary of State New Principal Place of Business: New Mailing Address: FEI Number Not Applicable (X) Certificate of Status Desired ( ) Name and Address of New Registered Agent: The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida. SIGNATURE Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date MANAGING MEMBERS /MANAGERS: Title: MGRM Name: ROSIN, JOSEPH A Address: 555 SKOKIE BLVD SUITE 350 City -St -Zip: NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 US I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under oath; that I am a managing member or manager of the limited liability company or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 608, Florida Statues. SIGNATURE: JOSEPH A. ROSIN MGRM 01/04/2011 Electronic Signature of Signing Managing Member, Manager, or Authorized Representative / Date EXHIBIT II.B. - Page 2 of 2 COPY EXHIBIT 111.A.. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Revision 2 EXHIBIT III.A LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRACT 112, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO. 30 ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 58, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND THE EAST 180 FEET OF TRACT 98, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO. 30 ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 58, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONTAINING 9.6 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Page 1 of 1 COPY EXHIBIT IV.B. PROPOSED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TEXT Revision 2 Exhibit IV.B Amended Language of the GOLDEN GATE MASTER PLAN (Note: Single underline text is added, as proposed by petitioner; double underline text is added, as proposed by staff; double text is deleted, as proposed by staff). 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION B. Estates — Commercial District 5. Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict [revised text, page 46] This Subdistrict consists of two infill areas. The two areas are located at the northwest corner of Collier Boulevard and Green Boulevard and at the northwest corner of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway. Due to the existing zoning and land use pattern in proximity to the Estates Commercial and Institutional In -fill Subdistrict (see Golden Gate Urban Commercial Infill Subdistrict and Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Map) and the need to ensure adequate development standards to buffer adjacent land uses, commercial uses shall be permitted under the following criteria: a) Commercial uses shall be limited to: • Low intensity commercial uses that are compatible with both residential and intermediate commercial uses, in order to provide for small scale shopping and personal needs, and • Intermediate commercial to provide for a wider variety of goods and services in areas that have a higher degree of automobile traffic. These uses shall be similar to C -1, C -2, or C -3 zoning districts outlined in the Collier County Land Development Code (Ordinance 91- 102), adopted October 30, 1991. b) Rezones shall be encouraged in the form of a Planned Unit Development (there shall be no minimum acreage requirement for PUD rezones except for the requirement that all requests for rezoning must be at least forty thousand (40,000) square feet in area unless the proposed rezone is an extension of an existing zoning district consistent with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan). c) Projects within this Subdistrict shall make provisions for shared parking arrangements with adjoining commercial developments when appropriate. d) Driveways and curb cuts for projects within this Subdistrict shall be consolidated with adjoining commercial developments. e) Access to projects shall not be permitted from Collier Boulevard. f) Any project located within this Subdistrict at the northwest corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard (properties include the East 180 feet of Tract 98* Unit 30 and Tract 112, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates), less and except an easement for Santa Barbara Boulevard right -of -way, shall be subject to the following additional development restrictions: 12. Permitted Lland uses shatl be FeStFiGte „ff� on! limited to Group Housing for seniors g, including Independent Living Units, Assisted Living Units, Continuing Care Retirement Communities, Skilled Nursing Facilities, and similar uses, not to exceed a maximum F.A.R. of 0.45: and medical office use. not to exceed 5.000 square feet 2 -3. All principal structures shall be required to have a minimum setback of one h ndFed 04DO3 fifty (50) feet from the project's northern and southern boundary. 34. The ReFtherR seveRty five (75) feet of the westeFR SiAY (60) peFGeRt Of the site shall IaR dSGape buffeFs , d aR similar uses. Buffers: The following minimum project buffers, as set forth in Section 4.06.02 of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this amendment; shall be provided. West: 25' wide type C. North: 25' wide type C. East: 25' wide type D. South: 25' wide type D. 4 Native vegetation shall be retained within the project buffers on the northern and western protect boundaries, where feasible. Required Ssupplemental plantings wl. shall be native species. The northern buffer adjacent to the southern boundary of Tract 111, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 30, may also be utilized for the native vegetation preservation requirements for the project and shall include a concrete or pre -cast concrete privacy wall at a minimum of & feet in height, which shall be located on the southern boundary of the buffer /preserve. No setback from the buffer /preserve shall be required for this wall. The North 330 feet of Tract 98 Unit 30 GGE shall be limited to native preserve and water management areas, except that a vehicular drive and /or wall may be located within this area. Native vegetation preservation areas may be utilized for water management purposes, when it can be demonstrated that the use for water management will not be harmful to the required native vegetation. as provided for in Policy 6.1.1 fo the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. - -- - - - - - _. 56. All buildings shall have the or metal roofs, or decorative parapet walls above the roofline, and buildings shall be finished in light subdued colors except for decorative trim. 6g. Building heights shall be limited to one (1) -story and a maximum of thirty -five (35) feet. 740. All lighting facilities shall be architecturally designed, and limited to a height of twenty -five (25) feet =, and shielded from neighboring residential land uses. 844. There shall be no ingress or egress on Santa Barbara Boulevard _. —m. TFag-+ i i `' However, this shall not preclude future access to Santa Barbara Boulevard via frontage road or access easement EXHIBIT V.A. LAND USE COPY Revision 2 N I v u d- w U N z O O Z -I; W 0 N v N cv MJVADinos W Q w f 11J z z � w 0 J O C) D1ViMA31N1 v . . . . . . ................. 0� 0 C- z Cf) O 0 0 0 w J Um Q Q o Qf w N cli r R 9 LdO O N O ly- w U) 0 II a `} Cn / o Q00 0 O O 0 w U) C) J w J e o O Q C O U 00 ' V W Q Ow a_ Of Q CO LLI OOH z 0 w Q a- ❑ �p Q 0 Z Yw <01f <ww� Q� <0 w� V2 vMV8 V1NVS U)0 V Q w V) m w Q Q Q m CL cn w O Q N W � �Z J z �V) Q CD z Z 0 >Q I� Li EXHIBIT V.A. - Page 1 of 2 . . . . . . ................. 0� 0 Cf) O 0 0 0 w J Um Q o Qf w N cli r R 9 w O z w 0 II a o Q00 0 O O 0 C) J w J e o O Q C O U 00 ' V W Q Of Q OOH Q� w� U)0 CL a �Z 0 >Q �C) 0 0 Y w 0 w m m _ _ w � w a �= s� Ld Ld W w 0 F rQ' " V/�/l DJ �p U w cn Z — cn w Ld w w n = -� FIR c�N CC J (n (n r = y y Y T 52�zz ¢ W LLJ LL] ED m G = J I� � =n mt V EXHIBIT V.A. - Page 1 of 2 w / Cf) O w J Um Q Qf w w�� I cn Z QU w r w O z w CD o Q00 z z O O 0 C) J e o O C (r 00 m EXHIBIT V.A. - Page 1 of 2 4 41-IL , - O O N O c ' p II$g o y O IN L F- I vr N e` W qW e1 :OLLLLZ I� O, UJ �¢ _ ioJN¢LL+ �° ,q ZN .,. 2 Z U Ja W Q Y O W qW Ro o< OW I k3 mw i z�LL~ i N LLp ; ..y ww N� a� Now NZ i- F Q -4 W z W zz yWi• �i� Z K N LL O F1 w a 3 w w _ N Q Q LU ..� ,OW ,. �z ., e p .. N N W (4 Z d' .ayav • Q 7) ..ZN I p = I,�N f c i' .� NNW LT7 > W .. I N I Z jN� _V)z j� IJ 1 Z. LL ❑ 2 ':i ` J •iit +j ' - ..-10 fi J 2 W N �' •. �a 1z��-- s!_� `� Q .6 1' > {I Z�'' 4 X w O l °p W ~ O VD * I g g .s owl- - - at NNmc l CLZZ C _ G � ✓� N [ o Qp- © � S C t C - � 2 a. J a Q_a r N Q W 2 W W c U �p p LL K 0' p Q Q' O - u„�► Q U IY = Z fe F..W WrpW Z Q m W z QFW-Nm, J W N N J p LU W p NC7 QIN V F W FD-' LL.a� W Q ZLLI WN W ZW FOQ. �p� W {Q, a OW -JaQa J WfJ OQJ J W JpJ_F - U 5 cn OZOI =N6 W N< W QQ U Q N< U Q (7 ? W> C }} H LL p O F y V F-' FW- LL a ZZZ 4 t Z W W (7 3 N U. IL N N O � ,_.� I.Wa z W a wz OOw nSw Wz �h n. c o r, z � z z X X X Q F-Z LU F-Z Ill Hz Il! Z LLl N W W W Q ZN7 NNp WN 7 3N7 EXHIBIT V.A. - Page 2 of 2 0 0 m K COPY Revision 2 A:taP@D - YE9x11M1. 1191 J LEGEND DCf 14 2= U112AN DESIGNATION ESTATES DESIGNATION AGISORTDIUIlIIUNAL DEZIGU -M" E- Z NAt•cT � R-w s � ku assci 0 O D uear rx axa5n[r ❑ Apcb�'x I ".ry Ta.+R DYEIILAY2 Alm va 9P 'Y Aczu'�A a.Tatm.'r �A•. Am Y scr SGEeuL "AT ES F tt'.uuW.M [4R CurRe�[ zACn�:f � rYd1oH]C9 rDiR AYS�'x:' � xu � T � UYtl6AL p1r10.f F .us�vr � r•m K A -c.[Ir ml'A1 6mT:�l ®��x � � `, 0 � ➢[H, ..1G M � C < n � awu. o+o�Y ass'�n cor4KW w:T ❑❑ �� ❑ xvea�u�at Mr rD+¢t L2+:rie1 AYE`+pEp - MAY 9, tbW n z ays. mucr.�a ran >s.� ^rs,tcr ❑'°" •x +s.:.�a � wm.->n DA�45 8OULEVARD ..rte.. eaacrAO amanN a,m-m�r BEACH ROAD Subdistrict{ c ❑ ury orrKl en�naau. m:�W%M Cxt � MYGYtt 1tt�Y9 HC U:O UY O[SY'r.Td K5TJOi AcP'al R �l G9cq 4rt AfA vaR -s9 A:taP@D - YE9x11M1. 1191 J - A,XxtlEO - WT 19, 1991 DCf 14 2= CA E- Z E 0 O D IMMOKALEE ROAD F G.G- PKWY. r A1lrHGm - AP94 14 191! 0 A C < n .Dow - fiMUMY F.1. 1991 AYE`+pEp - MAY 9, tbW n z VANDERBILT _ DA�45 8OULEVARD Institutional Infill BEACH ROAD Subdistrict{ c m 3 A4E1�:FD - JA.YOMY 21, 20]1 MD. N0. 257 -19 m a V GOLDEN GATE I n PINE RIDGE RD. .0] WRITE BLVD. A:taP@D - YE9x11M1. 1191 rn - A,XxtlEO - WT 19, 1991 DCf 14 2= E- Z Ax!xtta - 1JlY M ]GS oTa Na 2D1G -a AYEi6tD - h90. 12 t911 ArcYlRD - ,W,Y iD ]OID DR1 MD. 20tD -]2 F G.G- PKWY. AuRY.h.D - 0".T`9[R 2). 1991 A1lrHGm - AP94 14 191! < O Project Location E. C < n .Dow - fiMUMY F.1. 1991 AYE`+pEp - MAY 9, tbW Golden Gate Estates z Commercial and DA�45 8OULEVARD Institutional Infill sR.84 Subdistrict{ 9.6 +/- Acres A:taP@D - YE9x11M1. 1191 hY � -x� [1rLA9Ol 4 2(pT - A,XxtlEO - WT 19, 1991 DCf 14 2= wCUm - .tilt ri, 191] Ax!xtta - 1JlY M ]GS oTa Na 2D1G -a AYEi6tD - h90. 12 t911 ArcYlRD - ,W,Y iD ]OID DR1 MD. 20tD -]2 N4TLCi - YA9o1 I�. 19]5 AuRY.h.D - 0".T`9[R 2). 1991 A1lrHGm - AP94 14 191! .fu(r.D(;p - SV�X1f 0. 1996 .Dow - fiMUMY F.1. 1991 AYE`+pEp - MAY 9, tbW AYD6ED - YARC Ix 251 AW1vV.# YAr t9. 2DC9 Ayt— .. 5[TtpO[R M 29G fAO, x1')Nnl -11 W9. NQ 10W -71 --p,KD - JHI — Si MD am.rro.aws -1 A4E1�:FD - JA.YOMY 21, 20]1 MD. N0. 257 -19 GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP IMMOKALEE ROAD OIL WELL ROAD RANDALL I BOULEVARD C < O Exhibit V.131 I Existing Future Land Use Map Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict 6.8 +1- Acres I Residential Estates Subdistrict 2.8 +1- Acres I EXHIBIT V.B. - Page 1 of 2 Exhibit V.B2 GOLDEN GATE URBAN COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT AND GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA N 00 U W 0 co o I - o zw J Q O g�T W � pNaR U W N¢zd J ° �Z � \ W p p m p u>O M W R U ZN 0� w O N N Z O W o 0 0 0 U > Ef) Z Z Z rZ wo w << O W U W Z W ¢ a a 0 O a T. F-1 K 0- �U i m N p ZOM ZZ-.- W ~W 0 ? w w F- o N U a=bA31n0e Ntl00 3 a 1 °m C �7 a Ovii Oij a nn w N 0 tl tl 3 ; Z 0 C� 0 m � J TV a PROJECT LOCATION Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict =6.8 +/ -Acres 9.61 ACRES - GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL Residential Estates Subdistrict = 2.8 +1- Acres AND INSTITUTIONAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT ? COPY EXHIBIT V.C. ENVIRONMENTAL Revision 2 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.C.1, Vegetation Discussion The subject parcel was inspected and a vegetation map prepared to reflect existing site conditions. The mapping is according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) and is attached. The following is a description of the communities found: 110 Residential (1.13+ acres) These residential areas are occupied by single- family home sites and account for 1.13+ acres of the property. Landscape planting and native Florida Slash Pines (Pinus elliottii) are present in these areas. Soils have been disturbed or filled, and replanted or seeded with Bahia (Paspalum notatum), St. Augustine (Stenotaphrum secundatum) and other lawn grasses. Other vegetation noted includes Mexican clover (Richardia grandiflor), beggar weed (Desmodium trnuifolium), and Spanish needles (Bidens alba). 411E1 Pine Flatwoods (1 -24 %% Exotics) (3.50± acres) This upland habitat type occupies 3.5f acres of the property. Slash pine (Pinus elliottii) dominates the canopy with occasional Earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), and cypress (Taxodium distichum) in the sub canopy. Brazilian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), Myrsine (Myrsine cubana), and cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) are found in the mid- story). Scattered saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), grapevine (Vitus rotundoifolia) and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) dominate the groundcover in this community. Other vegetation observed includes beauty berry (Callicarpa americana), winged sumac (Rhus copallinum), carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides), swordfern (Nephrolepis exaltata), Catbriaer (Smilax spp.), Caesar weed (Urena lobata), brackenfem (Pteridium aguilinum), and Indian flcus (Ficus microcarpa). Vegetation is typical of upland communities and no hydrology or hydrologic indicators were present. 411E3 Pine Flatwoods (50 -74% Exotics) (1.25± acres) This upland habitat type occupies 1.25± acres of the property. Slash pine (Pinus elliottii) dominates the canopy with occasional Earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), and cypress (Taxodium distichum) in the sub canopy. Brazilian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), Myrsine (Myrsine cubana), and cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) are found in the mid - story). Scattered saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), grapevine (Vitus rotundoifolia) and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) dominate the groundcover in this community. Other vegetation observed includes beauty berry (Callicarpa americana), winged sumac (Rhus copallinum), carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides), swordfern (Nephrolepis exaltata), Catbriaer (Smilax spp.), Caesar weed (Urena lobata), brackenfem (Pteridium EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 1 of 22 aquilinum), and Indian ficus (Ficus microcarpa). Vegetation is typical of upland communities and no hydrology or hydrologic indicators were present. 411E4 Pine Flatwoods ( >75% Exotics) (0.43± acres) This upland habitat type occupies 0.43± acres of the property. The community is dominated by Brazilian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) with occasional Slash pine (Pinus elliottii) in the canopy. 621DE3 Drained Cypress (50 -74% Exotics) (0.15± acres) Cypress are common in the canopy of this small community. Midstory was dominated by Brazilian Pepper. Other vegetation consisted of a mix of Dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), Myrsine ( Myrsine cubana), and beauty berry (Callicarpa americana). The groundcover included grapevine (Vitus rotundoifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Catbrier (Smilax spp.), Caesar weed (Urena lobata), swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum), and oyster plant (Tradescantia spothacea). Although some vegetation is associated with wetlands communities, the lack of hydrology has resulted in the successional species that are more common in upland hammocks and disturbed sites. No hydrologic indicators were observed in this area. 740 Disturbed Areas (0.53± acres) This area includes the disturbed areas adjacent to the roads from the road construction that included the sodden swales and utility lines. 814 Road (2.65± acres) This area includes the existing paved areas for Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara. EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 2 of 22 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Section 29; Township 49 South; Range 26 East Collier County, Florida Protected Species Survey Exhibit V.C.2 April 20, 2011 Project No. 990033 11000 Metro Parkway Suite 4 Fort Myers, Florida 33966 (239) 418 -0671 phone / (239) 418 -0672 fax EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 3 of 22 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Protected Species Survey INTRODUCTION An environmental scientist from Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc conducted a field investigation on the 9.64± acre property on April 12, 2011. The site is located in portions of Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. Specifically, it is situated at the northwest corner of the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard in Naples. Please see the attached Project Location Map Exhibit A. The purpose of the field investigation was to identify and document the presence of any listed species and any potential listed (endangered, threatened, etc.) species inhabiting the site that are regulated by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). METHODOLOGY The survey method consisted of overlapping belt transects performed for all FLUCFCS communities onsite in compliance with the Collier County Land Development Code 10.02.02.A.4.g.i. This survey is comprised of a several step process. First, vegetation communities or land -uses on the study area are delineated using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS). Please see the attached FLUCFCS Map Exhibit B and FLUCFCS Map with Aerial Exhibit C. Next, the FLUCFCS codes are cross - referenced with the Protected Species List. This protected species list names the species which have a probability of occurring in any particular FLUCFCS community. An intensive pedestrian survey is conducted using parallel belt transects that are approximately 10 -40 feet apart, depending upon both the thickness of vegetation and visibility, as a means of searching for plants and animals. In addition, periodic "stop- look - listen" and quiet stalking methods are conducted for animals. Signs or sightings of these species are then recorded and are marked in the field with flagging tape. The table at end of the report lists the FLUCFCS communities found on the parcel and the corresponding species which have a probability of occurring in them. Transects were walked approximately as shown on the attached Protected Species Survey Map Exhibit D and Protected Species Survey Map with Aerial Exhibit E. Specific attention was placed on locating any gopher tortoise burrows, potential fox squirrel nests, locating RCW cavity trees, and eagle's nests within the forested portions of the property. TABLE 1: SURVEY DATE AND WEATHER CONDITIONS Survey Survey' Wcatiie�Cop�ditioII Date Time _ _ _... 11:30am- Partly cloudy with light winds and temperatures in the mid to 4 -12 -2011 2:30prrt upper $0s Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 4 of 22 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Protected Species Survey EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Site Details — The boundary is approximate and based upon GIS and assumed to be 8.4f acres. In general, the property is composed of pine flatwoods with exotics and a residential site. The site is bordered to the east and south by major roads, and residential to the north and west. Soil Type - The soils on the property have been mapped by the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS, formerly the Soil Conservation Service). Please see the attached NRCS Soils Map Exhibit F. These mappings are general in nature, but can provide a certain level of information about the site as to the possible extent of wetland area. According to these mappings, the parcel is underlain by Pineda fine sand and Hilolo Limestone substratum, Jupiter and Margate Soils. All are considered as hydric soils. Vegetation Communities — Each community was mapped in the field according to the system in use by the agencies, the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System ( FLUCFCS). Listed below are the vegetation communities or land -uses identified on the site. The following descriptions correspond to the mappings on the attached FLUCFCS map. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation 1999) for definitions. FLUCFCS CODES/DESCRIPTION 110 Residential (1.131 acres) These residential areas are occupied by single - family home sites and account for 1.131 acres of the property. Landscape planting and native Florida Slash Pines (Pinus elliottii) are present in these areas. Soils have been disturbed or filled, and replanted or seeded with Bahia (Paspalum notatum), St. Augustine (Stenotaphrum secundatum) and other lawn grasses. Other vegetation noted includes Mexican clover (Richardia grandiflor), beggar weed (Desmodium trnuifolium), and Spanish needles (Bidens alba). 411E1 Pine Flatwoods (1 -24 %% Exotics) (3.50t.acres) This upland habitat type occupies 3.51 acres of the property. Slash pine (Pinus elliottii) dominates the canopy with occasional Earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), and cypress (Taxodium distichum) in the sub canopy. Brazilian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), Myrsine ( Myrsine cubana), and cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) are found in the mid - story). Scattered saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), grapevine (Vitus rotundoifolia) and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) dominate the groundcover in this community. Other vegetation observed includes beauty berry (Callicarpa americana), winged sumac (Rhus copallinum), carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides), swordfern (Nephrolepis exaltata), Catbriaer (Smilax spp.), Caesar weed (Urena lobata), brackenfern (Pteridium aquilinum), and Indian ficus (Ficus microcarpa). Vegetation is typical of upland communities and no hydrology or hydrologic indicators were present. 411E3 Pine Flatwoods (50 -74% Exotics) (1.251 acres) This upland habitat type occupies 1.251 acres of the property. Slash pine (Pinus elliottii) dominates the canopy with occasional Earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), and cypress (Taxodium distichum) in the sub canopy. Brazilian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 5 of 22 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Protected Species Survey Myrsine (Myrsine cubana), and cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) are found in the mid - story). Scattered saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), grapevine (Vitus rotundoifolia) and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) dominate the groundcover in this community. Other vegetation observed includes beauty berry (Callicarpa americana), winged sumac (Rhus copallinum), carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides), swordfern (Nephrolepis exaltata), Catbriaer (Smilax spp.), Caesar weed (Urena lobata), brackenfern (Pteridium aquilinum), and Indian ficus (Ficus microcarpa). Vegetation is typical of upland communities and no hydrology or hydrologic indicators were present. 411E4 Pine Flatwoods ( >75% Exotics) (0.43-+ acres) This upland habitat type occupies 0.43-+ acres of the property. The community is dominated by Brazilian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) with occasional Slash pine (Pinus elliottii) in the canopy. 621DE3 Drained Cypress (50 -74% Exotics) (0.15-+ acres) Cypress are common in the canopy of this small community. Midstory was dominated by Brazilian Pepper. Other vegetation consisted of a mix of Dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), Myrsine (Myrsine cubana), and beauty berry (Callicarpa americana). The groundcover included grapevine (Vitus rotundoifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Catbrier (Smilax spp.), Caesar weed (Urena lobata), swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum), and oyster plant (Tradescantia spathacea). Although some vegetation is associated with wetlands communities, the lack of hydrology has resulted in the successional species that are more common in upland hammocks and disturbed sites. No hydrologic indicators were observed in this area. 740 Disturbed Areas (0.53-+ acres) This area includes the disturbed areas adjacent to the roads from the road construction that included the sodden swales and utility lines. 814 Road (2.65-+ acres) This area includes the existing paved areas for Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara. Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 6 of 22 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Protected Species Survey TABLE 2: FLUCFCS COMMUNITY TABLE FLIIG'FiCS Legend - FLUCFCS Code Community Acres % 110 Residential 1.13 Ac.± 27.29% 41 lEl Pine Flatwoods, Exotics 1 -24% 3.50 Ac.:� 41.72% 411E3 Pine Flatwoods, Exotics 50 -74% 1.25 Ac.:E 16.09% 411E4 Pine Flatwoods, Exotics >75% 0.43 Ac.:i: 4.77% 621 DE3 Drained Cypress, Exotics, 50 -74% 0.15 Ac.:h 1.79% 740 Disturbed lands 0.53 Ac.f 6.32% 814 Roads and Trails 2.65 Ac.t 2.03% TOTAL 9.64 Ac.f 100.00% SPECIES PRESENCE During the field survey for protected species on the property, 5 potential Big Cypress Fox Squirrel day beds or potential dreys were observed on-site. Other non - listed animal species noted include: Swallowtail Kite (Elanoides forficatus, Northern Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinahs), Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata), Northern Mockingbird (11?imus polyglottos), and signs of small mammal usage. DISCUSSION Due to the disturbed nature of the site, the abundance of exotic plant species, location, and lack of corridors or contiguous habitat of the property with off -site areas, it is unlikely that this site supports or would provide habitat for other protected species. The, nearby roads also create a barrier and a hazard to other animals. In order to determine if Big Cypress Fox Squirrels are actively nesting on the property the project will be resurveyed for stick nests prior to any site cleating. If potential daybeds are located at that time the nests will either be inspected or a five day Big Cypress Fox Squirrel survey will be conducted to determine if Big Cypress Fox Squirrels are actively nesting. If Big Cypress Fox Squirrels are determined to be actively nesting, no clearing or construction shall occur within 125' of the tree (or the distance approved by the latest FWC guidelines) until the nesting is deemed completed and approved by FWC or County staff. Community locations were estimated and drawn by using a non - rectified aerial with approximate property boundaries hence, their location, aerial extent, and acreage is approximate. Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 7 of 22 w � r '-^�k, IJJ y R1 U 4 � V O Iq 4w w Gn TI b 4d CC RU. a� 1~ O V w W m w 4� O ii a .r T U V F 1 F I W U en I U cn I F U cn V cn F w U y V y U y U h W U vi V cn F- I y y cn y y y Cn V] cn y y cn cn cn I I I I F I N I W I F w I t I W ! I I I w V eta f u) ! I I f I l I t l l l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I L 1 I + 1 I t f t I 1 I I 1 + t f I I I 1 1 1 I I C In o 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 00 0 w C. w 0 m w o0 00 0o w 0v oo a a o. rn ,- �.y. a e0 00 00 00 ea o0 00 00 00 00 s' E .� o4li C d t C a C is It c h a a a 4 y y a .`yt o O V ti F I. E Q N C y -C y y Q wM 14 1 GJ fi C 3 4l y "� C 4, V ,•� �0 5 li C��' jr O E r 1 y •C �C a4 •Q p> JC O y € .0 O � c� 1~ O a � t0 Q U N .! to •.'' c•-Lj = DD r 0 �= C VC P. `u o c a n a d o er s z u w e 3 c cn U. i7 `� v E u. ;.] F 03 C7 w�`" b u "" Q u ; 0 Q y 0 Vl m m s w 9a. r a o <w N N bCA W II W ti a� (U Cd Qj I Q V W E E 0 U W EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 8 of 22 ti C r-� O U m a 0 W G O 0 m Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Protected Species Survey Exhibit A Project Location Map Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 9 of 22 in C7 Z J J D_ t— a w _+ , I 0 I 1 t a , i , COLLIER COUNTY Inim RADIO RD GOLDEN GATE BLVD L I I% 1 D J M a a m x a m a U) 1 -75 )JECT LOCATII 29, TWP 49 S, RGE 26 E � , EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 10 of 22 i lJ c M Boylan E/-nvvironmental Cam' { Gnsultants. Inc., W-0—d • rrtatq. Impeof dsxmn��s lIOM Mcrro Parh.s7, Sumo, Ft M�rrt, FL 3i9 (2391Wffa7! Drawn sr Date: KAS 9/21M catevwy Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Project Location Map Page ,onrlw^ee. ss[r/R ° S(UR 29149S/26E cora,ty Collie EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 10 of 22 i Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Protected Species Survey Exhibit B FLUCFCS Map Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT V.C. -Pagel 1 of 22 Z W �V) N e� � O w a ii O _ C V Q L Cc E E� o U cl) d co S cu > W C T m o U O � V EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 12 of 22 W �o rn rn v o� N m Z5� N CD C b N ~ W Elm �aQ . m g s to U rb cn U y uaiau`' y U G Q a C-4 �, rn eV Q V Q Z W �V) N e� � O w a ii O _ C V Q L Cc E E� o U cl) d co S cu > W C T m o U O � V EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 12 of 22 W �o rn rn v o� N eV Q V Q y � ;:b$4 b o' U a U v Z W �V) N e� � O w a ii O _ C V Q L Cc E E� o U cl) d co S cu > W C T m o U O � V EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 12 of 22 W �o rn rn v o� N Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Protected Species Survey Exhibit C FLUCFCS Map with Aerial Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 13 of 22 EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 14 of 22 0 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Protected Species Survey Exhibit D Protected Species Survey Map Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT V. C. - Page 15 of 22 b y C C w � O V F b m Q C Q cuy O m o Q x a h U � 'C Q C U� CD ca U � y U �LL' LL ca N ro '2 5 y g 2 C �U�° C J4 C u Z y � W i Q CO Z CD MS U CO r LO O L Ow- I -f-1 Nt 7 dQ�iJ tit- d w� x- LO (� 0 7 U O � t° H U � m � m til q0. O x II C CO cm Q Q E [� U� U) a. C N w U c � o co 0 IM d w a a v� N EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 16 of 22 o �+ o m o ry cM 0 .w' 0 n 0 4 lip ON V u aAiAA a i U o v U u c c r oa CO Z CD MS U CO r LO O L Ow- I -f-1 Nt 7 dQ�iJ tit- d w� x- LO (� 0 7 U O � t° H U � m � m til q0. O x II C CO cm Q Q E [� U� U) a. C N w U c � o co 0 IM d w a a v� N EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 16 of 22 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Protected Species Survey Exhibit E Protected Species Survey Map with Aerial Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 17 of 22 EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 18 of 22 Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict Exhibit F MRCS Soils Map Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Protected Species Survey EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 19 of 22 M 41, S7 o wi M 1I .h DIVISIONS OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE 08tr1 of dv secretary OMceoffatemaVmWltehtk w D1vWm of Blecdom DIVAM mf corprmdo" t3lvl mofCulhvWA1Wa Dfvhtnnof1V kwkitRenowta 'a s Dfvtetm of Ubmy end Infomutfat Seevloes t,.s D[vb'ian of umvkg l YWMofAdmhrfetnaveSemica FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE Katherine Harris Secretary of State DIVISION OF HISTORICAL. RESOURCES May 4, 1999 Mr. Jeremy Sterk Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. 11000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 RE: DHR Project File No. 992457 Cultural Resource Assessment Request USACOE Nationwide Permit Application Golden Gate Parkway / Santa Barbara Parcel Collier County, Florida Dear Mr. Sterk: MEMBER OF THE FLORIDA CABINET state Eoard of Eduudm Theism of the Internal Lmptoverna mud Pond Ad VrdstrmdonComudaefoo Florida Land and Water AdJudkatm7Commh*n s bg Boetd Division of Sood Ftnaon Deparbntnt of Reveans DDeepy�ertmmt of taw Woiammt oepertmeet of Hlalmg 5" and Mohr VddeW Deperlmrnt of Ve mr& Alfiha In accordance with the procedures contained in 36 C.F.R., Part 800 ( "Protection of Historic Properties "), we have reviewed the referenced project for possible impact to historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places. The authority for this procedure is the National i-Iistoric Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89 -665), as amended. A review of the Florida Master Site File indicates that no significant archaeological or historical sites are recorded for or likely to be present within the project area. Furthermore, because of the project location and/or nature it is unlikely that any such sites will be affected. Therefore, it is the opinion of this office that the proposed project will have no effect on historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places. If you have any questions concerning our continents, please contact Scott Edwards, Historic Preservation Planner, at 850- 487 -2333 or 800- 847 -7278. Your interest in protecting Florida's historic properties is appreciated. Sincerely, George W. Percy, Director Division of Historical Resources and GWP/Ese State Historic Preservation Officer RA Cray Building a 500 South Bronough Street a Tallahassee, Flo ' 32399 -0250 • hi[F.1 /mm.flhmitage.com d D)rectoeb Office Q Archaeological Research Historic Preservation 0 Historical Museum .(850) 488 -1490 • PAX' 498 -3355 (850) 487 -2299 • FAX: 414.22V (8M) 487-2333 • FAX: 922-0496 (M) 488-1484 • PAX: 921 -2503 Historic Pensacola Pteservation Board O Palm Beach Re •octal Office (3 St. Au�ttatine Re •oral Office O Um Regional Office (B50) 595h985 •PAX-595-5989 (56])279 ]475 • iAX; 274 147b (917 f) 973 5045 • PrUC: 82-0-50H (813)27280.9 •FAX; 272 -2irn EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 21 of 22 J RNG 26 1 RNG 27 my mll SAY= AM MCA =MW Cr 14510C.Vt/ .- -x. PMWSLM fF MtD= WRDW sr MAZ (IM W CAW MF 4 M? T V.4]00 T 49 IP 50 BELLE MEADE NV QUADRANGLE AREAS OE HISTORICAL ARCHAEOI OGICAL PROH H Lim O EXHIBIT V.C. - Page 22 of 22 COPY EXHIBIT V.D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Revision 2 A MARKET FEASIBILITY STUDY ON N W/c Golden Cate Park-.vay and Santa Barbara Boulevard Collier County Naples, Florida FOR Continental Health Care Properties 555 Skokie Boulevard Suite 350 Northbrook, Illinois 60062 AS OF January I, 2012 PREPARFI) BY Province Valuation Group 5800 Mountain Creek Road Atlanta, Georgia 30328 MARKET VALUE APPRAISALS, MARKET" STUDIES, FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY AND OPERATIONAL OVERVIEWS PROVINCE l %nlwtri�+rf Gwrrr WW W,proyniccya1uatbn.Coal IW/i1L71 M91 Page 1 of 106 PROVINCE VALUATION GROUP Health Care Appraisers and Consultants January 1, 2012 Mr. Joe Rosin Continental Health Care Properties 555 Skokie Boulevard Suite 555 Northbrook, Illinois 60062 Dear Joe: Province Valuation Group ( "Province ") is presenting this report in order to determine demand for assisted living and Alzheimer's services for a defined area of Naples, Collier County, Florida. Specifically, you have requested that Province Valuation Group examine the supply of and demand for a retirement center offering assisted living services, as well as Alzheimer's service, to be located at the northwest corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard. The estimated Project size will consist of 92 assisted living units and 28 Alzheimer's units. In addition, the center will include a 3,200 square foot rehabilitation area for out - patient services, as well as providing rehabilitation services to the residents of the facility. As detailed later in this report, we have analyzed the demographics for a four zip -code area considered to be the primary market area (PMA) detailed later in this report (34112, 34104, 34119 and 34116). SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY Our analysis included a site visit and desk review of Naples, Collier County, Florida. The study analyzed the local services, identified and profiled the primary market and analyzed income and demographic data concentrated on the elderly population. The income and demographics for the overall population base have been studied. 5800 Mountain Creek Road Atlanta, Georgia 30328 404- 459 -0066 (1- 775- 307 -2488 efax) www.provincevaluation.com EXhibit VD Page 2 of 106 Mr. Joe Rosin Continental Health Care Properties Specifics analyzed in our study include: 1/1/2012 Page 2 • Analysis of the site for the proposed development; • An overview of current and proposed assisted living and Alzheimer's services; • Income and demographic analysis tied to the PMA; • Analysis of net demand in the selected PMA that includes assumptions based on industry knowledge of the following: • analysis of utilization rates; • estimation of market draw; and • estimation of supply (assisted living and Alzheimer's services). SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - NET DEMAND The forecasted demand is the final demand for the market area taking into account all of the previously described factors. Overall, there appears to be demand for assisted living and Alzheimer's services. Payor Mix The Project's operations will provide services to private pay residents. Recommendations Based upon the information contained in this analysis, it is our opinion that there appears to be demand for assisted living/ Alzheimer's services for the community of South Naples. This recommendation is based on the following factors: • Demand in the area continues to be positive; • Population growth over the next five years indicates there will continue to be a need for services; • The South Naples market has limited competitive communities; • The North Naples market area is nearly built -out. Therefore, South Naples offers the only remaining area with available land for larger developments; • The site is well positioned at the intersection of a recently widened artery (Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway); • While some of the retirement communities in the surrounding area have realized concessions and a decline in occupancy, several have increased rates over the last year; • The Project will have a state -of- the -art physical plant that will be superior in design to the majority of the surrounding development within the primary market area; /""- 5800 Mountain Creek Road Atlanta, Georgia 30328 404 - 459 -0066 (1- 775- 307 -2488 efax) www.provincevaluation.com EXhibit VD Page 3 of 106 Mr. Joe Rosin 1/1/2012 Continental Health Care Properties Page 3 The Project has an excellent location with a high traffic count that will provide the development with enhanced access and exposure; and The Project is anticipated to have a solid network system in place and experienced management. The following study provides a preliminary analysis of the market, as well as a demand analysis for assisted living and Alzheimer's services within the community of South Naples. It has been a pleasure to serve you in this matter. Sincerely, Carol Reynolds, MAI, CCIM Principal 5800 Mountain Creek Road Atlanta, Georgia 30328 404 - 459 -0066 (1- 775- 307 -2488 efax) www.provincevaluation.com EXhibit VD Page 4 of 106 r� Section III - Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLEOF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... ............................... III -1 PHOTOGRAPH........................................................................................................................ .............................IV - -1 EXECUTIVESUMMARY ....................................................................................................... ............................... V V-2 ADDENDA Qualifications Certification Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /1660/cr vPROVO4U E=Xhibit VD Page 5 of 106 Section IV - Page 1 AERIAL OF SITE Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 1660/cr PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 6 of 106 Section IV - Page 1 SUMMARY OF MARKET STUDY ASSUMPTIONS/UTILIZATION Intended User/Use of Report: The intended user of this report is Continental Health Care Properties. The use of the report is to determine the Market Feasibility for the planned Project. Effective Date of Conclusions/Date of Inspection: The site was inspected on December 15, 2011 and the effective date of the conclusions is January 1, 2012. Extent of the Analysis and Process: The extent of this analysis included the inspection of the subject site, including interviewing management, inspection of competing health care facilities in the area, review of architectural plans, as well as an analysis of the area, city and neighborhood, analysis of market parameters include occupancy levels and concessions. Use Restrictions. The Project will not be subject to use restrictions other than those implied by the state for the licensing of assisted living facilities in the state of Florida. These use restrictions will not affect demand for services but act to provide care (under state guidelines) for those seeking assistance with activities of daily living. Ownership /Financing /Census Mix: The Project is forecasted to be owned and operated by a For - Profit entity and with market financing. Payor Source: The payor source will be private pay. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /1660/cr e$ PROVINCE vas _' (;.,,p EXhibit VD Page 7 of 106 Section V - Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS) Purpose of the Engagement Province Valuation Group, a nationally recognized provider of senior- related marketing services, was contracted to provide data collection and analysis to assist in evaluating the demand for assisted living services, as well as Alzheimer's services in the community of Naples ( "the Project "). The estimated Project size will consist of 92 assisted living units and 28 Alzheimer's units. In addition, the center will include a 3,200 square foot rehabilitation area for out - patient services, as well as providing rehabilitation services to the residents of the facility. The center will consist of a two -story assisted living section ( "Y "- shaped) consisting of one- and two- bedroom units. Each floor will contain a total of 46 units consisting of 14 one - bedroom suites and 16 two- bedroom suites. At the juncture of the "Y" (on the first floor) will be an open living room (open to the second story), an activities room/ dining room and a wellness center. Directly outside the common area space will be an outdoor living area and a small nicely landscaped pool area. Outdoor areas will also include a small putting green and pathway that leads to a Chapel/ community room located within the main core of the facility. Second floor common areas will include an activity room and outdoor terrace /balcony area. The 28 -bed Alzheimer's will be situated on the opposite side of the building and will contain 16 one - bedroom units and six two- bedroom units. This wing (one - story) will also contain a central bath, dining room, two activity rooms and two support centers. Two courtyards will be located off the central core and an additional courtyard with memory garden will be located at the extreme end of the building. The central core of the building provides for a porte cochere entrance leading to a main lobby, reception area, Chapel, gift shop, post office, salon, library, market, cafe, the commercial kitchen and common dining area. Also located in this area are the mechanical rooms and two elevators providing access to the second floor. Parking is located along the front portion of the development, as well as long the eastern side of the site and along a portion of the rear of the building. The eastern end of the site will contain a 0.6 acre lake and the extreme northwestern portion of the site will contain a nature preserve (0.99 acre) with a picnic gazebo area. Total acreage is 9.62 with a total building square footage of 67,800. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/2108/cr O PROVINCE v.h.u.„ c_ . EXhibit VD Page 8 of 106 Section V - Page 3 Province has conducted a Preliminary Market Evaluation of the community and its respective market in order to assist with decisions as to the short- and long -term demand for services within a four zip -code area (34112, 34104, 34119 and 34116 - detailed later in this report). The purpose of this assessment is to provide decision makers with data and information that may be used to determine the viability of the proposed Project in Naples, Florida. Engagement Scope Continental Health Care Properties sought assistance from a nationally recognized provider (Province) of senior- related marketing services to provide data collection and analysis to assist in evaluating the probable long -term market viability for the Project. Real Time Market Indicators The following market data and indicators were obtained and analyzed for the Naples market/ service area for the Project: • Real estate trends and related home values; • Economic impact of business and industry, economic growth/ decline, related employers and employee profiles, impressions of local economic development personnel; • Demographic trending of seniors, next generation, adult children, including growth/ decline patterns, wealth, status, migration patterns and other pertinent demographic impact data; and • Competitor profile including existing and planned product. Province incorporated its findings, observations and recommendations into the overall Preliminary Market Evaluation document for the proposed assisted living facility, as well as Alzheimer's services. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr IV PRO sVNa EXhibit VD Page 9 of 106 Section V - Page 4 Market Viability Assessment The following information summarizes the parameters utilized in the overview of Collier County and within a four zip -code area: • Occupancy and operating statistics; • Payor mix and trends; and • Competitor analysis. Lastly, findings are summarized and observations were made in comparison to industry standards (as available), as well as national and regional trends of other like providers based upon the national experience and research of the Province marketing and strategy professionals. Observations of Services and Current Positioning in the Market The Project is anticipated to provide for assisted living services, as well as Alzheimer's services within the community of South Naples. The physical plant will be in excellent condition with a proposed construction time of 12 to 18 months. Inspection of the community indicates there are several retirement communities located throughout the Naples area. However, the majority of the centers are located within north Naples and outside the primary market area. The following information summarizes the facilities in the market area: Arden Court provides primarily for Alzheimer's care in studio and semi - private units. The facility is operated by ManorCare and the center remains relatively full. Private pay rates have increased over the last year while semi - private rates have decreased indicating a preference for private rooms. The average rate of increase has been 3.0 percent annually over the last several years. Due to the specific level of care provided, this facility will be partially competitive. Terracina Grand is an elegant senior living community with gracious community areas. Amenities include a beauty salon and spa, heated pool, scheduled transportation and social and recreational activities. The building and grounds are well - maintained and residents can choose from a variety of floor plans including studio, one - bedroom, one- bedroom /den and two- bedroom unit. Common areas include walking areas and outdoor heated pool and spa, dining room, private dining room, billiards room, patio areas for outdoor activities, library and fireplace lounge. This facility is located within the primary market area and is considered competitive to the planned Project. Barrington Terrace has primarily studio units (formerly known as Heron House). Lease - up was originally slower than anticipated most likely due to the small unit sizes and the facility's location on the south side of town. However, the property overlooks the Lely Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/cr 4ff YPROV NCE Exhibit VD Page 10 of 106 Section V - Page 5 Palms Golf Course. This facility is located outside the primary market area (along the periphery) and will be partially competitive with the planned Project. Lely Palms Retirement campus includes the Arden Courts dementia care facility. as well as 148 independent living apartments, 52 independent living villas, an eight unit twelve bed assisted living center and a 117 bed nursing center. All of these centers are in place primarily for the residents of Lely Palms but the nursing center does accept private pay patients from outside the community. As Lely Palms does provide month -to -month independent living rentals and the nursing center is available to non - residents of the community, this community is considered to be partially (50.0 percent) competitive with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 11 of 106 Section V - Page 6 Executive Summary Based on analysis and research of the market area, the following observations have been made. While the slowdown in the national economy has impacted the area, the city of Naples continues to realize development, however at a slower pace than it has experienced in the previous five years. The county and the city are utilizing this period of economic slowdown to revitalize the city and to encourage more growth in the commercial sector to compensate for the rapid population growth. Statistics indicate an increase in the unemployment rate during the first quarter of 2009 for the state and for the county. It is noted that the state currently has a higher unemployment rate than that of the nation (8.5 percent). However, the rate for the state has decreased over the last year, as has the county rate. The county is currently reporting an unemployment rate just above that of the nation and below that of the state. While the North Naples area has been the prime upscale market area for Naples, the South and Southeastern portion of the city are prime for development due to the lack of available land in North Naples. Overall, the demographics for the Project PMA are considered to be very strong, as is the secondary market draw. Therefore, while the demographics are supportive of ample age and income qualified senior residents (detailed later in this report), the adult population base is also quite strong, reflecting a market area that has the potential to provide a strong draw from outside the four zip -code primary market area. The area surrounding the Project has one existing retirement community within the four zip - code primary market area. However, several communities exist to the north and south of the primary market area. The area surrounding Naples has realized no new development of senior services over the last several years. However, one facility has undergone a major renovation. While growth has slowed, demographics indicate the community will continue to realize growth in population and income through 2015. The Project will be of state -of -the -art design and will provide for quality amenities and services that will fill a void currently in the market for assisted living services, as well as Alzheimer's services within the four zip -code primary market area. The Project has an excellent location at the intersection of a major north/ south and east /west artery. Impact of Planned Development in the Market Area - We are aware of one planned retirement community that was planned for south Naples (60 assisted living units and 30 Alzheimer's units). The 11.25 acre site is located along Airport Pulling Road and Glades Boulevard. Research does not indicate that this facility has received a license to operate. However, we have included the 60 planned assisted living units in the demand analysis for 2014. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 4W PROMNCE Vah.U. " 6rory EXhibit VD Page 12 of 106 SUMMARY OF PROTECT (PROPERTY DESCRIPTION) Existing Project Section V - Page 7 The purpose of this assessment is to determine the feasibility for a retirement community that may include assisted living and /or Alzheimer's services to be located at the northwest quadrant of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard, Naples, Collier County, Florida. The Project is in the initial stages of planning. Therefore, complete plans have not yet been developed. The following information summarizes the services and amenities that may be provided. SPruirvc Assisted Living Services - Basic services include three meals a day, weekly housekeeping, 24 -hour security with an emergency alert system, maintenance of grounds and appliances, assisted living activities and 45 minutes of personal care services per day. Care services above 45 minutes will be charged accordingly. Alzheimer's Services - Services are to include three meals a day, weekly housekeeping, 24 -hour security with an emergency alert system, maintenance of grounds and appliances, assisted living activities and all assistance required for the care of Alzheimer's residents. Services will be all inclusive within the monthly rate. AmonitiPc Amenities are to include the following: • Private and semi- private suites in assisted living units/ Alzheimer's units; • Administrative offices and conference room; • Dining areas; • Activity rooms; • Commercial kitchen; • Bistro; • Utility rooms; • Entry Gallery; • Wellness Center with pool and locker rooms; • Storage; • Family -like communities within the core of each floor; and • Exterior recreational areas including a pool, cabana and garden area. Management The Management team has not yet been selected. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr ,aMPROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 13 of 106 Section V - Page 8 Licensure The assisted living units are anticipated to be licensed for Level 1 and Level II (ECC) care. Level II care is required for the care of Alzheimer's residents in the state of Florida. uali The improvements will be of excellent quality and state -of -the -art design. Site Characteristics The following table details the site characteristics: Site Characteristics Topography - Level Paved Land Access - Good from both fronting streets Exposure - Excellent from main road frontage Other - None noted Public Services - Served by all pubic utilities Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 40 PROVINCE V01 -U." ( ;-,p EXhibit VD Page 14 of 106 v Section V - Page 9 AREA ANALYSIS Location Characteristics and Brief History The Project will be located in Naples, Collier County, Florida. The county is located in the lower southwest section of Florida, in the Naples -Marco Island Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Miami is located 104 miles east; Orlando, 166 miles northeast; Atlanta, 550 miles north; New York, 2200 miles northeast and Chicago, 1,135 miles northwest. Before the arrival of Spanish explorers, Florida's lower Gulf Coast was inhabited by the Calusa Indians. The area remained virtually uninhabited until after the Civil War when farmers and squatters began their southern migrations. Early pioneers fished, hunted and raised crops for a living. Collier County was created in 1923 and its early growth is tied to millionaire, Barron Gift Collier. With his fortune from streetcar advertising he built paved roads and introduced electric power and telegraphs, bringing development to Florida's last frontier. Barron Collier's completion of the Tamiami Trail in 1928 unlocked the region's potential in the agriculture and resort sectors. World War II introduced hundreds of servicemen to the county and city via a U.S. Army Airfield (now Naples Airport). Many veterans returned after the war, started businesses and helped the area to grow and become a destination for tourism and real estate. Economy Collier County /Naples has long been an attractive destination for retirees. Therefore, the population is slightly older than other areas of the country. It also experiences seasonal population increases due to the retirees and the "snowbirds' who winter in the area. The population increases by an estimated one -third due to the seasonal residents and short -term agricultural workers in the Immokalee area. This creates a high degree of seasonality in the retail, service and hospitality sectors. Collier County extends from the middle of Florida to the Gulf Coast. Naples refers to the western edge of Collier County and consists primarily of separate communities within the county and represents only a small part of the population and geographic area. The majority of the Naples population lives within planned urban developments (large tracts of land where developers constructed the roads, sewers, boulevards, housing, golf courses, community amenities, etc.). The far western edge of Naples has been mostly built out. The opportunity to build something new is confined to redevelopment. Due to the lack of large tracts of land in western Naples (only a few smaller tracts suitable for small communities), development opportunities for new communities that require large tracts of land (golf course communities for example) are confined to the northeast and southeast reaches of Naples. On the eastern edge of Naples is Golden Gate Estates. Golden Gate Estates is a large area consisting of residential lots of an acre or more. This area is carved out of former swamp land Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr �► PROM NU Ya&, " C.'ror p EXhibit VD Page 15 of 106 Section V - Page 10 that was drained in the early 60s through a series of canals. Single family homes and lots can be purchased, but no development exists within that area. As residential growth continues, new housing trends will head further east and south within the Naples area. Employment Sector Listed below are the major county employers as listed by the Economic Development Council of Collier County: Company Product Employees Collier Co. Public Schools Education 6,685 Collier Co. Government Government 2,984 Naples Community Hosp. Healthcare 3,007 Public Supermarket Grocery Stores 2,214 Wal -Mart Retail 1,547 Collier Co. Sheriffs Office Government 1,273 Marriott Hotels and 743 Fifth Third Bank Finance 733 Naples Grande Resort Hotels and 605 Barron Collier Partnership Real Estate 600 California Pizza Kitchen Restaurant 576 Physicians Regional Med. Healthcare 551 Robert Forbis Inc. Construction 543 Home Depot Building 542 Moorings Park Retirement 522 City of Naples Government 509 U.S. Postal Services Postal Services 504 Classic Bentley Village Retirement 501 Kraft Construction Co. Construction 447 Naples Beach Hotel Hotels and 425 Naples Daily News Publishing 408 Hilton Hotels Hotels and 411 Anchor Health Centers Healthcare 398 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/cr O PROVINCE V41 -t'." (;-,? EXhibit VD Page 16 of 106 Section V - Page 11 Economic Development and Future Trends Real estate values in Collier County and Naples have been depressed as in other southwestern areas of the state - notably the Fort Myers area. However, according to the Naples Florida Real Estate Guide, recent sales of real estate in Naples are higher than the previous year. It has also been noted that foreclosed homes are selling in a short time and buyers with realistic expectations are benefiting from current market conditions as prices of Naples real estate has rolled back five years or more. Naples inventory is down in every price segment in both condominiums and single family homes, with the exception of condominiums above $5,000,000. Third quarter 2011 inventory posted a 24.0 percent decline over third quarter 2010 and a 45.0 percent decline compared to third quarter 2007. Naples inventory is at its lowest level since third quarter 2004. Naples' banking industry continues to be a growing market with a very strong customer base. Regarded as having more millionaires and financial institutions per capita than any other area in the U.S., Collier County's deposits at local area banks continues to grow. With the aging of the population base, the banking industry for Collier County is forecasted to remain very strong. Listed below are some of the reasons for the upswing of the market: • As real estate prices are returning to before pre -boom prices, buyers wishing to buy in Naples now find the area affordable; • Local residents can now afford to buy homes at current price levels; • Naples real estate market is driven by second home buyers and remains a very attractive area during the northern colder months; and, • Investment buyers, including foreign buyers, have re- entered the market. Homes and condos listed under $300,000 continue to represent the most active segment of the market with condos over $300,000 and single- family homes over $600,000 selling at a slower pace. A large portion of the houses listed under $200,000 are in areas inhabited by local working residents. Second home buyers do live in these areas but the communities may lack amenities and the locations may be more remote. However, there are also other communities with a high concentration of second home residents that have appeal due to location, amenities, or golf availability. Some of these condos might be older - however some are new - and are in gated golf communities with a great Naples location. The homebuilding industry has also suffered due to the inventory of unsold new houses and the glut of about 15,000 houses listed for sale through realtors. The above mentioned industries are the key targets for expansion and recruitment to Collier County by the Department of Economic Development. As a result, ASG Software and Arthrex, a manufacturer of medical equipment, are success stories for the area as they have continued to expand since establishing their businesses in the county. Also, the professional and business sectors are expected to achieve growth through 2012. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr PROVINCE vkus» cp EXhibit VD Page 17 of 106 Section V - Page 12 In the wake of the closure of the Economic Development Council of Collier County (EDC), The Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce is taking the first and what they believe is the most important step to help job growth. Recently formed is the Partnership for Collier's Future Economy. Its mission is to help existing businesses expand and grow for the benefit of all Collier County citizens. Programs that are being adopted are FastTrac GrowthVenture, the Roundtable, the Chairman's Luncheon Series, Business of the Month and the Excellence in Industry Awards. The EDC focused on a number of key areas of economic development, such as business attraction and reverse investment. The Partnership was narrowly focused on helping existing businesses. In that effort, the Partnership has formed alliances with numerous organizations who have dedicated their unique talents and resources to help inform, educate, retain and grow existing business in our community. Organizations like SCORE, Gulf Coast Venture Forum, the Small Business Development Center of FGCU, Hodges University, Edison State College - Collier Campus and the Economic Recovery Task Force, to name a few. Physicians Regional Healthcare System, formerly Cleveland Clinic Florida, is comprised of two hospitals, Physicians Regional -Pine Ridge and Physicians Regional - Collier Boulevard. The Collier Boulevard hospital, an $80 million 100 -bed facility, is Southwest Florida's newest hospital that was completed in February 2007. This hospital brings services to East Naples and Marco Island. The two hospitals have separate and complementary services and operate with one leadership team under the umbrella of Physicians Regional Healthcare System. Together the hospitals have 183 beds, of which 163 are adult and pediatric and 20 are intensive care. A full roster of medical services is provided. NCH Healthcare System operates two hospitals - NCH Downtown Naples Hospital and NCH North Naples Hospital. Combined, the hospitals are comprised of 681 beds - 420 beds in the Downtown Naples hospital and 261 acute care beds in the North Naples hospital. Services offered include advanced heart care, via the Shick Heart Center, cancer, obstetrics, newborn and pediatric care. Oncology, diagnostic and rehabilitation services are also available. Education The Naples public school system is comprised of 18 elementary schools, eight middle schools and seven high schools. Various private schools are also located in the county and city. Institutions of higher education include International College and the Lorenzo Walker Institute of Technology. Florida Gulf Coast University and Edison College are located in Fort Myers, 30 miles north. Access Interstate 75 (north/ south) is a major interstate in the midwest and southern United States. This interstate system travels from Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan to Hialeah, Florida, a suburb of Miami. When the highway reaches Naples it turns east toward the Fort Lauderdale area, linking Naples Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 4V PROVINCE Yom,,.,, ( ;-,p EXhibit VD Page 18 of 106 Section V - Page 13 to the east coast and Interstate 95, the major east coast artery. This stretch of road is known as Alligator Alley. U.S. Highway 41 (north /south) runs from the upper peninsula of Michigan to Miami, Florida. The highway is parallel to Interstate 75 on it travels from Georgia to Miami. The road turns southeast from Naples to travel through the everglades to Miami - this portion is known as the Tamiami Trail, derived from the combination of Tampa and Miami (designated as a National Scenic Byway). State Roads 29, 82, 84 and 951 travel throughout the region providing access to cities, towns and communities. Airports: Most residents and travelers use Southwest Florida International Airport in Fort Myers, 30 miles north of Naples, for their commercial air service. The airport serviced approximately eight million passengers in 2007. More than 20 airlines provide non -stop service throughout North America and international service to Canada and Germany. Major gateways in Atlanta, Chicago and New York provide access to national and international destinations. Naples Regional Airport provides general aviation services and limited commercial service, via Gulf Coast Airways, to Key West. The area is serviced by Greyhound Bus and public transportation is provided by the Collier Area Transit. Water transportation is limited to personal and charter boats at marinas. Freight rail service is provided by Seminole Gulf and Norfolk Southern lines. Unemployment Rates The following table details the unemployment rates for the nation, state of Florida and Collier County. UNEMPLOYMENT RATE 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 -Nation 6.0 - Florida - Collier County 4.0 2.0 0.0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Summary: Statistics indicate an increase in the unemployment rate during the first quarter of Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr f► PROVINCE vkh.a G p EXhibit VD Page 19 of 106 Section V - Page 14 2009 for the state and for the county. It is noted that the state currently has a higher unemployment rate than that of the nation (8.5 percent). However, the rate for the state has decreased over the last year, as has the county rate. The county is currently reporting an unemployment rate just above that of the nation and below that of the state. Population - Collier County The following table details the total population trend for Collier County. POPULATION BY AGE COHORTS Geography. County Population Trends: The demographics for the area indicate a continued trend toward an increase in population. Growth is anticipated to be good through 2014. Income The following table details median income for the 75 - 85+ age cohorts for Collier County. MEDIAN INCOME - OVER 75 POPULATION BASE Geoexavhv: Countv Income Trends: Median household income characteristics indicate growth for the over $25,000 income brackets. The under $15,000 and $15,000 - $24,999 income brackets are also anticipated to grow, however, at a slower rate. The demographics are indicative of a market area that is Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr IRI PROVINCE v<.I;- cb,p EXhibit VD Page 20 of 106 Section V - Page 15 experiencing a growth in income levels. Housing Characteristics The following table details housing characteristics for the subject's market area. HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS Housing Trends: Housing characteristics indicate a continued increase in households and household size through 2015. Of note, median household income and average household wealth are anticipated to increase through 2014. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr iffPRONANCE V.A.. , c.r,p EXhibit VD Page 21 of 106 Section V - Page 16 Recreation Collier County /Naples is known as Florida's Paradise Coast. The best known area asset is the 17 miles of white beaches along the Gulf of Mexico. The natural beauty and wildlife of the area secure the county as a popular destination for high -end retirement and winter resident "snowbirds." There are endless opportunities for boating, deep sea fishing, shelling, hiking, canoeing, airboating, all water sports and beach relaxation. Golf is also a huge recreational and competitive activity. More than 80 championship courses are located in and near Naples, some designed by Jack Nichlaus and Tom Fazio. The Conservancy of Naples, an organization devoted to protecting Southwest Florida's natural resources, operates two nature centers: The Naples Nature Center and the Briggs Nature Center that offer educational programs relating to Florida's ecosystem. Naples Botanical Gardens and Naples Zoo are also area attractions. State and National parks located in the county include: Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary, Everglades National Park, Collier - Seminole State Park, Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, Fakahatchee Strand State Park and Wilderness Waterway. Culture/Festivals Museums and galleries include the Naples Museum of Art, the Von Liebig Art Center, the Big Cypress Gallery, Marine Arts Gallery and the Collier County Museum. Fans of performing arts can enjoy the Naples Philharmonic Orchestra, Opera Naples, Classic Chamber Concerts, Naples Concert Band, Naples Orchestra and Chorus, Naples Music Club, Naples Players and the Philharmonic Center for the Arts presentations of music, dance and theater. Summer Jazz on the Gulf, Naples Spring Art Festival, Christmas Walk, Festival of Lights and open air concerts are held annually. Shopping Shopping and fine dining venues are plentiful. Many national department stores, boutique shops and galleries are scattered throughout the Naples/ Marco Island MSA. Conclusion There is no doubt the housing market has and is still suffering in Collier County/ Naples. It has been a well known high -end retirement area for seniors and foreign visitors who have been seeking the "good life." After a setback of adjusting housing prices, the area still has the advantage of its warm climate and natural beauty that will remain a draw for northern residents who wish to escape the cold winter months. Baby boomers are also approaching retirement age and that may be another draw for the area. After adjustments, the economy is expected to continue an upward then, though at a much more moderate pace. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr W Pf4OVP -&-E V46"" cro y EXhibit VD Page 22 of 106 ape Coral .CYOJ Cc!acsahmc 5rr 4 ti El . Sanibel 6Fort Myers Beach G! �LJE x!cc AREA MAP -__ —_ ----------- __ —( 4b4Bon'ita Springs - +>3 'Vanderbilt Beach I *Naples Park ,Pelican Bay SUBJECT I ,North Naples Napbs Muni Will .N aplleit ,East Naples 47 Marco t;lo d Marco Island 51 A2 Gondland Section V - Page 17 D*Lorm! Str**t Atlas USAF 2009 t Felt! l I ....... i---------- y t �l i tmwkeke � �u j.e�,r�t mbkalee not ake, ai Everglades C�itryy{e Em&dn Akperk IM Chokoloskee ne 29 Data use subject to license mi © Dell DeLorme Street Atlas 1.6AS 2009. 0 2 4 6 8 10 www.delarne.com aNr1(4.9- V) Data Zoom 9-0 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties PROVINCE urrrw,..... Group C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD Page 23 of 106 NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS Neighborhood Section V - Page 18 Neighborhoods may be devoted to one, or more uses such as residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, cultural and civic activities. Analysis of the neighborhood in which a particular property is located is important due to the fact that the various economic, social, political and physical forces that affect the neighborhood also directly influence the individual properties within it. An analysis of these various factors as they affect the Project is presented in the following discussion. The Project is located within the incorporated area for the city of Naples in the Golden Gate area of the city (eastern side). Based on the property's specific location, the neighborhood for the Project is considered to be comprised of the following zip codes (34104, 34112, 34116 and 34119). The primary market area is detailed later in this report. Access As indicated, Interstate 75 and U.S. Highway 41 provide excellent access through the community. Santa Barbara Boulevard provides north/ south access through the community and Golden Gate Parkway provides east /west access through the community. Both arteries provide the site with an excellent location within South Naples. Existing Development The site is well located at the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard. Existing development includes single- family housing, as well as low -rise commercial and retail use. The following information details existing development in the surrounding area: Multi- Family - No significant multi- family development was noted proximate to the Project. Single - family - Single - family residential homes are located throughout the area. The majority of the homes were constructed over 30 years ago and are in good to average condition (proximate to the Project). Single - family housing is located to the north and south of the subject with higher priced housing located to the northeast (North Naples). To the east and southeast, development is less dense. Commercial and Institutional Uses - The bulk of the commercial and retail development is located along Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. Included are numerous churches, schools, several small restaurants, retail bank branches. Also located proximate to the Project is a CVS pharmacy and a mini- market. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD Page 24 of 106 Section V - Page 19 The following map depicts the immediate area surrounding the site. New Development No new development was noted on the day of the site visit. However, the intersection of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway has been widened over the last 12 months due to growth and development throughout this portion of south Naples. The expansion of both arteries provides excellent exposure for the Project from both Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr IV PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 25 of 106 Section V - Page 20 Percent Built -Up The following table details the percent built -up by development type in the market area. Type of Development Single- Family Multi- Family High Density Commercial Low - Density Commercial Industrial Institutional Vacant Percent - 60.0 Percent - 5.0 Percent - 0.0 Percent - 15.0 Percent - 5.0 Percent - 5.0 Percent - 10.0 Percent The area has experienced stability over the last several years. The community was slated for strong growth and development prior to the economic slowdown due to the lack of available land within the greater Naples area. All indications are that the neighborhood will continue to experience slight growth over the short -term. Long -term growth is anticipated once the economy regains strength. The mix of development within the neighborhood is anticipated to remain relatively stable with a slight increase in high- density commercial development (based on the widening of both Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway). Population The following income and demographic trends for the Project are based on the primary market area (PMA), which is detailed later in this report (four zip -code area). The demographics were compiled by Claritas, a national data firm. PRIMARY MARKET AREA - POPULATION BY AGE COHORT Geography- 4 ZIP Codes The primary market area (PMA) is anticipated to experience growth for the total population. In addition, the 65 -74, the 75 -84 and the 85+ year age cohorts are forecasted to experience strong growth that is above the national average. The 75+ cohort is the end -user of senior housing services including retirement communities. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr PROVINCE vk&.�„ cro,P EXhibit VD Page 26 of 106 18,000 - -- -- 16,000 14,000 - - - - - -- 12,000 10,000 ■ 2000 8,000 ■ 2010 6,000 4,000 -- 2,000 0- 50-54 YEARS ■ 2015 55 -64 65 -74 75 -84 85- YEARS YEARS YEARS YEARS The primary market area (PMA) is anticipated to experience growth for the total population. In addition, the 65 -74, the 75 -84 and the 85+ year age cohorts are forecasted to experience strong growth that is above the national average. The 75+ cohort is the end -user of senior housing services including retirement communities. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr PROVINCE vk&.�„ cro,P EXhibit VD Page 26 of 106 Section V - Page 21 Of importance, children of dependent seniors, those in the 55 -64 year age cohort, can have a huge impact on the placement and care of their senior parent(s). As their parent(s) age, children are more likely to relocate these family members to their town of residence. Thus, the 55 -64 year age cohort can have a significant impact on absorption of beds/ units in the market. The PMA is represented by the following adult children (age 55 -64) population base: 2010 14,728 2015 16,330 Market trends indicate that an acceptable percentage of adult children within the age and income qualification group that would opt to assist in the financial care of their parents is 25.0 percent of 5.0 percent of the available pool. Demographics for the subject's PMA indicate the following potential beds which could be filled from outside the PMA. 2010 184 Overall, the demographics for the subject PMA are considered to be strong. In addition, the secondary market area draw is considered to be good. It is noted that areas with a high percentage of second homes are not fully detailed by the demographics. Therefore, the primary demographics, as well as the secondary market draw, may be understated. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/cr 4W PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 27 of 106 Section V - Page 22 Income The following graphs detail median household income for the PMA. As indicated, the income characteristics indicate excellent growth for all of the upper - income categories. AGE 75+ COHORTS - INCOME GROWTH Geography: 4 ZIP Codes AGE 85+ COHORTS - INCOME GROWTH Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties AW PROVINCE vet; ' 6.11P C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD Page 28 of 106 Section V - Page 23 Median Housing Values The following graph details median housing values within the PMA. MEDIAN HOUSING VALUES Housing Trends: Housing characteristics indicate good growth through 2015. Sales Price Distribution for the Surrounding Community As illustrated on the following chart, there are significantly more homes that sold for $300,000 in zip code 34119 with zip code 34116 (zip code of the Project) representing the least amount of home sales over the last 14 months. Zip code 34119 clearly represents a market area that exceeds the remaining four zip codes in the market area. RECENT HOME SALES BY ZIP CODE $450,000 $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 -34112 -34104 -34116 34119 Source:www.melissadata. com Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 29 of 106 Section V - Page 24 The planned Project will be located in zip code 34116 which represents the low end of the housing values. However, zip code 34119 is directly north of the planned Project, as is Physicians Regional Medical Center. As noted in the chart below, zip code 34116 reports the lowest average housing value and the lowest value overall for all four zip codes. However, zip code 34116 is impacted by the existence of the Golden Gate neighborhood which defines an approximate 3.0 square mile within the northeastern portion of the zip code comprised of moderate income housing. Average Sale Price byip Code (Primary Market Area) MONTH ZIP CODE High 34112 34104 34116 34119 Feb -12 $150,000 $150,000 $130,000 $341,000 Jan -12 $143,000 $143,000 $115,000 $332,000 Dec -11 $169,000 $159,000 $113,000 $227,000 Nov -11 $144,000 $144,000 $123,000 $286,000 Oct -11 $106,000 $128,000 $117,000 $290,000 Sep -11 $137,000 $101,000 $127,000 $389,000 Aug -11 $129,000 $151,000 $112,000 $302,000 Jul -11 $124,000 $158,000 $124,000 $293,000 Jun -11 $151,000 $178,000 $111,000 $308,000 May -11 $159,000 $150,000 $101,000 $344,000 Apr -11 $126,000 $155,000 $105,000 $306,000 Mar -11 $153,000 $135,000 $131,000 $316,000 fit, Feb -11 $165,000 $138,000 $110,000 $254,000 Jan -11 $164,000 $149,000 $115,000 $328,000 High $169,000 $178,000 $131,000 $389,000 Low $106,000 $101,000 $101,000 $227,000 Awerage $144,286 $145,643 $116,714 $308,286 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD Page 30 of 106 Section V - Page 25 Building Permits The following table details building permits for Naples and Collier County. As indicated, January 2012, on an annualized basis, is set to match building permits for cumulative 2011 and out - perform 2010. Naples is forecasted to realize slower development than 2011 and exceed that noted for 2010. By in large, the community of Naples is nearly 100.0 percent built -out. Overall, the growth potential remains stable. Two Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 Three and Four Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 Frye or More Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 6 $7,600,930 6 6 $7,600,930 $1,266.822 Decembecll BUILDING PERMITS - COLLIER COUNTY Cummulative Year to Date Buildings Units January -12 Buildings Cummulative Year to Date Construction Cost Avg Cost Per Unit Single Buildings Units Construction Cost Buildings Units Construction Cost Avg Cost Per Unit Single 57 57 519 086 602 57 57 $19,086.602 0 Two Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Three and Four Family 2 8 51.759.000 2 8 51.759 „000 $15.309.706 Five or More Family 4 29 $5,799000 4 29 55.799,000 TOTAL 63 94 $26,644,602 63 94 S26,644,602 $283,453 December -11 Cummulative Year to Date Buildings Units Construction Cost Buildings Units Construction Cost Avg Cost Per Unit Single 48 48 $13.161,412 764 764 $199.876,727 Two Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 Three and Four Family 2 8 S1 800,71S 13 72 S15,080.000 Fne or More Family 4 fit 59 732,548 22 230 $36 160 000 TOTAL 54 117 524,694,678 804 1066 $251,116.727 $235,569 December -10 Cummulative Year to Date Buildings Units Construction Cost Buildings Units Construction Cost Avg Cost Per Unit Single 8= 84 S19487,000 570 570 5159,972450 Two Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-� Three and Four (amity 3 12 52,762.000 27 108 $25,083.000 Five or More Family 0 0 50 12 202 531377.000 TOTAL 87 96 $22,249,000 609 880 $218,432.450 $248,219 Two Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 Three and Four Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 Frye or More Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 6 $7,600,930 6 6 $7,600,930 $1,266.822 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/2108/cr PROVINCE Val—i- G.o"p EXhibit VD Page 31 of 106 Decembecll Cummulative Year to Date Buildings Units Construction Cost Buildings Units Construction Cost Avg Cost Per Unit Single 8 8 $16.309 706 81 81 S108896637 Two Family 0 0 0 0 0 50 Three and Four Family 0 0 0 0 0 So Five or More Family 0 0 0 3 29 528,000 TOTAL 8 8 $15.309.706 139 139 $108,924,637 ST83,630 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/2108/cr PROVINCE Val—i- G.o"p EXhibit VD Page 31 of 106 December.10 Cummulative Year to Date Buildings Units Construction Cost Buildings Units Construction Cost Avg Cost Per Unit Single 2 2 $2850.000 63 63 579221.737 Two Family 0 0 0 0 0 SO Three and Four Family 0 0 0 0 0 50 Five or More Family 0 0 0 0 0 50 TOTAL 2 2 $2.850,000 63 63 S79.221.737 $1.257,488 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/2108/cr PROVINCE Val—i- G.o"p EXhibit VD Page 31 of 106 Section V - Page 26 Florida Market Overview According to Florida Realtors(R) Chief Economist Dr. John Tuccillo, the state is in a stage of mini - recovery. Sales are trending up, listing inventories are falling, the supply of lender - related properties has stabilized and the market is realizing multiple offers on homes in some local markets. Tuccillo noted that foreclosed and distressed properties will remain a significant part of the Florida market in 2012, but lenders are feeding these properties into the market at a gradual pace rather than pushing them out all at once. Mark Vitner, senior economist at Wells Fargo said the U.S. economy will continue to face significant challenges, particularly financial concerns related to the European debt crisis. But he expects the U.S. economic recovery will continue next year, making it easier for Midwesterners, for example, to buy Florida homes. Mr. Vitner also indicated that with tourism and healthcare leading the way. international tourism will be particularly strong in Miami and Orlando. Dr. Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the National Association of Realtors®, said many Florida markets are showing sharp drops in inventories of homes for sale, a sign that demand is picking up and prices are stabilizing. The indication is that buyers have stepped back into the Florida market. Noting the state's powerful appeal to international buyers, Yun also stated he was particularly optimistic about the outlook for southern Florida with an expected gain in home prices in the Miami and Naples markets over the next 18 months. From there, the recovery is likely to roll northward to Central Florida and then North Florida. Health Care As indicated in the Area section, there is a wide array of medical specialists within a short distance of the Project. Housing Characteristics The total cost of an assisted living/Alzheimer's stay is $30,000 to $52,000 per year. Funds will be generated either through a regular income source (social security, pensions, interest, dividends and other income), or the sale of an asset (house). Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr EXhibit VD Page 32 of 106 n Section V - Page 27 The following ownership is noted within the PMA. HOUSING OCCUPANCY TYPES 10 ■ % Owning ■ % Renting 14 1 ■ % Vacant The owner- occupied percentage is within the range of the national average as noted by PVG for numerous markets located throughout the country. In addition, the area indicates an increase in median household income for the over -75 population base and housing values are considered to be within the mid- range. Therefore, available equity from the sale of a home is considered to be favorable. It is also noted that the high vacancy is due to second home ownership. The following percentages of the 75+ population base have income in excess of $25,000. INCOME IN EXCESS OF $25,000 • Income M Excess of $25,000 ■ Income in Excess of $35,000 In summary, the median housing values, as well as home ownership and the high percentage of the over -75 age cohort with income in excess of $25,000, indicates that the community is capable of supplying a pool of private pay residents for utilization of assisted living/ Alzheimer's services. Transportation The Project's area is conveniently accessible via local arteries. The Project is well located with easy access for employees. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 40 PROVINCE Val-t -, c-,p EXhibit VD Page 33 of 106 Section V - Page 28 Cultural, Educational and Recreational As discussed in the Area section, the surrounding area has numerous cultural, educational and recreational activities. Conclusion Overall, the Project's immediate area is experiencing moderate growth. Area demographics indicate continued good growth in population with a solid increase in income levels and housing values in the immediate area. Indications are that the neighborhood will experience continued slight growth in economic conditions over the short -term with long -term growth forecasted as the economy strengthens. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 1r WPRJW EXhibit VD Page 34 of 106 Section V - Page 29 DeLorme Stmot Atlas USAF 2009 NEIGHBORHOOD MAP s- I I —T- G �\�-j R(tjyr��, ---------------------------------- z .Gate ------- a m _ I BELVILL`E.BL•VD =— al- ft=j Data use subjectto license 1 © DeLorme. DeLorme Street Atlas USA.R7 2009 0 % t�2 '�A I 1 Y. www.delorme.com MN (4.8° V) Data Zoom 12 -0 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 4V PROVINCE Page 35 of 106 Section V - Page 30 SITE DATA SITE CLASSIFICATION The site being considered in this report can be identified as: NW /c Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway Naples, Collier County Florida According to the 2nd Sufficiency Review of Growth Management Plan Amendment Petition CP- 2011, an amendment to the existing Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict to increase the Subdistrict acreage by +2.81 acres (East 180 feet of Tract 98, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates); allow senior housing including, independent living units, assisted living units and continuing care retirement communities, skilled nursing and similar uses at a maximum FAR of 0.45; retain 5,000 square feet of office use (ancillary medical office uses for in- and out - patient care; revise the Subdistrict name to include the reference to "institutional" uses; modify certain development standards; and eliminate 30,000 square feet of general office uses within the Subdistrict. Please see that attached conceptual site plan illustrating a one -story option for the assisted living facility incorporating the following modifications from last week's plan: • 25' Landscape Buffer around the perimeter of the entire site (providing 10 additional feet .--� from previous version); and • "Rehab" more centrally located. With this version we are really beginning to limit the flexibility of the future building design as far as unit sizes, one - bedroom versus two- bedroom ratios, commons square foot, building footprint, therefore, we feel as if this is about as much as we can constrain the site in order to allow the program of the building to functionally operate and simultaneously attempt to appease the neighbors. Perhaps another good point to make to the neighbors is regarding the floor area ratio - Per county standards we are allowed 0.45 and we are only utilizing 0.24 (53% of maximum allowable square foot). Once again with this layout, the commons area is centrally located within the Assisted Living Units minimizing the walking distances; therefore food for the memory care facility would need to be carted. The water management would be distributed throughout the site in areas of dry detention. The building layout is articulated to allow for possibility of nicely landscape courtyards allowing for pleasant views from all units. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr ., 0. r Exhibit VD Page 36 of 106 ^. Section V - Page 31 AREA IDENTIFICATION The Project is to be located in southeastern portion of the community of Naples, Florida. The site has good access and exposure to the fronting streets. Access to Interstate 75 is via Golden Gate Parkway to the east, then south on CR 951. SITE CHARACTERISTICS Shape and Size: The site consists of an irregular- shaped tract of land consisting of two combined parcels of land totaling 9.62 acres. Of the total land area, a small portion is designated as nature preserve and for water management. Total developable area is 6.61 acres. Frontage: The site has frontage along the north side of Golden Gate Parkway and the west side of Santa Barbara Boulevard. Access: Current access to the site is via Golden Gate Parkway. Visibili and Exposure: Visibility and exposure are considered to be excellent. Curb Cuts: Curb cuts are currently along the north side of Golden Gate Parkway. Topography: Level topography throughout the site. Easements and Encumbrances: Typical utility easements that would not affect development of the site. Other Site Conditions: Ponds /Retention Ponds /Brush - None noted. Power Lines (plants) - Physical inspection indicated power lines along the Santa Barbara Boulevard road frontage. Underground Tanks - We are not aware of any underground tanks (oil and /or gasoline). Aboveground Tanks - None noted. Hazardous Waste: No adverse soil, or subsoil conditions. Any unapparent adverse soil, or subsoil conditions would need verification by a qualified expert. Drainage: Storm drainage appeared to be adequate on the day of the site visit. Utilities: All public utilities are available to the site. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr Z EXhibit VD Page 37 of 106 Section V - Page 32 Summary In summary, the site appears to be of adequate size, shape and utility to handle legally permissible uses. There are no noted hazards, or nuisances that would adversely restrict site development. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD Page 38 of 106 Section V - Page 33 AERIAL VIEW Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr O PROVINCE u<wndm,(;-y EXhibit VD Page 39 of 106 SITE MAP Section V- Page 34 d, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY con cvk"Sv�plw' Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties 4W PROVINCE [:/2]O8/rr EXhibit VD Page 40 of 106 Fm Section V - Page 35 CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY: BUILDING COLOR LEGEND: SITE DATA: GROSS SITE AREA - 9,62 +/- ACR S R.O.W. EASEMENTS— 3,01 -/ -ACRES HEALTH CARE NETACREAGE- 6.61 + 1- ACRES NATIVE PRESERVE -0.99 ACRES = 15% OF NET ACREAGE 1NATFR MANA GMW -0.99 ACRFS (WET $ DRY DETENTION = 1.5 COMMONS / SERVICiS BUILDING SUMMARY: 120 T0_AL 3C :S TOTAL S_F. - 67,8u0 S.F. (INCLUDING 2,200 S.F. REr1ABILITATION FACILITY; 92 ASSISTED LIVING BEDS - (ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY = 41,903 S.F.) ASSISTED LIVING (40) 1 B UNITS s: 352 S.F. EACH • (25) 2BR 1JNITS x'548 S.F, EACH (1) 26R SUITE Q764 S.F. EAC-i 28 MEMORY CARE BEDS - (MEMORY CARE FACILITY=] 3,90C S.f . � MEMORY CARE (18) 1 B UNITS 9 286 S F, EACH • (6) 2BR UNITS @ 324 5.F. EACH 8,800 S.F. COMMONS /SERVICES 3,200 S.F. REHABILITATION FACILITY FLOOR AREA RATIO CALCULATION: TOTAL EUILDING S.F. = 67.81,0 S.7. 70TA1 SITE - 6.61 ACRES= 287,931 S.>'. F.A.R. - 67,80C S.F. / 287,931 S.F. -.24 F.A.R. (,45 MAX; Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/ cr p PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 41 of 106 Section V - Page 36 LOCATION AND SUITABILITY OF SITE Positive Findin &s: • Easy access to area roadways; • Proximate to health care facilities (new hospital has been developed in South Naples); • The design and quality of the development will be superior to the majority of the surrounding development; and • The market demographics continue to indicate a growing market area. Challenges to the Project: The Project is located in an area that was in the process of redevelopment and is located adjacent to older housing and commercial/ retail uses. However, the site is located in a growth corridor and both Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway have recently been widened in anticipation of continued growth; and The site will be subject to specific zoning guidelines. WHAT IS THE CONDITION OF THE LOCAL REAL ESTATE MARKET? Positives: The housing values have declined throughout the Naples market area rendering the housing stock more affordable. However, the market area appears to have been on an upward trend over the last six months; and Population growth is positive and is anticipated to continue to grow due to favorable housing values. Negatives: • None noted. The market area appears to have entered a phase of economic recovery. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr ►z 0 AN yr: EXhibit VD Page 42 of 106 MARKET AREA DEFINED Primary Market Area (Defined) Section V - Page 37 The primary market area (PMA) consists of a geographic region radiating out from the Project. In general, the PMA defined by social, psychological and physical barriers. This area typically represents an area from which 50.0 percent to 90.0 percent of the potential residents are drawn to the Project. Physical barriers represent defined geographical lines that many prospective residents will not cross in order to use the project's services. Such barriers include railroad lines, rivers, creeks, mountain ranges, state lines, county lines, interstates and major arteries. Such barriers may create time barriers in addition to direct access barriers. Psychological barriers represent characteristics within certain ethnic categories. For instance, many of German decent prefer to care for their elderly at home rather than place them in an institutional setting. Finally, social barriers can also be representative of cultural and ethnic characteristics. However, social barriers may involve such items as Kosher requirements and /or other church- related requirements. Percentage of Market Draw The percentage of residents relocating to the community from outside the primary market area can range from 20.0 to 50.0 percent depending on a number of influencers which can include the following: • geographic make -up of the community; • economic make -up of the community and location within the community; • marketing by management/ ownership; and • percent of adult children living in the market area. Project's Primary Market Area (PMA) The Project will be located within the community of South Naples with limited competitive factors in the surrounding area. In order to estimate the primary market area from which residents will relocate to the Project, we have surveyed area operators, analyzed traffic patterns and surveyed area assisted living/ Alzheimer's facilities. The following analysis details our findings. Discussions with Area Operators - Marketing coordinators at the main comparables indicated the bulk of their resident base was from within five to ten miles of their centers and from within their respective portions of the county. The North Naples facilities tend to draw residents from North Naples and the South Naples facilities tend to draw residents from South Naples. The majority of the administrators also indicated a strong secondary market draw due to the "snowbirds" that relocated to the area during the winter months. Traffic Patterns - Another key factor affecting the primary market area is analysis of surrounding traffic patterns. Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway both provide Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr PROMNCE EXhibit VD Page 43 of 106 Section V - Page 38 excellent access through the community. In addition, Interstate 75 and U.S. Highway 41 /Tamiami Trail provide good access within the county and easy access to the surrounding communities. There are no barriers to transfer within the greater Naples area. Primary Market Area Conclusion Based on analysis of the market area, as well as analysis of the competitive centers in the surrounding area, the primary market area is considered to be a four zip -code area surrounding the Project (34112, 34104, 34119 and 34116). As noted above, the majority of the administrators surveyed indicated those residents that emanated from the surrounding area came from within a five- to ten -mile radius. The four zip -code area encompasses an approximate five mile area to the south, ten mile area to the north and five miles east to west along the southern portion of the primary market area (within an approximate 10- minute drive time). The northern portion of the primary market area extends two miles east /west and does not include North Naples or the communities to the west of Interstate 75. The following map depicts a 10- minute drive surrounding the Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 4W PROVINCE V.1 —;." G_'P EXhibit VD Page 44 of 106 The following map depicts the four zip -code primary market area. Section V - Page 39 D*Lorm4 5tro,i AtWi USAE' 1VuB F PRIMARY MARKET AREA r-f 1 \P 1 D41s• f \Y;1 BOHITA BEACH OF 1 \ f / \L7 urn II D911! I "34131 \l} IL +BOnita Springs A BEACH. RD I i it i i __ _ - , *___a�,,,,, ...34119 t �N I PtlD!, aria ' 3411! 4 f4Ut I 1 � ?gtj$ \ �PallcanPay $4162 I i � —_ i PRO 341J ¢ r • North 1440169 '\ i yyyae`13W" 311 OIiw I Nles East Naples/y '1 D41a1 341;1 i1s 3411' \•� �< � � 34t 14 t ; ,\ 11 .snrf HM �• 9i Sig \\`+, R;�tJcwq < fie+�derson ♦ -__EVERGLADESPKY z ADP9rk , r Data use subject to license. Mi © DeLorme. DeLorme Street Alas USA® 2009 0 1 2 3 4 5 www.delorme.com MN (4 9` W) Data Zoom 10-0 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr i0 PROMNCE V.&_h.. (,'—,p EXhibit VD Page 45 of 106 Section V - Page 40 SUPPLY ANALYSIS As indicated, there are no independent living communities located within the four zip -code primary market area. There is one assisted living facility within the primary market area (Terracina Grand) with several located along the periphery of the primary market area. The following table provides for a summary of the facilities surveyed and those facilities either located inside the primary market area and /or on the periphery of the primary market area. FACILITY IL AL ALZ SNF COMMENTS IL AL ALZ SNF Arden Courts 52 50% COMPETITIVE 26 Barrington Terrace 89 31 O 5011% COMPETITIVE 45 15 Lely Palms 200 ® = =F 50 -% COMPETITIVE F 100 ® F 59 Terracina Grand 137 33 O COMPETITIVE-----1 137 33 Aston Gardens 276 83 OUTSIDE PMA The Carlisle 254 125 OUTSIDE PMA The Glenview 140 35 OUTSIDE PMA Harbor Chase 93 40 OUTSIDE PMA Homewood Residence 76 24 OUTSIDE PMA The Moorings 355 74 35 OUTSIDE PMA Tuscany Villa 136 OUTSIDE PMA Windsor Place 50 OUTSIDE PMA TOTALS 1,318 778 140 347 100 190 74 179 The following charts detail the comparables that were surveyed. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr Ir yPROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 46 of 106 ASSISTED LIVING COMPARABLE Name: Location: County: City, State: Type: Land Area: Gross Living Area (Est): Number of H, Units: Number of AIJALZ Unit: Average Size Per Unit: Year Built: Number of Stories: Exterior: MANAGEMENT VERIFICATION SURVEY DATE OCCUPANCY HCR- ManorCare LLC Administrator 11/01/11 96.43 OWNERSHIP HCR- ManorCare LLC UNJT MIX NO. UNITS BATHS MONTHLY RATE DAILY RATE Private Studio 48 1.0 $5,415 $178.03 Semi - Private Studio 4 1.0 $4,460 $146.63 AMENITIES AMENITIES SERVICES IGtchen No Courtyard/S un room Yes Assistance with Meds Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Yes Toileting Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor No Dressing Waite red Meals Three Walking Path Yes Assistance to Meals Buffet N/A library Yes Utilffrans/Housekeeping Arts and Crafts Yes Level I Deposit $2,500 Beauty/Barber Yes Level H Refundable No Laundry One Level HI Rent Increase 04% Average Age Stucco Level IV www.her-manorcare.com STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: Year Constructed 1988 Number Stories One IndividualHeat/Aif Interior Condition Average Building Materials Stucco Assessment Site Location Good Exterior Condition Average Nursing Staff Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr Section V - Page 41 Arden Court of Naples 6125 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. Collier County Naples, Florida AL and ACZ N/A 29,532 N/A 52 N/A 1998 One S to cco www.hcr-nianorcare.com SQUARE FEET 960 960 Included Included Included Included Partial N/A N/A N/A N/A No Yes Yes (on-going) No PROVWC:E EXhibit VD Page 47 of 106 Section V - Page 42 Arden Courts Arden Courts is co- located with the ManorCare owned and operated Lely Palms Retirement community. Arden Courts is primarily focused on Alzheimer's and dementia care in studio and semi - private units. The facility is operated by ManorCare and the center remains full allowing for turn -over (occupancy has been consistently above 90.0 percent during the last twelve months). The Lely Palms Campus is located just south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and just below the southern extent of the Primary Market Area (PMA). Arden Courts was designed exclusively for individuals in early -to -mid stages of Alzheimer's disease. Special attention has been given to physical building layout, safety and decor. Modified activity and food service programs focus on preferences, abilities and, most importantly, maintaining independence for as long as possible. As Arden Courts does accept residents from outside of the Lely Palms community, Arden Courts is considered to be partially competitive (50.0 percent) with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr AW PROVINCE u.h.M„ (;—,p EXhibit VD Page 48 of 106 W.J Section V - Page 43 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD iff PROVINCE u,h.l,,.,, G—P Page 49 of 106 ASSISTED LIVING COMPARABLE LOCATION DATA Name: Barrington Terrace l Location: County: 5175 Tamiami Trail East Collier County City, State: Naples, Florida a P14YS ICAL DATA 1� Type: Assisted and Alz. Land Area: N/A Gross living Area (Est): 54,073 Number of AL Units: 89 Number of ALZ Units: 31 Average Size Per Unit: 451 Year Built: 2004 Number of S tones: Two Exterior: Stucco and Frame Condition: Good www.bt- nanles.com MANAGEMENT VERIFICATION S URVEY DATE AL-OCCUPANCY ALZ OCCUPANCY The Arbor Company Executive Director 11 /01 /11 91.01% 90.32 OWNERSHIP Brookdale Senior Living UNIT MIX NO.BEDS BATHS MONTHLYRATE DAILY RATE SQUAREFEET Studio 59 1.0 $2,775 $91.23 268 One - Bedroom 30 1.0 $4,075 $133.97 476 Studio - Alz. 20 1.0 $4,575 $150.41 268 Semi - Private Alz. 11 1.0 $5,875 $193.15 350 Second Person Fee $900 AMENITIES AMENITIES SERVICES Kitchen Yes Courtyard/S un room Yes Assistance with Meds For a Fee Full Bath Yes Fitness Room No Toileting For a Fee Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor No Dressing Fora Fee Waitered Meals Three Walking Garden Yes Assistance to Meals For a Fee Buffet N/A library Yes Util/Trans/Housekeeping Included Arts and Crafts Yes Level I $400 Deposit $1,500 Beauty/Barber Yes Level H $800 Refundable No Laundry Yes Level 111 $1,500 Rent Increase 3% Average Age Two Evergreen $1,800 STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: Year Constructed 2004 Number Stories Two Individual Heat /Air Yes Interior Condition Good Building Materials Stucco and Frame Assessment Yes Site Location Average Exterior Condition Good Nursing Staff No Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD iff PROVINCE u,h.l,,.,, G—P Page 49 of 106 Section V - Page 44 Barrington Terrace Barrington Terrace is an assisted living and Alzheimer's facility with small unit sizes. This design, in combination with the property's proximity to the noise and dense traffic of Tamiami Trail and its location on the south side of Naples, works against the overall attractiveness of the facility. However, the property is well maintained, has a good reputation in the community and overlooks the Lely Palms Golf Course. The center provides for three meals per day, daily housekeeping, transportation, activities and assistance with activities of daily living. The center has nicely designed and appointed common areas including; a dining room, beauty salon, library, lounge and a therapy room. Units include kitchenettes (with the exception of the small studio which is 268 square feet). The "Evergreen" dementia care wing charges a $1,800 premium on top of the unit rent. Therefore, a studio unit in Evergreen would be $4,575 per month. This facility is located just south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and east of Tamiami Trail (U.S. Route 41) which is just outside the primary market area (along the periphery) and will be partially competitive (50.0 percent) with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr 4W PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 50 of 106 INDEPENDENT LIVING COMPARABLE MANAGEMENT DAILY RATE VERIFICATION HCR- ManorCare 11.0 $55.89 Marketing Director OWNERS HIP $62.47 596 HCR ManorCare LLC $70.68 750 UNIT MIX NO. UNITS BATHS IL- Studio 48 1.0 LL- Alcove Studio 19 1.0 IL- One Bedroom 90 1.0 IL -Two Bedroom 33 1.0 IL- Villa 52 1.0 AT-Private 4 1.0 AIGSemi- Private 4 1.0 SNF Private 24 1.0 SNFSemi- Private 46 1.0 AMENITIES Assistance to Meals AMENITIES Kitchen Yes Courtyard/Sunroom Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor WaiteredMeals Two Walking Path Buffet N/A library www.hcr- manomam.com Arts and Crafts Deposit $1,500 Beauty/Barber Refundable No Laundry Rent Increase 04% Average Age STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: No Year Constructed 1984 Number Stories Interior Condition Average Building Materials Site Location Good Exterior Condition Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr Type: Land Area: Gross living Area (Est): Number of IL Units: Number of AL Units: Average Size Per Unit: Year Built: Number of Stories: Exterior: SURVEYDATE OCCUPANCY 11/01/11 99.00 Section V - Page 45 1000 Lely Palms Drive Collier County Naples, Florida 28 N/A 200 8 N/A 1984 Three S tucco www.hcr-trianorcare.com MONTHLVRATE DAILY RATE SQUARE FEET $1,700 $55.89 350 $1,900 $62.47 596 $2,150 $70.68 750 $2,600 $85.48 1100 $2,600 $85.48 1500 $3,950 $129.86 596 $3,350 $110.14 596 $9,360 $307.72 275 $8,892 $292.35 275 SERVICES Yes Assistance with Meds Included Yes Toileting Included No Dressing Included Yes Assistance to Meals Included Yes Util/Lrans/Housekeeping Partial Yes LevelI N/A Yes Level H N/A Yes Level In N/A 80 Level TV N/A www.hcr- manomam.com No One Individual Heat /Air Yes Stucco Assessment Yes (on- going) Average Nursing Staff No EXhibit VD 4W PROVINCE Page 51 of 106 Section V - Page 46 Lely Palms Retirement Lely Palms Retirement campus includes the Arden Courts dementia care facility, as well as 148 independent living apartments, 52 independent living villas, an eight unit twelve bed assisted living center and a 117 bed nursing center. All of these centers are in place primarily for the residents of Lely Palms, but the nursing center does accept private pay patients from outside the community. As Lely Palms does provide month -to -month independent living rentals and the nursing center is available to non - residents of the community, this community is considered to be partially (50.0 percent) competitive with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr PROVINCE V.1-t- G-V EXhibit VD Page 52 of 106 w MANAGEMENT N/A OWNERSHIP N/A UNIT MIX Studio One - Bedroom One- Bedroom/Den Two-Bedroom Two Bedroom Deluxe Studio ALZ One - Bedroom ALZ Second Person Fee NO. UNITS 57 30 20 20 10 23 10 ASSISTED LIVING COMPARABLE 1 VERIFICATION Marketing Director BATHS 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 AMEN III I US Terracina Grand AMEN I I7ES Kitchenette Yes Courtyard/Sunroom Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor Waitered Meals 2 (H); 3 (AL) Walking Garden Buffet N/A library Number of ALZ Units: 33 Arts and Crafts New Resident Fee $1,500 Beauty/Barber Refundable No Laundry Rent Increase 3-4% Average Age STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: www.terracinurand.co m Year Constructed 2001 Number Stories Interior Condition Good Building Materials Site Location Good Exterior Condition Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr Section V - Page 47 Name: Terracina Grand location: 6825 Davis Boulevard County: Collier County City, S late: Naples, Florida _Lill S ICAL DATA Assistance to Meals type: ALAALZ Land Area: 12.72 Gross Living Area (Est): N/A Number of AL Units: 137 Number of ALZ Units: 33 Average Size Per Unit: N/A Year Built: 2001 Number of S tones: Four Exterior: Stucco Condition: Good www.terracinurand.co m AL- OCCUPANCY ALZ- OCCUPANCY 100.00% 96.97% DAILY RATE SQUARE FEET $88.27 410 $108.82 600 $138.08 750 $144.66 950 $164.38 1050 $148.27 410 $168.82 600 EXhibit VD For a Fee For a Fee For a Fee For a Fee Included $1,275 $1,525 $1,825 $2,050 Yes Yes No �V PROVINCE r.rh.xi , Page 53 of 106 NEKVIUM Yes Assistance with Meds Yes Toileting No Dressing Four Assistance to Meals Stucco Utilffrans/tIousekeeping Good Level Yes Level D Yes Level DI 84 Level IV Four Individual Heat/Air Stucco Assessment Good Nursing Staff EXhibit VD For a Fee For a Fee For a Fee For a Fee Included $1,275 $1,525 $1,825 $2,050 Yes Yes No �V PROVINCE r.rh.xi , Page 53 of 106 Section V - Page 48 Terracina Grand Terracina Grand is located off of Davis Boulevard (State Route 84), just west of Santa Barbara Boulevard and within the Primary Market Area (PMA). Terracina Grand offers assisted living and Alzheimer's care in a well- designed enclave community. The building and grounds are well- maintained and residents can choose from a variety of floor plans including studio, one- bedroom, one - bedroom with a den, or two- bedroom unit. The amenities at Terracina Grand include a fitness center, a beauty salon and spa, a heated pool, paved waking areas, an elegant main lobby with a water fountain, an elegant dining room, a private dining room, a billiards room, patio areas for outdoor activities, a library, a fireplace lounge and the Forum for special events and large groups. The Terracina Grand provides scheduled transportation and social and recreational activities. The facility includes a complimentary laundry on each floor as well as massage services, nail services and full- and half -day spa treatments. Some units also have washer /dryers, dishwashers and fireplaces (upgrades). The center has remained near full capacity during the last three years. Unit rental rates increase on a schedule of from 3.0 to 4.0 percent per year. The above rates are reflective of the minimum rent. This facility bases the unit rent on a standard monthly rent plus the level of care required. Dementia care units include level III in the unit rate. Terracina Grand is considered to be 100.0 percent competitive with the assisted living and Alzheimer's services of the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr AW PROVINCE V,&."." cep EXhibit VD Page 54 of 106 Section V - Page 49 INDEPENDENT AND ASSISTED LIVING COMPARABLE MANAGEMENT Senion Living Property Co. LLC OWNERSHIP Senion Living Property Co. LLC UNIT MIX NO. UNITS IL - Canterbury 75 IL - Bridgeport 45 IL - Alexandra 50 IL - Essex 40 IL - Dartmouth 40 IL - Grandeur 14 IL - Harrington 12 AL- Studio 33 AL- One - Bedroom 20 AL- Two - Bedroom 10 AIZ- One - Bedroom 20 Second Person Fee VERIFICATION SURVEYDATE Marketing Director 11 /01 /11 Type: Land Area: Gross Living Area (Est): Number of IL Units: Number of AL Units: Average Size Per Unit: Year Built: Number of Stories: Exterior: Condition: IGOCCUPANCY 100.00 4800 Aston Gardens Way Collier County Naples, Florida 23.25 N/A 276 83 N/A 1999 One Stucco Good AI/ALZ- OCCUPANCY 100.00 BATHS MONTHLY RATE DAILY RATE SQUARE FEET 1.0 $2,305 $75.78 710 1.0 $2,550 $83.84 856 2.0 $2,950 $96.99 1010 2.0 $3,075 $101.10 1108 2.0 $3,375 $110.96 1382 2.5 $3,575 $117.53 1289 2.5 $3,995 $131.34 1546 1.0 $2,895 $95.18 342 1.0 $3,595 $118.19 503 1.0 $4,895 $160.93 738 1.0 $4,095 $134.63 248 $850 AMENITIES SERVICES AMENITIES Kitchenette Yes Courtyard/Sunroom Full Bath Yes Fi tin ess Room Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor Waitered Meals Yes Walking Garden Buffet N/A Library IL- Community Fee $2,000 Arts and Crafts AL- Community Fee $1,500 Beauty/Barber Refundable No Laundry Rent Increase 1-3% Average Age STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: Individual Heat /Air Yes Year Constructed 1997 Number Stories Interior Condition Good Building Materials Site Location Good Exterior Condition Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr Aff PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 55 of 106 SERVICES Yes Assistance with Meds Included Yes Toileting Included No Dressing Included Yes Assistance to Meals Included Yes Util/rrans/Housekeeping Included Yes Levell N/A No Level H N/A One Level Ill N/A Stucco Level IV N/A One Individual Heat /Air Yes Stucco Assessment Yes Good Nursing Staff N/A Aff PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 55 of 106 Section V - Page 50 Aston Gardens Aston Gardens at Pelican Marsh is a large high -end retirement community, which offers independent living, assisted living and Alzheimer's care services. The 24 -acre gated campus is located just south of Immokalee Road (County Road 846) and west of Interstate 75. The community includes 100 privately owned villas, 276 independent living apartments ranging in size from 710 to 1,382 square feet and from one to three bedrooms, as well as a separate assisted living and Alzheimer's facility (The Inn) which provides 83 studio, one - bedroom and two - bedroom accommodations and a locked Alzheimer's wing (The Gardens). Located at The Gardens in The Inn, is the Special Needs area for residents with memory care related issues. Residents needing Alzheimer's care and other dementia care receive the very best attention and services in a supportive, compassionate and secure setting. All amenities are available to independent living residents including golf privileges and access to the luxurious common spaces in the 20,375 square foot Grande Clubhouse. The Grande Clubhouse includes dining areas, a ballroom, lounge areas, a fitness and wellness center, a heated pool and spa, arts and crafts areas and a library and internet cafe. The campus includes walking paths, putting greens and a Bocce Ball court. This property is located outside of the Primary Market Area (PMA and will not be competitive with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr Qr PROVINCE uat —f;.» G—P EXhibit VD Page 56 of 106 MANAGEMENT SRGSenior living OWNERSHIP SRGSenior living UNIT MIX IL- One - Bedroom IL- One - Bedroom IL- One - Bedroom IL- Two - Bedroom IL - Two-Bedroom AL- One - Bedroom Second Person Fee Section V - Page 51 INDEPENDENT AND ASSISTED LIVING COMPARABLE NO. UNITS 64 50 50 50 40 IKI VERIFICATION SURVEY DATE Marketing Director 11 /01 /11 BATHS 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 2.0 1.0 AMENITIES S ERVICES AMENITIES Kitchen AL Units Cou rtyard/S un room Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor Waitered Meals Three Walking Garden Buffet N/A library Community Fee $1,500 Arts and Crafts Pet Fee $500 Beauty/Barber Refundable N/A Laundry Rent Increase 3% Average Age STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: Year Constructed 1996 Number Stories Interior Condition Good Building Materials Site Location Good Exterior Condition Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr MONTHLY RATE $2,625 $2,900 $3,150 $3,350 $3,750 $3,880 $800 LOCATION DATA Name: Location: County: City, State: PHYSICAL DATA Type: Land Area: Gross Living Area (Est): Number of H. Units: Number of AL Units: Average Size Per Unit: Year Built: Number of Stories: Exterior: Condition: IL-OCCUPANCY 100.00 DAILY RATE $86.30 $95.34 $103.56 $110.14 $123.29 $127.56 The Carlisle 6945 Carlisle Court Collier County Naples, Florida H, and AL 28 N/A 254 125 N/A 1996 Three Stucco Good www.srgsenior1ivmg.co AL- OCCUPANCY 100.00 S O UARE FEET 420 550 873 1,026 1,075 480 Three Stucco Good Individual Heat /Air Yes Assessment Yes Nursing Staff No O PROVINCE value.„ G—P EXhibit VD Page 57 of 106 S ERVICES Yes Assistance with Meds Fora Fee Yes Toileting Fora Fee No Dressing Fora Fee Yes Assistance to Meals For a Fee Yes Util/Trans/Housekeeping Included Yes Level l Included in Rent Yes Level H $450 Yes Level M $800 80 Level IV N/A Three Stucco Good Individual Heat /Air Yes Assessment Yes Nursing Staff No O PROVINCE value.„ G—P EXhibit VD Page 57 of 106 Section V - Page 52 ThP C nrlieln The Carlisle is a large high -end retirement community which offers independent and assisted living. The 28 acre gated campus is located just west of Airport Pulling Road (County Road 31) and just south of Orange Blossom Drive. The community includes 254 independent living apartments with one and two- bedroom floor plans ranging in size from 420 to 1,075 square feet. The gated campus includes a wellness center, walking paths and a range of amenities including a well- designed heated outdoor pool and spa, common and private dining rooms, library, putting green, business center, deli, computer room, fitness center, courtyard and concierge services. All living accommodations are contained within the one building. In addition, there are 125 private one - bedroom assisted living apartments. Both the independent living and assisted living accommodations are currently at full capacity with a waiting list. The center provides for two meals per day in independent living and three meals for assisted living, housekeeping services, transportation, activities and assistance with activities of daily living. The community is gated. Unit options also include dens and split floor plans. Units have full kitchens, private baths, washer /dryer, walk -in closets, individually controlled HVAC and emergency pull cords. This facility is located outside the primary market area and will not be competitive with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr iff PROVINCE V.I—,inn Gmi p EXhibit VD Page 58 of 106 Section V - Page 53 INDEPENDENT AND NURSING COMPARABLE MANAGEMENT The Glenview Cooperative OWNERSHIP The Glenview Cooperative UNIT MIX One - Bedroom NO. UNITS 70 VERIFICATION Market BATHS 1.0 SURVF.N 11/01/11 MONTHLYRATE N DA I E A Two-Bedroom 50 2.0 N A Three - Bedroom 16 2.0 N A Penthouse 4 3.0 N A SNFPrivate 35 1.0 $9, 77 AMENITIES AMENITIES Kitchen Yes Courtyard/Sunroom Y s Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Y s Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor o Waitered Meals Three Walking Garden Y s Buffet N/A library Y s Arts and Crafts ISO Deposit N/A Beauty/Barber Yes Refundable N/A Laundry Yts Rent Increase 3% Average Age 15 STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: Year Constructed 1993 Number Stories Ten Interior Condition Good Building Materials Stucco Site Location Good Exterior Condition Good Naples Market Study Y Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr Name: Location: County: City, State: .Jr... land Area: Gross living Area (Est): Number of H. Units: Number of SNF Beds: Average Size Per Unit: Year Built: Number of Stories: Exterior: Condition: OCCUPANCY AL 93.00% DAILY RATE N/A N/A N/A N/A $328.00 SERVICES Assistance with Meds Toileting Dressing Assistance to Meals Uti I/IYans/Housekeepin g Level I Level H Level III Level IV Individual Heat /Air Assessment Nursing Staff 100 Glenview Place Collier County Naples, Florida N/A N/A 140 35 N/A 1993 Ten Stucco Good www.glenviewnar)les.com SQUARE FEET 750 1,450 2,100 3,500 300 For a Fee Fora Fee Fora Fee For a Fee Included N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes Yes Yes PROVINCE 1 alumina Grnup EXhibit VD Page 59 of 106 Section V - Page 54 The Glenview The Glenview at Pelican Bay is a high -end (equity) retirement community which offers independent and assisted living care. The Glenview is located just west of Tamiami Trail (U.S. Route 41) and one -half mile north of Seagate Drive (County Road 896). The Glenview offers 140, one -, two- and three- bedroom private residences and penthouse apartments and the eighteen different floor plans ranging from 891 to 3,200 square feet of living space. Each apartment is elegantly designed and features a gourmet style kitchen and coffered ceilings and crown molding throughout. The community includes lush and ample common areas including a pool and spa, common and private dining rooms, library, auditorium, business center, computer room, fitness center, a card room, a fully equipped arts and crafts room and an art studio. Residents have access to the private beach and boardwalk along Pelican Bay. The center provides residents two meals per day in the main dining room. Services include housekeeping, transportation and activities coordination. In addition to the independent living apartments and common areas the campus includes Premier Place at the Glenview, a health care center which provides short and long term health care services to those who have purchased residences in The Glenview Retirement Center, as well as to private pay patients when availability permits. Premier Place has 35 care units and the main entrance to the healthcare facility is at the rear of the building. All units are private and private pay. This facility is located outside the primary market area and will not be competitive with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr Ir PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 60 of 106 ASSISTED LIVING AND NURSING COMPARABLE MANAGEMENT MONTHLY RATE N/A SQUARE FEET OWNERSHIP $1,995 Harbor Retirement Associates, LLC 333 UNIT MIX NO. UNITS Studio 53 One - Bedroom 20 One - Bedroom - Den 20 SNF Private 10 SNF Semi - Private 15 VERIFICATION Marketing Director Section V - Page 55 Name: Location: County: City, State: PHYSICAL DATA Type: Land Area: Gross Living Area (Est): Number of AL Units: Number of SNF Units: Average Size Per Unit: Year Built: Number of Stories: Exterior: Condition: SURVEYDATE OCCUPANCYAL 11/01/11 86.02 7801 Airport Pulling Road Collier County Naples, Florida N/A N/A 93 40 N/A 1998 Three Stucco Good www.harborchase.com OCCUPANCY SNF 95.00 BATHS MONTHLY RATE DAILY RATE SQUARE FEET 1.0 $1,995 $65.59 333 1.0 $2,525 $83.01 435 1.0 $3,550 $116.71 510 1.0 $7,908 $260.00 258 1.0 $7,148 $235.00 258 AMENITIES AMENITIES S ERVICES Kitchen Yes Con rtyard/S un room Yes Assistance with Meds Fora Fee Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Yes Toileting For a Fee Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor No Dressing For a Fee Waitered Meals Three Walking Garden Yes Assistance to Meals Fora Fee Buffet N/A Library Yes Util/rrans/Housekeeping Included Deposit $1,500 Arts and Crafts No Level 1 $500 Pet Deposit $500 Beauty/Barber Yes Level H $950 Refundable No Laundry Yes Level 111 $1,350 Rent Increase 3% Average Age N/A STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: Year Constructed 1998 Number Stories Three Individual Heat /Air Yes Interior Condition Good Building Materials Stucco Assessment Yes Site Location Good Exterior Condition Good Nursing Staff No Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD M► PROVINCE V4&.1;.„ G—P Page 61 of 106 Section V - Page 56 Harbor Chase Harbor Chase is an assisted living and Alzheimer's care facility located just west of Airport Pulling Road (County Road 31) and just south of Vanderbilt Beach Road (County Road 862). Harbor Chase offers 93 assisted living units ranging from a 333 square foot studio to a 510 square foot one - bedroom with a den. Harbor Chase also has a 40 -bed nursing center with 10 private and fifteen semi - private rooms each with a private bathroom and 258 square feet of space. The center includes a full range of amenities including a formal dining room, beauty salon, library and lounge areas and a therapy room. Residents are provided with three meals per day, daily housekeeping, transportation, activities and assistance with activities of daily living. This facility is located outside the primary market area and will not be competitive with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr V PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 62 of 106 OWNERSHIP NHPMS,LLC UNIT MIX ASSISTED LIVING COMPARABLE BATHS Studio AL 36 1.0 LOCATION DATA °'•� 1.0 Two - Bedroom AL 20 1.0 Studio ALZ 24 1.0 Extra Person Fee Name: AMENITIES Kitchen Yes Location: Full Bath Yes Fitness Room County: x Ice Cream Parlor Waitered Meals Three Walking Garden t5� N/A City, State: Arts and Crafts PHYS ICAL DATA $2,500 BeautyBarber Refundable Type: Laundry r 1-2% Average Age STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: Year Constructed Land Area: Number Stories Interior Condition Good Gross Living Area (Est): Site Location Good Exterior Condition Number of AL Units: tF Number of ALZ Units: Average Size Per Unit: R r� Year Built: Number of Stories: Exterior: Condition: MANAGEMENT VERIFICATION SURVEY DATE AL-OCCUPANCY Brookdale Senior Living Marketing Director 11/01 /11 85.53 OWNERSHIP NHPMS,LLC UNIT MIX NO. UNITS BATHS Studio AL 36 1.0 One - Bedroom AL 20 1.0 Two - Bedroom AL 20 1.0 Studio ALZ 24 1.0 Extra Person Fee AMENITIES AMENITIES Kitchen Yes Courtyard/S un room Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor Waitered Meals Three Walking Garden Buffet N/A library Arts and Crafts Community Fee $2,500 BeautyBarber Refundable N/A Laundry Rent Increase 1-2% Average Age STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: Year Constructed 1999 Number Stories Interior Condition Good Building Materials Site Location Good Exterior Condition MONTHLY RATE $2,980 $3,570 $5,205 $5,630 $650.00 Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Four Stucco Good Four S tucco Good DAILY RATE $97.97 $117.37 $171.12 $185.10 SERVICES Assistance with Meds Toileting Dressing Assistance to Meals Util/Erans/Housekee pi ng Level I Level H Level III Level IV Individual HeatlAir Assessment Nursing Staff Section V - Page 57 Homewood Residence at Naples 770 Goodlette Road N. Collier County Naples, Florida AL and ALZ 3.16 38,191 76 24 503 1999 Four S tucco Good ALZ-OCCUPANCY 100.00 SQUARE FEET 500 600 972 300 Fora Fee Fora Fee Fora Fee For a Fee Included $385 $740 $1,065 N/A Yes Yes (on- going) No Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties O PROVINCE C: /2108 /cr EXhibit VD Page 63 of 106 Section V - Page 58 Homewood Residence Homewood Residence at Naples offers assisted living and Alzheimer's and Dementia Care. The Alzheimer's program is provided in Clare Bridge Place which provides programs and a secured environment for those who have Alzheimer's or other types of dementia. Units include emergency pull cords, fire detectors and private baths and kitchenettes. Services include three meals per day, housekeeping, transportation, assistance with activities of daily living and activities. This community is typically full with a wait list. The demand for dementia care remains very strong, but demand for assisted living has not been as strong during the last twelve months. The marketing director indicated that while concessions are not routinely being granted, they would work with potential residents. This facility is located outside the primary market area and is not considered competitive. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr O PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 64 of 106 MANAGEMENT The Moorings Inc. OWNERSHIP The Moorings Inc. UNIT MIX NO. UNITS BATHS IL- One - Bedroom 175 1.0 IL- Two - Bedroom 125 2.0 IL- Three- Bedroom 55 3.0 AL- One - Bedroom 74 1.0 SNF Private 36 1.0 SNF Semi - Private 35 1.0 AMENITIES AMENITIES Kitchen Yes Courtyard/Sunroom Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor Waitered Meals Three Walking Garden Buffet N/A library Community Fee Yes Arts and Crafts Pet Fee N/A Beauty/Barber Refundable N/A Laundry Rent Increase 3% Average Age STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS: Year Constructed 1980 Number Stories Interior Condition Good Building Materials Site Location Good Exterior Condition CCRC COMPARABLE N. Section V - Page 59 • Name: m Location: m County: F City, State: PHYSICALDATA Type. Land Area: Gross living Area (Est): Number of H. Units: Number of AL Units: ' Number of SNF Units: Year Built: Number of Stories: Exterior: Condition: IL-OCCUPANCY 100.00% VERIFICATION SURVEY DATE Marketing Director 11/01/11 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108 /cr ENTRYPRICE MONTHLY FEE $247,000 $3,000 $850,000 $5,000 $2,300,000 $7,000 N/A N/A $12,410 $408.00 $8,760 $288.00 SERVICES Yes Assistance with Meds Yes Toileting No Dressing Yes Assistance to Meals Yes Util/frans/Housekeeping Yes Level Yes Level H Yes Level HI so Levelly Varies Individual Heat /Air Varies Assessment Good Nursing Staff EXhibit VD Moorings Park 120 Moorings Park Drive Collier County Naples, Florida CCRC 97 N/A 355 74 71 1980 Varies Varies Good www.sr2seniorhving.co m AL- OCCUPANCY 100.00% SQUARE FEET 882 2,560 4,240 480 300 300 For a Fee Fora Fee For a Fee Fora Fee Included N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes Yes No Yrn(Rwatvnrr C'rtonp Page 65 of 106 Section V - Page 60 Moorings Park Moorings Park is a large high -end continuing care retirement community (CCRC), which offers independent living, assisted living, nursing care services. The 83 -acre gated campus is located within the city of Naples and one -half mile east of Tamiami Trail (U.S. Route 41) and one -half mile south of Pine Ridge Road (County Road 896). Moorings Park provides 355 independent living units in four different settings (buildings) and over thirty different floor plans for independent living with plans ranging from 882 square feet to 4,240 square feet of living space. Moorings Park is also in the final construction phase of three new independent living buildings which will provide 29 lakefront residences featuring private grand terraces and living space ranging from 1,800 to 5,550 square feet. These building will include new amenities such as a rooftop garden and a new dining and lounging venue. Occupancy is scheduled for Fall of 2012. In addition to independent living, Moorings Park provides assisted living services in Orchid Terrace a 24,315 square foot Extended Congregate Care (ECC) facility with 74 private apartments and suites. The ECC designation allows Orchid Terrace to provide residents with higher levels of care than the assisted living license allows. When residents require higher levels of care or rehabilitation, The Chateau provides skilled nursing care (separate three -story facility consisting of 6,392 square feet). The Chateau is surrounded by 14 landscaped acres. The Chateau has rehabilitation on the first floor and private and semi - private rooms on the second and third floors. The Chateau is licensed for 106 beds. This property is located outside of the Primary Market Area (PMA and will not be competitive with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 4RNPRD\ANCE vkh.u." G —P EXhibit VD Page 66 of 106 Section V - Page 61 ASSISTED LIVING COMPARABLE LOCATION DATA Name: Tuscany Villa of Naples Location: 8901 Tamiami Trail County: Collier County City, State: Naples, Florida :r t•,; �_', PHYSICALDATA e Type: Independent and AL i ti Land Area: 4.88 Gross living Area (Est): 42,000 Number of IL Units: N/A Number of AL Units: 136 Average Size Per Unit: N/A c� Year Built: 1998 Number of Stories: Three Exterior. S tucco Condition: Good www.tus canyvillaof naples.com MANAGEMENT VERIFICATION SURVEYDATE OCCUPANCY AL Five Star Quality Care Marketing Director 11/01/11 86.00% OWNERSHIP Five Star Quality Care UNIT MIX NO. BEDS BATHS MONTHLY RATE DAILY RATE SQUARE FEET' Studio 24 1.0 $2,005 $65.92 286 Studio Deluxe 24 1.0 $2,205 $72.49 324 Studio Suite 24 1.0 $2,505 $82.36 420 One - Bedroom 20 1.0 $2,905 $95.51 572 One - Bedroom 20 1.0 $3,105 $102.08 700 Two - Bedroom 12 1.0 $3,400 $111.78 1,010 Two - Bedroom 12 1.0 $3,500 $115.07 1100 AMENITIES AMENITIES SERVICES Kitchen Yes Courtyard/Sunroom Yes Assistance with Meds For a Fee Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Yes Toileting For a Fee Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor No Dressing For a Fee Waitered Meals 3 Walking Garden Yes Assistance to Meals For a Fee Buffet N/A Library Yes Util/Trans/Housekeeping Included Deposit $1,000 Arts and Crafts No Level I Included in Rent Pety Deposit $250 Beauty/Barber Yes Level H $350 Refundable No Laundry Yes Level HI $650 Rent Increase 3% Average Age N/A Level IV $850 Level V $1,050 Level VI $1,250 STRUCTURALCOMPONENTS: Year Constructed 1998 Number Stories Three Individual Heat /Air Yes Interior Condition Good Building Materials Stucco Assessment Yes Site Location Good Exterior Condition Good Nursing Staff No Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Pro erties d PROVINCE C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD Page 67 of 106 Section V - Page 62 Tuscany Villa Tuscany Villa of Naples is located just east of Tamiami Trail (U.S. Route 41) and approximately a mile south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Tuscany Villa is a resort - style assisted living community which provides 136 living units ranging from a 286 square foot studio to a 1,100 square foot two- bedroom suite. Tuscany Villa provides competitive and well- designed amenities including elegant living and dining areas, a beauty salon, a library, an internet cafe, a bar and bistro and an on -site clinic with visiting physicians. Tuscany Villa was totally renovated five years ago and remains in very good condition with excellent curb appeal. However, occupancy remains slightly low (mid 80th percentile) due to Tuscany Villas' location on the south side of Naples. This facility is located outside the primary market area and will not be competitive with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr ► PROVINCE verb.„ cro,,p EXhibit VD Page 68 of 106 MANAGEMENT Senion Living Property Co. L LC OWNERSHIP Senion Living Property Co. LL.0 UNIT MIX NO. UNITS Studio 43 One- Bedroom 7 Second Person Fee Section V - Page 63 ASSISTED LIVING COMPARABLE BATHS 1.0 1.0 AMENITIES LOCATION DATA e ffi p sill Name: Yes Location: Full Bath Yes Fitness Room County: Yes City, State: Waitered Meals PHYS ICAL DATA Walking Garden Type: N/A Land Area: Gross Living Area (Est): Arts and Crafts Number of IL Units: None Number of AL Units: exe Average Size Per Unit: laundry Year Built: 1 -3% Number of Stories: Exterior. " . Condition: VERIFICA'T'ION St'RVEYDATE OCCUPANCY Administrator 11/01/11 86.00% BATHS 1.0 1.0 AMENITIES AMENITLFS Kitchenette Yes Courtyard/Sunroom Full Bath Yes Fitness Room Shower Yes Ice Cream Parlor Waitered Meals Yes Walking Garden Buffet N/A Library Arts and Crafts New Resident Services Fee None Beauty/Barber Refundable N/A laundry Rent Increase 1 -3% Average Age Year Constructed 1997 NumberStories Interior Condition Good Building Materials Site Location Good Exterior Condition DAILY RATE $105.21 $118.36 SERVICES Assistance with Meds Toileting Dressing Assistance to Meals Uti l/Trans/Housekee pi n g Moderate Care Heavy Care One Individual Heat /Air Stucco Assessment Average Nursing Staff NYindsor Place 2626 Goodlette Road Collier County Naples, Florida Assisted Living N/A N/A N/A 50 N/A 1997 One Stucco Good SQUARE FEET 384 500 Included Included Included Included Included $1,000 $1,500 Yes Yes N/A Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties PROVINCE C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD Page 69 of 106 Section V - Page 64 Windcnr Mart- Windsor Place is located off Goodlette Road and one -half mile east of Tamiami Trail (U.S. Route 41) and a quarter -mile north of Golden Gate Parkway. Windsor Place is a small assisted living facility that has an Extended Congregate Care (ECC) license which allows Windsor Place to provide higher levels of care than the assisted living license normally allows. The center is currently 86.0 percent full but has experienced difficulty in maintaining full occupancy due to turn -over from hospice care and market challenges. The center provides for three meals per day, daily housekeeping, transportation, activities and assistance with activities of daily living. The center has a common dining room, beauty salon, library, lounge areas and a therapy room. Units have kitchenettes and private baths. Monthly assessments determine the need for additional care levels. This facility is located outside the primary market area. This facility will not be competitive with the planned Project. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/cr O PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 70 of 106 Section V - Page 65 • Street Atlas USAF 2008 Plus R 846 C 846 CR 646.,,." �V�anr7er�ii7t£IaaHr -- -�� _ G COMPARABLE FACILITIES 4 Naples Park m 311oa I!I HARBOR CHASE D y m4 t � j CARLISLE Peyican Bay � �Pine P, Idge VI IneVa E GLENVIEW� R r i 4 I I CR 896 CR 896 �R 896 'a �.�. 9 � MOORINGS PARK �..-7 �t a � I I 1 334103 L� AAA - I apes ' hAR8Gi1q UR � �'y WINDSOR PLACE w _GOLDEN GATE PKY SIT T; JH0141WOOD RESIDENCE ___ ' 1 yr a`'ex CR 856, ':. .31101 " I - �2 s. East Naples Na TEPo O N � y4_ 1 ..31101 MANORCARESNF C R 856 '�P ARDEN t f �rf l,ty� BARRINGTON TERRACE LELY PALA t W r��1 1 7 •-•� = `'.gym " s 1, ;� .� � . �I 41 TUSCANY VILLAGE Data use subject to license © 2007 Del-orme. Street Atlas USAS 2008 Plus Ymm.delorme.com t MN (5 1 ° V� LWng $aRh Air k ip :OURTS ±� A SABAL =ALM RD _ .. ml �t I �Lely Resort, 1 Lni 0 1/z 1 1' /r 2 2' /z Data Zoom 11 -1 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties PROVINCE P V,1 -6." G—P C: /2108/cr EXhibit VD Page 71 of 106 Section V - Page 66 PROPOSED SUPPLY AND IMPACT OF PLANNED SUPPLY Proposed Independent Living and Assisted living/Alzheimer's Supply According to the state licensing office, there are continued requests for the granting of licenses for assisted living/ Alzheimer's facilities within the state of Florida. Potential developments for which we are aware include the following: • Addition of three Independent Living buildings containing twenty -nine units to the existing Moorings Park CCRC. The addition is in the final phase of construction with availability planned for 2012. All of the units have been presold at $2.3 million a unit. Moorings Park is not within the primary market area WMA). According to the state licensing office, there are continued requests for the granting of licenses for assisted living/ Alzheimer's facilities within the state of Florida. Potential developments for which we are aware include the following: • Planned retirement community for south Naples (60 assisted living units and 30 Alzheimer's units). The 11.25 acre site is located along Airport Pulling Road and Glades Boulevard. Research does not indicate that this facility has received a license to operate. Therefore, we have not included any of these beds in the planned supply. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 4W PROMNCE EXhibit VD Page 72 of 106 Section V - Page 67 COMPARABLE BEDS The following table details the current and planned supply for the four zip -code primary market area. FACILITY IL AL ALZ SNF COMMENTS IL AL ALZ SNF Arden Courts - 52 - 50% COMPETITIVE 26 Barrington Terrace - 89 31 - 50 % COMPETITIVE 45 15 Lely Palms 200 8 - 117 50% COMPETITIVE 100 8 59 Terracina Grand - 137 33 - COMPETITIVE 137 33 TOTALS 200 1 234 1 116 1 237 100 1 190 1 74 179 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr fr PROVINCE y r-t; cw,,p EXhibit VD Page 73 of 106 ?OD&ORME Section V - Page 68 DeLorme Strw Atlas USM1 2009 Cnel t i � ��r a Mexi'cc 1 , I'I i 14188 341a1 orth Naples t 7 Nape: MUni 341,1 ,ks4 HOI11EIVOOD RESIDENCE , East East Naple ♦ s �PL AIVNED PR0ECTI ,- , 34112 34112 341 1 71. RARRINGTONTERRACE s Data use subject to license © DeLorme DeLorme Street Atlas USAO 2009 www.delorme.com Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr _EVERC�1pES PKY _ r *4117 — �TERRA� INAGFANL) 1 �J 1 1 1 lMrp }Wh Aiperk 1 aRDEN COURTS OF NAPLES Y TUSC ANl % IL.LAGE OF N- PLES `` 34"1 • \t \RQok6j- Henderson A Bgy I Creek \ \ \A it`d jfd 1 8411 -t r1 <'- ""•klateovst/nb t t.,�j�c 3414 4 } � � y, ��ig$I;aILQ �i Y¢r MN (4.6° W) EXhibit VD �I) IIIIIIMIIIIIII�� nil 0 1 2 3 4 5 Data Zoom 10 -0 PROVINCE Page 74 of 106 COMPARABLE FACILITIES t M tee- .Bonita Springs . . ............ A. ot4T� BEACH Rg (._.. -_._ .:.......... asy l 84188 Y 46 --, at 1u1s 1 y HArsor \CHASE — � - - - - -- 1 N4, rk 84418 �I i 1 sour; F- ` Pel,Icantay u1u THE CARLISLE r 1 + � %viNDSOr. PLACE PROTECT 1 Cnel t i � ��r a Mexi'cc 1 , I'I i 14188 341a1 orth Naples t 7 Nape: MUni 341,1 ,ks4 HOI11EIVOOD RESIDENCE , East East Naple ♦ s �PL AIVNED PR0ECTI ,- , 34112 34112 341 1 71. RARRINGTONTERRACE s Data use subject to license © DeLorme DeLorme Street Atlas USAO 2009 www.delorme.com Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr _EVERC�1pES PKY _ r *4117 — �TERRA� INAGFANL) 1 �J 1 1 1 lMrp }Wh Aiperk 1 aRDEN COURTS OF NAPLES Y TUSC ANl % IL.LAGE OF N- PLES `` 34"1 • \t \RQok6j- Henderson A Bgy I Creek \ \ \A it`d jfd 1 8411 -t r1 <'- ""•klateovst/nb t t.,�j�c 3414 4 } � � y, ��ig$I;aILQ �i Y¢r MN (4.6° W) EXhibit VD �I) IIIIIIMIIIIIII�� nil 0 1 2 3 4 5 Data Zoom 10 -0 PROVINCE Page 74 of 106 DEMAND ANALYSIS (ASSISTED LIVING) INTRODUCTION Section V - Page 69 The following demand analysis provides a Net Demand analysis for the private pay assisted living services. Specifically, the Net Demand analysis is an indication of the number of beds /units needed within a stated market area. The assisted living demand analysis is dependent upon the number of people in a population who are in need of help with activities of daily living. However, only a small portion of this group is composed of assisted living patients at any given time. According to a number of national studies, the total risk of becoming an assisted living patient for a 65- year -old is approximately 43.0 percent. The probability of admission increases for persons age 75 to 85. Because the life expectancy at age 65 is lengthening, the expected number of admissions is forecasted to grow. The assisted living demand analysis assumes services for healthcare and provides for an analysis of age and income qualification, utilization for services (percent who would opt to utilize assisted living services) and care modality (percent requiring care). The fastest growing age cohort in the United States is the over -85 bracket. As "baby boomers' continue to enter their senior years, the demand for long -term care is expected to increase. The portion of the demand that will come from the "baby boomer" population is dependent on the growth of long -term care insurance and the continued participation of adult children caregivers who have typically provided most of the informal care to the dependent elderly. A third factor that has limited demand is the advent of health care reform. Keeping all of the above in mind, the following information details the Net Demand process for assisted living services within the previously determined primary market area. All statistics used in the Net Demand table are derived from demographic analysis and /or in -depth surveys of the market area and /or through the use of Claritas demographics. Following the overview of the Net Demand process are tables summarizing the Net Demand calculation. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr 4W PROVINCE Exhibit VD Page 75 of 106 Section V - Page 70 NET DEMAND PROCESS T.-. "-A.. -.I-: Seniors have a variety of reasons that prompt them to utilize senior housing services. According to a study performed by the National Investment Center (NIC), older respondents indicated they moved to be closer to family while the younger cohort (age 60 to 74 years) indicated they moved due to the death of a spouse (7.9 percent versus 2.1 percent), difficulties in getting around (3.9 percent versus 2.1 percent) and difficulty in taking care of their home (14.5 percent versus 9.3 percent). The NIC study also analyzed the percent of residents by age cohort that have made the decision to move to senior housing by age group and those that were in the market. Their survey revealed the following: Age Age Age Age Age Age 60 -54 65 -69 70 -74 75 -79 80 -84 85+ Definite* 2 2 0 4 5 3 In Market 6 6 5 9 8 8 *Made decision to move The Net Demand analysis utilizes the following parameters. Following the listing is a summary of each parameter. The "alphabetical" representation for each category correlates to the respective row on the Net Demand table. • Population; • Households; • Ratio of Residents per Household; • Income Qualified Households; • Income Qualified Population; • Care Modality - Assisted Living; • Utilization Rate; • Total Qualified Demand; • Primary Market Draw; • Existing and Planned Supply; • Adjustment for Occupancy; • Adjustment for Rollover; and • Net Adjusted Supply. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr O PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 76 of 106 Section V - Page 71 Population The following analysis utilizes Claritas demographics in order to analyze the percentage of age and income qualified senior residents within the chosen primary market area. It should be noted that the demographics can be skewed based on the number of second homes in the market (not accounted for in the U.S. Census) and due to the lack or of progression of current development (not always captured by demographers). Therefore, demographics should be analyzed along with data provided by Economic Development Offices, the Chamber of Commerce and key business developers in the market area. Age factors vary depending upon the type of development, services, amenities, location, etc. Research performed by PVG for numerous markets throughout the United States over the last 20 years indicates independent living residents are typically 75 and older. Assisted living residents are generally in the 78 and older age cohorts and nursing home residents are typically over 80. CCRCs have been experiencing an average age of 77 (AAHSA's Continuing Care Retirement Communities: 2005 Profile 1St Edition). The Net Demand process utilizes ages 75+ for independent living services and assisted living services. The population figures are a product of the 2000 National Census and are drawn from Claritas (A). Households Households represent the total number of households within each respective age cohort for the PMA. The household numbers are a product of the 2000 National Census and are drawn from Claritas (B). Ratio of Residents Per Household Claritas reporting provides for total population within the market area, as well as number of households within the market area (i.e. for every household there are "x" number of people - ratio of residents per household on the Demand Schedule - Line "C "). Therefore, the ratio of residents per household adjusts for the total population base per age cohort to the number of households in the market (i.e., the number of residents per household within the PMA by age cohort). This ratio is derived by dividing the total population for the PMA by the total households within the PMA (C = A divided by B). Income Qualified Households Income Qualification is the percentage of the relevant population deemed to be capable of affording residence in an assisted living facility and /or independent living community in the market area. According to statistical research compiled from the survey of the areas comparable facilities, the average private pay rate for services is utilized. This figure is an approximate average of the surveyed facilities' studio /one - bedroom basic rental rates. It is also generally assumed that potential assisted living residents are willing to spend up to 80.0 Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/cr 4W PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 77 of 106 Section V - Page 72 percent of their income on rent and independent living residents are willing to pay 50.0 percent of their income on rent. The following table details the income qualification. The $80 per day income qualification is based on demographics of the market area, analysis of assisted living facilities in the market and the care level planned for the Project. The $65.00 per day income qualification for independent living services is also based on demographics in the market area and analysis of comparable independent living facilities. All data has been obtained through Claritas (D). INCOME QUALIFICATION Average Daily Rates Within the Market: $80.00 Monthly Rate: $2,433 Adjusted for Yearly Income: $29,200 Adjusted for Income Utilization: $36,500 Income Qualification Set at: $35,000 It should be duly noted that the figures in the income section represent estimates of disposable income only. In reality, the money available to spend on assisted living and independent living monthly fees may be drawn from alternate sources as Social Security Income, pensions, interest and dividends, spending down of assets (savings, selling of stocks and bonds and /or other investment interests), interest income from the sale of a home and /or draw down of assets from the sale of a home. Other impacting variables not taken into account, such as whether the potential resident's children, or family are planning to contribute financially, could also change the statistical outlook. The following table summarizes the Income Qualified population for each respective service, as well as the percentage of the population base. INCOME QUALIFICATION 2010 2015 Assisted 65 -74 - $35,000 5,935 75.2% 7,575 81.4% 75 -84 - $35,000 3,785 68.5% 4,322 74.8% 85+ $35,000 1,362 66.1% 1,774 72.6% Income Qualified Population Income- qualified population is derived by multiplying the ratio of residents per household by the income- qualified households. This adjusts for the differential between total population and households (E = C * D). Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr PROVINCE V,d -t.,, (;—P EXhibit VD Page 78 of 106 Section V - Page 73 Care Modality - Assisted Living Claritas - The Care Modality figure refers to those with either a physical, or mental disability. This percentage, supplied by Claritas (Senior Life Report), does not differentiate between the age cohorts. Claritas reports care modality for the 65+ and 75+ population cohorts. However, this data is taken from the 2000 census and is not directly related to activities of daily living. The percentage range frequently noted on Claritas is between 25.0 percent and 37.0 percent. The primary market area analyzed indicated that 35.0 percent of the 65+ population base has a physical impairment and 10.0 percent had a self -care disability. The following analysis utilizes the population base over 75 +. Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research - The Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research indicates the following care need: • 14.5 percent for the 65 to 74 age cohort; and • 34.0 percent for the 75 to 80+ cohort. National Investment Center (NIC) - Two common measures of seniors' health status are the ability to perform activities of daily living (ADLs), such as bathing, dressing, eating and toileting and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), such as phone use, laundry, shopping and money management. Over 14.0 percent of seniors require assistance with ADLs and 21.6 percent have difficulty with IADLs. As the table below indicates, limitations on ability to perform these activities increase with age. PREVALENCE OF CHRONIC DISABILITY Age Nondisabled Only IADL impaired ADLimpaired 65 -74 88.50% 3.10% 8.40% 75 -84 73.10% 55.00% 21.40% 85+ 40.20% 72.00% 52.70% Source: National Investment Center, The Case for Investing in Senior Housing Based on the various studies that have been performed and statistics as gleaned from Claritas, as well as through analysis of data provided by the National Investment Center and the Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research, the following care modalities have been utilized (F): PRIVATE PAY 65 -74 Age Cohort 10% 75+ Age Cohort 20% 85+ Age Cohort 45% Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/cr O PROVINCE V,d ..,.„ G—p EXhibit VD Page 79 of 106 Section V - Page 74 Utilization Rate The Utilization Rate represents those who will seek care in an assisted living facility and /or residing in an independent living facility as opposed to a nursing home, care through a home health agency, or simply by remaining at home. The utilization factor also accounts for the percent of the population living alone. Claritas indicates percentages for those living alone ranging from 7.0 percent to over 24.0 percent. The national averages range from 6.1 percent to 22.8 percent. Total utilization rates can also range from 20.0 percent to 50.0 percent depending on the depth of the market, alternative services available and sophistication of the services available, as well as taking into account the percentage of the population base living alone. The utilization rate also varies, based on the age cohort. The primary market area for the Project indicates the following percentage of people living alone (people living alone are much more likely to utilize retirement services including independent living and assisted living services). PERCENT LIVING ALONE- 65+ Female Householder 18.30% Male Householder 4.20% Approximately 28.74 percent of the female and male population base is living alone with the Project's primary market area. Considering the above percentages, as well as taking into account the lack of alternative services in the community (home health, adult day care and Meals on Wheels), the following utilization rates are assumed for the market (G). PRIVATE PAY 65 -74 Age Cohort 5% 75+ Age Cohort 15% 85+ Age Cohort 25% Total Qualified Demand Total qualified demand is derived by multiplying the income - qualified population base by the care modality and the utilization rate. The resulting product is the qualified demand per age cohort prior to adjusting for existing and proposed supply (H = E * F * G). Row I is the sum of the demand total qualified demand for all age cohorts. Primary Market Draw The Primary Market Draw reflects the percentage of residents that the provider can expect to draw to the facility from the PMA. This statistical estimate is derived from surveys of the area's competitive facilities and a general feel for the market after analysis of interviews with local health care administrators and other officials. A lower percentage indicates that facilities within the Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr e$ PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 80 of 106 Section V - Page 75 market draw a larger portion of their residents from outside the market area (out of state included). As previously detailed, a primary market draw of 70.0 percent is utilized for independent living services with an 80.0 percent primary market draw utilized for assisted living services. The Total Adjusted Qualified Demand for All Ages is Total Qualified Demand divided by the primary market draw (K = I / J). Total Existing and Planned Supply The following table summarizes the existing supply within the market area. FACILITY IL AL ALZ SNF COMMENTS IL AL ALZ SNF Arden Courts - 52 - 50% COMPETITIVE 26 Barrington Terrace - 89 31 - 50% COMPETITIVE 45 15 Lely Palms 200 8 - 117 50% COMPETITIVE 100 8 59 Terracina Grand 137 33 - COMPETITIVE 137 33 TOTALS 200 234 116 237 100 190 74 179 As noted above, we have not included the 60 previously planned assisted living units (potential development off Airport Pulling Road (total projected supply is: O = L + M). Adjustment for Occupancy The average occupancy in the market is within the 90.0 percent range. Therefore, the potential supply of beds is adjusted for the average occupancy within the market and takes into account the small size of the centers. The occupancy adjustment assumes that 10.0 percent of the supply of beds will never be occupied and are, therefore, deducted from the pool of available beds /units (O P). Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr O PROVINCE V'd -fi- c o,'P EXhibit VD Page 81 of 106 Section V - Page 76 Adjustment for Rollover According to the State of Seniors Housing survey, median annual resident rollover for nursing homes was 53.8 percent. Independent living had a median rollover of 32.8 percent; assisted living had a median rollover of 55.5 percent. CCRCs had a median rollover of 18.9 percent. The following table summarizes the rollover percentages for the three care levels as reported by The State of Seniors Housing. ROLLOVER RATES RESIDENT TURNOVER BY COMMUNITY TYPE Lower Quartile Median Upper Quartile Independent Living 26.10% 32.80% 39.30% Assisted Living 43.80% 55.50% 78.80% CCRC 12.60% 18.90% 31.00% As noted, independent living services report a median rollover of 32.8 percent with assisted living reporting a rollover of 43.80 percent for the lower quartile and 55.5 percent for the median. The independent living rollover is anticipated to be within the median level while the assisted living services are anticipated to be within the lower quartile due to the lower level of care. Based on analysis of the secondary data, as well as analysis of the market comparables, a rollover of 30.0 percent for assisted living services (adjustment for rollover = P / Q). Adjustment for rollover assumes the same bed will be available for occupancy more than one time in any given year. Forecasted Demand Overall, there appears to be a continued need for independent living and assisted living services in 2010 with increased demand through 2015. The Project is planned for development over the next 24- to 30- months. Therefore, the market demographics and income analysis support the addition of assisted living beds within the market area (K -Q) . Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/cr DEMAND FORECAST 2010 442 2015 612 O PKOMNCE EXhibit VD Page 82 of 106 Section V - Page 77 ASSISTED LIVING A B C D E F G H 1 J K L M O P Q DEMAND - FOUR ZIP -CODE AREA 2010 2015 65 -74 75-84 85+ TOTALS 65 -74 75 -84 85+ TOTALS TOTAL POPULATION PRE%IARY MARKET AREA 14,264 9,761 3,040 17,052 10,375 3,637 TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 7,891 5,528 2,061 9,305 5,778 2,443 RATIO OF RESIDENTS PER HOUSEHOLD 1.81 1.77 1.48 1.83 1.80 1.49 INCOME QUALIFIED HOUSEHOLDS 5,935 3,785 1,362 7,575 4322 1,774 INCOME QUALIFIED POPULATION 10,728 6,683 2,009 13,882 7,761 2,641 PERCENT REQUIRING CARE CARE MODALITY 10% 20% 45% 10% 20% 45 UTILIZATION RATE 5% 15% 25% 5% 15% 25 TOTAL QUALIFIED DEMAND AGE, INCOME, CARE 54 200 226 69 233 297 TOTAL QUALIFIED DEMAND ALL AGES 480 599 PRIMARY MARKET DRAW 70% 70 ADJUSTED DEMAND ALL AGES 686 856 EXISTING SUPPLY 190 190 PLANNED UNITS 0 0 TOTAL PROJECTED SUPPLY 190 190 ADJUSTMENT FOR OCCUPANCY 90% 171 171 ADJUSTMENT FOR ROLLOVER 30% 244 244 NET ADJUSTED SUPPLY 244 244 FORECASTED DEMAND 442 Note: Households have been converted to persons in the market (ratio of residents per household). Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/cr 4V PROMNCE V.h."., G_,P EXhibit VD Page 83 of 106 Section V - Page 78 (A) From Claritas data (see Population charts as detailed in the neighborhood Outlook) (B) Total Households as reported by Claritas for all income categories (see Income as reported in Neighborhood Outlook) (C) A divided by B (D) Income qualified households set at $35,000 for assisted living services and $50,000 for independent living services as per data supplied by Claritas for private pay (E) D times C (F) Based on the research of data provided by Claritas, data provided through research articles over a ten - year period. (G) Based on research of data provided through research articles over a ten -year period. (H) E times F times G (I) Sum of all categories a) Based on research of the market area specific to the project's market area (K) I divided by J (L) Supply as detailed in the attached report (M) Proposed supply as detailed in the attached report (0) Total existing and proposed supply (P) O times adjustment for occupancy (R)K - Q Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr e$ PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 84 of 106 v Section V - Page 79 Penetration Rate Analysis Penetration rates help measure the degree to which supply and demand indicates either a saturated market or underserved market. Essentially, the penetration rate analysis determines what percentage of the market must be captured in order to obtain stabilized occupancy. However, penetration rates should not be utilized on the basis of absolute value due to the nature of market variations. That is, other factors may be in place within the market area above and beyond the pure demographic analysis (i.e., social and ethnic trends). In general, as penetration rates increase, average rents tend to be lower than the market at large (i.e., a more competitive market area). Other factors may include the degree to which the facility is offering a slightly different product than the market at large (i.e. nitch market position). All else being equal, in a perfect world, a lower penetration rate is an indicator of market depth. However, if the market is unfamiliar with the product type, the lease -up period may be longer than otherwise noted in the respective market. Conversely, a high penetration rate may be the result of an active wait list with pent -up demand in the market (often noted in markets where seniors are educated regarding senior housing and healthcare services). Overall, penetration rates provide one method of assessing market demand and should be considered in conjunction with other factors, including but not limited to, occupancy levels, planned development, current design parameters, alternative services in the market and key management personnel. The following information summarizes the penetration analysis for the subject's market area. Penetration Analvsis Total Supply (a) 190 Market Occupancy (b) 0.90 Adjusted Supply (a * b) 171 Estimated Demand 442 Calculated Penetration Rate 39% While the penetration rate appears to be slightly high, there are limited "true" competitors in the immediate market and the center will provide for a state -of -the -are facility along a major traffic artery. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr iff PROVINCE vd —n,." G_,P EXhibit VD Page 85 of 106 Section V - Page 80 DEMAND ANALYSIS - ALZHEIMER'S Overview The Alzheimer's Demand analysis is a subset of the assisted living demand analysis. It is not intended to be utilized in addition to the assisted living net demand. Rather, this analysis is provided for informational use only and is representative of the depth of Alzheimer's services within the PMA. A large proportion of Alzheimer's residents can be cared for in an assisted living setting. General Assumptions The Alzheimer's net demand schedule is based on several general assumptions and can only function accurately when these assumptions are taken into account. These assumptions are: Demand is being assessed only for Alzheimer's care exclusively. This demand assessment cannot be used in conjunction with any other care demand figure. By definition, individuals with Alzheimer's Disease (AD) will develop the need for assistance with activities of daily living (adls) as the disease progresses. An assisted living demand schedule, which assesses the demand for adl assistance, is already taking into account those with AD, who, as a result of the disease, have developed adl assistance needs. In effect, adding the Alzheimer's demand figure to the figure generated for assisted living demand would duplicate part of the demand. Alzheimer's demand must be looked at as a calculation exclusively of individuals that need care for AD and would enter into a facility that is specifically providing Alzheimer's (not assisted living) care. We are assessing the demand for Alzheimer's care for those individuals that have already been diagnosed as having "probable AD" ( "probable AD" is how the diagnosis is termed for the living - there is no certain way to ascertain if it was indeed AD until post - mortem autopsy). We are not accounting for individuals that may have undetected and undiagnosed AD - there is no way to establish how many of these individuals exist. Risk Factors for Alzheimer's Disease The greatest risk factor for Alzheimer's disease is advancing age, but Alzheimer's is not a normal part of aging. Most Americans with Alzheimer's disease are aged 65 or older. These individuals are said to have late -onset Alzheimer's disease. However, people younger than age 65 can also develop the disease. When Alzheimer's occurs in a person younger than 65 who does not have familial Alzheimer's disease, it is referred to as "younger- onset" or "early- onset" Alzheimer's. It is assumed that all individuals diagnosed with probable Alzheimer's Disease will progress through the disorder in stages of deterioration after the onset of the disease. This is based on both the Alzheimer's Associations widely accepted three -stage theory , as well as Dr. Barry Reisberg and colleagues' seven -stage scale for degenerative dementia ( Reisberg B, Ferris SH, De Leon MJ, Crook T: The Global Deterioration Scale for Assessment of Primary Degenerative Dementia. American Journal of Psychiatry 139(9):1136 - 1139.1982). Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr PROVINCE Exhibit VD Page 86 of 106 Section V - Page 81 For the purposes of this demand schedule, it has been assumed that there are four different basic types of care options available to individuals diagnosed with probable AD. These options are home care, assisted living care, nursing care and community based and other similar care. It has further been assumed that only assisted living that specifically caters to advanced Alzheimer's symptoms (maintenance of incontinence and tendencies to wander, etc.) can be considered a viable care option. This means either a special care unit, or a facility that provides the same level and extent of care as a special unit. It has been assumed that those responsible for the care of an individual diagnosed as having probable AD would not consider placing that individual in a facility that could not see to the individual's specific and increasing needs. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr 4W PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 87 of 106 Section V - Page 82 ASPECTS OF ALZHEIMER'S NET DEMAND PMA Population The PMA population figures represent the estimated number of people of each age group residing within the PMA. These statistics, drawn from estimates based on the 2000 national census, are taken from Claritas. Prevalence An estimated 5.4 million Americans of all ages have Alzheimer's disease in 2011. This figure includes 5.2 million people aged 65 and older, Al and 200,000 individuals under age 65 who have younger -onset Alzheimer's. The following information summarizes the prevalence of Alzheimer's disease as reported by the Alzheimer's Association (2011). • One in eight people aged 65 and older (13.0 percent) has Alzheimer's disease; • Nearly half of people aged 85 and older (43 percent) have Alzheimer's disease; and • Of those with Alzheimer's disease, an estimated 4.0 percent are under age 65, 6.0 percent are 65 to 74, 45.0 percent are 75 to 84 and 45 percent are 85 or older. In addition, based on evidence from the Aging, Demographics and Memory Study (ADAMS), a nationally representative sample of older adults, 13.9 percent of people aged 71 and older in the United States have dementia. This study also reports that more women than men have Alzheimer's disease and other dementias (almost two- thirds of all Americans living with Alzheimer's are women). However, analyses show that the larger proportion of older women than men who have Alzheimer's disease or other dementia is primarily explained by the fact that women live longer on average than men. Thus, women are not more likely than men to develop dementia at any given age. The following table depicts the prevalence of Alzheimer's disease gleaned from a study performed by the Alzheimer's Association. figure 1: Proportion or People Aged 65 and older with Alzheimer's Disease and other Dementies. by RacetEthnMy, Washington Heights - Inwood Columbia Aging Project. 2006 ea x moo xi zo afzcs L.nswnan aca �u+6usxa� �:... Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr 4W PROVINCE Exhibit VD Page 88 of 106 Section V - Page 83 The Rotterdam Study (2009) The table below (The Rotterdam Study in 2009) shows the numbers of participants in the dementia study together with their age distribution and the proportion resident in institutions. Of the 7,528 study participants, 474 (6.3 percent) were demented -- 3.8 percent (112/2,939) of men, 7.9 percent (362/4,589) of women. Age and sex specific prevalence's of dementia are shown below. With the exception of the age category 80 -89 years, there were no major differences in prevalence between men and women. At ages 80 -89 years, women had a higher prevalence of dementia than men with about one- third of all those suffering from dementia have severe dementia (both men and women). — w� 35 Men 30 k � 20 Tool dunencla li S.� 10- . a 5 a 55 60 65 70 75 !0 S5 90 9S Age 6-rs) Summary The following information summarizes the prevalence of Alzheimer's disease based on the two above noted studies: Study I • 65 to 74 - 2.9 percent; • 75-84 - 10.9 percent; and • 85+ - 30.2 percent Study 11 • 65 to 74 - 2.0 percent; • 75-84 - 5.0 to 20.0 percent; and • 85+ - 20.0 to 40.0 percent Summary - Based on the above study, the following utilization rates have been applied to the demand analysis for the subject's market area: • Age 65 - 74 - 2.5 Percent; • Age 75 - 84 - 11.0 Percent; and • Age 85+ - 35.0 Percent. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108 /cr O PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 89 of 106 Section V - Page 84 Utilization Rate The Utilization Rate represents those who will seek care in an institutional setting, assisted living setting and /or residential setting as opposed to a nursing home, care through a home health agency, or simply by remaining at home. The utilization factor also accounts the fact that beginning stage Alzheimer's patients can be cared for within a typical assisted living setting and also takes into account the percent of the population living alone. Claritas indicates percentages for those living alone ranging from 7.0 percent to over 24.0 percent. The national averages range from 6.1 percent to 22.8 percent. Total utilization rates can also range from 5.0 percent to 30.0 percent depending on the depth of the market, alternative services available and sophistication of the services available, as well as taking into account the percentage of the population base living alone. The utilization rate also varies, based on the age cohort. Considering the above percentages, as well as taking into account a variety of alternative services in the community (home health), the following utilization rates are assumed for the market. The 35.0 percent utilization rate for the age 85+ cohort represents the increasing prevalence of Alzheimer's in the 85+ cohorts and due to the fact that as residents age -in- place, the illness progresses requiring specialized programs for care. • Age 65 - 74 - 5.0 Percent; • Age 75 - 84 - 10.0 Percent; and • Age 85+ - 35.0 Percent. Primary Market Draw The Primary Market Draw reflects the percentage of residents that the provider can expect to draw to the facility from the PMA. This statistical estimate is derived from surveys of the area's competitive facilities and a general feel for the market after analysis of interviews with local health care administrators and other officials. A lower percentage indicates that facilities within the market area draw a larger portion of their residents from outside the market area (out -of -state included). A 70.0 percent primary market draw has been utilized which has been confirmed through discussions with management. Total Projected Supply There are 74 competitive Alzheimer's beds within the market area. Adjustment for Occupancy The average occupancy in the market is within the 90.0 percent range. The occupancy adjustment assumes that 10.0 percent of the supply of beds will never be occupied and are, therefore, deducted from the pool of available beds/ units. Adiustment for Rollover Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr QJ vPROVI�NCE EXhibit VD Page 90 of 106 Section V - Page 85 According to the State of Seniors House survey, median annual resident turnover for nursing homes was 53.8 percent. Independent living had a median turnover of 32.8 percent; assisted living had a median turnover of 55.5 percent. CCRCs had a median turnover of 18.9 percent. The following table summarizes the turnover percentages for the three care levels as reported by The State of Seniors Housing. ROLLOVER RATES RESIDENT TURNOVER BY COMMUNITY TYPE Lower Quartile Median Upper Quartile Independent Living 26.10% 32.80% 39.30% Assisted Living 43.80% 55.50% 78.80% CCRC 12.60% 18.90% 31.00% As noted, independent living services report a median rollover of 32.8 percent with assisted living reporting a rollover of 43.80 percent for the lower quartile and 55.5 percent for the median. The Alzheimer's rollover is anticipated to be within the lower quartile due to the lack of true competitors in the market area. Based on analysis of the secondary data, as well as analysis of the market comparables, a 40.0 percent rollover is utilized for Alzheimer's services. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr PROVINCE �j EXhibit VD Page 91 of 106 Section V - Page 86 Income Qualification Income Qualification is the percentage of the relevant population deemed to be capable of affording residence in the type of care facility in question. This figure is derived by determining the average yearly rental rate for residence in such a facility and utilizing a generally accepted assumption for the percentage of yearly income that an individual would be willing to spend in order to reside in such a facility. The result will yield the minimum income necessary to enter into such a facility. The percentage of individuals in this age group that earn in excess of this amount annually is provided by Claritas. It should be duly noted that the income figures utilized represent estimates of disposable income only. In reality, the money available to spend on facility rental rates may be drawn from alternative sources of income, including the sale of a house. Other impacting variables not taken into account, such as whether the potential resident's children, or families are planning to contribute financially, could also change the statistical outlook. Of note, the income qualification for the Alzheimer's demand schedule is based on the specific age cohorts of 65 -74; 75 -84; and 85 plus. Income qualification has been set at $50,000. Summary For purposes of this analysis, we have only included the statistics for the age cohorts of 75+ for the demand analysis. Overall, there appears to be demand for Alzheimer's services within the market area. Therefore, the center should be capable of leasing -up to stable operations for the Alzheimer's wing. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/2108/cr O PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 92 of 106 Section V - Page 87 ALZHEIMER'S DEMAND NFT nFMAVn Note: the following demand calculations are based on the total of the 65+ age cohorts for Alzheimer's services. D = A times B times C F =D /E G = Existing Supply H = Planned Units (no planned units for the market area) I= G plus H J = I times percent occupied (90.0 percent) L =J M = Sum of 75 to 85+ Note: the net adjusted supply is divided by 3 to account for total beds within each respective age cohort (i.e., forecasted demand for the 85+ cohort = Row F - Row L / 3). N = Percent of population base with $50,000 plus income for the respective age groups O = Sum of age groups (forecasted demand - M - times Income Qualification - N - for each age group) Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr O PROVINCE V.1—n." cror p EXhibit VD Page 93 of 106 65-74 75-84 85+ TOTAL 65+ 65-74 75-84 85+ TOTAL 65+ PRIMARY MARKET POPULATION A 14,264 9,761 3,040 27,065 17,052 10,375 3,637 31,064 PREVELANCE RATE B 3.9% 16.5% 47.6% 3.9% 16.5 % 47.6% UTILIZATION RATE C 5.0% 10.0% 35.0% 5.0% 10.0% 35.0% TOTAL DEMAND D 28 161 506 695 33 171 606 810 PRIMARY MARKET DRAW E 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% ADJUSTED DEMAND F 40 230 724 954 48 245 866 1,110 EXISTING SUPPLY G 74 74 PLANNED UNITS H ` 0 0 TOTAL PROJECTED SUPPLY I 74 74 ADJUSTMENT FOR OCCUPANCY AT 90.0 PERCENT J 0.90 67 67 ADJUSTMENT FOR ROLLOVER AT 40.0 PERCENT K 0.40 1 95 95 NET ADJUSTED SUPPLY L 95 95 FORECASTED DEMAND 1 M 8 198 692 890 1 16 213 1 834 1,047 INCOME QUALIFICATION N 58% 51% 47% 68% 61% 58 1 NETDEMAND O 5 101 328 429 11 130 483 613 Note: the following demand calculations are based on the total of the 65+ age cohorts for Alzheimer's services. D = A times B times C F =D /E G = Existing Supply H = Planned Units (no planned units for the market area) I= G plus H J = I times percent occupied (90.0 percent) L =J M = Sum of 75 to 85+ Note: the net adjusted supply is divided by 3 to account for total beds within each respective age cohort (i.e., forecasted demand for the 85+ cohort = Row F - Row L / 3). N = Percent of population base with $50,000 plus income for the respective age groups O = Sum of age groups (forecasted demand - M - times Income Qualification - N - for each age group) Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr O PROVINCE V.1—n." cror p EXhibit VD Page 93 of 106 Section V - Page 88 Penetration Rate Analysis Penetration rates help measure the degree to which supply and demand indicates either a saturated market or underserved market. Essentially, the penetration rate analysis determines what percentage of the market must be captured in order to obtain stabilized occupancy. However, penetration rates should not be utilized on the basis of absolute value due to the nature of market variations. That is, other factors may be in place within the market area above and beyond the pure demographic analysis (i.e., social and ethnic trends). In general, as penetration rates increase, average rents tend to be lower than the market at large (i.e., a more competitive market area). Other factors may include the degree to which the facility is offering a slightly different product than the market at large (i.e. nitch market position). All else being equal, in a perfect world, a lower penetration rate is an indicator of market depth. However, if the market is unfamiliar with the product type, the lease -up period may be longer than otherwise noted in the respective market. Conversely, a high penetration rate may be the result of an active wait list with pent -up demand in the market (often noted in markets where seniors are educated regarding senior housing and healthcare services). Overall, penetration rates provide one method of assessing market demand and should be considered in conjunction with other factors, including but not limited to, occupancy levels, planned development, current design parameters, alternative services in the market and key management personnel. The following information summarizes the penetration analysis for the subject's market area which indicates a continued need for services. Penetration Analvsis Total Supply (a) 74 Market Occupancy (b) 0.90 Adjusted Supply (a * b) 67 Estimated Demand 429 Calculated Penetration Rate 16% Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108 /cr 4► PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 94 of 106 Section V - Page 89 The following analysis summarizes the subject's market penetration in comparison to data provided by NIC mapping for the top 100 MSAs and the metro Atlanta region. Penetration Rates $50,000 and up 27.30% 19.60% 38.20% 15.52% Subject's Market Position Occupancy Well Within the Range of the Top MSA Penetration Rate At the Low End of the Range of the Top MSA The following table summarizes the general market assumptions relating to the Penetration Rate analysis. General Market Assumptions Median Lower Quartile Upper Quartile Subject's Market Average Occupancy 89.92% 85.50% 93.12% 90.00% Median Housing Value $173,333 $131,920 $231,233 $154,386 Adult Children Prevalence 0.88 0.65 0.12 0.27 Penetration Rates $50,000 and up 27.30% 19.60% 38.20% 15.52% Subject's Market Position Occupancy Well Within the Range of the Top MSA Penetration Rate At the Low End of the Range of the Top MSA The following table summarizes the general market assumptions relating to the Penetration Rate analysis. General Market Assumptions In general, a market area with a penetration rate lower than the median and an occupancy rate higher than the median indicates a market that is undersupplied (i.e., unmet demand). Analysis of the subject's market indicates an under supplied market for the care and services for Alzheimer's residents. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/ cr PRCMNCE ykh.,M„ G—P EXhibit VD Page 95 of 106 Above Secondary Data Above Secondary Data Competitive Market Below Secondary Data Above Secondary Data Overbuilt Market Below Secondary Data Below Secondary Data Market in Transition Older Product Above Secondary Data Below Secondary Data Under Supplied Market In general, a market area with a penetration rate lower than the median and an occupancy rate higher than the median indicates a market that is undersupplied (i.e., unmet demand). Analysis of the subject's market indicates an under supplied market for the care and services for Alzheimer's residents. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C:/ 2108/ cr PRCMNCE ykh.,M„ G—P EXhibit VD Page 95 of 106 Section V - Page 90 NET DEMAND - FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - NET DEMAND The forecasted demand is the final demand for the market area taking into account all of the previously described factors. Overall, there appears to be demand for assisted living and Alzheimer's services. Payor Mix The Project's operations will provide services to private pay residents. Recommendations Based upon the information contained in this analysis, it is our opinion that there appears to be demand for assisted living/ Alzheimer's services for the community of South Naples. This recommendation is based on the following factors: • Demand in the area continues to be positive; • Population growth over the next five years indicates there will continue to be a need for services; • The South Naples market has limited competitive communities; • The North Naples market area is nearly built -out. Therefore, South Naples offers the only remaining area with available land for larger developments; • The site is well positioned at the intersection of a recently widened artery (Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway); • While some of the retirement communities in the surrounding area have realized concessions and a decline in occupancy, several have increased rates over the last year; • The Project will have a state -of -the -art physical plant that will be superior in design to the majority of the surrounding development within the primary market area; • The Project has an excellent location with a high traffic count that will provide the development with enhanced access and exposure; and • The Project is anticipated to have a solid network system in place and experienced management. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr O PROVINCE EXhibit VD Page 96 of 106 N Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr ADDENDA. EXhibit VD V - Page 91 4V PROVINCE Page 97 of 106 QUALIFICATIONS Carol Reynolds, MAI, CCIM Principal Province Valuation Group, Inc. 5800 Mountain Creek Road Atlanta, Georgia 30328 404 - 459 -0066 EXPERIENCE: Section V - Page 92 Twenty years of experience in the real estate and /or healthcare field. Specific experience includes the analysis of all types of healthcare and senior housing including retirement homes, assisted living facilities, nursing homes, acute -care hospitals, psychiatric hospitals and rehabilitation hospitals. Analyses include disposition analysis, economic feasibility studies, market and marketability studies and valuation studies (real estate and business). Experience has also been gained in tax appeal court and bankruptcy court. EDUCATION: Bachelor of Science in Real Estate, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia Member of the Appraisal Institute (MAI) Member of the Commercial Investment Real Estate Institute (CCIM) ASA - American Society of Appraisers BV 201 - Business Valuation BV 202 - Business Valuation BV 203 - Business Valuation Harvard Business School - Executive Education Program - Business to Business Marketing PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS: Certified Real Estate Appraiser No. 0634 (Georgia) Member of the Appraisal Institute (MAD Member of the Commercial Investment Real Estate Institute (CCIM) Past Board of Directors - Assisted Living Association of Georgia Board of Directors - Southeast Finance Seminar Board of Directors- National Association for Senior Living Industries (NASLIE) Member - Georgia Nursing Home Association Member - Assisted Living Federation of America (ALFA) Member - Healthcare Financial Management Association (HFMA) - Georgia Chapter Member - Georgia Chapter - Assisted Living Federation of America (GA - ALFA) Member - American Seniors Housing Association Member - American Health Lawyers Association Member - National Association for Senior Living Industry Executives (NASLIE) CLIENTS: Pension Funds, Banks and Savings Institutions, Mortgage Bankers, Insurance Companies, Real Estate Investors and Developers, Governmental Agencies, Attorneys, Architects, Certified Public Accountants and Public Companies. Naples Market Study Continental Health Care Properties C: /2108/cr nu PROVINCE Y "1 .rt Grw p EXhibit VD Page 98 of 106 • E. 34104 34104 (Naples, FL) Geography: ZIP Code Prepared by Carol Reynolds Summary 2000 2010 2015 Population 18,862 22,967 23,624 Households 8,382 9,868 10,142 Families 5,661 6,461 6,536 Average Household Size 2.25 2.33 2.33 Owner Occupied Housing Units 5,961 6,707 6,850 Renter Occupied Housing Units 2,421 3,161 3,292 Median Age 44.6 47.8 49.1 Trends: 2010 - 2015 Annual Rate Area State National Population 0.57% 0.84% 0.76% Households 0.55% 0.83% 0.78% Families 0.23% 0.64% 0.64% Owner HHs 0.42% 0.89% 0.82% Median Household Income 1.94% 2.34% 2.36% Households by Income <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000- $34,999 $35,000- $49,999 $50,000- $74,999 $75,000- $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 -$199,999 $200,000+ Median Household Income Average Household Income Per Capita Income Population by Age 0 -4 5 -9 10- 14 15- 19 20- 24 25- 34 35 -44 45-54 55 -64 65- 74 75- 84 85+ Race and Ethnicity White Alone Black Alone American Indian Alone Asian Alone Pacific Islander Alone Some Other Race Alone Two or More Races Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 2000 2000 2010 Percent 2015 89.8% Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 677 8.0% 640 6.5% 561 5.5% 976 11.6% 691 7.0% 572 5.6% 1,285 15.3% 1,165 11.8% 962 9.5% 1,888 22.4% 1,754 17.8% 1,417 14.0% 1,948 23.1% 2,506 25.4% 2,856 28.2% 847 10.1% 1,657 16.8% 1,784 17.6% 601 7.1% 1,071 10.9% 1,500 14.8% 65 0.8% 195 2.0% 255 2.5% 136 1.6% 189 1.9% 235 2.3% $45,018 2000 $54,232 Percent $24,289 89.8% 2000 3.6% Number Percent 1,036 5.5% 991 5.3% 839 4.4% 781 4.1% 918 4.9% 2,485 13.2% 2,488 13.2% 2,098 11.1% 2,480 13.1% 3,103 16.4% 1,461 7.7% 184 1.0% $57,130 2000 Number Percent 16,939 89.8% 682 3.6% 62 0.3% 236 1.3% 4 0.0% 587 3.1% 353 1.9% 2,721 14.4% $57,130 $66,686 $28,656 2010 Number Percent 1,242 5.4% 1,140 5.0% 1,116 4.9% 1,033 4.5% 1,007 4.4% 2,463 10.7% 2,678 11.7% 2,865 12.5% 3,109 13.5% 3,245 14.1% 2,425 10.6% 644 2.8% 2010 Number Percent 19,299 84.0% 1,264 5.5% 92 0.4% 464 2.0% 11 0.0% 1,232 5.4% 605 2.6% 5,492 23.9% $62,877 $73,456 $31,540 2015 Number Percent 1,277 5.4% 1,166 4.9% 1,145 4.8% 1,029 4.4% 1,163 4.9% 2,449 10.4% 2,472 10.5% 2,856 12.1% 3,265 13.8% 3,576 15.1% 2,418 10.2% 808 3.4% 2015 Number Percent 19,412 82.2% 1,402 5.9% 98 0.4% 545 2.3% 13 0.1% 1,476 6.2% 678 2.9% 6,605 28.0% Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esd forecasts for 2010 and 2015. "OW August 23, 2012 ©2012 Esn Page 1 of 2 EXhibit VD Page 99 of 106 Trends 2010 -2015 2.2 c 2 v 1.8 a 1.6 c 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 c 0.4 Q 0.2 Population Population by Age 15 14 13 12 11 10 c 9 a� g U a5 7 CL- r, 34104 34104 (Naples, FL) Geography: ZIP Code Households Families Owner HHs Prepared by Carol Reynolds ■ Area ■ State USA ian HH Income 1� �... 0 0 -4 5 -9 10 -14 15 -19 20 -24 25 -34 35 -44 45 -54 55 -64 65 -74 75 -84 85+ 2010 Household Income 2010 Population by Race $75K - $99K 16.8% $50K - $74K 25.4% $3 17.8% LOOK - $149K 10.9% $150K - $199K 2.0% $200K+ 1.9% < $15K 6.5% 5K -$24K 7.0% $25K - $34K 11.8% C N U L a ■ 2010 2015 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esd forecasts for 2010 and 2015. @2012 Esn EXhibit VD August 23, 2012 • Page 2 of 2 Page 100 of 106 Demographic and Income Profile Report 34112 Prepared by Carol Reynolds 34112 (Naples, FL) Geography: ZIP Code Summary 2000 2010 2015 Population 26,604 33,007 34,107 Households 12,051 14,850 15,373 Families 7,524 9,035 9,219 Average Household Size 2.15 2.17 2.17 Owner Occupied Housing Units 8,947 11,177 11,683 Renter Occupied Housing Units 3,103 3,673 3,690 Median Age 51.1 57.4 59.9 Trends: 2010 - 2015 Annual Rate Area State National Population 0.66% 0.84% 0.76% Households 0.70% 0.83% 0.78% Families 0.40% 0.64% 0.64% Owner HHs 0.89% 0.89% 0.82% Median Household Income 2.98% 2.34% 2.36% 2000 2010 2015 Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent <$15,000 1,357 11.3% 1,326 8.9% 1,145 7.4% $15,000 - $24,999 1,867 15.5% 1,457 9.8% 1,211 7.9% $25,000 - $34,999 2,277 18.9% 2,167 14.6% 1,795 11.7% $35,000 - $49,999 2,296 19.1% 2,941 19.8% 2,457 16.0% $50,000 - $74,999 2,055 17.1% 2,975 20.0% 3,627 23.6% $75,000 - $99,999 1,054 8.8% 1,807 12.2% 2,028 13.2% $100,000 - $149,999 639 5.3% 1,362 9.2% 2,020 13.1% $150,000 - $199,999 200 1.7% 338 2.3% 475 3.1% $200,000+ 288 2.4% 477 3.2% 615 4.0% Median Household Income $37,838 $47,356 $54,850 Average Household Income $52,023 $63,746 $72,650 Per Capita Income $24,178 $29,038 $33,140 2000 2010 2015 Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0 - 4 1,171 4.4% 1,241 3.8% 1,192 3.5% 5 - 9 1,040 3.9% 1,200 3.6% 1,171 3.4% 10- 14 913 3.4% 1,203 3.6% 1,188 3.5% 15- 19 1,059 4.0% 1,142 3.5% 1,179 3.5% 20- 24 1,316 4.9% 1,049 3.2% 1,141 3.3% 25- 34 2,963 11.1% 2,602 7.9% 2,263 6.6% 35-44 3,145 11.8% 3,191 9.7% 2,915 8.5% 45- 54 2,793 10.5% 3,770 11.4% 3,668 10.8% 55-64 3,601 13.5% 5,184 15.7% 5,446 16.0% 65-74 4,732 17.8% 6,132 18.6% 7,180 21.1% 75 - 84 3,220 12.1% 4,638 14.1% 4,856 14.2% 85+ 650 2.4% 1,655 5.0% 1,908 5.6% 2000 2010 2015 Race and Ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent White Alone 23,319 87.7% 27,884 84.5% 28,523 83.6% Black Alone 1,473 5.5% 2,039 6.2% 2,101 6.2% American Indian Alone 64 0.2% 82 0.2% 82 0.2% Asian Alone 130 0.5% 265 0.8% 319 0.9% Pacific Islander Alone 27 0.1% 50 0.2% 54 0.2% Some Other Race Alone 874 3.3% 1,643 5.0% 1,915 5.6% Two or More Races 716 2.7% 1,044 3.2% 1,113 3.3% Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 4,410 16.6% 7,362 22.3% 8,391 24.6% Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esd forecasts for 2010 and 2015. ©2012 Esri August 23, 2012 EXhibit VD Page 101 of 106 Page 1 of 2 Trends 2010 -2015 2.8 +� 2.6 2.4 2.2 a� 2 is 1.8 1.6 ,4; 1.4 1.2 1 j 0.8 0.6 Q 0.4 0.2 0 Population Population by Age � 1 U i 1 a 34112 34112 (Naples, FL) Geography: ZIP Code Prepared by Carol Reynolds y i ■ Area °' ■ State USA Households Families Owner HHs Median HH Income 0 -4 5 -9 10 -14 15 -19 20 -24 25 -34 35 -44 45 -54 55 -64 2010 Household Income 2010 Population by Race $75K - $99K 12.2% $50K-$74K Y "I'll 9nni $35K - $491, 19.8% $25K - $34K 14.6% OOK- $149K 9.2% $150K- $199K 2.3% $200K+ +' 3.2% C N V L a < $15K 8.9% $24K ■ 2010 1 2015 74 75 -84 85+ Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esd forecasts for 2010 and 2015. ©2012 Esri EXhibit VD August 23, 2012 Page 2 of 2 Page 102 of 106 34116 34116 (Naples, FL) Geography: ZIP Code Prepared by Carol Reynolds Summary 2000 2010 2015 Population 25,170 29,709 30,181 Households 8,137 9,356 9,536 Families 6,171 6,881 6,916 Average Household Size 3.09 3.17 3.16 Owner Occupied Housing Units 4,972 5,657 5,699 Renter Occupied Housing Units 3,165 3,699 3,837 Median Age 30.9 32.3 32.9 Trends: 2010 - 2015 Annual Rate Area State National Population 0.32% 0.84% 0.76% Households 0.38% 0.83% 0.78% Families 0.10% 0.64% 0.64% Owner HHs 0.15% 0.89% 0.82% Median Household Income 1.59% 2.34% 2.36% Households by Income <$15,000 $15,000- $24,999 $25,000- $34,999 $35,000- $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000- $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+ Median Household Income Average Household Income Per Capita Income Population by Age 0 -4 5 -9 10- 14 15- 19 20- 24 25 -34 35 -44 45- 54 55 -64 65-74 75-84 85+ Race and Ethnicity White Alone Black Alone American Indian Alone Asian Alone Pacific Islander Alone Some Other Race Alone Two or More Races Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 2000 2000 2010 Percent 2015 79.7% Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 719 8.9% 595 6.4% 493 5.2% 1,067 13.2% 725 7.7% 581 6.1% 1,293 16.0% 1,048 11.2% 835 8.8% 1,656 20.5% 1,533 16.4% 1,264 13.3% 1,838 22.7% 2,635 28.2% 2,947 30.9% 839 10.4% 1,470 15.7% 1,567 16.4% 467 5.8% 997 10.7% 1,405 14.7% 97 1.2% 182 1.9% 237 2.5% 113 1.4% 171 1.8% 207 2.2% $43,936 2000 $55,091 Percent $17,756 79.7% 2,239 2000 Number Percent 2,048 8.1% 2,109 8.4% 1,970 7.8% 1,961 7.8% 1,946 7.7% 4,450 17.7% 4,389 17.4% 2,802 11.1% 1,660 6.6% 1,096 4.4% 611 2.4% 128 0.5% Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esd forecasts for 2010 and 2015. ©2012 Esri $57,854 2000 Number Percent 20,063 79.7% 2,239 8.9% 88 0.4% 207 0.8% 27 0.1% 1,587 6.3% 959 3.8% 8,164 32.4% Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esd forecasts for 2010 and 2015. ©2012 Esri $57,854 $67,607 $21,319 2010 Number Percent 2,417 8.1% 2,325 7.8% 2,141 7.2% 2,169 7.3% 2,193 7.4% 4,866 16.4% 4,319 14.5% 4,198 14.1% 2,666 9.0% 1,421 4.8% 742 2.5% 252 0.8% 2010 Number Percent 21,895 73.7% 3,021 10.2% 120 0.4% 351 1.2% 41 0.1% 2,913 9.8% 1,368 4.6% 13,220 44.5% $62,610 $74,798 $23,664 2015 Number Percent 2,435 8.1% 2,356 7.8% 2,251 7.5% 2,034 6.7% 2,253 7.5% 4,758 15.8% 4,177 13.8% 3,945 13.1% 3,203 10.6% 1,721 5.7% 769 2.5% 279 0.9% 2015 Number Percent 21,839 72.4% 3,039 10.1% 119 0.4% 393 1.3% 42 0.1% 3,316 11.0% 1,433 4.7% 14,704 48.7% August 23, 2012 EXhibit VD Page 103 of 106 Page 1 of 2 Demographic and Income Profile Report STDBtbN 01 IN;' 34116 Prepared by Carol Reynolds 34116 (Naples, FL) Geography: ZIP Code Trends 2010 -2015 2.2 c 2 1.8 L a 1.6 c 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 fa 0.6 ■ Area Q 0.2 • USA Population House Population by Age 16-1 1 � 1 N U L a Families Owner HHs Median HH Income ■ 2010 ��2015 $50K - $74K 28.2% 16.4% LOOK - $149K 10.7% $150K - $199K 1.9% $200K+ 1.8% < $15K 6.4% 5K - $24K 7.7% $25K - $34K 11.2% 41 C N U L a Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esd forecasts for 2010 and 2015. EXhibit VD August 23, 2012 Pau,-', 2 of 2 Page 104 of 106 Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esd forecasts for 2010 and 2015. June 15, 2012 ©2012 Esri EXhibit VD Page 105 of 106 Page 1 of 2 Demographic and Income Profile Report B 34119 Prepared by Carol Reynolds 34119 (Naples, FL) Geography: ZIP Code Summary 2000 2010 2015 Population 9,674 18,562 21,017 Households 3,932 7,346 8,349 Families 3,150 5,777 6,498 Average Household Size 2.45 2.52 2.51 Owner Occupied Housing Units 3,689 6,376 7,221 Renter Occupied Housing Units 243 970 1,128 Median Age 48.7 56.1 58.6 Trends: 2010 - 2015 Annual Rate Area State National Population 2.52% 0.84% 0.76% Households 2.59% 0.83% 0.78% Families 2.38% 0.64% 0.64% Owner HHs 2.52% 0.89% 0.82% Median Household Income 2.06% 2.34% 2.36% 2000 2010 2015 Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent <$15,000 216 5.5% 283 3.9% 233 2.8% $15,000- $24,999 175 4.5% 178 2.4% 143 1.7% $25,000 - $34,999 212 5.4% 268 3.6% 212 2.5% $35,000 - $49,999 543 13.8% 513 7.0% 399 4.8% $50,000- $74,999 880 22.4% 1,498 20.4% 1,696 20.3% $75,000 - $99,999 639 16.3% 1,269 17.3% 1,373 16.4% $100,000 - $149,999 596 15.2% 1,904 25.9% 2,514 30.1% $150,000 - $199,999 316 8.1% 594 8.1% 766 9.2% $200,000+ 348 8.9% 839 11.4% 1,013 12.1% Median Household Income $72,631 $91,793 $101,643 Average Household Income $99,887 $119,009 $127,658 Per Capita Income $41,337 $47,142 $50,756 2000 2010 2015 Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0 - 4 449 4.6% 654 3.5% 666 3.2% 5 - 9 544 5.6% 724 3.9% 756 3.6% 10- 14 590 6.1% 822 4.4% 864 4.1% 15- 19 455 4.7% 830 4.5% 816 3.9% 20- 24 189 2.0% 525 2.8% 611 2.9% 25 - 34 643 6.6% 1,001 5.4% 1,238 5.9% 35-44 1,411 14.6% 1,537 8.3% 1,438 6.8% 45-54 1,479 15.3% 2,789 15.0% 2,663 12.7% 55-64 1,627 16.8% 3,769 20.3% 4,416 21.0% 65-74 1,584 16.4% 3,466 18.7% 4,575 21.8% 75- 84 626 6.5% 1,956 10.5% 2,332 11.1% 85+ 75 0.8% 489 2.6% 642 3.1% 2000 2010 2015 Race and Ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent White Alone 9,394 97.1% 17,623 94.9% 19,750 94.0% Black Alone 57 0.6% 144 0.8% 180 0.9% American Indian Alone 5 0.1% 11 0.1% 11 0.1% Asian Alone 56 0.6% 241 1.3% 333 1.6% Pacific Islander Alone 3 0.0% 8 0.0% 10 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 69 0.7% 284 1.5% 413 2.0% Two or More Races 90 0.9% 251 1.4% 320 1.5% Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 442 4.6% 1,612 8.7% 2,280 10.8% Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esd forecasts for 2010 and 2015. June 15, 2012 ©2012 Esri EXhibit VD Page 105 of 106 Page 1 of 2 STDB0 LINE' Trends 2010 -2015 C C W u L Q C 41 M c c Q 34119 34119 (Naples, FL) Geography: ZIP Code Prepared by Carol Reynolds - Population Housenolas Families Owner HHS Median HH Income Population by Age c a� U i Q] a 0 -4 5 -9 10 -14 15-19 20 -24 25 -34 35 -44 45 -54 55 -64 65 -74 75 -84 85+ 2010 Household Income 2010 Population by Race $100K - $149K $75K - $99K 17.3% $50K - $74K 20.4% Yo $200K+ 11.4% <$15K 3.9% $15K - $24K 2.4% ;25K- $34K 3.6% -$49K a�+ c U U L a ■ Area ■ State USA ■ 2010 2015 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. Esri forecasts for 2010 and 2015. June 15, 2012 ©2012 Esri Pa=-;:- 2 of 2 EXhibit VD Page 106 of 106 COPY EXHIBIT V.E. PUBLIC FACILITIES Revision 2 EXHIBIT V.E. PUBLIC FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: The subject Growth Management Plan Amendment proposes to permit a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.45 for development of senior housing uses including independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing, CCRC, or similar facilities on the 9.6± acre property that comprises this portion of the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict land use category. Up to 5,000 square feet of ancillary medical office use for in- patient and out - patient care will also be permitted. It is expected that this project will commence development by 2013 with anticipated buildout in 2016. Potable Water: The subject project is located within the urban boundary with standards for Potable Water established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Service to this area is provided by Florida Governmental Utility Authority. This Project will have no impact on the Collier County Regional Water System. Water Demand: Proposed: ALF: 120 beds x 115 gpd/bed = 13,800 gpd 5,000 sq. ft. medical office: 3 practitioners x 250 gpd = 750 gpd 9 staff 15 gpd = 135 gpd Total Water Demand 14,685 gpd Existing: Residential: 1 unit x 250 gpd/unit = 250 gpd Medical Office 35,000 sq. ft. 20 Practitioners x 250 gpd = 5,000 gpd 30 Staff x 15 gpd = 450 gpd Total Water Demand 5,700 gpd Net Impact = (New Subdistrict — Existing Residential) = (14,685 — 5,700) gpd = 8,985 gpd Data Source: Tables in Chapter 64E -6 F.A.C. Exhibit V.E. Page 1 of 4 Sanitary Sewer: The subject project is located within the urban boundary with standards for Sanitary Sewer established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Service to this area is provided by Florida Governmental Utility Authority. This Project will have no impact on the Collier County Regional Sewer System. Sewer Demand: Proposed: ALF: 120 beds x 115 gpd/bed = 13,800 gpd Medical office: 5,000 sq. ft. 3 practitioners x 250 gpd = 750 gpd 9 staff x 15 gpd = 135 gpd Total Water Demand 14,685 gpd Existing: Residential : 1 unit x 250 gpd/unit = 250 gpd Medical Office 35,000 sq. ft. 20 Practitioners x 250 gpd = 5,000 gpd 30 Staff x 15 gpd = 450 gpd Total Water Demand 5,700 gpd Net Impact = (New Subdistrict — Existing Residential) _ (14,685 — 5,700) gpd = 8,985 gpd Arterial and Collector Roads: Please refer to the Traffic Impact Statement for discussions of the project's impact on level of service for arterial and collector roadways within the project's radius of development influence. 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. Page 2 of 4 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 120 bed facility, and ancillary medical office use.. Solid Waste Generation: Proposed: ALF: 120 beds x 0.2 tons/bed/yr = 24 tons /yr x 1 cy /200 lbs = 240 cy /yr Medical Office: 5,000 sq. ft. x 2.3 /tons /1000 sq. ft. = 11.5 tons /yr x 1 x cy /200 =115 cy /yr. Total Proposed = 355 cy /yr Existing: Residential: 1 unit x 25 cy /unit/yr = 25 cy /yr Medical Office: 35,000 sq. ft. x 2.3 /tons /1000 sq. ft. = 80.5 tons /yr x 1 x cy /200 = 805 cy /yr. Net Impact = (New Subdistrict — Existing Residential) _ (355 - 805) cy /yr = (450) cy /yr The currently adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards and 2010 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) for Solid Waste are as follows: Solid Waste LOS Standard Two years of constructed lined cell capacity at average disposal rate /previous 5 years Available Inventory as of FY2010 1,897,913 Site Tons Required Inventory as of FY2015 507,101 Site Tons Planned CIE FY 11 -16 0 Site Ton 5 -Year Surplus or (Deficit) 2,162,492 Site Tons Data source: "Solid Wastes: Engineering Principles and Management Issues ", Tchobangolous /Theisen and "Environmental Engineering and Sanitation ", Salvato. No adverse impacts to the existing solid waste facilities are anticipated from this project. 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 ancillary medical office has no community or regional park impact. 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 1 dwelling unit and a maximum of 35,000 Exhibit V.E. Page 3 of 4 sq ft of office uses. Using the average County household occupancy rate of 2.4 people per unit, this could represent 5 residents. Conversion to the proposed institutional subdistrict represents a slight reduction in the County population (the ALF population, though residents, will not normally utilize a County park facility, as recognized by County impact fee schedule). 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 slightly less community park space and slightly less regional park land. No adverse impacts to the existing parks are anticipated from this 9.6± acre mixed use project. Schools There will be no units that will be occupied by school aged children. Therefore, there is no affect on school capacity due to the proposed plan amendments. Fire Control and EMS The proposed project lies within the East Naples Fire District. There are two existing fire stations within 3.5 miles of the project site. In addition, Golden Gate Fire District has a station that is less than 1 mile from the project site. No significant impacts to Fire Control level of service are anticipated due to the proposed project. Estimated impact fees for fire and EMS are $25,260 based on a 120 -bed facility with ancillary 5,000 square feet medical office (values based on 2011 Collier County Impact Fee calculator). ALF: EMS $6,585 Fire $16,250 5,000 sq ft medical office: EMS $475 Fire $1,950 Exhibit V.E. Page 4 of 4 B &j � ■) 2 / 4 k �9 N-IIi. / - % m \ } � b k � ; $ � \ \ LLI § o ■_ /�):��\ r ) 2 §00z t ~�� m G£ / IL }/ _ W 2 3 8 ¥ § )&I��_ @G\§ 2§y= _ § 2 v) [ § r4-. 0 u< § § 2 ® § E y } - 2 » S ± o 2 i § 0 � ° § ■ . (Q y § { q = _ / j 2 / j § § & / } § g 6 A = g Q- | L, » \ - § } \ § \ ) \ } ■ °) § / � ■ Lil ■ u- La o 0 I 4®+ ■ N-IIi. \ —Z— __j ] \ � 0 / - % m \ } � b % � � ; $ � La ■_ /�):��\ ■ /§ ! \ « E �, @§ & X t ~�� § — /' / IL )&I��_ #, � �� j � ■ | , - . , r4-. - � 2 E�� \ —Z— __j ] \ � 0 �� - � b % � w / � __j ] \ � 0 COPY EXH I B I;T V. E. 1, G TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT Revision 2 Qmega Consulting Group GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT COMPREHESIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT April 2011 Revised August 2011 Collier County, Florida Prepared For: Q. Grady Minor & Associates, PA 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Job # R 1 1 12.02 Prepared By: Omega Consulting Group, LLC 11338 Bonita Beach Road, S.E. * Suite 103 * Bonita Springs, Florida 34135 EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 1 of 22 INTRODUCTION Omega Consulting Group, LLC has been retained to complete a TIS for the Golden Gate Estates Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict comprehensive plan amendment. The purpose of this study is to provide Collier County with sufficient information to assure that traffic- related impacts are anticipated and that effective mitigation measures are identified for the proposed development. The project is located on the northwest corner of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway in Collier County, Florida. The project includes land currently zoned for office space along with an estates zoned parcel. The existing parcel land use plan is as follows: Medical Office (LU 720): 35,000 SF Single Family Home (LU 210): 1 DU The site currently accesses Golden Gate Parkway via a single right - in/right -out access. The Estates parcel would have a single right - in/right -out access when developed. The proposed project has the following land use plan for the two parcels: Adult Living Facility (LU 254): 120 Beds The Alzheimer and skilled nursing services are anticipated at the facility. It will have a single access on Golden Gate Parkway vs. the two accesses currently anticipated. Completion of the project is anticipated prior to the 2016 peak season. SITE - GENERATED TRIPS TRIP GENERATION Site - generated trips were estimated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (8t' Edition). Medical Office (LU 720): ADT: T = 40.89 * X — 214.97 AM Peak Hour. T = 2.30 * X (Average Rate) PM Peak Hour: Ln (T) = 0.88 *(X) + 1.59 Single Family (LU 210): Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXHIBIT V. E.1 c - Page 2 of 22 ADT: Ln (T) = 0.70 *(X) + 2.71 AM Peak Hour: T = 0.70* X + 9.74 PM Peak Hour: Ln (T) = 0.90 *Ln(X) + 0.51 ALF (LU 254): ADT: T = 2.66 (Average Rate) AM Peak Hour: T = 0.14 (Average Rate) PM Peak Hour: T = 0.22 (Average Rate) The above equations were used with the land use data provided to generate the proposed estimated trip generations for the project. Table 1 shows the summary of the existing and proposed site - generated trip estimates. TABLE I EXISTING APPROVED TRIP GENERATION AM Peak PM Peak Land Use Size Unit Daily Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Medical Office (LU 720): 35,000 SF 1,216 81 64 17 112 30 82 Single Family (LU 210): 1 DU 15 10 3 8 2 1 L Existing Approved Traffic 1,231 91 67 25 114 31 83 PROPSOSED TOTAL TRIP GENERATION (Phase 1) AM Peak PM Peak Land Use Size Unit Daily Total Enter Exit Tonal Enter Exit Assisted Living (LU 254): 120 Beds 319 17 11 6 26 11 15 Proposed Total Traffic 319 17 11 6 26 11 15 Net New Traffic -912 -74 -56 -19 -88 -20 -68 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT The site - generated trip distributions were determined by review of the area and estimating where the trip generators /attractors are located in reference to the project. Since the primary draw for the facility is to /from the Naples Community Hospital to the west and the former Cleveland Clinic Hospital to the north, we have estimated that most of the trips will come from/go to those directions, hence the distribution used. The Peak Hour traffic distribution and trip assignment for both the existing and proposed land use plans are shown in Table 2. Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 3 of 22 TABLE 2 EXISTING TRIP DISTRIBUTION /ASSIGNMENT PM Peak Hour PROPOSED TRIP DISTRIBUTION /ASSIGNMENT PM Peak Hour Roadway Link From Entering Exiting 1 -75 Roadway Link From To Distribution VPH Distribution VPH 35% Livingston Rd 1 -75 35% 11 35% 29 GG Pkwy 1 -75 Santa Barbara 85% 26 85% 71 GG Pkwy Santa Barbara Collier Blvd 15% 5 15% 12 Santa Barbara Green Blvd GG Pkwy 35% 11 35% 29 Blvd GG Pkwy Radio Rd 15% 5 15% 12 PROPOSED TRIP DISTRIBUTION /ASSIGNMENT PM Peak Hour Roadway Link From Livingston Rd GG Pkwy 1 -75 Distribution VPH Santa Barbara Santa Barbara Green Blvd Blvd GG Pkwy SIGNIFICANCE TEST ANALYSES The adjacent concurrency links were evaluated to determine whether projected operation would be within County standards. Table 3 shows the results of the PM Peak Hour Significance Test for both the existing and proposed land use plans. Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional In fill Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 4 of 22 Entering Exiting To Distribution VPH Distribution VPH 1 -75 35% 4 35% 5 Santa Barbara 85% 9 85% 13 Collier Blvd 15% 2 15% 2 GG Pkwy 35% 4 35% 5 Radio Rd 15% 2 15% 2 SIGNIFICANCE TEST ANALYSES The adjacent concurrency links were evaluated to determine whether projected operation would be within County standards. Table 3 shows the results of the PM Peak Hour Significance Test for both the existing and proposed land use plans. Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional In fill Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 4 of 22 TABLE 3 EXISTING TRIP ASSIGNMENT /SIGNIFICANCE PM Peak Hour PROPOSED TRIP ASSIGNMENTISIGNIFICANCE PM Peak Hour Peak Peak Project Roadway Link From Roadway Link From To SFA44X2 Direction Trios Impact 4,370 Livingston Rd 1 -75 4,370 NB /WB 29 0.7% SB /EB 4 0.1 1 -75 SB /EB II 0.2% 13 1 -75 Santa Barbara 3,730 NB /WB 71 1.9% GG Pkwy SB /EB 26 0.7% Santa Barbara Santa Barbara Collier Blvd 1,980 NB /WB 5 0.2% SB /EB 2 SB /EB 12 0.6% 1,930 Green Blvd GG Pkwy 1,930 NB /WB 29 1.5% Santa Barbara 4 0.2% GG Pkwy SB /EB 11 0.6% Blvd GG Pkwy Radio Rd 3,100 NB /W B 5 0.2% 0.1 SB /EB 12 0.4% PROPOSED TRIP ASSIGNMENTISIGNIFICANCE PM Peak Hour 'Bold denotes Peak Direction. 2From Con currency Report for segment or a similar segment The significance test analyses for the adjacent roadway network indicate that there are no links that have site - generated primary trips that are significant for either the existing or proposed land use plans. Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional In fill Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXH I BIT V. E.1 c - Page 5 of 22 Peak Project Roadway Link From To SFtyxz Direction Trios Impact Livingston Rd 1 -75 4,370 NB /WB 5 0.1 SB /EB 4 0.1 1 -75 Santa Barbara 3,730 NB /WB 13 0.3% GG Pkwy SB /EB 9 0.3% Santa Barbara Collier Blvd 1,980 NB/WB 2 0.1 SB /EB 2 0.1 Green Blvd GG Pkwy 1,930 NB /WB 5 0.3% SB /EB 4 0.2% GG Pkwy Radio Rd 3,100 NB /WB 2 0.1% SB /EB 2 0.1 'Bold denotes Peak Direction. 2From Con currency Report for segment or a similar segment The significance test analyses for the adjacent roadway network indicate that there are no links that have site - generated primary trips that are significant for either the existing or proposed land use plans. Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional In fill Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXH I BIT V. E.1 c - Page 5 of 22 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES Background traffic volumes were developed using the Collier County AUIR for 2005 through 2010. A minimum two percent (2 %) growth rate has been assumed. Tables 4 & 5 show the results of the growth rate calculations based on the Trip Bank from the 2010 AUIR and the Historical Growth Rate. TABLE 4 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES Based on Historical Growth of AUIR TABLES Based on 2010 AUIR Trip Bank 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 -2010 Rate 2016 Roadway Link From To PK H R PK HR PK HR PK HR PK HR PK HR Growth Rate Used Total Livingston Rd 1 -75 1,990 1,990 1,330 2,517 2,468 2,657 2.7% 2.7% 3,118 GG Pkwy 1 -75 Santa Barbara 2,070 1,680 1,600 2,084 1,929 1,937 -1.3% 2.0% 2,181 Santa Barbara Collier Blvd 1,740 1,740 1,700 1,603 1,600 1,388 -4.4% 2.0% 1,563 Santa Barbara Green Blvd GG Pkwy 1,390 1,390 1,410 1,410 1,410 1,102 -4.5% 2.0% 1,241 Blvd GG Pkwy Radio Rd 1,590 1,470 1,470 1,470 1,470 1,328 -3.5% 2.0% 1,496 TABLES Based on 2010 AUIR Trip Bank ANALYSES LINK LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSES The Maximum Service Flow (SF.,x) for area roadway segments is shown in Table 6 & 7 for 2016. Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXHIBIT V.E.1 c - Page 6 of 22 Bkgd Trip Total Roadway Link From To Vol Bank Vol Livingston Rd 1 -75 2,657 148 2,805 GG Pkwy 1 -75 Santa Barbara 1,937 137 2,074 Santa Barbara Collie- Blvd 1,388 154 1,542 Santa Barbara Green Blvd GG Pkwy 1,102 143 1,245 Blvd GG Pkwy Radio Rd 1,328 228 1,556 ANALYSES LINK LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSES The Maximum Service Flow (SF.,x) for area roadway segments is shown in Table 6 & 7 for 2016. Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXHIBIT V.E.1 c - Page 6 of 22 TABLE 6 LEVEL OF SERVICE DETERMINATION Based on Historical Growth 'Bold N denotes Not within LOS Standards TABLE 7 LEVEL OF SERVICE DETERMINATION Based on 2010 AUIR Trip Bank 2016 2010 W/I LOS Std? W/1 LOS Std?r 13kgd rrolect Iota I t3kgd W/ Roadway Link From To SF Vol Trips Vol Only Proj. Vol Livingston Rd 1 -75 4,370 3,118 4 3,121 Y Y GG Pkwy 1 -75 Santa Barbara 3,730 2,181 9 2,191 Y Y 137 Santa Barbara Collier Blvd 1,980 1,563 2 1,565 Y Y Santa Barbara Green Blvd GG Pkwy 1,930 1,241 5 1,246 Y Y Blvd GG Pkwy Radio Rd 3,100 1,496 2 1,497 Y Y 'Bold N denotes Not within LOS Standards TABLE 7 LEVEL OF SERVICE DETERMINATION Based on 2010 AUIR Trip Bank 'Bold N denotes Not within LOS Standards The analysis shows that the adjacent arterials are projected to operate within LOS standards both with and without the project for the proposed land use plan. It should be noted that the proposed land use plan is less intense than what is currently approved for project site (see Table 1). ACCESS ANALYSES Collier County uses what is commonly referred to as the "Right -of -Way Manual" to determine turn lane requirements for arterial and collector roadways. This manual requires right turn lanes on all multi -lane roadways. Since the project will access Golden Gate Parkway (a six -lane arterial), a right turn lane will be required. Since Collier County uses speed limit to determine Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional Infrll Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 7 of 22 2010 2010 W/1 LOS Std?r Bkgd Tri p Project Total Bkgd W/ Roadway Link From To SFM,X Vol Bank Trios Vol Only Poi. Livingston Rd 1 -75 4,370 3,118 148 4 3,269 Y Y GG Pkwy 1 -75 Santa Barbara 3,730 2,181 137 9 2,328 Y Y Santa Barbara Collier Blvd 1,980 1,563 154 2 1,719 Y Y Santa Barbara Green Blvd GG Pkwy 1,930 11241 143 5 1,389 Y Y Blvd GG Pkwy Radio Rd 3,100 1,496 228 2 1,725 Y Y 'Bold N denotes Not within LOS Standards The analysis shows that the adjacent arterials are projected to operate within LOS standards both with and without the project for the proposed land use plan. It should be noted that the proposed land use plan is less intense than what is currently approved for project site (see Table 1). ACCESS ANALYSES Collier County uses what is commonly referred to as the "Right -of -Way Manual" to determine turn lane requirements for arterial and collector roadways. This manual requires right turn lanes on all multi -lane roadways. Since the project will access Golden Gate Parkway (a six -lane arterial), a right turn lane will be required. Since Collier County uses speed limit to determine Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional Infrll Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 7 of 22 the length of right turn lanes, a turn lane length of 185 feet (including a 50 foot taper) would be appropriate for the 45 mph speed limit of Golden Gate Parkway in the vicinity of the project site. As noted before, this project is anticipated to have a single right - in/right -out access. The existing project has a single right -in /right -out access anticipated. In addition, the estates zoned residential lot that is being added to make the proposed project would also have a right - in/right -out access. So the combination of these lands will reduce the accesses on Golden Gate Parkway. Golden Gate Estate Commercial and Institutional Infill Subdistrict CPA TIS 002 EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 8 of 22 Reed Jarvi From: PodczerwinskyJohn [ JohnPodczerwinsky @colliergov.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 20114:45 PM To: RJarvil234 @comcast.net Cc: GreeneMichael Subject: RE: Santa Barbara /GGP Comp Plan Amend Reed, We agree with your assessment. I took a quick look at it, and I don't have any objection to the methodology you proposed. Thank you, John M. Podczerwinsky Development Review Project Manager, Growth Management Division Land Development Services Department Transportation Planning Section 239 - 252 -8192 239 -252 -6793 Fax Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e -mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: Reed Jarvi [mailto:RJarvi1234 @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, April 18, 20113:13 PM To: PodczerwinskyJohn Cc: GreeneMichael Subject: RE: Santa Barbara /GGP Comp Plan Amend John, Here is the Methodology Meeting request and Trip Generation, Trip Distribution and Significance tables for the project. We are adding approximately 2 % acres to the existing project, deleting the medical office as a use and proposing a120 bed Alzheimer /skilled nursing /ALF facility on the new site. This land was rezoned in 2004, but I have been unable to obtain the previously approved TIS. Since the primary draw for the facility is to /from the Naples Community Hospital to the west and the former Cleveland Clinic Hospital to the north, we have estimated that most of the trips will come from /go to those directions, hence the distribution used. This project currently has a signal right -in /right -out access unto Golden Gate Parkway and the single family du land that is currently unbuilt would also have a right -in /right -out access onto Golden Gate Parkway (i.e. two accesses in the current condition). The proposed project will have a single right -in /right -out onto Golden Gate Parkway (i.e. a single access). As you can see from Table 3, neither the current land use plan nor the lesser intense proposed land use plan has a significant impact on the adjacent roadway network. In the TIS, I will analyze the LOS of the proposed land use plan for the 2010 AUIR plus Trip Bank along with the 2010 AUIR with 6 years of growth (minimum rate of 2 %). 1 will also describe the trip generation as you suggest below. Please review the attached and if you agree, please send me a methodology approved email. Thanks.. Reed EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 9 of 22 From: PodczerwinskyJohn [ mailto: JohnPodczerwinsky @colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, April 15, 20111:22 PM To: RJarvi1234 @comcast.net Cc: GreeneMichael Subject: RE: Santa Barbara /GGP Comp Plan Amend I think that the approach to LOS analysis will be fine at the new intensity, but please include a notation that what is analyzed is "less than what is currently approved ". ?'hank you, John M. Podczerwinsky Development Review Project Manager, Growth Management Division Land Development Services Department Transportation Planning Section 239 - 252 -8192 239 - 252 -6793 Fax Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e -mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: Reed Jarvi [mailto:RJarvi1234 @ comcast.net] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 11:28 AM To: Podczerwinskylohn Cc: GreeneMichael Subject: RE: Santa Barbara /GGP Comp Plan Amend I will put together a methodology meeting package for you on Monday or Tuesday. I will include trip gen, trip distribution, trip assignment for both the existing maximum intensity project and the new lesser intensity project. For the TIS, I propose to do the same, but only do the LOS analysis for the proposed new lesser intensity project (because we are specifically taking out the existing maximum intensity project). O k? Reed From: Podczerwinsky]ohn [ mailto: JohnPodczerwinsky @colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, April 14, 20112:51 PM To: RJarvi1234 @comcast.net Cc: GreeneMichael Subject: RE: Santa Barbara /GGP Comp Plan Amend Reed, I think we should go with your second approach, but look at distribution of the (existing) maximum trip generation. Thoughts? John M. Podczerwinsky Development Review Project Manager, Growth Management Division EXHIBIT V.E.1c- Page 10 of 22 Land Development Services Department Transportation Planning Section 239 - 252 -8192 239 -252 -6793 Fax Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: Reed Jarvi [mailto:RJarvi1234 @comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 20114:52 PM To: Podczerwinsky]ohn Subject: Santa Barbara /GGP Comp Plan Amend John, I'm working on a comp plan amendment for the property on the northwest corner of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway. Currently, the zoning ( #04 -35) is for up to 35,000 sf of mixed office uses (no maximum on medical office). The intent of the project is to add adjacent parcels and ask for a comp plan change of the entire area from office including medical to ALF. As you can see from the attached Trip Generation, a 120 bed ALF generates significantly less traffic than 35,000 sf of medical office (worst case existing condition). I can see two ways to proceed: 1) just a trip generation to show that the new land uses are less than the proposed land uses or 2) since this is a relatively old PUD (2004), complete a new Comp. Plan Amendment level TIS for what is proposed on the land (i.e. 120 bed ALF). Since the trip generation is projected at less than 50 peak hour trips, this should be a small scale TIS. What do you think? Thanks. Reed Reed K. Jarvi, P.E. Principal Omega Consulting Group, LLC 11338 Bonita Beach Road SE., Suite 103 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Phone (239) 777 -5741 Fax (239) 948 -6689 Email: RJarvi1234 @comcast.net EXHIBIT V.E.1c -Page 11 of 22 APPENDIX A INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply. Date: 4/19/11 Time: 2:45 Location: via Email People Attending: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1) Reed Jarvi P.E., Omega Consulting Group, LLC 2) 3) 4) 5) Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title: Reed K. Jarvi, P.E. Organization: Omega Consulting Group, LLC Address & Telephone Number: 11338 Bonita Beach Road, S.E., Suite 103., Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Reviewer(s) Reviewer's Name & Title: John Podczerwinsky Collier County Transportation Planning Department Reviewer's Name & Title: Organization & Telephone Number: Applicant: Applicant's Name: See above Address: Telephone Number: Proposed Development: Name: Santa Barbara Blvd/GGP CPA Location: northwest corner of Santa Barbara Blvd & Golden Gate Parkway Land Use Type: Currently Golden Gate commercial ITE Code 4: 710/720/210 Proposed number of development units: up to 35,000 sf/1 single family du on land to be added to current desi ng ation Other: Description: CA Docs1Projects120111R1112- SantaBar6ara _GGP%Transportation1R1112 Methodology meeting request 418- 11.doc EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 12 of 22 Zoning Existing: commercial Comprehensive plan recommendation: _ Requested: ALF /Alzheimer Care facility Findings of the Preliminary Study: Study Type: Small Scale TIS ® Minor TIS ❑ Major TIS ❑ Study Area: Boundaries: Santa Barbara Blvd north and south of Golden Gate Parkway, Golden Gate Parkway east and west of Santa Barbara Blvd. Additional intersections to be analyzed: None Horizon Year(s): 2016 Analysis Time Period(s): PM Peak Hour Future Off -Site Developments: none Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None: X_ Pass -by trips: None Internal trips (PLTD): None Transmit use: Other: Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements: None Methodology & Assumptions: Non -site traffic estimates: None Site -trip generation: ITE Trip distribution method: Manual by knowledge of area Traffic assignment method: Manual Traffic growth rate: 2% minimum C.*Wocs1Projects120111R 1112- SantaBarbare _GGATranspottatlonlR1112 Methodology meeting request 418- 11.doc EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 13 of 22 Special Features: (from preliminary study or prior experience) N/A Accidents locations: Sight distance: Queuing: Access location & configuration: Traffic control: Signal system location & progression needs: On -site parking needs: Data Sources: Base maps: Prior study reports: Access policy and jurisdiction: Review process: Requirements: Miscellaneous: Small Scale Study —No Fee X_ Minor Study - $750.00 Major Study - $1500.00 Includes 2 intersections Additional Intersections - $500.00 each All fees will be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and must be paid to Transportation prior to our sign -off on the application. SIGNATURES Reed Study Preparer Reviewers Applicant C:IDocslProjects120111R 1112- SantaBarhara GGPUranspodation1R1112 Methodofogymeeting inquest 418- 11.doc EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 14 of 22 EXHIBIT A Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Methodology Review, Analysis Review, and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional meetings or other optional services are also provided below. Methodology Review - $500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement, including review of submitted trip generation estimate(s), distribution, assignment, and review of a "Small Scale Study" determination, written approval /comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confirmation of a re- submitted, amended methodology statement, and one meeting in Collier County, if needed. "Small Scale Study" Review - No Additional Fee (Includes one sufficiency review) Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review includes: a concurrency determination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study compliance with trip generation, distribution and maximum threshold compliance. "Minor Study Review" - $750 Fee (Includes one sufficiency review) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: optional field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, distribution, and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected /assembled, review of off -site improvements within the right -of -way, review of site access and circulation, and preparation and review of "sufficiency" comments /questions. "Major Study Review" - $1,500 Fee (Includes two intersection analysis and two sufficiency reviews Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, special trip generation and /or trip length study, distribution and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of traffic growth analysis, review of off -site roadway operations and capacity analysis, review of site access and circulation, neighborhood traffic intrusion issues, any necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates, and preparation and review of up to two rounds of "sufficiency" comments /questions and/or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional intersection Review" - $500 Fee The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the "Major Study Review" and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the "Major Study Review" "Additional Sufficiency Reviews" - $500 Fee) Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. C:1D=Vs Djects12011 181112- SantaBarbara_ GGATranspedationlR1112Methodologymeeting request418-1i.doc EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 15 of 22 U J J Q O L C 7 C O U m m Q d U Q. (a (a `m m M c (a w 0 N NI 00 EXH I BIT V. E.1 c - Page 16 of 22 x X O O U) H1 M :Ll ul d XiN — � co LlJ U o — — ° C7 a- C wl — M M C c _ — N i CD CL —Cd 1 @' O N N O N N (a F-) L ^ m xl N XI 10 1 .Y w w d r 10 C— — �9 U) Q WI Q WI N O 00 O. O — — M Ln N— N C) M M N s CL 0 O Z LL.� O �I "' o Z �I m ca O ~ d o ~ U W N i in o _ Ln Z M W LU Z -2 (� LU Lm IL m IL Imo— in Q F- N LU J U w Q r' O u v o a m .. � � Ln Cl - 0 O J to W v w (' J L a N c L a) O Z O •E N N a� ! (v 4. O Ov H a N i Qo W E in x W 0. Q O. Z U EXH I BIT V. E.1 c - Page 16 of 22 U J J J 'Ln V C 75 U) r., O U m rn a) F� U^ CD (a co -0 W Un EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 17 of 22 O N co r 'V' n- a, C4 N 'N [V CL fLn rh N ;Ln N X O W = R O O o ' O O 7 f O O - O O Ln Ln IfI Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln IA d_ N Ln _ Ln ' d" 0% N N O O O O � �' O O O �'� : O - Ln M Ln 00 Ln Ln M ..O l M Ln : (1) z € °- W W , ` L n� Cd k ° `a m CO F-I �' t 0' O ; {z n a� O va , r- = o - z o , C� j� fd o m O� !� Cd o m lL t _ O 't r > m C iLi V' tk _ g O Uf >` � . m m 00 = O.. F s _ ; Ln r CL L Q J r` ! L rre^f TO W= TO d _ 1 ' ui L (� ca o (C { - CO o ' c7 cis p CL I, wa I, n. a EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 17 of 22 O N co r 'V' J Q 3 O c� a1 C 7 47 C O U m rn W a n. U cu .9 (0 CO �0 M U) EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 18 of 22 0 N V x N X O O f-' Q' CL U a^ V c' (0 Q t6 CO Y O O - e- 11- N 'O 'ilA 'O N V' - CD C- C. 0 0 - O C G O Ci Ci Ci Ci C O O O O � V N v1 V' _ V N N fL ~ n Y 1-� mm 2m C mm >>>m>mmd W W m m ` W W W W UJ O- i W\ . W w m m m m m Z ul Z 0 Z N m m ' Z vmi Z N m m m m m m Z N Z VI Z to M - Z N Z N W W r M co oo U o 0 o 0 U ^ M a r°� a: Z co M a cli Z LL af• M — — M Q N � M — — M U Z m N CL O m O. (7 " C7 m Q9 Z �, U (D E W W N w m Q Z m c v o m E N o m m C ,C y N Q m E b0 Q_ y Q _ °) �tl CIO s cc Lt ° o to a ° U o O 00 N U D O (0 U Z L c W = n ac Z C J n. 0 w o t N 0 J d m U Ci U C] c c O d b U c U X :2 O 2 o �. c L b O II E m W a N m a s r EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 18 of 22 0 N V x N X O O f-' Q' CL U a^ V c' (0 Q t6 CO 2005 -2010 AU I R EXCERPTS EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 19 of 22 i 3 A 3 0 7 6 u t 1 L D co n m m n 0 .� •U N Tr ¢� LO ^O C� y O cl c� o •� it O 0. cd O O U i. ..r O U s. 4z AR e PLO H 0 a z 0 H i~ d X 0 O O L� C) 0 r.+ N CL (� C O U i"" W U zs a !L� D o Q U EXHIBIT V.E.1 c - Page 20 of 22 cl 00 00 �O N oo V7 M y a N �t 1") M O O a xU RS y � y � O Q� N O M N N ON vi 01 H N N - - 000 c1 Lr) 0000 O c� A a+ O O\ N c� C H N —+ M i. O M i.. c. O H o A rn C °rn rn A 0 0 0 ON O �o r— m Ln � N a � G O O O O oM O U I 000 01 o 0 0 0 � n M r- 00 Cl M C� O\ O O r1 r..' ❑ A U.r O p cu C.6 j QOD Fa' 0 a 0 a 0 C, �x z U '. �o w Fij o d) as ,/ W - U C7 0 C ❑ f� 0 t a H > � U 0 H d s°. � 0 cd ° , o o Cd 3 xCA o cd o ° xCdC,3 Zl g 0 o aj Z N O CSC w � w H C O V -0 2 000�� a 7:1 cd cd -0 - 0 .� •U N Tr ¢� LO ^O C� y O cl c� o •� it O 0. cd O O U i. ..r O U s. 4z AR e PLO H 0 a z 0 H i~ d X 0 O O L� C) 0 r.+ N CL (� C O U i"" W U zs a !L� D o Q U EXHIBIT V.E.1 c - Page 20 of 22 cl 00 00 �O N oo V7 M .Ni 0 W (, a RS y � � � O Q� N •--� M 000 c1 Lr) 0000 O C O M i.. O A o 0 0 0 0 E' °o o•x� rn�� O O oM O I 000 01 con Q •--+ y � n O cl cu C.6 Fa' 0 a 0 C, �x z �o w d) as - U C7 0 0 0 H cd d s°. � ° o o C. P� xCA o o ° ° � Zl g o Z N H C -0 2 000�� a 7:1 0 .� •U N Tr ¢� LO ^O C� y O cl c� o •� it O 0. cd O O U i. ..r O U s. 4z AR e PLO H 0 a z 0 H i~ d X 0 O O L� C) 0 r.+ N CL (� C O U i"" W U zs a !L� D o Q U EXHIBIT V.E.1 c - Page 20 of 22 J cn cn C O U c6 CD N F Q U d C7 m M M c,-- M [— M �."•i O • cl � � tn ) O z d CYN O 00 a N 00 C,4 °� M M U � O O � C� O � 1-n 00 I-- N N 00 00 M •� --� ° c— t N H � A� ON "t M t-- C> V) x � A 6 0 CC O M 0 M 0 O 0 O 0 0 l- � a CSC a x, o � H � ° a x q u 0 � 0 � 0 M 0 00 o M O O .:: ,.�. M '�i M r� O\ O\ N C� dl o a U a - C3 e4 0 as a'' ° U £LI c. 0 00 m CD s, O0000 O ff" c� .. C\ a , - o ° � a o ON o H 0 0 ° U C7 0 U •°: 0 -od H U o � pd a�cd cd a cz o d oar o O H r co �0 CIS A C7 0 ° > 0 +1 Cd aoi ^s -+ o a � O a a a a W W E-4d' 0000 A M c,-- M [— M �."•i O O l � .�' •� V � V) C'l M M m o � � d- M d oo � � 1-n N I-- N N ° NHW H � A� ON "t M t-- C> V) M \0 't Vl CSC a � H � ° a CC tl- d M O O q r, 000 M 0 00 �O A n N N U r+ - C3 e4 0 as a'' ° U o c. m 00 m CD s, O0000 O ff" M I*- C\ O) ° � o o H H ° U •°: C H U o � pd � cd a cz o `n cd o O H r CIS cl U o a � O O W W E-4d' A > as ° o � on o v� on A t4 o O CCJ v, O N ao°i 00 C O ci a U w a O V cc O U a a a cl L Cd 04mclol U v �l 0 C7 C7 v� rig EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 21 of 22 x O O NI LO O 0 N U X W Q r O • L U V) � 110 M o � � d- M d oo � � NHW A� � a ° a "�' •iii � � [� M U a as ° U M o ?? U ° � o o H H � J C�j H � o V)a O W E-4d' � on o v� Pro t4 F4 O O N � � C h ci a U w a 04mclol EXHIBIT V.E.1c - Page 21 of 22 x O O NI LO O 0 N U X W Q r O ) 3 J 3 J 6 3) u PC L L L 7 7 0 EXHIBIT V.E.lc - Page 22 of 22 0 N X 0 0 N LO O O N U X w Q �O v� � Vn Cl) 00 It � U d � ,.a Ln a d .- r 00 O N 0 rte+ .C�] N a � o 0 t-- �1' M 00 CD 00 W d M vi d' N NFL .a cd cl [ 00 N 00 A y y V) M 00 O N \O Q1 M M x y i+ O 1M.0.1 chi N a W y o a' a 00 0 M 0 O � s, o00 �+ Cl) ~ ~ M �a � a 0 U c 0 U W A; o pig o `n cd cd U o � O � a �a 0 H w H 3 A a1° Cc b c a 0. a� bn r-1 O � N � N F-1 cd cd a a a C's Cc C7 C7 C7 c � a � � Cd w a(�0c) CZ 60 EXHIBIT V.E.lc - Page 22 of 22 0 N X 0 0 N LO O O N U X w Q I- 1-6141WA EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT ADDENDUM Revision 2 GradyMinor GOLDEN GATE ESTATES COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT COMPREHESIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT (March 2012 Addendum to August 2011 Traffic Analysis) Collier County, Florida Prepared For: Naples Venture II, LLC and Naples Venture III, LLC 4951 Tamiami Trail, N., Suite 11 Naples, FL 34103 Prepared By: Q. Grady Minor & Associates, PA 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Exhibit V.E.1c Page 1 of 6 INTRODUCTION Project was previously submitted with 120 ALF (LU254) beds. A proposed ancillary medical office use is now proposed to be added to the ALF use. The medical office (LU720) for inpatient and outpatient use will be a maximum of 5,000 s£ The additional trips from this use will be added to the previous calculations. TRIP GENERATION Site generated trips were estimated using Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (8t' Edition). Calculations: Medical Office (LUS 720): ADT: T = 40.89 *X — 214.97 T = 150 trips (note, this is estimated because of inadequate data for smaller building sizes in ITE manual) AM Peak Hr: T = 2.30 * X (Average rate) T = 11 trips Enter = 9 trips Exit = 2 trips PM Peak Hr. Ln(T) = 0.88 *Ln(X) + 1.59 T = 20 trips Enter = 5 trips Exit = 15 trips TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT The site - generated trip distributions were determined by review of the previous TIS for the site and knowledge of the area and the adjacent roadway network. The Peak Hour traffic distribution and trip assignment is shown in Table 2. TAR[ F 9 Exhibit V.E.1c Page 2 of 6 PM Peak Hour Roadway Link From To Entering Distribution VPH Exiting Distribution VPH Livingston I -75 35% 2 35% 5 GG Pkwy I -75 Santa Barb 85% 3 85% 13 Santa Barb Collier Bld 15% 1 15% 2 Santa Barbara Green Blvd GG Pkwy 35% 2 35% 5 Blvd GG Pkwy Radio Rd. 15% 1 15% 2 Exhibit V.E.1c Page 2 of 6 SIGNIFICANCE TEST ANALYSES The concurrency links within the vicinity of the project were previously evaluated to determine whether projected operation would be within County standards. Table 3 shows the results of the PM Peak Hour Significance Test from that analysis. As seen in the above figures, there is a small resultant increase in the number of trips from the proposed addition of the 5,000 medical office compared to the scenario for only 120 ALF units with inpatient medical care; however the total trip volume remains significantly less than that previously analyzed for office use only as permitted in the existing sub - district. TABLE 3 PROPOSED TRIP ASSIGN+1MENTISI.+GNIFICANCE PM Pear Hour '81 mates Peak Direction. "Fran Car_aurresi; y Refit far segm?rt[ or a smear segn=_nt The significance test analyses for the adjacent roadway network indicate that there are no links in the vicinity of the project that have site - generated primary trips that are significant. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES As depicted in the previous TIS by Omega, background traffic volumes were developed using the Collier County AUIR for 2005 through 2011. A minimum two percent (2 %) growth rate has Exhibit V.E.1c Page 3 of 6 PeA pm Roadway Unk From: TO � - I3 r€ -ion' Tt ib5 1€ Livingtton Ad 1 -75 4,17o Ni3t4 8 14 03% 531 9 13 03% 1=75 Sand Barbara. 3,710 fr §BAIVR 33 1191% crc per` SBIEB 31 0 5artra,Barbara Colrierblvd 11980 NB'9` B 5: 00 - � h SWES 6 03% __ —B Cron Blvd GG '} w1 1,93o e 8d1R B 14 0.7% SEVE8 13 0 -n GG nxwy tadia Rd 3,100 mafm 5 0 <2 S£3,'Et3 6 0.2% '81 mates Peak Direction. "Fran Car_aurresi; y Refit far segm?rt[ or a smear segn=_nt The significance test analyses for the adjacent roadway network indicate that there are no links in the vicinity of the project that have site - generated primary trips that are significant. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES As depicted in the previous TIS by Omega, background traffic volumes were developed using the Collier County AUIR for 2005 through 2011. A minimum two percent (2 %) growth rate has Exhibit V.E.1c Page 3 of 6 been assumed. Table 4 & 5 show the results of the growth rate calculations based on the Trip Bank from the 2011 AUIR and the Historical Growth Rate. TABLE 4 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES Based on Historical Growth of AUIR Si Draft 2069,11 Raddwsy.Link From Try 4�f , 1005 2009 20+161 2011 Groww Rate 2016 Rae&a L(nk From T6 Pfd HR :PK HR Pr, HR PK Hk 5;1x w Bar6drd Golder 1314 1,308 154 Wng on R.d. 1 -75 x,517 2,468 2,657 4405 - f.5% 2 -0% 2,934 GG Pkwy 1-75 Santa Ba!6ma 2,084 1,929 (,937 (,71 f - 66.4: 2 -0% 2,131 3SdnfiJ Bafftrxrci CoNerNyd 1,603 1,660 1388 1,16f -6_7 1.6% 1,532 Santa &.lelwd Gtet'1't Fil d GG Pkwy 1.410 1,410 1,162v 1,035 91°,,,'' 2.0% 1,217 ISW 116 Pkwy Radio Rd 1,470 1,470 (;328 1,398 -11% 2.0 1,466 TABLES BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES Based on Draft 2011 AUIR Tire Bank LINK LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSES The Maximum Service Flow (Wmax) for area roadway segments is shown in Table 6 & 7. The LOS analysis, again from Omega's report, showed that the adjacent arterials are projected to operate within LOS standards both with and without the project for the proposed land use plan. The increase in trips (AM Peak 11 trips, PM Peak 20 trips) from the proposed 5,000 sf medical office use is a very insignificant increase to these projections and will not affect LOS. Exhibit V.E.1c Page 4 of 6 Si Tdp TQtaf Raddwsy.Link From Try 4�f , 1'st !arirrgstutt Rd 1 -75 2,657 151 2,808 GG Pkwy 143 Santa $axb= 1,937 137 —074 5;1x w Bar6drd Golder 1314 1,308 154 1,542 $ Sn a. Satltd Barbara Greed Bfi GG Play F, 102 143 1,245 Wtd CG P'kky Rtd'io Rd ),318 228 F,556 LINK LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSES The Maximum Service Flow (Wmax) for area roadway segments is shown in Table 6 & 7. The LOS analysis, again from Omega's report, showed that the adjacent arterials are projected to operate within LOS standards both with and without the project for the proposed land use plan. The increase in trips (AM Peak 11 trips, PM Peak 20 trips) from the proposed 5,000 sf medical office use is a very insignificant increase to these projections and will not affect LOS. Exhibit V.E.1c Page 4 of 6 TABLE 6 LEVEL OF SERVICE DETERMINATION Based on Historical Growth I Bold N denotes Not mffiftn: LOS Standards TABLE 7 LEVEL OFSERVICE DETERMINATION Based on Droft 2011 AUIR Trip Bank 2010 2010 W!f Los 5ta I Bkgd 2016 , Prqject toW Wit Los Swl Wrl RoolM Unk Fmm To 8kg4 Pmjea Total &.gd WJ Link ftow ro 2AUX AV i1 yo., P-h-tx ftL v Lhtqg�1n Rd 1-75 4,370 2,93:4 13 2946 Y y y 1-75 Smito Barb= 3,730 2,139 11 4169 y y y Sam Sarbord CoNt'r BIW 1,980 1,M 6 1,538 Y y =Z Z W Siam Barbara Grecri gJvd 66 Pk',Vl 1,930 1,217 14 1,230 y y &vd 66 Pk Wy RM& Rd -41100 1,466 3 1,472 y y I Bold N denotes Not mffiftn: LOS Standards TABLE 7 LEVEL OFSERVICE DETERMINATION Based on Droft 2011 AUIR Trip Bank 2010 2010 W!f Los 5ta I Sdata Sarboto Gtetlii Pikl GG Pkwy 11W 66 Pkuy Radio Ad 'Bold N denotes Not i%RNa LOS Standards INTERSECTION ANALYSES 1,15730 1,217 143 14 1,373 Y y 3J06 1,46.6 228 S 1,70, Y y The project's access to Golden Gate Parkway will not be affected by this small increase in trips from the 5,000 sf addition to the uses. Exhibit V.E.1c Page 5 of 6 Bkgd Tnp Prqject toW 9�gd Wrl RoolM Unk Fmm To Ai ZdAL 141 YaL D111K h:DL Udngswfl Rd 11.5 43717 2,934 148 0 .3,094 Y v G6 Kmvy 05 Santa Bwbaro 3,736 7-139 137 3 If 2,306 Y y Sarm Barbara COX& BW 1,99 1.1512 154 6 1,02 Y y Sdata Sarboto Gtetlii Pikl GG Pkwy 11W 66 Pkuy Radio Ad 'Bold N denotes Not i%RNa LOS Standards INTERSECTION ANALYSES 1,15730 1,217 143 14 1,373 Y y 3J06 1,46.6 228 S 1,70, Y y The project's access to Golden Gate Parkway will not be affected by this small increase in trips from the 5,000 sf addition to the uses. Exhibit V.E.1c Page 5 of 6 CONCLUSION The analysis shows that the adjacent arterials are projected to operate within LOS standards both with and without the project for the difference between the current and new land use plans and the new land use plan as a standalone project through the buildout year of 2016. From the intersection analysis of the project access, the project increase will not greatly impact turning lane for the project. Exhibit V.E.1c Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT V.F. OTHER COPY Revision 2 EXHIBIT V.F. -PAGE 1 OF 1 Ln H (3) O O O� m M NSZ96 =Yblg SON j N O n Z o C) N 5 m CD iL U5 Z 0 z a N Q o a N< z vwi 8 z U i O N p� 99999�rAica.m.A7.9�f_ OW bi u ! W j N z g i a J U < cj U i S ,j H - �.Ci6.`LIYC o o �111�11 man= . 43� � � - .SFi4Zp2' rCiC�llfLC ■ :.F'�F`LtP1 iC ;2Sl1� MIIMI e t -CO KOIL-tlY -9D -N -ZZK t1 cs-eD sit- ar -vo -ro 60KtK -2aana Ln�zK oa -LO wcu- pv- LO CLKO 'Otl0 J(T M 9 6i -iDrm WKZK IX IX-40 iR,-WKO Z,l -LO eL91- tlY- 40-J1W ZD -21K Lf tptK6 B -pb -ro 46-6K B'. Oel-% f�06-IU (53[(INW 6R-[6 t- -OON Lb -9L -v K 1n60 b bL 1Wn OBtOx A6 JZlOUONI) 901K0 -OON 9 -CL -Z lC tt,K6 '1[3 B-f6 -ro S6KL -L K LK6 -pIK bi Bt0-h6 - ZL -It BZ C-h6M f66 hZh-,6 tK6 -N ,6-ftK 4L LK6 -ro [6 -BLK SL lL-f6 ptLK6 lKBwaB C6KCK hL EIroNO!�D 5'DAYf SMNN BKC -tl CL ltIK6 DZ-O6 -Dd I6 -bi-I ZL lONIIW AYWNO IN3N - 30YM'N rn(IpNN I-e W -btKl LL C[pK6 Ct K6 -A O6�[L9 tl OE vttlK6 Zb6 -JAM - K 61 L9-& OZKC-M O< -81"I L6l -LB J-[LKp -M tei-ll Cl JIZ -SHM 91 JIEB -Itd SL Jrbp -nd fl Jt,-v[Kid it -Oa Lt J[t -Bp-M j-LL -Ik 06 KL -Otl Jpi -9v-na v xiKC�n C a Joy w-r�ie s ac -CC -na _ t J91 -6<-Od p3lON JLaN)Z F U_ m Q } >- W Q > O J 0 O Y W zQ W W O j Q7 w R qO O0 ° N DO w ¢4 oil 111111 Ill I z 2 ta/1T NW W W Q Q QO 2 Z 8 O S_ ce OVOM NOISONIAII NSZSB SSZS6 ( z $�mE�� EXHIBIT V.F. -PAGE 1 OF 1 99999�rAica.m.A7.9�f_ i - �.Ci6.`LIYC . � � - .SFi4Zp2' rCiC�llfLC ■ :.F'�F`LtP1 iC ;2Sl1� EXHIBIT V.F. -PAGE 1 OF 1 COPY EXHIBIT V.G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Revision 2 Details Property Record Sketches f Trim Notices Current Ownership Parcel No. 138170000009 Property Address NO SITE ADDRESS GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 30 TR 112 Section 11 Township Range Acres �1 Map No. Strap No. 29 49 26 4.15 4629 11 335500 112 04629 -t Millage Rates Sub No. 335500 -J GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 30 ` F MiIIaae Area School Other Total `I Use Code 10 VACANT COMMERCIAL 10 5.6990 6.6239 12.3229 2010 Final Tax Roll (Subject to Change) If all Values shown below equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll I'See Instructions for Calculations Latest Sales History Land Value $1,354,336.00 Date Book -Page Amount ( +) Improved Value $ 0.00 10 / 2007 4298-58 $ 2,300,000.00 (_) Market Value $1,354,336.00 02 / 2005 3737 - 1166 $0,001 ( -j SOH Exempt Value & Other Exemptions $ 0.00 09 ! 2003 1392-4 $1,010,000.00 ( =) Assessed Value $1,354,336.00 04 / 1977 683-173 $0,001 ( -) Homestead and other Exempt Value (_) Taxable Value $1,354,336.00 {_) School Taxable Value (Used for School Taxes) I $1,354,336.00 SUH = "Save Our Homes" exempt value due to cap on assessrpent increases. The Information is Updated Weekly. EXHIBIT V.G. - Page 1 of 9 This instrument prepared by: Thomas A Collins, It Esquire Trc&r, Collins & Vernon 3080 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Florida 34112 4090284 OR: 4298 PG: 0058 RECORDED in OPPICIAL RECORDS of COLLIER COUM, PL 10/31/2007 at 03 :07M DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERI CONS 2300000.00 REC PEE 27.00 DOC -.10 16100.00 Retn: SNALK BOQRGIA6 IT AL 2375 4AKIAKI 4R 11308 NAPLES PL 34103 4139 [Space Above This Line For Recording Data] WARRANTY DEED (Statutory Form - FS 689.02) THIS INDENTURE, made this D��'day of October, 2007, between COLONNADE ON SANTA BARBARA, LLC., a Flori t company, Grantor, whose post office address is 3838 Tamiami Trail North a 34103, and NAPLES VENTURE 11, LLC, a Florida limited liabili y, Grantee, w e qst office address is 555 Skokie Boulevard, Suite 350, Northbroo , ois 60062. The Grantor, for d i o e tfo consideration, to it in hand p ' sai It , *has granted, bargained and st the said Grantee, the following described land, to All of Tract 112, Golk plat thereof as recorde Collier County, Florida. 1 t 10.00 and other valuable I of is hereby acknowledged, d assigns forever, in and to /C according to the map or 58, Public Records of (For Information Only: Property Appraiser's Parcel Identification Number is 38170000009) Subject to the following: (a) ad valorem and non ad valorem real property taxes for the year of closing and subsequent years; (b) covenants, restrictions and public utility easements of record; (c) zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental authority; (d) outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any; and (e) road easement as shown in Official Records Book 3932, Page 2323, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. TOGETHER with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same in fee simple forever. EXHIBIT V.G. - Page 2 of 9 OR: 4298 PG: 0059 And the said Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. Signed, sealed and delivered COLONNADE ON SASNTA BARBARA, LLC a Florida limitecl✓9iability company By: Seal A KYRITSIS, Manager �c Witness Print��0.c�• #1 [7 Witness #2 N�c STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER Cp &� 1701 , Manager h The foregoing in- si-mment was acknowledged before me this day of October, 2007, by ATH NA L. KYRITSIS, as Manager of Colonnade on Santa Barbara, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, who is personally known to me OF has -pM dI as- icienti€eation. NOTE: If a type of identification is not inserted in the blank provided, then the person executing this instrument was personally known to me. My Commission expires: �� Lam, Ctcv--e MaRYlowOlcipr.- weKi NOTARY P I ' CoAAflSSION N D.7 t5 4 V WMS` Fabnaq `s �OPs� T p or ted name a��. EXHIBIT V.G. - Page 3 of 9 * ** OR: 4298 PG: 0060 * ** STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER -1 '' The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this�F� day of �= 2007, by KENNETH D. GOODMAN, Manager of Colonnade on Santa Barbara, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, who are personally known to me er- have, produced n. NOTE: If a type of identification is not inserted in the blank provided, then the person executing this instrument was personally known to me. My Commission expires: y mo wo)CiECxow514 NOTARY PUB C MY COMh1�S510N p DD3?i' ^SCC� y -So 1..' `'t 'e Y fl Typed or pr ted name co EXHIBIT V.G. - Page 4 of 9 Details Property Record Sketches I Trim Notices I Current Ownership Parcel No. 138168800004 J Property Address 5715 GOLDEN GATE PKWY GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 30 E 18OFT OF TR 98 OR 1408 PG 1205 Section Township Range Acres Map No. Strap No. (-- 29 49 --I 26 IF 2.81 --1F--4B29---II 335500 98 04829 Millage Rates I Sub No. 335500 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 30 Millage Area F—school--JDihW71 Total Use Code �— 1 � SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 10 5.6990 6.6239 12.3229 2010 Final Tax Roll (Subject to Change) If all Values shown below equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Land Value $ 73,763.00 ( +) Improved Value $108,952.00 ( =) Market Value $182,715.00 ( -) SOH Exempt Value & Other Exemptions I $ 39,234.00 ( =) Assessed Value $143,481.00 ( -) Homestead and other Exempt Value $ 50,500.00 (_) Taxable Value $ 92,981.00 (_) School Taxable Value (Used for School Taxes) I $ 117,981.00 SOH = "Save Our Homes" exempt value due to cap on assessment increases. 'See Instructions for Calculations Latest Sales History Date Book -Page Amount 01 ! 1989 1408-1205 $ 0.00 12 ! 1988 1402-8 $ 122,000.00 02 1 1988 1330-1882 $0.001 01 / 1987 1242 - 900 11 $ 35,000.00 The Information is Updated Weekly. EXHIBIT V.G. - Page 5 of 9 SEC .A ?RM t�,pC 4T— ND- 1'M • J �V `FJ .tV consideration: $ 122000 0 1 2 3 7 9 6 1 1908 DEC 19 ItM 8 20 J File No: 9301 COLLIER COUNTY RECORDED This Warranty Deed Made and executed the 13th day of December A.D. 1988 by Seacreat Homes, Inc. _- a corporation existing under the Imes of Florida and having its principal place of bt!siness at 5715 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida 33999 hereinafter call the grantor, to Marvin E. Smith and Eva M. Smith, Husband and Wife whose postoffice address is 5715 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida 33999 hereinafter call the grantee: Witnesseth: That the grantor. for and in consideration of the sum of g $10.00 and other valuable considerations, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, by these presents does grant, bargain. sell. alien, remise, release, convey and confirm unto the grantee. all that certain land situate in Collier — County, Florida, viz: Unit 30 The East 180 feet of Tract 98, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES,Aaccording to the Plat '71) thereof as recorded in Plat Book.7, Page 58, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 11 244905 1969 JAN 12 PR 3'•oy�01 408 00120 OLLIER COUNTY J LJ`- 1ECORDED ✓/ OR BO K PAGE Received S671 Documentary Stamp Tax Received 3 � �y Class "C.' Inta! ;gibie PersonalProDarty Tax Together with all the ten! appertaining. To Have and to Hol And the grantor- hereby v that it has good right and lawful at said land and will defend the s Ir free from all encumbrances ex Subject�o easements, Y J? LI 2' (CORPORATE SEAL) In Wltney i reof the grantor has caused these presents to be executed in its name, and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed, by its proper officers thereunto duly authorized, the day and year first above written. k1hereditaments and same i?flf iipple f! S 1 t ty to sc� t ' �}vf la s es accunng su s m �n i ictions and rest GuT Le. OF CO f § D.C. the o belonging or in anywise seized of said land in fee simple: hereby fully warrants the title to ,homsoever, and that said land is er al, 19 87. record. Seacrest Homes, Inc. ATTEST: .............. ............................... WITNF5S: �\\a� beet F. Slttton Vice - . STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ODTT,TF.R The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 13th day of Decc�aber 19 88 by Robert F. Simon, Vice - President Of Seacrest Hanes, Inc. a Florida corporation, on behalf of the corporation. 0 No4y. h is NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF FLORIDA EXPI ES; MAY 23. -MY COMMISSION lot '('his nsarument prepared by and return to: Joann Sandy First American Title Co. Recnrc:da!tivriacd () �`�- 5020 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 1021.- .,.,.... - ^.:it mon:allr,.x soI \(v3L Naples, Florida 33940 1&c�3�� COLLIER COLINIY.. FLORIDA, JAMES G GILES. CL ERR EXHIBIT V.G: Page )f 9 .9ec ^rd . -.... ;rn to: South Fl : ;j--;t a Title The BCrcnvna t Low Buil*MORANDUM OF CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE 27911 Crown I. �tF� Blvd., !#�''1f66ft' "` Bonita S;t: L 34135 AND SALE OF PROPERTY File :%!uir.:,•:r: This is a Memorandum of that unrecorded Contract for Sale and Purchase of Property ( "Contract'), dated September 29, 2009, between Marvin E. Smith, (referred to therein as "Seller "), and Naples Venture I11, LLC and/or its assigns, (referred to therein as "Buyer ") concerning the real property ( "Property ") commonly known as 5715 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida 4116 and legally described as: The East 180 feet of Tract 98, Golden Gate Unit 30, according to the plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 58 of the public Records of Collier County, Florida. For good and valuable consideration, Seller has agreed to sell and Buyer have entered into a Contract for the purchase and sale of the property upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Contract referred to. Seller shall not have the right, with respect to the Property to enter into any new contracts, leases or agreements, oral or written, without the prior written consent of Buyer. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Memorandum on October .1i'' 2008. Witnesses: SELLS : W : lt-,A r PURCHASER: STATE OF R—o p-9 Q Iq ) O� �jfE CIR�� COUNTY OF Cv t c1Z ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 21 day of October, 200 , by Marvin E. Smith as Seller. Notary Public tom * myco ls"SD0r716M d(PIFEs: April 30.2012 My Commission Expires: ' 30 Z b i Z- . �� eonaaTMYema+ n ' Ft,-C--0 �R� f L b STATE OF 1-/-, } COUNTY OF C. 0 o i4 ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thiskyday of October 200 Joseph . Rosin, Mana er of Naples Venture I11, LLC, as Purchaser. otary Public�� My Commission Expires: I (D ft M " wCOMbINN� 000A a a m m ,e o ,E ^ rn V7 N a 00 0 n n _ A T c N Q f-� m 'e EXHIBIT V.G. - Page 7 of 9 LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize Q. Grady Minor and Associates. P.A. and Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A. (Name of Agent(s)) to serve as my Agents in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. Signed: �`` .,r, i Date: `+ L-) 1 Joseph A Rosin, Manager of Na{ 1p's Venture II, LLC and Naples Venture III, LLC V. I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. l Signature of Applicant f Joseph A Rosin, Manager of Naples Venture II, LLC and Naples Venture III, LLC Name - Typed or Printed STATE OF ( Rorld -a- COUNTY OF ( (J:)111.e,r- Sworn to and subscribed before me this _day of -AQrl 1 12011 by _ 'D(&njjLa) X MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Notary Public CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: who is personally known to me, who has produced as identification and did take an Oath did not take and Oath NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: ��1111111111111 //t �. � Qp 2a. 20, Z ' #EE 031402 : O i�q ••�;ia Bonded to '�eh • �Q� a 41C ST Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of %500.00 and /or maximum of a sixty day jail term." LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A.. Naples Venture ll, LLC and Naples Venture III, LLC (Name of Agent(s)) to serve as my Agents in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. Signed: & Date: arvin E. Smith I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. V §nature of Applicant Joseph A Rosin, Manager of Naples Venture II, LLC Name - Typed or Printed STATE OF (norido COUNTY OF ( CD I I Itr Sworn to and subscribed before me this a04�' day of - ,�(ar"i 1 12011 by D (Lc1'1.2Av A Q Lt.c-n4a r U IeAj Notary Public CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: V who is personally known to me, who has produced and did take an Oath did not take and Oath MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: identification NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: p �Missloa'9l'� G �yaY 28, o : #EE 031402 ' SW TAT i��LdrypthN �yf Q Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of %500.00 and /or maximum of a sixty day jail term." PRE APPLICATION M EETING NOTES COPY Revision 2 t c �7�6 . � .� Y�9+ -� - gyp,,,, ` � ]�✓.�. /� s,.� � u- � vi.• �+(1 h/�,L� Snv'�f � � pio r /Vow JFLt� /vn 414D zsr. PA - — - -- -- - -- — ___._... - - — - —_ — - - -- - - - -- — Pact `3�I7 �t >6ec�9 3SI b�BcD�� Pagel. of_3. _. is cv bw eq. Cc- ... .. - ------ f6'4Z c (f C vb� C19 . ..... ...... 0-,K M-Ylc�cj--- ON ....... . ...... ... .. . ..... STUD10"i Rey Pezeshkan 1, President & CEO 71239.434.5800 F1239.434.0208 Elrpezeshkon@pkstudlos-com Page 2 of 3 mz�m p— — — � E ( � $ !| �A n�®�2 R ; ■!�■!§G; ; 2� ) ■��a J §; 4,! � •!: � � §\ /\\ ) §( ! Page a J 3 \ \� \)j\§ ! � �a ■ ,•_._a Page a J 3 COPY PUD ORDINANCE 20,04,=35 RESOLUTION 2007=270 Revision 2 r ORDINANCE NO.04 - 35 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91— . 102 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING �8�9BbBZ�� REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM "E" ESTATES TO "CPUD" COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE COLONADES AT SANTA BARBARA PUD, WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY AND SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 6.83+ ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. r . 1 r, WHEREAS, Richard D. Yovanovich, of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, P.A., representing Colonnade Medical Park, LLC, in Petition Number PUDZr2003 -AR -4332, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "E" Estates to "CPUD" Commercial Planned Unit Development in accordance with the Colonades at Santa Barbara PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein. The Zoning Atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 91 -102, the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby amended accordingly. Page 1 of 30 SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board Of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this c254'l day of 2004. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Attachment: Exhibit A PUD Document Page 2 of 30 lowh� BY: 2f— (!j - DONNA FIALA, CHAIRMAN I G 3HR U, . .......... n,,,,,,.,..,.••'''' This ordinance filed with the y 4rlarof State's Office th� day of Jay— -am$ Approved as to Form and acknowledgerne that A 6 and Legal Sufficiency flliX,c:-,',e,d this, 2' day of B11 y Patrick G. White Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A PUD Document Page 2 of 30 lowh� COLONADES AT SANTA BARBARA A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PREPARED FOR Colonnade Medical Park, LLC 9240 Bonita Beach Road Suite 2206 Bonita Springs, Florida 34135 JUNE 2003 Exhibit "A" (1ACUjrem\r3e 1CmU'UD Ficzones \Cnlunad s (� Santa Barbara NUll. AR- 433?\PU0 docum Areciscd per BCC 5- 25- 04.doc Page 3 of 30 COLONADES AT SANTA BARBARA A CONEWERCML PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 6.83± Acres Located in Section 29 Township 49 South, Range 26 East Collier County, Florida PREPARED FOR: Colonnade Medical Park, LLC 9240 Bonita Beach Road, Suite 2206 Bonita Springs, Florida 34135 PREPARED BY: Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 Q. Grady Minor & Assoc. PA 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 DATE FILED DATE APPROVED BY CCPC DATE APPROVED BY BCC -6-.q6-041 ORDINANCE NUMBER a00 y • ,3.S cdCurn:ntllhx•Icm \PUll Rcrune.,104 nades w Santa Barbars YVU. AR-433--MUD dtxument revised per BCC 5•25414.doc _ Page 4 of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLE i STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE SHORT TITLE iv SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, & 1 -1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2 -1 2.1 Purpose 2.2 General Description of the Project and Proposed Land Uses 2.3 Compliance with County Ordinances 2.4 Land Use Summary 2.5 Use of Right -of -Way 2.6 Sales Office and Construction Office 2.7 Changes and Amendments to CPUD Document or CPUD Master Plan 2.8 Preliminary Subdivision Plat Phasing 2.9 Open Space and Native Vegetation Retention Requirements 2.10 Surface Water Management 2.11 Environmental 2.12 Utilities 2.13 Transportation 2.14 Common Area Maintenance 2.15 Design Guidelines and Standards 2.16 Landscape Buffers, Berms, Fences and Walls 2.17 Signage 2.18 General Permitted Uses 2.19 Deviations and Substitutions SECTION III OFFICE DISTRICT 3 -1 3.1 Purpose 3.2 General Description 3.3 Permitted Uses and Sections 3.4 Development Standards SECTION IV PRESERVE DISTRICT 4 -1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 SECTION V DE 5.1 5.2 5.3 Purpose General Description Uses Permitted Development Standards VELOPMENT COMMITMENT 5 -1 Purpose General CPUD Master Development Plan G.'NCurrent\DeseluniM1UD Reznnrx \CoMnatL% w 3ama Barbara FUD. AR433211'UI) durumenu \rer[kd pa RCC5.254".t ue Page 5 of 30.. LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES EXHIBIT A- I Conceptual CPUD Master Plan and Surface Water Management Plan EXHIBIT B Boundary Survey EXHIBIT C Location map EXHIBIT D Legal Description ( AC=enlll)e dcm \PCll RexowmCnkmado (c Sams Barb= PVI)- AR- 1:32WLTD dncuuvnLArLviud per BCC 5- 25413.doc i Page 6 of 30 i STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The purpose of this section is to express the intent of the Heartbeat Cardiac Services, Incorporated, hereinafter referred to as the Developer, to create a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) on 6.83± acres of land Iocated in Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The name of this Commercial Planned Unit Development shall be Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD. The development of this site will comply with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as set forth in the Growth Management Plan. The development will be consistent with the policies and land development regulations adopted there under of the Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element and other applicable regulations for the following reasons: 1. The subject property is within the Golden Gate Commercial Infill Sub - district as identified in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and on the Future Land Use Map. In addition to other uses allowed by the Plan, this District is intended to accommodate a mix of general and medical office uses on this infill parcel, and contains development intensity standards to insure that development is compatible with surrounding residential and commercial land uses. The development of the property is also located within the corridor management overlay district and is subject to the provisions of Section 2.2.21 of the LDC, unless modified herein. 2. Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD is compatible with and complementary to existing and zoned future land uses surrounding the project as required in Policy 5.4 of the FLUE. 3. Site and building improvements will be in compliance with applicable land development regulations and development regulations specified herein. 4. The development of Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD will result in a well- designed office project, through coordinated and regulated signage, building design, vehicular and pedestrian access, and landscaping and will further the intent of Policies 3.1.E and F of the FLUE. 5. The development of Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD will be designed in a manner consistent with Objective 7, Policies 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 and 7.5 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, which address access management, on -site traffic and pedestrian circulation, and compliance with the Collier County Streetscape Master Plan. 6. The development of Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD will result in an efficient and economical extension of community facilities and services as required in Policies 3.1 G of the Future Land Use Element. 7. All final local development orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, Division 3.15 of the Land Development Code. 8. Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD has received a waiver from the historical/archaeological survey and assessment requirements of Section 2.2.25.3.10 of the Land Development Code due to the site's location in a low potential area for containing historical/archaeological G:1Curren1\IXsekm \W13 RezuneslColunades yr Santa Barbara NVD. AR41'12M VI) documenLAreiiaed per BCC S•'_S- W.dne 11 Page 7 of 30 artifacts. The developer will comply with Section 2.2.25.8.2 of the Land Development Code should accidental discovery of any historic or archaeological site, significant artifact, or other indicator occur during site development or building construction. G- ACurrcntUxseIemITUD Re,.owstCukmades W Santa Barhara PUD. AR- 4332TUD dmurnentsVenwd Per BCC 5.25-IW.dm Page 8 of 30 SHORT TITLE This ordinance shall be known and cited as the "COLONADES AT SANTA BARBARA COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE.- C i:%CurmntUlesdemlPCJD Rernnu\Culunades f? Santa Barbara PCU. AR- 3332U'lrU dmumrnuveviw.d per BCC 545- 114.dtx iv Page 9 of 30 SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to set forth the legal description and ownership of Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD, and to describe the existing condition of the property proposed to be developed. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Please refer to Exhibit "D ". PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The subject property is currently under the equitable ownership or control of Colonnade Medical Park, LLC, a Florida Corporation, or its assigns, whose address is 9240 Bonita Beach Road, Suite 2206, Bonita Springs, Florida 34135. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY A. The project site is located in Section 29, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, and is generally bordered on the east by Santa Barbara Boulevard, to the south by Golden Gate Parkway, to the west and north by developed estates zoned property. B. The zoning classification of the subject property at the time of CPUD application is E, Estates and is located within the Corridor Management Overlay, which applies to projects along Golden Gate Parkway. C. Elevations within the site are approximately 7.5 to 9 feet -NGVD. Per FEMA Firm Map Panels No. 1200670415D, dated June 3, 1986, the Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD property is Iocated within Zone "X" of the FEMA flood insurance rate map. D. Prior to development, vegetation on the site primarily consists of low quality pine flatwoods, xeric oak, and palmetto prairie vegetation. Habitats of the site also been invaded by exotic plant species, including Brazilian pepper, melaleupa, and downy rose myrtle. (i:lUwsmllXxlemlYUD Renme.%Wolonades i Santa Bar-Nara PUD. AR- 4332TUD doet n,!nvAre,-Lwd per BCC 5- 2544.dne 1-2 Page 10 of 30 SECTION H PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to generally describe the plan of development for Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD, and to identify relationships to applicable County ordinances, policies, and procedures. 2.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AND PROPOSED LAND USES A. Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD is a 6.836 -acre mixed office development oriented to serve surrounding residential areas within a convenient travel distance, which will consist of medical and professional offices. Of the gross 6.83± acres, 2.03± acres is encumbered as a right -of -way easement for Santa Barbara Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway. The developable area excluding rights -of -way is 4.8± acres. Collier County has proposed to acquire an additional .65t acre for road right of way purposes. The net developable area outside of those areas proposed for right - of -way is 4.15± acres. B. The CPUD Master Plan is illustrated graphically on Exhibit A -1. A Land Use Summary indicating approximate land use acreage is shown on the plan. The location, size, and configuration of the buildings shall be determined at the time of County development approvals in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). C. The Project shall contain a maximum of 35,000 square feet of gross leasable area for mixed office uses. 2.3 COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ORDINANCES A. Regulations for development of Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this CPUD Ordinance, and to the extent they are not inconsistent with this CPUD Ordinance and applicable sections of the LDC, which is in effect at the time of issuance of any development order. Where this CPUD Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific section of the LDC that is otherwise applicable shall apply. B. Unless otherwise defined herein, or as necessarily implied by context, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the LDC in effect at the time of development order application. C. Development permitted by the approval of this CPUD will be subject to the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, Division 3.15 of the LDC. D. All conditions imposed herein or as represented on Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD Master Plan are part of the regulations, which govern the manner in which GACurrcn1V)e.Wlcm\PUD Rezones \Cuhmades [q, Sanin Barb= PUD. AR- 4 ?12V'UD ducumenLArevis�d Per 11CC S ?5- fU.drq; 2 -1 _ _ Page 11 of 30 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 the land may be developed. E. The Developer shall submit to the County an annual PUD monitoring report in accordance with LDC Section 2.7.3.6. LAND USES A. The location of land uses and general project configuration are shown on the CPUD Master Plan, Exhibit A -1:- Changes and variations in building, location and square footage shall be permitted at time of County development to accommodate utilities, topography, vegetation, and other site and market conditions, subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5. of the Collier County LDC. The specific location and size of buildings and the assignment of square footage or units shall be determined at the time of County development approval. B. All infrastructure will be private. The Developer or its assignees shall be responsible for maintaining the drainage, common areas, and water and sewer improvements where such systems are not dedicated to the County. The Developer reserves the right to request substitutions to Code design standards in accordance with Section 3.2.7.2. of the LDC. USE OF RIGHTS -OF -WAY The Developer may place landscaping, signage, lighting, water management facilities, berms, decorative walls and fences, utilities or decorative entry features within a private right -of -way within the Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD, subject to permitting agency approval. SALES OFFICE AND CONSTRUCTION OFFICE Sales offices, construction offices, and other uses and structures related to the promotion, leasing and sale of real estate such as, but not limited to, pavilions, parking areas, and signs, shall be permitted temporary uses throughout Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD. These uses shall be subject to the requirements of Section 2.6.33.4. Section 3.2.6.3.6. and Division 3.3 of the LDC. These uses may use temporary septic tanks or holding tanks for waste disposal subject to permitting under 64E -6 FAC and may use potable water or irrigation wells. CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS TO CPUD DOCUMENT OR CPUD MASTER PLAN Changes and amendments may be made to this CPUD Ordinance or CPUD Master Plan as provided in Section 2.7.3.5. of the LDC. Minor changes and refinements as described herein may be made by the Developer in connection with any type of-development or permit application required by the LDC. (i:lCuMntUhx1cmll'V1) Rec(,rWACpinnadci (t Santa Ilarbam PC). AR -1\ ?-' \1'111) dncument.,\mviscd ptr HCC 5 -25 -t) A)c 2 -2 Page 12 of 30 2.8 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT PHASING In the event platting is required, submission, review, and approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plats for the project may be accomplished in phases to correspond with the planned development of the property. 2.9 OPEN SPACE AND NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS The CPUD will comply with Section 2.6.32 and Division 3.9 of the LDC, and Collier County Comprehensive Plan Amendment CP- 2000 -7 adopted by Ordinance No. 2000 -12 on March 12, 2001 relating to open space and retention of native vegetation. Specific landscaping and open space requirements are established in Section 2.12 and Section 2.17 of the Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD. 2.10 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT A. The surface water management permit for the water management system will be designed in accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), Chapters 40E -4 and 4 -E-40. B. For the size and development intensity of this project, current rules require appropriate water quality storage to be provided. Water quality treatment shall be provided, based on 2.5" over the impervious area of the site. The current site design provides adequate area for meeting this requirement. Discharge from the site will be to Santa Barbara Boulevard and/or Golden Gate Parkway. C. The site will be designed in a manner that will prevent water from Colonades at Santa Barbara from draining onto the property located to the north. D. Any standing water that remains on the Colonades at Santa Barbara site after a seven (7) day period will be treated for mosquitoes. 2.11 ENVIRONMENTAL A. An Environmental Impact Statement was waived by the Collier County Planning Services Department, Environmental Review Section staff due to a previous Environmental Impact Statement provided for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment CP- 2000 -7, Ordinance No. 2000 -12. B. Other permits will be obtained from applicable State, Federal and Local agencies as appropriate. C. The Preserve area shown on the Conceptual CPUD Master Plan encompasses approximately .75t acres. The subject site, after excluding improved County Right -of -way easements contains approximately 4.8± acres of native vegetation. Retention of .75± acres of Preserve exceeds the required 15% (.72 acres) native vegetation of Section 3.9 of the LDC. G- ACurrcnLkDm1,.\1,u1) ldcrom.%\Cukmadas 01 Santa Barbara 1"). AR4332-TM ducumemslreviwd Nr ACC 5- 254M.doe 7 -3 _ Page 13 of 30 D. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes. Setbacks and buffers shall be provided in accordance with Section 3.9 of the LDC. In the event the Project does not require platting, all conservation areas shall be recorded as conservation/preservation tracts or easements dedicated to the project's homeowners association or like entity for ownership and maintenance responsibility and to Collier County with no responsibility for maintenance. E. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic -free) plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Environmental Review Staff for review and approval prior to final site development plan/construction plan approval. This plan shall include the methodology and a time schedule for removal of exotic vegetation within the conservation/preservation areas. 2.12 UTILITIES All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time approvals are requested. The project is within the service area of Florida Government Utility Authority. All water and wastewater facilities will be designed in accordance with Chapter 64E -6 FAC. 2.13 TRANSPORTATION A. All traffic control devices, signs, pavement markings and design criteria shall be in accordance with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards (MUMS), current edition, FDOT Design Standards, current edition, and the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), current edition. All other improvements shall be consistent with and as required by the Collier county Land Development code (LDC) B. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at all access points. Access lighting must be in place prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy (CO). C. Site - related improvements necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall not be eligible for impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior to the issuance of the first CO. D. Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 01 -13, as amended, and Division 3.15. LDC, as it may be amended. E. All work within Collier County rights -of -way or public easements shall require a Right -of -way Permit. F. All proposed median opening locations shall be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution 01 -247), as it may be amended, and (1:XCtnwnnDc4km \11Ull ReznneACulnnades to Santa 13arhara PUD. AR 4332 \PVh tlncutnenlalreviwd Iwr BCC 5- 254W_dnc 2-4 Page 14 of 30 the LDC, as it may be amended. Collier County reserves the right to modify or close any median opening existing at the time of approval of this CPUD which is found to be adverse to the health, safety and welfare of the public. Any such modifications shall be based on, but are not limited to, safety, operational circulation, and roadway capacity. G. Nothing in any development order shall vest a right of access in excess of a right in/right out condition at any access point. Neither will the existence of a point of ingress, a point of egress or a median opening, nor the lack thereof, shall be the basis for any future cause of action for damages against the County by the developer, its successor in title, or assignee. H. All internal roads, driveways, alleys, pathways, sidewalks and interconnections to adjacent developments shall be operated and maintained by an entity created by the developer and Collier Country shall have no responsibility for maintenance of any such facilities. I. If any required turn lane improvement requires the use of existing County right -of- way or easement, compensating right -of -way, shall be provided without cost to Collier County as a consequence of such improvement. J. If, in the sole opinion of Collier County, a traffic signal, or other traffic control device, sign or pavement marking improvement within a public right -of -way or easement is determined to be necessary, the cost of such improvement shall be borne by the developer and shall be paid to Collier County before the issuance of the first CO. K. Ingress and egress to Santa Barbara Boulevard shall be prohibited. L. All sidewalks located within public rights of way shall be designed and constructed to LDC requirements. M. An interconnection from the subject property to the abutting tract to the north may be allowed should the Golden Gate Commercial Infill Sub - district as identified in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and on the Future Land Use Map be amended to include the subject property to the north. The interconnection location and design will be subject to review and approval by county Zoning and Land Development Review and Transportation Planning staff in conjunction with the appropriate application submittal and fee payment pursuant to LDC Article 3. In no case should a possible interconnection be construed as support or vesting for any future amendment action for the Golden Gate Commercial Infill Sub - district as identified in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and on the Future Land Use Map. 2.14 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Common area maintenance, including maintenance of the surface water management system, will be provided by the Developer or its assigns. GACurnen1Q%,1emlPUD Rexows \Colonadrs tai Santa Barbara PUD. Aft- 3332%1101) docurne=sVeviwd per 13CY: i- 2S- 1M.dnc 2 -5 __ Page 15 of 30 2.15 2.15 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS A. The Collier County Planned Unit Development District is intended to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership as set forth in the LDC, Section 2.2.20. B. Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD is planned as a professional office site under unified control. The Developer will establish guidelines and standards to ensure quality for the common areas. All development will meet and enhance LDC Division 2.8, Architectural and Site Design Standards and Guidelines, and those specific requirements listed below that are requirements of the Golden Gate Commercial In -fill Subdistrict. 1. All buildings shall have file or metal roofs, or decorative parapet walls above the roofline, and buildings shall be finished in light subdued colors except for decorative trim. 2. All lighting facilities shall be architecturally- designed, and limited to a height of twenty -five (25) feet. Such lighting facilities shall be shielded from neighboring residential land uses. LANDSCAPING, BERMS, FENCES AND WALLS Landscaping, berms, fences and walls are permitted as a principal use throughout Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD. Required buffer treatments shall comply with the Collier County LDC and the Collier County Comprehensive Plan Amendment CP- 2000 -7 adopted by Ordinance No. 2000 -12 on March 17, 2001. The following standards shall apply: A. Landscape buffers contiguous to right -of -ways: Minimum width of 25' measured from the property line. The minimum number of required trees shall be calculated at 1 tree per 25' linear feet. Plantings shall not be required to be planted on 25' centers in a linear manner, but may be clustered or planted in irregular patterns to provide greater buffers in certain areas and to provide enhancements of key project features. 2. The height of required trees within the buffers shall be 12' on average. Canopy trees shall have a 6' canopy spread at the time of planting. 3. Hedges, where required by the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) shall be installed in accordance with LDC Division 2.4, Landscaping and Buffering, except as provide in Section 2.16.4. 4. The developer must provide a berm and wall/fence combination along the northern property boundary at a total height of seven feet (7'). A concrete block wall will be constructed from the eastern boundary of the property (i:%Currem \DisclemlPUD Reznnes(Qllnnades (m Santa Barbara PUD. AR 4}}2U'UD documentsVLvL%ed Per BCC 5- 25.04.dpc 2 -6 Page 16 of 30 westward to twenty -five feet (25') past the required thirty -five foot (35') buffer. A green chain link fence must be constructed from the end of the concrete block wall to the western boundary. The fence /wall combination will be constructed five (5) feet inside the subject property. The developer must plant a hedge on the north side of the wall and fence that will reach the height of the wall and fence within one (1) year of planting. 5. At the commencement of site clearing, the developer of Colonades at Santa Barbara must construct a temporary fence along the northern property boundary which will provide screening from the construction. B. The northern seventy -five (75) feet of the western sixty (60) percent of the site less those areas reserved for Santa Barbara road rights -of -way and easements, shall be a green area (open space area). It shall be utilized for only water management facilities, landscape buffers, and similar uses. C. The western sixty (60) percent of the site shall have an outdoor pedestrian- friendly patio area(s), that total at least five hundred (500) square feet in area and incorporate a minimum of. benches or seating areas for at least twelve (12) persons, and vegetative shading, and a water fall or water feature of at least one hundred (100) square feet in area, and brick pavers. The patio area will be designed such that utilities are not located within the pedestrian friendly area. D. A twenty -five (25) foot wide landscaped strip shall be provided along the entire frontage of both Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard. E. A minimum buffer of thirty -five (35) feet in width shall be provided along the project's western boundary and along the eastern forty (40) percent of the project's northern boundary. A minimum buffer of fifty (50) feet in width shall be provided along the western sixty (60) percent of the project's northern boundary. Where feasible, existing native vegetation shall be retained within these buffers along the project's western and northern boundaries. These buffers shall be supplemented with Oak or Mahogany trees planted a maximum of twenty (20) feet apart in a staggered manner; and a seven (7) foot wall, fence, or hedge that will, within two (2) years of planting, grow to a minimum height of seven (7) feet and be a minimum of ninety -five (95) percent opaque. When feasible, a hedge in lieu of a wall or fence will be provided. F. Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls may be constructed along the perimeter of the Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD boundary concurrent with site development. G. Sidewalks, signage, water management etc. shall be permitted within landscape buffers, per the LDC. 2.17 SIGNAGE A. GENERAL GACurrentUhselemlPUD Rezones%CoIanaekx (a Santa Bartura PUD. AR- 4332TUD dacumenwreviwd per IICC 5.2.5.(M.dw 2-7 Page 17 of 30 1. All ground mounted project and freestanding use signs shall be of consistent architectural style and shall feature like building materials and sign structures. Sign structures will be uniform in size, color, and building material. Pole signs shall be prohibited. All signage shall be consistent with Section 2.5 and Section 2.2.21 of the LDC. 2. Pursuant to Sections 2.8.3.6.2.1 of the LDC, the following conditions provide for the required comprehensive sign plan for the Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD. All sign regulation, pursuant to Collier County Division 2.5 shall apply unless such regulations are in conflict with any conditions established in this CPUD, in which case the CPUD Document shall govern. a) Signs and decorative landscaped entrance features within a County dedicated right -of -way shall require a right -of way permit subject to the review and approval of the County. b) A minimum setback of 5' from edge of pavement shall be required, except that no sign shall be located so as to create a vehicular line of site obstruction. C) All project sign structures may feature architectural treatments, which shall be permitted to extend above the maximum height of the sign specified herein. B. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic signs such as street name signs, stop signs, and speed limit signs, may be designed to reflect an alternative specification and common architectural theme upon approval by the Development Services Director, in accordance with Section 3.2.8.3.19. of the LDC. 2.18 GENERAL PERMITTED USES A. Certain uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD. General permitted uses are those uses, which generally serve the Developer and tenants of Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD and are typically part of the common infrastructure. B. General Permitted Uses: 1. Essential services as set forth under LDC, Section 2.6.9.1. 2. Water management facilities and related structures. 3. Architectural features and elements including walls, fences, arbors, gazebos and the like. C,:1CurrentVxsc1eMkPUD RezoneslColonadas td' Santa 1larbara PUD. AR•433211'UD docurnentskrevLwd per 11CC 5-15d14.doc 2-8 Page 18 of 30 4. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the Developer and Developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas and related uses, subject to Section 2.6.33.4 of the LDC. 5. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.18 of this CPUD. 6. Pedestrian pathways 7. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible. 8. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein are to be in accordance with the LDC provision in effect at the time of Site Development Plan Approval. 2.19 DEVIATIONS AND SUBSTITUTIONS A. From LDC Section 2.2.21.3.2 (Corridor Management Overlay) which required a minimum yard (building setback) of 50' for parcels along Golden Gate Parkway to permit a minimum yard (building setback) of 40' (see Section 3.4.C.l.a). This deviation is permitted due to the proposed additional right -of -way taking of 9.1' for expansion of Golden Gate Parkway. (i:\Currcnt \DcscicrnkPUD R=ncs\Calnnades (-1 Santa Barbara PLTD. AR- 3332TUD d(xunncntArLvLsod per WX 5- 254M.dnc 2 -9 _ Page 19 of 30 SECTION III OFFICE DISTRICT 460» 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD designated Commercial on the Master Plan. 3.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. Areas designated as Office on the CPUD Master Plan are intended to provide a maximum of 35,000 square feet (gross leasable area) of office uses as conceptually depicted on the Master Plan. B. No one building may exceed 25,000 square feet in gross leasable floor area. C. No business may be open to the public after 9 p.m. D. Overnight parking of vehicles and equipment is prohibited. 3.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: 1. Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchange and services (6211- 6289) 2. Insurance Carriers and agents (6311- 6399, 6411) 3. Real estate (6512 -6553) 4. Holding and other investment offices (6712 -6799) 5. Tax return preparation (729 1) 6. Business services (7311, 7322 -7331, 7336, 7338, 7371 -7376, and 7379 (including only those business services conducted in an office area)) 7. Health services (8011 -8049, 8071 -8092) (8082, only those services conducted in an office area.) 8. Legal Services (8111) 9. Engineering, accounting, research, management and related services (8711 - 8733-- except 8713 uses are prohibited, 8741 -8743, 8748) 10. Executive Offices (9111) 11. Executive and Legislative Offices (9111, 9131) B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted in this district. , 2. Accessory apothecary facility only in conjunction with medical office. GACurrenftD,%lem1PUD RczoneAColonadus 0 Santa Barbara PUD. AR- 4332TUD documenLArcOwd pa BCC 5- 25- (9.00c 3 -1 Page 20 of 30 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Minimum Lot Area: 10,000 S.F. for fee simple lots; however, there shall be no minimum lot area for condominium parcels. B. Minimum Lot Width: 50 FT. for fee simple lots; however, there shall be no minimum lot area for condominium parcels. C. Minimum Yard Requirements: 1. Principal Structure Setbacks: a) Golden Gate Parkway: Forty feet (40') b) Santa Barbara Blvd: Twenty -five feet (25') C) Internal Frontage Drives: Five feet (5') d) Distance Between Free Standing Uses: Thirty feet (30') e) Minimum Building Setback from Non - Right -of -Way Perimeter Project Boundary of CPUD: i. One hundred feet (100') from the north boundary. ii. Thirty-five feet (35') from the west boundary. fl Preserve Boundary: Twenty -five feet (25') 2) Accessory Structure Setbacks: a). One hundred feet (100') from the north boundary, except that a gazebo, water feature and similar open space uses may be located up to 50' from northern boundary. b). Thirty-five feet (35') from the west boundary. c). Preserve boundary Ten feet (10'). d). Road ROW: Twenty -five feet (25') D. Maximum Height: 1. Office Buildings: One story, not to exceed thirty -five feet (35'). 2. Accessory Structure: Thirty -five feet (35'), except as limited by Section 2.15 B.2. I Architectural features: Forty -five feet (45') ( ACumntllhxkmU'UD ReMMI lCokmadca w Santa Barbara PUI). AR- 1332TUD docurnmAm-gwd Nr ACC 5.25 -IMAx 3 -2 ___ Page 21 of 30 3. Architectural features: Forty-five feet (45') 1 •h.XlWOrXV'Ad_l6h7UUiVC= 3-3 Page 22 of 30 SECTION IV PRESERVE DISTRICT 6TI19P 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within the Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD community designated on the Master Plan as the Preserve District. 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as Preserve on the Master Plan are designed to accommodate a full range of conservation and limited water management uses and functions. The primary purpose of the Preserve District is to retain viable naturally functioning wetland and upland systems. 4.3 USES PERMITTED No building or structure or part thereof, shall be erected altered or used, in whole or in part for other than the following, subject to Regional, State and Federal permits when required; A. Principal Uses 1. Passive recreational areas, boardwalks. 2. Nature trails. 3. Landscape buffers. 4. Drainage, water management, subject to all needed permits. 5. Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses. 4.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Setback requirements for all structures shall be in accordance with Section 3.9, of the Collier County Land Development Code. B. Maximum height of structures — Twenty -five feet (25'). QACurrenA1)Nm*mU'l'1) 14zaneslC010n2des h' Santa Barbara PUD. AR- 4z3_+\I'UD docurwntslrL%,Le 1 pLr BCC S_J.j)4.&C 4 -1 . Page 23 of 30 SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development commitments for the development of the project. 5.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with Final Site Development Plans, Final Subdivision Plans (if required), and all applicable State and local laws, codes, and regulations applicable to this CPUD. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and specifications of Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code shall apply to this project, even if the land within the CPUD is not to be platted. The Developer, its successors and assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this document. These commitments will be enforced through provisions agreed to be included in the declaration of covenants and restrictions, or similar recorded instrument. Such provisions must be enforceable by lot owners against the developer, its successors, and assigns, prior to the development's last final subdivision acceptance. The Developer, its successors or assignee, shall follow the Master Development Plan and the regulations of the CPUD, as adopted, and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successors or assignee in title to the Developer is bound by any commitments within this agreement. These commitments may be assigned or delegated to a condominium/ homeowners' association to be created by the Developer. Upon assignment or delegation, the Developer shall be released from responsibility for the commitments. 5.3 CPUD MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN A. Exhibit "A," CPUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed tract, parcel, or land use boundaries, or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final, and may be varied at any time at any subsequent approval phase such as final platting or site development plan application. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5 of the Land Development Code, amendments may be made from time to time. B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all services and all common areas in the project. GACurrentOD - ICMWUD RenmeACulonades (W Santa Barbara PUD. AR- 4332VPUD ducunva%\ eriwd per ACC 5- 25- 114.d(ve 5 -1 Page 24 of 30 fit OW n3lnM VUVSWS VINn Vl :NATIONAL ONLY UDZ- 2003 -AR -4332 ROJECT #2003020038 ATE: 314/04 ev nVQ-vy -vr,w j N 0 W C-) o Ct.,: EX Ul. z r; r. \ r I � r f r h r I �y I I r Q--D I . j i j ! i` I I r h r r I r E � � r y I i x p b get ill Exhibit q r�asrsz= eoroozfu�so �s • iF� • �I H al j W M 1 i E ll !4f! YY of: 1! if i s M x Iff A Page 25 of 30 !1Y. :.t ' • i r w.• , Vl :NATIONAL ONLY UDZ- 2003 -AR -4332 ROJECT #2003020038 ATE: 314/04 ev nVQ-vy -vr,w j N 0 W C-) o Ct.,: EX Ul. z r; r. \ r I � r f r h r I �y I I r Q--D I . j i j ! i` I I r h r r I r E � � r y I i x p b get ill Exhibit q r�asrsz= eoroozfu�so �s • iF� • �I H al j W M 1 i E ll !4f! YY of: 1! if i s M x Iff A Page 25 of 30 Y r • lk 4rlr��r M i.r.s oa�'.�Moa I .I V a K e n t3 Exhibit B ggr �i � M ors 4 a a C aMo �o w wAOHA 1 Ali 1^11.1 e z�i F9f o , lii� P1J Page 26 of 30 .lS[LI— lT.Of�.000 N - -� i� tj S L�� tab � i r I• e II a. I. I I i� All S Z �I l I I Y I I Y 3 I' �` .crca �.ncacm w E Acoc • .94&Ug r I .I V a K e n t3 Exhibit B ggr �i � M ors 4 a a C aMo �o w wAOHA 1 Ali 1^11.1 e z�i F9f o , lii� P1J Page 26 of 30 EXHIBIT °C° LOCATION MAP Page 27 of 30 0 0 N e e EXHIBIT "o" Legal Description Tract 112, Golden Gate Estates Unit No. 30, as Recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 58 of the Public Records of Collier County. Page 28 of 30 STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct COPY of: ORDINANCE 2004 -35 Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on the 25th day of May 2004, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 25th day of May, 2004. DWIGHT E . BROCI{a +` •.. •Ol. '' Clerk of C ou , rk`w Ex- officio tpib •!d f� ° County Commi S �md By: Linda A. Houtzer Deputy Clerk Page 29 of 30 RESOLUTION 2007 -270 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.02.13.D. OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AFFECTING ORDINANCE 04-35 KNOWN AS THE COLONA�)ES AT SANTA BARBARA PUD, BY EXTENDING THE CftRENT PUD APPROVAL TO MAY 25,2009; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Colonades at Santa Barbara CPUD, Ordinance 104 -35, adopted on May 25, 2004, is subject to the provisions of Section 10.02.13.D. of the Land Development Code (LDC), Time limits for approved PUDs, together with their respective Master Plans; and WHEREAS, this CPUD was adopted consistent with and under the provisions of the Collier County Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has reviewed the PUD extension request submitted by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, on behalf of Naples Venture II, LLC, Petition No. PUDEX - 2007 -AR- 11781, and has determined to extend the current PUD Zoning for an additional two years until May 25, 2009. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 1. The above recitals are adopted herein by reference as if fully set forth herein. 2. This Resolution shall constitute evidence of compliance with the review requirements of Section 10.02.13.D. of the LDC. 3. Pursuant to Section 10.02.13.D. of the LDC, the current PUD approval is hereby extended to May 25, 2009, 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its approval. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Board and in the records of the Petition for which the extension is granted. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and super - majority vote, this I5Yj day of $ &Vks&,� 2007. ATTEST:. ' t DWIGMYBROE.t. CLERK :CAhfriillplityClerk �i�cur+r a+tl3, Jef4h A. County Attorney COLLIER COUNTY,: FLORIDA i Page 30 of 30 AGENDA ITEM 9 -13 Coer County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING SERVICES PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION -- PLANNING & REGULATION HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2012 SUBJECT: PUDZ- A- PL20120000303: Mirasol RPUD PROPERTY OWNER & APPLICANT /CONTRACT PURCHASER/AGENT: Owner /Applicant: Agents: IM Collier Joint Venture Alexis Crespo, AICP 6080 Cypress Hollow Way Waldrop Engineering Naples, FL 34109 28100 Bonita Grande Dr Ste 305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Contract Purchaser: TM Newco, LLC 501 North Cattleman Road, Suite 100 Sarasota, Florida 34232 REQUESTED ACTION: Richard Yovanovich, Esquire Coleman, Yovanovich Koester 4011 Tamiami Trail N Ste 300 Naples, FL 34103 The petitioner is asking the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) to consider an application for an amendment to the existing PUD zoned project known as Mirasol Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), to approve several changes to the project. For details about the project proposal, refer to "Purpose/Description of Project." GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, consisting of 1,638.6E acres, is located on the north side of Immokalee Road (CR 846) bordered on the east by the proposed extension of Broken Back Road and future Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Sections 10, 15 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (See location map on the following page). PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 1 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 | \. «§ � sm I :( / Imat, �£ \§ :- Z 7 Ow AL }| Z\ .� Q � � z Z 0 N � Q � Z 0 � Q C) 0 J \ \ \ 2 § i # z 0 E E ƒ m +: ; § ® LU y & Cc A ° §! k ._ a- � : # # $\ \ § Q § _ g a �| __a_= 1 _w n,o __ § | | ......�....... . .... ■ / \ |� g§ �» . § <q -)# z d` C) Ld .� Q � � z Z 0 N � Q � Z 0 � Q C) 0 J \ \ \ 2 § i # z 0 E E ƒ rn a N 0 w O co m m n a m co3 a v C3 W CD 0 m N 2 C3 o� � n SEE SHEET # 2 FOR CONTINUATION R/G L R/G L R/G TERAFINA L (PUD) R/G CONCEPTUAL L CLUB HOUSE COMPLEX L LOCATION R/G L R/G Lpt Ll R/G L R/G a R/G NOTE- FOR PLAN LEGEND AND SPECIAL NOTES SEE SHEET 3 OF 3 SFWMD PRESERVE HERITAGE BAY (PUD) I O O II W U iu I ,4 22 23 L ENTRY L SIGNAGE L L (TYP.) L R/G 20' TYPE 'D' L.B.E. R/G too' PROPOSED C.R. 951 EXT. R.O.W. DEDICATION L I- I' IS' TYPE O : B' L.B.E. L MAINTENANCE FACILITY TREE FARM (PUD) POSSIBLE FUTURE L INTERCONNECT OLDE 36 35 CYPRESS 37 34 L R/G (PUD) 15' TYPE 3e 33 'B' L.B.E. 39 32 MIRASOL w 3,_ L PROPERTY ¢ ENGINEERING BOUNDARY CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND MIRASOL at 30 ix DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS PROPERTY Nd BOUNDARY 42 29 mm 28100BON BONITA SPRINGS, FL 36135 305 43 28 = P: 239dOS7777 F: 239.00S7899 POSSIBLE Y EMAIL iM � o@— Idmpenwri W r- 44 27 18 •,5 • FUTURE FLORIDA CERIFICATE OF AUF ORT AnON 48516 ss ze ,n - INTERCONNECT 00 n 48 25 8 3 L L R/G R.P.u?D. AMENDMENT FUTURE 47 24 19 2 ACTIVITY 46 a zD „ L CENTER CONCEPTUAL 49 22 10 • 2122 2' L MASTER PLAN 28 27 , z 3 5 6 7 j EXHIBIT "C211 8 q IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R. 846) 20' TYPE ENTRY ;22' g SHEET 1 OF 3 D' L.B.E. SIGNAGE (TYP.) FILE NAME: 27600E0602.dwg UPDATED: 2012 -07 -12 ' COLLIER. COUNTY• .'.' - (A) VACANT OUT PARCEL OWNER: FLAMAX LLC PARKLANDS - (PUD) (A) VACANT 9 0 18 5 TERAFINA (PUD) . . . V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SEE SHEET # 1 FOR CONTINUATION NOTE: FOR PLAN LEGEND AND SPECIAL NOTES SEE SHEET 3 OF 3 s n V 7 V V 0 0 0 u w Q U � 01 PROPERTY BOUNDARY (A) VACANT ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS 28100 BONITA GRANDE DRIVE - SURE 305 BONIFA SPRINGS. FL 34135 P: 239.405.7777 F: 239-405.7899 EMAIL: info@wdidropengineering- FLOR -A CERTIFICATE OF AOTNORIZATION #6636 MIRASOL R.P.U.D. AMENDMENT CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT I C2" SHEET 2 OF 3 FILE NAME: 27600E0602.dwg UPDATED: 2012 -07 -12 m a N 0 oW 0 co n co N N a a U C O U 0 0 W 0 0 co ti N Q O r _ c O m c r .t c � r o c oc cp c N r CONCEPTUAL LAKE LOCATIONS * R/G RESIDENTIAL / GOLF 0 PRESERVE RIGHT -OF -WAY * LAND USE AREAS ARE CONCEPTUAL AND SUBJECT TO RELOCATION /CHANGE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING. SPECIAL NOTES: 1) WHERE APPLICABLE ALONG PROJECT BOUNDARY AND UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED PRESERVE AREAS SHALL SERVE AS BUFFERS. IF AFTER EXOTIC REMOVAL THE PRESERVE VEGETATION FAILS TO MEET MINIMUM CODE BUFFER STANDARDS ADDITIONAL PLANT MATERIAL MAY BE REQUIRED. NATIVE HABITAT SUMMARY: EXISTING NATIVE HABITAT = 895.6 Ac. - REQUIRED NATIVE HABITAT = 537.4 Ac. ± PROVIDED NATIVE HABITAT (ON SITE) = 537.4 Ac. ± ACREAGE SUMMARY: SECTION 22 = 425.8 Ac. ± SECTION 15 = 634.6 Ac. - SECTION 10 = 578.2 Ac. ± TOTAL = 1,638.6 Ac. -F TOTAL AREA OUTSIDE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY = 928.8 Ac. -_* TOTAL AREA WITHIN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY = 709.8 Ac. -* PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner is asking the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) to consider an application for an amendment to the Mirasol RPUD, governed by Ordinance Number 2009 -21, to allow the following changes: • Add 951 acres of land zoned Rural Agricultural (A) to the Mirasol RPUD; thereby increasing the RPUD acreage from 1,543.6 acres to 1,638.6 acres • Increase the number of dwelling units from 799 to 1,121; • Reduce the number of golf course holes from 36 to 18; • Reduce the development footprint from 809.8 acres to 709.8 acres; • Increase native preserve from 511.9 acres to 537.4 acres (all of which will be provided within the RPUD boundary); • Amend Exhibit A, Principal Uses to remove the redundant reference to "single family attached dwellings ", which are defined as townhouses by the LDC. Other than this minor change, all principal uses are the same as permitted by the prior zoning approval. • Amend Exhibit A, Accessory Uses to clarify that certain accessory uses will be limited for use by residents and their guests only. Additionally, equestrian uses have been removed from the list of approved accessory uses. Welcome centers have been deleted and model home sales centers have been added to comply with current LDC definitions. • In Exhibit B, Principal Use Development Standards, amend minimum lot width for townhouse dwellings from 35' to 20% • In Exhibit B, Principal Use Development Standards, amend minimum side yard setback for single family detached dwellings from 7.5' to 5', which will only apply to lots equal to or lesser than 70' in width. Lots greater than 70' in width will provide 6' side yard setbacks per Note 11; • In Exhibit B, Principal Use Development Standards, amend minimum side yard setback from multi- family dwellings from 15' to 10'. • In Exhibit B, Accessory Use Development Standards, amend accessory rear yard setbacks for all dwelling types from 10' to 5% • In Exhibit B, Accessory Use Development Standards, amend the setback between accessory structures on the same lot from 0' or 10' to 0'. • In Exhibit B, Accessory Use Development Standards, amend the setback between principle and accessory structures on the same lot from 0' and 10' to 0' and 5% • In Exhibit C, amend the Master Plan to demonstrate the additional acreage incorporated in the western portion of the RPUD; the updated conceptual layout for the spine road, residential/golf course areas (R/G) and lakes (L); and the updated location for the golf club complex. • In Exhibit E, modify approved deviation no. 2 for maximum cul -de -sac length from 1,200 linear feet to 1,600 linear feet. • In Exhibit E, add deviations for increased maximum wall height, reduced golf clubhouse parking, additional model homes, increased signage, internal sidewalks on one (1) side of the private roads where applicable, and other deviations related to clearing and site development permitting; • Exhibit F, Transportation Commitments B.3 has been revised to reflect the current status of the Mirasol Developers Contribution Agreement, and the timing of the proportionate fair share contribution for the CR 951 intersection improvements has been revised in Transportation Commitment B.4. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 2 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 • Exhibit F, Transportation Commitments B.5 has been added to reflect the maximum number of p.m. peak hour trips that may be generated by the RPUD; • Exhibit F, Environmental Commitments have been revised to reflect the increased on -site native vegetation acreage; • Exhibit F, Utility Commitments F. 1 -3 has been added to include provisions for connection to County water, wastewater and irrigation. • Revised references to erroneous/outdated sections of the LDC throughout the RPUD document. According to the Petitioner's Agent's description, the following constitutes the project's history: The property was originally rezoned in 2001 from Rural Agricultural with ST Overlay to a Planned Unit Development per Ordinance 2001 -20. In 2009, the Property was rezoned to RPUD to allow for 799 dwelling units, 36 golf course holes, 780-L acres of on -site preserve, and additional off-site preserve, thus repealing Ordinance 2001 -20. Pursuant to the terms of a Developers Contribution Agreement (DCA) executed by the Applicant on May 3, 2007, the project was vested for 799 — dwelling units for the purposes of transportation concurrency. Following RPUD zoning approval, the Applicant continued to work with conservation groups, including the Conservancy of Southwest Florida, Collier County Audubon Society, National Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation, and Florida Wildlife Federation regarding the Property's listed species and native habitat. Following several years of negotiations and diligent efforts by the Applicant and concerned parties, an agreement has been reached to address the environmental impacts of the project. The agreement involves the addition of lands into the overall project that will be set aside as conservation, and a reduction in the development footprint by 100 acres to 709.8-+ acres, which allows for the creation of a 200zL acre preserve in the western portion of the property. The applicant is seeking approval of fifteen deviations. These are discussed later in this report. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: City of Bonita Springs in Lee County, developed with the Village Walk single - family residential development, with a zoning designation of Mixed Use Planned Development East: The partially developed Heritage Bay DRUPUD, a mixed use 2,562+ acre mixed use project, approved for a density of 1.3 units per acre in Ordinance #2003 -40, a 20 acre undeveloped tract with an Agricultural zoning designation, and two undeveloped Commercial Planned Unit Development zoned projects, Tree Farm PUD and Addie's Corner PUD South: Agriculturally zoned tracts ranging in size from 0.5 to 2.5 acres with frontage along Immokalee Road, Nursery Lane, Woodland Avenue, and Rose Boulevard. There is also one small PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 3 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 C -3 zoned undeveloped tract, then Immokalee Road (CR 846). On the south side of that road are the developed Laurelwood PUD, a 78 -acre, residential PUD zoned project known as Ibis Cove, developed at a density of 5.96 units per acre in Ordinance #94 -63; and the Richland PUD, a mixed used PUD developed as Pebblebrooke Lakes, which includes commercial and residential components, the residential density was approved at 3.1 units per acre. West: Terafina and the Parklands PUD zoned projects. Terafina (approved at a density of 1.3 units per acre) is partially developed as Riverstone; Parklands (approved at a density of 2.5 units per acre) remains undeveloped. Additionally there are smaller agriculturally zoned tracts that are used for agricultural and residential purposes; then Olde Cypress (approved at a density of 2.1 units per acre), a developed residential project with a zoning designation of PUD 0 rrrkLa*e5 WMASM 10 TE�FFItia 1 1i(kA'$q, tt 15 MCi�lJf1 ('--- 1 Excerptfrom the PUD map (6/2012) PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 4 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Subject property depiction is approximate GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): A portion of the total subject property (425.7 acres in Section 22) is designated Urban (Urban -Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict), the .-. remainder of the property (1,212 acres in Sections 10 & 15) is designated Agricultural/Rural PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 5 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 (Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands) as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Relevant to this petition, the Urban Residential- Subdistrict allows residential development at a base density of four (4) dwelling units per acre, subject to the Density Rating System provisions; recreation and open space; and earth mining and related processing uses. The proposed amendment would increase the amount of property that is within this portion of the existing PUD, from 340.7 acres to 425.8 acres, thus increasing the maximum allowed density on the portion of the PUD located in the Urban Residential Subdistrict (Section 22): Eligible density for property within Section 22 of approved PUD: 340.8 acres x 4 DU /A = 1,363 units (1,363.2) Eligible density for property within Section 22 of proposed PUD amendment: 340.8 acres + 85 acres = 425.8 acres x 4 DU /A = 1,703 units (1,703.2) The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands allows for a base density of one (1) dwelling unit per five (5) acres; golf courses subject to specific standards; and, earth mining and related processing. The existing portion in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District is eligible for a maximum of 242 units: Eligible density for property within Section 10 and 15 of approved PUD: 1,212 acres x 0.2 DU /A (1 DU /5 acs.) = 242 units (242.4) Eligible density for property within Section 10 and 15 of proposed PUD amendment: 1,212 acres + 10 acres = 1222 acres x 0.2 DU /A (1 DU /5 acs.) = 244 units (244.4) The entire PUD, Urban Residential and RFMUD Neutral Lands combined, is eligible for up to 1,947 DUs. The existing PUD provides for 799 DUs. The proposed PUD amendment proposes 1,121 residential DUs to be developed in Sections 15 and 22. The maximum amount of dwelling units allowed in Section 22, located within the Urban Residential Subdistrict, and in Sections 10 and 15, located within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, are to be developed within their respective District/Subdistrict if density blending is not utilized. Specific to the Mirasol PUD, Section 5.1(g) of the Density Rating System allows for density blending between the portions of the PUD that straddles between, and only within, Sections 15 and 22. The proposed PUD amendment seeks to utilize the Density Blending provision of the Density Rating System of the FLUE which reads as follows (conditions and limitations are followed by staff s analysis in bold): Density Blending: This provision is intended to encourage unified plans of development and to preserve wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features that exist within properties that straddle the Urban Mixed Use and Rural Fringe Mixed Use Districts or that straddle Receiving and Neutral Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. In the case of such properties, PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 6 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 which were in existence and under unified control (owned, or under contract to purchase, by the applicant(s)) as of June 19, 2002, the allowable gross density for such properties in aggregate may be distributed throughout the project, regardless of whether or not the density allowable for a portion of the project exceeds that which is otherwise permitted, when the following conditions are met: 1. Density Blending Conditions and Limitations for Properties Straddling the Urban Residential Sub - District or Urban Residential Fringe Sub - District and either the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral or Receiving Lands: (a) The project must straddle the Urban Residential Sub - District or Urban Residential Fringe Sub - District and either the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral or Receiving Lands; (Condition met The existing Mirasol PUD straddles between the Urban Residential Sub District and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral Lands.) (b) The project in aggregate is a minimum of 80 acres in size; (Condition met. Condition 5.1(g) specifically provides for Section 15 only to utilize Density Blending. Therefore, the developable Sections 15 and 22 total 1060.4 acres.) (c) At least 25% of the project is located within the Urban Mixed Use District (Condition met. Condition 5.1(g) specifically provides for Section 15 only to utilize Density Blending. Therefore, the cited minimum applies to the aggregate lands of the Mirasol PUD located in Sections 15 and 22 only. Of these Sections, the project acreage in the Urban Mixed Use District is 425.8 acres, which is 26 percent of the acreage in those two Sections). The entire project is located within the Collier County Sewer and Water District Boundaries and will utilize central water and sewer to serve the project unless interim provisions for sewer and water are authorized by Collier County; (Condition met. The developable Sections I5 and 22 are eligible for Density Blending and are within the Collier County Water and Sewer District boundaries and subject to the "Availability Letter" issued by the Public Utilities Division at the time of SDP.) (d) The project is currently zoned or will be rezoned to a PUD; (Condition met. The subject petition is for the Mirasol PUD.) (e) Density to be shifted to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District from the Urban Residential Subdistrict is to be located on impacted lands, or it is demonstrated that the development on the site is to be located so as to preserve and protect the highest quality native vegetation and/or habitat on -site and to maximize the connectivity of such native vegetation and/or habitat with adjacent preservation and/or habitat areas; (Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to the Environmental staff.) (f) The entire project shall meet the applicable preservation standards of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. (These preservation requirements shall be calculated upon and apply to the total project area. Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to the Environmental staff.) PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 7 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 (g) Section 15 (Township 48 South, Range 26 East), which straddles the boundary of the Urban Residential Subdistrict and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, is designated Neutral, and is in the approved Mirasol PUD, may utilize this density blending provision, subject to -the above criteria.-- (The Mirasol PUD Conceptual Master Plan Exhibit "C2" depicts development only in Sections 22 and 15, and thus density blending would be utilized for properties located in Section I5.) FLUE Objective 7 and relevant policies are stated below; each policy is followed by staff analysis. Objective 7: In an effort to support the Dover, Kohl & Partners publication, Toward Better Places: The Community Character Plan for Collier County, Florida, promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, where applicable. Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. (The Mirasol PUD Conceptual Master Plan depicts direct access to Immokalee Road (S R. 846), an arterial road as identified in the Transportation Element.) Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. (The Mirasol PUD Conceptual Master Plan depicts internal access or loop roads.) Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. (As shown in the Mirasol PUD Conceptual Master Plan, there are several proposed interconnects to the adjoining properties along the east of the project boundary. Native vegetation preserve and open spaces are proposed between the subject project and the adjoining properties to the north and most of the properties to the west thereby precluding interconnections in that area. In addition, most properties to the west are developed with single-family homes. The main access to and from the proposed PUD is from the south, or Immokalee Road) Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. (Open spaces and different housing types are proposed in the PUD document~ Sidewalks are being proposed as part of this petition.) Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff fmds the proposed amendment petition of the Mirasol RPUD consistent with the FLUE. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 8 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 capacity to accommodate this project within the 5 year planning period. Therefore, the subject application can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Immokalee Road Impacts: The first concurrency link that is impacted by this project is Link 43.2, Immokalee Road between Logan Boulevard and Collier Boulevard. The project generates 126 (net new) p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a significant impact of 3.47% by the project. This segment of Immokalee Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,441 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2011 AUIR. The next concurrency link that is impacted by this project is Link 43.1, Immokalee Road between I -75 and Logan Boulevard. The project generates 84 (Net New) p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a significant impact of 2.21% by the project. This segment of Immokalee Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,215 trips, and is currently at LOS "D" as reflected by the 2011 AUIR. Logan Boulevard Impacts: The first link of Logan Boulevard that is impacted by this project is Link 50.0, Logan Boulevard between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road. The project generates 41 (net new) p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a significant impact of 3.73% by the project. This segment of Immokalee Road currently has a remaining capacity of 678 trips, and is currently at LOS "B" as reflected by the 2011 AUIR. Collier Boulevard Impacts: The Collier Boulevard link that is impacted by this project is Link 30.0, Collier Boulevard between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road. The project generates 24 (net new) p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents an impact of 1.84% by the project. This segment of Immokalee Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,301 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2011 AUIR. No subsequent links beyond these segments are significantly impacted by this project. In accordance with Collier County Planning Commission guidance, staff has requested (by way of Stipulation for Approval) that the developer include a trip generation cap of 781 unadjusted, two - way, PM Peak hour trips. This is included in the PUD document Transportation Commitments of Exhibit F. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental staff has evaluated the application has determined that the proposed PUD document complies with all applicable GMP and LDC provisions regarding conservation, native vegetation preservation and potential listed species impacts. Review by the EAC is not required for this petition. Locations of preserves have not changed, but increased in size, and no new listed species, as identified in the Environmental Advisory Council Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2009 -32), have been identified on -site. GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions such as this proposed rezoning. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. A finding of consistency with the PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 9 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 FLUE and FLUM designations is a portion of the overall finding that is required, and staff believes the petition is consistent with the FLUM and the FLUE as indicated previously in the GMP discussion. The proposed rezone is consistent with the GMP Transportation Element as previously discussed. -Environmental staff also recommends that the- petition be found consistent with the COME. Therefore, zoning staff recommends that the petition be found consistent with the goals, objective and policies of the overall GMP. ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings "), and Subsection 10.03.05.I, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings "), which establish the legal bases to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the bases for their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support its action on the rezoning or amendment request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning Services Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document to address environmental concerns. There are no outstanding environmental issues. Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document and Master Plan for right -of -way and access issues. The PUD document contains the mitigation discussed in the Transportation Element section of this staff report. Additionally, staff notes that the petitioner has previously entered into a DCA with the County to provide mitigation addressing consistency with policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan over the 5 -year planning period. Furthermore, the petitioner has provided a fair share contribution for construction of the North leg of the CR- 95I/Broken Back Road intersection with Immokalee Road, which included modification, replacement, or relocation of the at -grade bridge crossing, as well as relocation of a portion of the Cocohatchee Canal. The petitioner has also agreed to dedicate to the County the future rights -of -way necessary to accommodate extension of CR -951 to the Northerly boundary of his project, which meets the Lee County line. Because Transportation impact fees have dropped since then, the owner will be able to vest for additional units for transportation concurrency at time of subdivision plat or site development plan. Fire Review: It is understood that the proposed development referenced in the PUD is conceptual in nature. However, with respect to Deviations #1 and #2 in Exhibit "F" regarding "cul -de- sacs" please note that although there is not enough information at this time to offer specific comment regarding compliance with currently adopted Fire Codes, as the site development progresses, all permits will be subject to compliance with all Fire Codes, Standards, PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 10 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Ordinances and local FCO Policy & Procedures adopted and in place at the time of the respective permit. This shall include, but not be limited to fire lane widths, turning radii and dead -end requirements (including minimum cul -de -sac dimensions), hydrant locations, fire flow requirements, etc: Utilities Review: The applicant has provided the stipulations requested by Utilities Review staff within the PUD document. Zoning Services Review: FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses and intensity on the subject site, the compatibility analysis included a review of the subject proposal comparing it to surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location. Zoning staff is of the opinion that this project will be compatible with and complementary to, the surrounding land uses only if other limitations are included. To support that opinion staff offers the following analysis of this project. The development standards contained in Exhibit B of the PUD document show the following: TABLE I DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR "RG" RESIDENTIAL AREAS PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 11 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Clubhouse/ PERMITTED Single Zero Two Family Fly Multi - Family Recreation USES Family Lot and Duplex Auached -an Dwelling Buildings AND Detached Line Townhouse *6 STANDARDS -t 2 3 4 6 Principal Structures Minimum Lot 5,000 SF 4,000 SF 3,500 SF per 3,500 SF 9,000 SF n/a Area lot or unit *3 Minimum Lot 50' *7 40' *7 35' per lot 3-51 20' *7 90' n/a Width *4 -*7 or unit *7 Front Yard 20' *2 *7 20' *2 *7 20' *2 *7 20' *2 *7 20 *2 25' Setback Side Yard �-5- 5' *7 0 or 10' 7.5' *7 *8 7.5' *7 *8 4 -510' *5 5' Setback *2 *11 *7 Rear Yard 15' *7 15' *7 15' *7 15' *7 15' 0' Setback *I Setback From 10' *7 10' *7 10' 10' 10' 20' Golf Course Setbacks from 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' Preserves Maximum 1 35' 35' 35' 35' 50' (5 stories 50' (2 stories over PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 11 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Zoned Height not to exceed parking not to *10 50') *9 exceed 50') Actual Height 45' 45' 45' 45' 65' 75' *10 Floor Area 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 750 SF n/a Min. (S.F.) Distance 10' 10' 10' 10' 20' *5 15' or .5 BH Between whichever is Principal greater *6 Structures Accessory Single Zero Two Family sin& Multi - Family Clubhouse/ Structures Family Lot and Duplex Family Dwelling Recreation Detached Line Attached an Buildings Townhouse *6 Front Yard SPS *7 SPS *7 SPS SPS SPS SPS Setback *2 Side Yard 5' *7 0 or 10' 5' 5' 10' 5' Setback *7 Rear Yard 418 5' *7 40 5' *7 40 5' 40 5' 4-0 5' 4-0 5' Accessory Setback *1 Setback From 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' Preserves Distance 0' er 10' or 107 or 10' 0' or 10' of 10' er -10'- Between Accessory Structures on the same lot Distance 0' or 44415' 0' or W 5' 0' or 4-W 5' 0' or -t8' 5' 0' or -t8' 5' 0' or W 5' Between Accessory and Principal Structures on same lot Maximum SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS Zoned Height *10 Actual Height SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS *10 Front yards for all uses shall be measured as follows: If the parcel is served by a public road right -of -way, setback is measured from the adjacent right -of -way line. If the parcel is served by a private road, setback is measured from the back of curb (f curbed) or edge of pavement (f not curbed). PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 12 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 *1 - Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut lakes and open spaces. Setbacks from lakes for all principal and accessory uses may be 0 feet provided architectural bank treatment is incorporated into design and subject to written approval from the Collier County Engineering Review Section. *2 - Single-family dwellings, as defined in the LDC, which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking other than in private driveways may reduce the front yard requirement to 10 feet for a side entry garage. Multi family dwellings, as defined in the LDC, which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking may reduce the front yard to 15 feet. This reduction shall not result in an approval to impede or block the sidewalk. Front loaded garages shall be a minimum of23 feet from the edge of sidewalk. *3 - Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3,500 square feet for a total minimum lot area of 7, 000 square feet. *4 — Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20% for cul -de -sac lots provided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained. *5- Building distance may be reduced at garages to half the sum of the height of the garages. *6 Although neither setbacks nor separation between structures are applicable to the clubhouse and other recreation structures located on a clubhouse tract, neither the clubhouse nor any other recreational structure shall be located closer than 25 feet from any residential or preservation boundary. * 7- The use of flag lots is allowed to provide maximum flexibility in subdivision design and may vary from the minimum lot widths. However, neither the minimum lot area, nor the minimum distance between structures may be reduced. *8- Zero foot (09 setback for internal units. *9 Inclusive of under building parking *10 Buildings shall not exceed three stories within 1,250 feet of Immokalee Road. *115' side yard setbacks shall apply to lots equal to or lesser than 70' in width. Lots greater than 70' in width will provide 6' side yard setbacks. BH = Building Height SPS = Same as Principal Structure Notwithstanding the foregoing; none of the Footnotes shall operate as a deviation from the Land Development Code unless they are listed as deviations on Exhibit E. None of the footnotes operate as deviations from the Collier County Code ofLaws and Ordinances. As shown in the aerial photograph located on page 2 of the staff report, the surrounding land use and zoning discussion of this staff report, and the Master Plan, the site is bounded to the north by developed residential uses within the City of Bonita Springs. To the east in Sections 11, 14, and 23 is the developing Heritage Bay PUD/DRI mined use project. Also to the east, within Section 22 are the undeveloped commercial PUD zoned projects known as the Tree Farm PUD and Addie's Corner PUD. The Tree Farm PUD is separated from the subject site by a 20 acre undeveloped agriculturally zoned tract. To the west are several residential projects — Parklands PUD/DRI (in Section 9) which is undeveloped; Terafina PUD (in Section 16) that is developing as Riverstone; and Old Cypress PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 13 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 PUD /DRI (in Section 21 and Section 22) which is largely already developed. In Section 22 east of Olde Cypress are agricultural and residentially used properties along Nursery Lane Rose Boulevard and Woodland Avenue that have a zoning designation of Agricultural. There is also a small C -3 vacant-tract fronting on Immokalee Road. To the south is a canal and then Immokalee Road. The applicant is adding 95 acres to the Mirasol project. The acreage being added is located to the southwest of the existing project. The acreage to be added is shown below in the excerpt from the Zoning Map with cross - hatching. .......................... k.•. -. -. . . -.-. . _ .... .. ... ... .. ...•. -. -.•. . . ..'..•.. •. ............ RPUD ' -' ..1 -`.. .' -i -'V IRASOL J �A'� .;_:.:..;.:.:. . PUD OLDE CYPRESS .'. .. DRS Most of the area being added will be utilized as preserve area. In any case, preserve areas will separate the developed portions of the project from the uses along Nursery Lane, Woodland Avenue and Rose Boulevard. Preserves will also separate this project from Terafina and Parklands and most of Heritage Bay. The applicant is not proposing increasing building heights from what was previously approved. Side setbacks are proposed to be reduced for single family and multi- family dwelling units; but PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 14 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 no other changes to the property development regulations are proposed, thus staff believes the property development regulations keep the project compatible with the surrounding uses. However, in recent Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) hearings for other PUD petitions, the CCPC has raised several issues to further address compatibility. The CCPC has asked petitioners to provide a maximum number of units that would be included in any multi- family structure. Also, the CCPC has been requesting petitioners to provide start up and ending dates for clubhouse type amenities. The petitioner's agent has declined to provide this information. Below is an excerpt from the petitioner's agents July 13, 2012 response letter: Staffs comment. Exhibit B: Please consider providing a maximum number of units per building. This has been an issue that has come up in recent CCPC hearings. RESPONSE. So noted The Applicant and their agents will be prepared to address this item at the public hearings Staffs comment. Please consider adding a startup and ending date for the construction of clubhouse. This also has been an issue at recent CCPC hearings. RESPONSE. So noted The Applicant and their agents will be prepared to address this item at the public hearings In the Parklands PUD and the Bent Creek PUD projects that were recently approve, the following limitation was included to address the number of units within a multi - family building: Maximum of ten (10) units attached in one building. In the Parklands PUD that was recently approved, the following stipulation was included: The developer shall commence construction of the community center /clubhouse on the recreation site (RS) prior to issuance of the building permit for the 250`h dwelling unit and shall complete construction within one year, unless delayed by natural disaster or other calamity beyond the control of the developer. The CCPC has asked on other projects that clubhouses be specifically shown on Master Concept Plans. While the site plan for this project shows a "Conceptual Club House Complex Location," the applicant's agent has indicated that flexibility is desired to allow clubhouses or recreation centers to be located in areas other than that "Conceptual Club House Complex Location," as shown below in an excerpt from the petitioner's agents July 13, 2012 response letter: Staffs comment: B.4: Why is this use not a subset of B.8? It seems that is the likely place to list this use. RESPONSE. Due to the size and scope of the project, the Applicant is requesting the flexibility to locate satellite clubhouses and recreational centers throughout the community, as well as within the Golf Clubhouse Complex shown on the master plan. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 15 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Staff has concerns about "satellite clubhouses" that could be constructed to 75 feet in actual height without knowing where they will be located in relationship to residential uses. Footnote 96 does set forth a minimum setback of 25 feet from any residential boundary. During the last amendment for this petition, the CCPC (March 19, 2009 in petition PUDZ -A- 2007 -AR- 12046) included a stipulation in the recommendation that required the clubhouse location to be shown on the Master Plan. As part of the CCPC hearing process, staff recommends that additional limitations for size and massing or some other information relative to satellite clubhouses, the construction dates for the clubhouse and number of units per multi - family buildings, be provided. Deviation Discussion: The petitioner is seeking fifteen deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are listed in PUD Exhibit E. Deviations are a normal derivative of the PUD rezoning process following the purpose and intent of the PUD zoning district as set forth in LDC Section 2.03.06 which says in part: It is further the purpose and intent of these PUD regulations to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design, and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership or control. PUDs .... may depart from the strict application of setback height, and minimum lot requirements of conventional zoning districts while maintaining minimum standards by which flexibility may be accomplished, and while protecting the public interest .... Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.0, which requires cul -de -sacs and local streets to have a minimum sixty (60') right -of -way width and two (2) ten foot (10') wide travel lanes, to allow a minimum right -of -way width of 40' for private local streets and 50' for private spine roads. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: This deviation was approved per Ordinance 09 -21 and remains appropriate for the RPUD for a number of reasons. The majority of roads within the proposed development are intended as private, rather than public roads. Therefore, the maintenance responsibility will fall upon the development and the homeowners association. Additionally, the reduced rights -of -way are appropriately designed to accommodate necessary infrastructure requirements, including standard width travel lanes and utility easements. Reduced right -of -way widths are proven to serve traffic calming purposes by reducing vehicle speeds and increasing public safety. Lastly, the reduced rights -of -way will support the clustered development program by allowing for increased useable open space for the enjoyment of future residents and preservation purposes. Please note the spine road refers to the main entry roadway shown on the PUD master plan, which does not provide direct access to proposed residential units. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 16 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. However, zoning staff reiterates the comments provided by the fire reviewer: .... there is not enough information at this time to offer specific comment regarding compliance with currently adopted Fire Codes, as the site development progresses, all permits will be subject to compliance with all Fire Codes, Standards, Ordinances and local FCO Policy & Procedures adopted and in place at the time of the respective permit. This shall include, but not be limited to fire lane widths, turning radii and dead -end requirements (including minimum cul -de -sac dimensions), hydrant locations, fire flow requirements, etc. The petitioner has not sought relief (nor can he) from any fire code requirements as part of this zoning action, thus it is understood that compliance as requested above would be required. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.133.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J. Street System Requirements, to allow cul -de -sacs in excess of 1,000' in length. For any cul -de -sac exceeding 1,600 feet in length, the roadway must include at approximately 1,600 feet intervals design features which provide for the ability of emergency vehicles to turn around. Traffic roundabouts, eyebrows, hammerheads or similar design features shall be allowed. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: This deviation was approved per Ordinance 09 -21 and is warranted due to the irregular configuration of the development tracts, which are expressly designed to minimize environmental impacts. The Applicant is requesting an increase to the maximum length of cul -de -sacs requiring design features due to the reduced development footprint and efforts to maximize the preservation of wetlands internal to the development. Cul -de- sacs will be designed with standard travel lanes and turning radii per the LDC requirements. Therefore, public health, safety and welfare will be upheld upon approval of this deviation, in addition to the noted environmental benefit. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. However, zoning staff reiterates the comments provided by the fire reviewer: .... there is not enough information at this time to offer specific comment regarding compliance with currently adopted Fire Codes, as the site development progresses, all permits will be subject to compliance with all Fire Codes, Standards, Ordinances and local FCO Policy & Procedures adopted and in place at the time of the respective permit. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 17 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 This shall include, but not be limited to fire lane widths, turning radii and dead -end requirements (including minimum cul -de -sac dimensions), hydrant locations, fire flow requirements, etc. The petitioner has not sought relief (nor can he) from any fire code requirements as part of this zoning action, thus it is understood that compliance as requested above would be required. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3 the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10 02.13.B.5.h the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.Q. Street System Requirements, which requires that street name markers shall be approved by the County Manager or designee for private streets or in conformance with U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. This requirement shall be waived. However, breakaway posts shall be used. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: This deviation was approved per Ordinance 09 -21 and will not impact public health, safety or welfare. The deviation will permit the developer to create a more customized streetscape, reflective of the community character and architectural standards. The street markers will be sized and located in order to meet the intent of U.S.D. O. T.F.H. W.A standards, and will be reviewed at the time of construction plan approval. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3 the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community " and LDC Section 10 02 13.B.5.h the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.0l.R. Street Requirements, which requires that street pavement painting, striping and reflective edging of public roadway markings shall be provided by the developer as required by the U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. This requirement shall be waived for private roadways. Traffic circulation signage shall be in conformance with U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device standards. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: PUDZ -A -PI 90120000303, Mirasol Page 18 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 This deviation was approved per Ordinance 09 -21 and will not impact public health, safety or welfare. The deviation will permit the developer to create a more customized streetscape, reflective of the community character and architectural standards. Moreover, the streets will be privately maintained and will be the responsibility of the developer and homeowners association. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived_ without a detrimental effect on the health safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.133.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such relations.' Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.H, which requires 1 parking space per 200 square feet of office /lobby /pro shop/health club /clubhouse /lounge /snack bar /dining/meeting room associated with golf courses. The requested deviation is to allow for 3 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of office /lobby /pro shop/health club /clubhouse /lounge /snack bar /dining/meeting room associated with the proposed golf course. Parking spaces for golf course holes, exterior recreation uses, and maintenance buildings will be provided per the LDC. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: The proposed golf course and amenity facility will be private and exclusively for the use of the development's residents. Due to the pedestrian amenities, such as sidewalks and trails, as well as anticipated golf cart usage, patrons of the clubhouse will utilize alternative modes of transportation as intended by the LDC's requirements. Furthermore, this deviation is typical of many of the private golf course developments throughout the County, and will encourage multi -modal movement throughout the community. This deviation language was recently approved as part of the Talis Park (fka Tuscany Reserve) PUD per Ordinance 2012 -11. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved, but notes for the record that this deviation was actually initially approved for the Talis Park PUD in 2004. Ordinance 2012 -11 was a strike thru/underline ordinance that did not specifically address that issue. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health safety and welfare of the community " and LDC Section 10.02.133.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 19 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.04.A, which limits the developer to 100 acres of residential, commercial, or industrial lots or building sites to store excess fill generated by lake excavations within the PUD. The requested deviation is to allow the developer to clear up to 300 acres -of residential; - commercial, or industrial lots or building -sites to store excess fill generated by lake excavations within the PUD or project where the excavation is taking place. This is not a deviation from the Collier County Excavation Ordinance. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: The proposed deviation allows for construction flexibility of the stormwater management features internal to the development, and will not negatively impact public health, safety or welfare. Development of the golf course component will result in significant excess fill due to the number of proposed lakes. Approval of this deviation will allow the developer sufficient area on -site to store the fill, thereby reducing unsightly stockpiles. Furthermore, it is understood that any site clearing will require approval from the SFWMD and Collier County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3 the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community " and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting public purposes to a_degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C, which permits a maximum wall height of 6' in residential zoning districts. The requested deviation is to allow a maximum wall height of 8' throughout the development. Where abutting an existing or future public roadway, a 20' tall wall, berm, or combination wall/berm is permitted. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: The proposed deviation will allow for additional visual screening and mitigation of noise pollution resulting from traffic along Immokalee Road, a 6 -lane divided arterial roadway, as well as the future CR 951 extension, which is also an arterial roadway. Approval of this deviation will serve to promote public health, safety and welfare, as well as enhance the aesthetic appeal of the proposed community and general area Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. A similar deviation, to allow an 18 foot high berm, wall or combination along Immokalee Road was approved from the Bent Creek Preserve PUD, whose location is shown on the Zoning Map as Summit Lakes. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding - _ that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3 the petitioner has demonstrated that "the PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 20 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.133.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #8 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.04.B.5, which permits a maximum of five (5) model homes, or a number corresponding to ten (10) percent of the total number of platted lots, whichever is less, per platted approved development prior to final plat approval. The requested deviation is to allow for a maximum of six (6) model homes per development tract, not to exceed 60 model homes within the overall RPUD. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: The RPUD proposes a variety of product types to accommodate various demographics and income levels. Due to the size of the project, the phased nature of the development, and the variety of dwelling types proposed, the Applicant is seeking an additional model home allowance to ensure the community is properly marketed to prospective buyers. The proposed deviation provides the County with the necessary safeguards to ensure an excess of model homes are not constructed. Therefore, public health, safety and welfare will not be negatively impacted upon approval of this deviation. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Due to the size of the project, staff agrees that some allowance can be made to allow additional model units. Hacienda Lakes PUD, which was approved for over 1,700 residential units on 2,262 acres received deviation approval to allow up to 60 model homes. Bent Creek Preserve with 450 units on 138 acres received deviation approval to allow a maximum of 15 model homes. With the project's proposed 1,120 units, allowing a maximum of 60 seems a bit excessive. To keep the ratio similar to what was approved in Hacienda Lakes and Bent Creek Preserve PUD, staff believes that 40 model units should be the maximum allowance, as shown below: Name of project No. Residential Units No. Model Units Ratio Hacienda Lakes 1,700± 60 0.035 Bent Creek Preserve 450 15 0.033 Mirasol 1,121 (proposed) 60 (requested) ;`. O ;i ..s(iiir�iiG`�'iiC:ted) 0.053 0.03.5 Additionally, staff suggests that the developer be required to provide documentation at each development order stating how many models are in operation to ensure the total of 40 is not exceeded. For Bent Creek Preserve PUD, the following developer commitment was included: Related to Deviation 91, as a part of the application material for every building permit for a model home, the developer shall provide documentation stating how many model homes are in existence so that the maximum of fifteen model homes is not exceeded. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 21 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation with the stipulations that the maximum number of models shall be limited to 40; and, 2) that the developer provide the number of existing model home /units as part of the application material for -every - building - permit, finding that,, -in - compliance with LDC- Section-- 10:02.13.A 3 the - petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.13.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #9 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height. The requested deviation is to allow a temporary sign or banner up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and a maximum of 8 feet in height. The temporary sign or banner shall be limited to 28 days per calendar year. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: Due to the property's substantial setback from Immokalee Road, as well as the high travel speeds along the roadway, the Applicant is seeking an increase to the allowable banner size to ensure visibility of this new community. The requested banner size is in accordance with deviations approved for similar residential projects throughout the County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. What is proposed is the temporary banner standards for commercially zoned properties, which is more similar to the application proposed. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safetv and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.133.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #10 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.13.2, which permits one (1) real estate pole sign per street frontage that is setback a minimum of 10' from any property line. The requested deviation is to allow for a maximum of two (2) real estate pole signs per street frontage setback a minimum of 5' from the property line along Immokalee Road only. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: The subject property is set back approximately 100 feet from Immokalee Road, a six (6) lane arterial roadway. Due to the setback and the high travel speeds along the road, the Applicant is seeking an increase to the allowable number of real estate pole signs and reduction to the setback in order to ensure visibility of this new community. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 22 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health safety and welfare of the community "and LDC Section 10 -02.13 B h 5 the - petitioner- has demonstrated that the deviation is " iustifed as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #11 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5, which requires on- premise directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10' from internal property lines. The requested deviation is to allow for on- premise direction signage to be setback a minimum of 5' from internal property lines. This deviation does not apply to property adjacent to public roadways. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: This deviation will allow for the development of appropriate directional signage internal to the RPUD. A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the community, thereby ensuring a cohesive appearance and increased aesthetic appeal. Furthermore, this deviation is typical of many of the large -scale master planned developments throughout Collier County. The proposed community will be master planned with a unified, cohesive signage theme. The reduced setback will allow for flexibility of signage placement, while ensuring public health, safety and welfare is protected. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.13.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting �public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #12 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.8.6, which permits two (2) ground signs per entrance to the development with a maximum height of 8' and total sign area of 64 square feet (s.f.) per sign. The requested deviation is to allow for two (2) ground signs per project entrance with a maximum height of 10' and total sign area of 80 s.f. per sign Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: The subject property will be accessed via two (2) arterial roadways (Immokalee Road and the future CR 951 extension), which demonstrate relatively high travel speeds. Additionally, the property has a significant street setback due to the location of the Cocohatchee Canal along the property's frontage. Due to the setback and the property's locational along these arterials, the Applicant is seeking an increase to allowable entry signage height and area to ensure visibility of the community. This deviation request is similar to previous requests approved for PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 23 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 large master planned communities within Collier County. The required setback from rights - of -way for entry signs will meet LDC standards, thereby ensuring public, health, safety and welfare is protected. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safetv and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting public nurooses to a degree at least eauivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #13 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6, which permits two (2) ground signs per entrance to the development. The requested deviation is to allow for one (1) ground sign at the property corners fronting on existing and proposed public roadways that provide access to the project, in addition to two (2) ground signs at each project entrance. The proposed ground signs at property corners, commonly referred to as "boundary markers ", will be permitted at a maximum height of 10' and sign area of 32 s.f. per sign. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: The Applicant is seeking additional boundary marker signage to increase the community's visibility and better delineate the property from surrounding master planned communities. Due to the size and scope of the project, and the distance between the entrance and property corners, the additional signage will not negatively impact viewsheds from surrounding roadways. The sign area and required setback from rights -of -way will meet LDC standards, thereby ensuring public, health, safety and welfare is protected. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safetv and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.13.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #14 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A, which requires sidewalks on both sides of roadways internal to the site. The requested deviation is to allow for an 8' wide sidewalk on one side of the spine road internal to the development, and 5' wide sidewalks on one side of all other private, local roadways internal to the development that service residential units on one (1) side of the roadway, and /or terminate in a cul -de -sac up to a maximum length of 2,500 linear feet. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 24 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 For the purposes of this deviation, the spine road is limited to that portion of the main entry road shown on the PUD master plan that does not provide direct access to dwelling units, and does not provide direct access to residential neighborhoods on both sides of the roadway. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: The deviation is proposed to allow for a more clustered development pattern that maximizes useable open space in consideration of the reduced development footprint, while ensuring appropriate pedestrian connections within and outside the project. In addition to the sidewalks, the community will include nature trails and other forms of pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure to ensure connectivity. The private, local roadways internal to the development will have relatively low vehicular travel speeds; therefore, the deviation will not negatively impact public health, safety and welfare. Additionally, the reduced internal right -of -way width requested per Deviation 91 will decrease the distance residents must travel to reach internal sidewalks on those roadways where sidewalks are provided on one (1) side. This deviation has previously been approved for numerous projects throughout the County, including Saturnia Lakes (FKA Rigas PUD), The Parklands PUD /DRI, and most recently for Marsilea Villas (Ordinance 2011 -03) and Talis Park PUD (FKA Tuscany Reserve) approved per Ordinance 2012 -11. As proposed, the sidewalks will provide adequate circulation throughout the community, and to sidewalk connections along Immokalee Road. Please note the spine road refers the main entry roadway shown on the PUD master plan, which does not provide direct access to proposed residential units. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved with the limitations noted by the applicant. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10 02 13 B 5 h the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #15 seeks relief from LDC Section 10.02.04.0 which limits the developer to one (1) Site Development Plan submittal for concurrent review with the final plat at such time as the applicant submits the response to the first staff review comments. The requested deviation is to allow for a maximum of three (3) Site Development Plan submittals for concurrent review with the final plat at such time as the applicant submits the response to the staff review comments. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 25 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 The proposed deviation allows the developer the ability to permit and construct multiple facilities simultaneously within the PUD, and will not negatively impact public health, safety or welfare. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved with the limitations noted by the applicant, i.e., no more than three concurrent reviews. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting Dublic purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." FINDINGS OF FACT: LDC Subsection 10.03.05.I.2 states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners ... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below. [Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in bold, non - italicized font] : PUD Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria" (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in bold font): 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and believes the uses as limited by the property development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The commitments made by the applicant should provide adequate assurances that the proposed change should not adversely affect living conditions in the area. In addition, as limited above, the proposed property development regulations provide adequate assurances that the proposed project will be suitable to the type and pattern of development in the area. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 26 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. Additionally, the development will be required to obtain platting and /or site development approval. Both processes will ensure that - appropriate stipulations for -the provision of and continuing operation and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on that analysis, staff is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. As described in the Analysis and Deviation Discussion sections of this staff report, staff is of the opinion that the proposed uses, development standards and developer commitments will help ensure that this project is compatible both internally and externally if staff's additional stipulations shown below are included in any approval recommendation. 1. Additional limitations for size and massing or some other information relative to satellite clubhouses, the construction dates for the clubhouse and number of units per multi - family buildings, be provided; and 2. Deviation #8 is approved subject to the following limitations: (1) The maximum number of models shall be limited to 40; and (2) The PUD document shall be revised to include the following information: As part of the application material for every building permit for a model home, the developer shall provide documentation stating how many model homes are in existence so the maximum of 40 model homes is not exceeded. S. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC. 6 The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project as noted in the GMP FLUE and Transportation Element consistency review, if the mitigation proposed by the petitioner is included in any approval recommendation. In addition, the PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 27 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23112 project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management .,. regulations when development approvals are sought. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal systems and potable water supplies to accommodate this project based upon the commitments made by the petitioner and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will be addressed when development approvals are sought. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The petitioner is seeking approval of fifteen deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06.A). This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff believes the deviations can be supported with the limitations shown in the Recommendation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the elements may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13.13.5.11, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Please refer to the Deviation Discussion portion of the staff report for a more extensive examination of the deviations. Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.03.05.1. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners ... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable" (Staffs responses to these criteria are provided in bold font): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. The comprehensive Planning Staff has provided an in -depth analysis of the GMP FLUE and FLUM provisions; zoning analysis provides an in -depth review of the proposed amendment. The petition can also be deemed consistent with the CCME and the Transportation Element based upon the review provided by the reviewers responsible for that task. Therefore, staff recommends that this petition be deemed consistent with the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern; PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 28 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 ^ Staff has described the existing land use pattern in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report and discussed it at length in the zoning review analysis. Staff believes the proposed amendment is appropriate given the existing land use pattern, and development restrictions included in the PUD Ordinance. - - - An excerpt from the map prepared by the Collier County GIS /CAD Mapping Section is provided that shows the adjacent projects discussed previously. The uses proposed or developing in the Parklands, Heritage Bay, Quail West, Terafina and Olde Cypress PUD zoned projects are similar to Mirasol. LEE C."OU" lTY AUAIL IAR *SOL WEST 10 Li PAY CUAII EERITACE (REEK TE"RAF14A YRASOL ORI) r tl U. 9 tW Ytivil ESTATES 14 Ln 2 QUAIL II Ja W"G'SHORE LARE QDE CYPRES: WASOL V F HERITACE RAY 2s) 22 2 ? (ORE} = CLDE C PRE33 {ORI) w .. ADCIn 9ORW OO(E w CORNER yLArA NAPLES- IV %WCALE6ROAD (e,% 04% Excerpt from current PUD Map 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; The proposed PUD amendment would not create an isolated zoning district because the majority of the site is already zoned PUD. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. .-. Staff is of the opinion that the district boundaries are logically drawn given the current - - property ownership boundaries and the existing PUD zoning. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 29 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 S. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed amendment is not necessary, per se; but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek changes. The rezone and amendment to the existing PUD will allow the owner the opportunity to develop the land in a manner other than what the existing zoning district would allow. Without this amendment, the property could be developed in compliance with the existing Agricultural zoning and the existing PUD ordinance regulations. 6 Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; Staff is of the opinion that the proposed petition, subject to the proposed list of uses and property development regulations and the proposed Development Commitments detailed in Exhibit F, along with staffs recommended limitation, is consistent with the County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Therefore, the proposed change should not adversely impact living conditions in the area. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time subject to the Transportation Commitments contained in Exhibit F of the RPUD ordinance. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem; The proposed change should not create drainage or surface water problems because the LDC specifically addresses prerequisite development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby properties. Additionally, the LDC and GMP have other specific regulations in place that will ensure review for drainage on new developments. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; If this petition is approved, any subsequent development would need to comply with the applicable LDC standards for development or as outlined in the PUD document. This project's property development regulations provide adequate setbacks and distances between structures; therefore the project should not significantly reduce light and air to adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors , PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 30 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 including zoning; however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market value. There is no guarantee that the project will be marketed in a manner comparable to the surrounding developments. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; The proposed changes in this petition are not anticipated to be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; The proposed development complies with the Growth Management Plan which is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; The PUD zoned subject property could be developed within the parameters of the existing zoning designations except for the lands being added which are not zoned PUD. The petitioner is seeking this rezone and amendment in compliance with LDC provisions for such action. The petition can be evaluated and action taken as deemed appropriate through the public hearing process. Staff believes the proposed rezone and amendment meets the intent of the PUD district regulations, if staffs stipulations are addressed, and further, believes the public interest will be maintained. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County; As noted previously, the proposed rezone boundary follows the existing property ownership boundary. The GMP is a policy statement which has evaluated the scale, density and intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable throughout the urban - designated areas of Collier County. Staff is of the opinion that the development standards and the developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the community. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is not the sole determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a particular zoning petition. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 31 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 the GMP and the LDC. The proposed rezone and amendment are consistent with the GMP as discussed in other portions of the staff report. 16 -T-he- physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require considerable site alteration and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site development plan or platting approval process and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities, except as it may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained in the PUD document. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (1VIM): The applicant, IM Collier Joint Venture, in conjunction with his agents, Richard Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. and Alexis Crespo, AICP, of Waldrop Engineering, P.A. conducted a duly noticed Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) on Tuesday, June 5, 2012. Also in attendance was a representative from the contract purchaser and a County staff person. The meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. at St. Monica's Episcopal Church at 7070 Immokalee Road. Approximately 10 other persons attended the meeting. The applicant's agent distributed handouts outlining the project overview, proposed uses, and site development regulations. Rich Yovanovich began the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and an overview of the rezoning process. Mr. Yovanovich outlined the public input opportunities throughout the process, and noted that dates had not been set for the Planning Commission or Board of County Commission hearings. Mr. Yovanovich provided an overview of the project location and history, and pointed out the location of the acreage being added to the PUD. He also explained the handouts. Mr. Yovanovich presented the approved PUD Master Plan and proposed PUD master plan, noting the additional preserve area and reduction to the development footprint. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 32 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Following the Agent's presentation, the meeting was opened up to for questions and comments regarding the proposed amendment. The following is a summarized list of the questions asked and responses given. Question /Comment 1: What is the timeframe to start construction? Response: The developer would like to break ground in 2013. Question /Comment 2: Does that include the golf course? Will the golf course be developed in the first phase of construction? Response: Yes. Question /Comment 3: What do the improvements to Broken Back Road entail to provide access to the development? Will the existing bridge remain until the construction of the CR 951 extension occurs? Response: The access shown on the master plan the will be used for temporary construction access. The County is also designing improvements to the Broken Back Rd/CR 951 intersection. All improvements to the roadway will require permitting approval through Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. Question /Comment 4: The existing Broken Back Road is not permitted. Where you aware of that? Response: No, this project is our first involvement with this roadway. Question /Comment 5: What is the outparcel in the northern portion of the development? How is that land zoned? Response: That parcel is not owned by the developer, and is zoned for agricultural purposes. The PUD currently provides for access to this parcel and so does the amendment. Question /Comment 6: Is there a road along the northern perimeter of the development? Response: No, there is no road in that area. Question /Comment 7: Are you under the DRI threshold? Response: Yes, the threshold is 2,000 units. The project is 1,121 units. Even if the density was maximized based on the property acreage development would not exceed the DRI threshold. Question /Comment 8: Will Collier Blvd. be extended to Bonita Beach Road? Response: Collier County has a long -range plan to extend Collier Blvd., but this project has nothing to do with the extension of Collier Blvd. This project does not contribute toward the need for the extension, nor is the developer constructing a portion of Collier Blvd. as a result of this project. Question /Comment 9: Are there any insurance companies connected with the developer? Response: I do not know. That is not a zoning -level issue. There are no commercial uses associated with this project. Question /Comment 10: Will the property to the east be commercial? Response: Yes, there are commercial uses permitted to the east. Question /Comment 11: Do you anticipate any reconfiguration of access to Immokalee Road? PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 33 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Response: No, the developer will use the existing bridge. There will be no new /additional points of access to Immokalee Road. - - Question /Comment 12 :- When will a plan be presented that shows the location of the golf course? Is it like the original plan? Response: We are still working on the site plans and do not have details to provide yet. It will be similar to the original plan, in that there will be single- family and multi - family uses around the golf course. Question /Comment 13: Where will the clubhouse be located? Response: The clubhouse has been relocated internally to the development as shown on the property PUD master plan. Question /Comment 14: When will the (site) plan be available? Response: The consultant team is working on it right now; we typically do not have that level of detail available during the zoning process. Question /Comment 15: Will there be a public park in the development? Response: No, this will be a private community. All amenities will be private and for the use of the community's residents. The developer will pay a park impact fee to fund community and regional parks. There will be a pathway system provided along the property's Immokalee Road frontage. Question /Comment 16: Will the gate be manned 24 hours per day? Response: That level of detail is not available yet, but I would imagine so. Question /Comment 17: Do you have the percentages of single - family and multi - family units? Response: Not at this time. The plans are geared towards more of a single - family community. Question /Comment 18: Who is the builder? This could have a big impact on employment in Collier County if they use local contractors. Response: Yes, this will have a positive impact on local employment. Taylor Morrison will use local contractors. Question /Comment 19: Will the golf course be an equity course or a public course? Response: The developer has not decided yet, but they are considering a bundled golf concept, where the membership fee is associated with the cost of the homes. Question /Comment 20: What will the price range be? Response: It will be market -rate homes. Question /Comment 21: What will the name of the community be? Response: The developer does not know yet, but it will not be Mirasol. Question /Comment 22: Do you have a website where we can watch the development and progress? Response: Not at this time, but eventually there will be a website. Question /Comment 23: Is the corner of CR 951 and Immokalee zoned for commercial? PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 34 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 .. Response: These properties are known as the Tree Farm PUD and Addie's Corner PUD. Addie's Corner is zoned for commercial uses. The Tree Farm PUD is zoned for mixed -use. The northern portion of the Tree Farm project is residential or Assisted Living Facilities. These projects are also in the preliminary design stages. - - Question /Comment 24: Is the project part of the primary panther zone? Response: Yes. Question/Comment 25: Are there any old cypress? Response: The site was logged in the 1930's and the trees are approximately 50 -70 years old. Question /Comment 26: What is the property just above you (to north)? Response: Village Walk in the City of Bonita Springs. Question /Comment 27: Will there be a road going from Village Walk down to Collier County? Response: Yes, the CR 951 extension is on the Collier County long -range plan. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office reviewed the staff report for this petition on August 21, 2012. RECOMMENDATION: Zoning and Land Development Review Services staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PUDZ- A- PL20120000303 to the BCC with a recommendation of approval subject to the following stipulations: 1. Additional limitations for size and massing or some other information relative to satellite clubhouses, the construction dates for the clubhouse and number of units per multi - family buildings, be provided; and 2. Approve Deviation #8 subject to the following limitations: (1) the maximum number of models shall be limited to 40; and (2) The PUD document shall be revised to include the following information: As part of the application material for every building permit for a model home, the developer shall provide documentation stating how many model homes are in existence so the maximum of 40 model homes is not exceeded. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/23/12 Page 35 of 36 i PREPARED BY: KA AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER tSELEM, MENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING REVIEWED BY: RAYMO D V. BELL S, ZONING MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING MIKE BOSI, AICP, INTERIM DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING APPROVED BY: NICIr[ CASALANU'`UIIDMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION DATE DATE 9 -7- rZ DATE DATE Tentatively scheduled for the November 13, 2012 Board of County Commissioners Meeting PUDZ- A- PL20120000303, Mirasol Page 36 of 36 September 20, 2012 CCPC Revised: 8/1/12 ORDINANCE NO. 12- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD- _OF _COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2009 -21, THE MIRASOL RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BY INCREASING THE PERMISSIBLE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 799 TO 1,121; BY AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF AN ADDITIONAL 95 +/- ACRES OF LAND ZONED RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) TO THE MIRASOL RPUD; BY REVISING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; BY AMENDING THE MASTER PLAN; AND ADDING DEVIATIONS AND REVISING DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846) BORDERED ON THE EAST BY BROKEN BACK ROAD AND FUTURE COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951) IN SECTIONS 10, 15 AND 22, TOtVNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 1,638.6 +1 - ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, IMCOLLIER JOINT VENTURE, represented by Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to amend the PUD and change the zoning classification of the additional herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION 03\1E: ZONING CLASSIFICATION The zoning classification of approximately 95 acres of the herein described real property located in Sections 10, 15 and 22, Township 48 South; Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida is changed from a Rural Agricultural Zoning District to the Mirasol Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District and when combined with the existing Mirasol RPUD provides for a 1,63$.6 =1 - acre project in accordance with the revised Exhibits A -F, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as Mirasal RPUD \ PUDZ- A- PL2012 -303 Page i of 2 Rev. 8/20112 described in Ordinance Number 04 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is /are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super - majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this., . day of , 2012. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: DIR-1 AFT Heidi Ashton -Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A - Permitted Uses Exhibit B - Development Standards Exhibit B2 - Flag Lot Scenario Exhibit C - Location Map Exhibit CZ - Master Plan Exhibit D - Legal Description Exhibit E - Deviations Exhibit F - Developer Commitments CPk 12 -CPS - 01158,42 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Mirasol RPUD 1 PUDZ- A- PL2012 -303 Page 2 of 2 Rev. 8/20/ 12 FRED W. COYLE, Chairman EXHIBIT A FOR MIRASOL RPUD PERMITTED (USES: A maximum of 7W 1,121 residential units and a maximum of -36 18 golf course holes may be developed within the RPUD, 1. ResidentiaLlGolf Tracts (RG): A. Principal Uses: 1. Single- family detached dwelling units. 2. Zero lot line dwelling units. 3. Townthouse dwellings. 4. Two- family and duplex dwellings. 5. Multiple- family dwellings. 6. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals determines to be compatible in the "RG" district. B. Accessory Uses /Structures: 1. Uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted 2. Guest houses. 3. Common area recreation facilities for fesidefitial uses. residents and their guests. 4. Clubhouse or recreation centers for fesi ential °^ residents and their guests. 5. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature trails, bikeways, gazebos, boat and canoe docks, fishing piers, picnic areas, fitness trails and shelters. 6. Model homes, model home sales centers, weleeffi and sales trailers, includin offices for project administration. construction sales and marketing. as well as resale and rental of units. 7. Golf course, practice areas and ranges, golf cart barns, rest rooms,, shelters snack bars and golf course maintenance yards for residents and their ug ests. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303 Strike- through text is deleted Page ! of 19 Mirasot RPUD Underline tart is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 8. Golf Club Complex as located on the Master Plan: i) Retail establishments accessory to the permitted uses in the District such as, but not limited to; golf, tennis and recreation related sales for residents and their Guests. ii) Restaurants, cocktail lounges, and similar uses ;,,tended to s°,-„e-elub ffiefabefs and club pests for residents and their ug ests. iii) Pro - shops, golf club, tennis clubs, and health spas mad equest,-:,,., elubs for residents and their Ruests. iv) Golf course, practice areas and ranges, golf cart barns, rest rooms, shelters snack bars and golf course maintenance yards and facilities. 9. Shuffleboard courts, tennis courts, swimming pools, and other types of accessory facilities intended for outdoor recreation for residents and their guests. 10. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures. 11. Essential services, pursuant to the LDC. 12. Water management facilities and related structures. 13. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or architectural or structural bank treatments. 14. Community aftd neigr,berheed pParks, recreational facilities, community centers for residents and their guests. 15. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the developer, builders, and their authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas and related uses. 16. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffer berms, fences and walls. 17. Any other accessory use which is comparable hi nature with the foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals determines to be compatible in the "RG" district. 11. Conservation/Preserve Tract: A. Principal Uses: PUDZ .-- PL201200t00303 Strike - through text is deleted Page 2 of 19 Mirasol RPUD Underline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 1. Passive recreation uses limited to the following so long as clearing for such uses does not result in the reduction of - Ppreserve acreage below the minimum requirement: i. Boardwalks ii. Environmental uses (wetland and conservation areas) iii.Pedestrian bridges iv. Equestrian trails v. Pervious nature trails except where American Disabilities Act requires otherwise. vi.Native Wildlife sanctuary vii. Inclement weather shelters, in presen e upland areas only unless constructed as part of a permitted boardwalk system. The shelters shall be a maximum of 150 square feet each. 2. Environmental research 3. Drainage and water management facilities subject to all required permits. 4. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list or permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals through the process outlined in the LDC. PUDZ- A- PL'0120000303 Strike - through text is deleted Page 3 of 19 Mirasol RPUi} Underline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 EXHIBIT B FOR MIRASOL RPUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Table I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the RPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the site development plan (SDI') or subdivision plat. TABLE I DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR "RG" RESIDENTIAL AREAS PUDZ- A- PL2 0 1 200003 03 Strike- through text is deleted Page 4 of 19 Mirasol RPUD Underline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 MM PERMITTED ED Single Zero Two Family Fit* i ivlulti- Clubhouse/ Recreation r USES ARC Family Detached Lot Line and Duplex " *° Family Dwelling Buildings t Townhouse j *6 STANDARDS 4 1 6 i -r Principal _ ._.v Structures Minimum Lot i 5 000 SF 4,000 SF 3,500 SF per 3,500 SF i 9,000 SF r is Area lot or unit f *3 i j Minimum Lot 50, *? 40' *7 1 35' per lot 33=-20' *7 90' 1-ya i Width *4? or unit *7 125' j Front Yard 20' *2 *7 20' *' *7 ?0' *2 *7 20 *2 *7 t 20 *2 ' Setback ... � Side Yard ; = ° 5' *7 0 or 10' 17.5' *7 *8 7.5' *7 *8 ij10' *5 5' Setback *2 * 1 i *7 - I i 15' *7 N 3 Rear Yard j 15' *? 1 15' *7 T j 3S *7 15' 0' i Setback *1 ! j 1 Setback From 1 10' *7 10' *7 . 10' 10' t0' 20 Golf Course 4 25 — Setbacks from 25' 25' 25' 25' Preserves j Maximum 35' 35' r 3Y 35' 50'(5 50' (2 stories Zoned Height stories not over parking not to exceed to exceed 50') • S0') *9 Actual Height 45' 45' 45' 45' i 65' 75 *10 I Floor Area 1 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 750 SF n'a 3 Min. (S.F.) d t � Distance 10' 10'� 10' 10' 20' *5 _ ( 15' or .5 BH- Between ! i whichever is i Principal j greater *6 Structures PUDZ- A- PL2 0 1 200003 03 Strike- through text is deleted Page 4 of 19 Mirasol RPUD Underline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 MM Single Zero Clubhouse/ Two Family I Multi- Family Lot I and Duplex Fan�, Family I Recreation Dwelling Buildings Accessory Detached Line Attached an Structures Townhouse *6 Setback *2 Setback Setback Preserves Between Accessory Structures on the same lot Between Accessory and Principal Structures on same lot Zoned Height Enmt yards for all uses shall hv measured uofollows: K the parcel i, served byo public road dght-of-wny. setback Ismeasured frorn tile adjacent ,ight-"f-°oyline. /f the naicr! is served hfuprivate muu setback iumeasured from the back o[curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not nurbcd). *| Rear yards for principal and accessory structures no lots and tracts which *but !»km and open spaces. So/bxrko from lakes for all principal and accessory uses may be feet provided architectural bank treatment is incorporated into design and ombJcuc to written approval onm the Collier County Engineering Review Section. *% ' Single-family dneU/ngs, which provide for two parking onocoo vhuio an enclosed garage and provide for 8"em parking oub�� than in private driveways may reduce the front yuui requirement to 10 feu for aside vntn., garago. Multi-family dwellings, as defined in the LDC, which provide For mw parking ,pucvx within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking may reduce the from yard to 15 fiect. This reduction shall not result in an approval to impede or block the sidewalk. Front |umjcd Qwag*o shall hnumioimumoo] feet from the edge vfsidewalk. *3 - Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3,500 square feet for a toLal minimum lot Uomorr.on0 square feet. °4—yaiuimurn lot width muxuc reduced by 20% f(w cul-de-sac lots provideJ the minimum lot area requirement is maintained, +5- Building distance may horeduced at garages to half the sum or,��xcigmofmegarages *6 Althou:h neither setbacks nor separation between structures areapplicable to the clubhouse and officr recreation structures located on u clubhouse trxxt�neither the clubhouse nor any other recreational structure shall N: located closer than 25 feet from any residential o, preservation hvondo,y. � ?' The use of flog lots is allowed to provide maximum flexibility in subdivision design and may "an, from the minimum lot widths. However. neither the minimum lot area. nor the minimum distance between structures may be reduced. *8' Zero foot (0') setback for internal units, PUDZ-6_pL20120000303 stru-e'th,ough text isdeleted Page 5uf|Y ��iraso|R9DD Underline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 *9 Inclusive of under building parking *10 Buildings shall not exceed three stories within 1,250 feet of Immokalm Road. *11 5' side yard setbacks shall apply to lots equal to or lesser than 70' in width Lots greater than 70' in width will provide 6' side yard setbacks. BH = Building Height SPS = Same as Principal Structure 'notwithstanding the foregoing: none of the footnotes shall operate as a deviation from the Land Development Code unless they are listed as deviations on Exhibit E. None of the footnotes operate as deviations from the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. PL'DZ- A- PL20120000303 Strike - through text is deleted Page 6 of 19 M, irasol RPUD Underline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 NOTE: THIS EYHISIT IS FOR I[LITSTIMIYE PIIRPOSES TO SBDW NOW CIVAIN CEOkETRY OF Mfg TRACT WOULD fANUTATE T9E IM FLEMENTATION Of A "F1A& IAT' OESION LAYOUT. 0 s0 100 200 SCALE IN FEET I -M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE �.0 =ter i$ER :R(M, I;trplI I:�,1��m rye sty CJXi.0 t7:7tEQ T.d.wlTwi N- ,v.�y.•71.N 1M MJ tr)7))!)J!!1.lYSt CST!!K )td3 —° YUtCDitf6 F4�iPKENi' fLQ LOT MIRASOL PUDA FLAG LOT SCENARIO EXHIBIT '82' a y 5 4 c a q �3 5 u! 3! PUDZ- A- PL20120000303 Strike - through text is deleted Page 7 of 19 Mirasol RPUD Underline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 SEE SHEET # 2 FOR CONTIRUATION. ........... Ira) amwn 610 wx DDIN, RIG I OWL- UK0 US a lwt,,ft vvvl"m %a w RIG L d II =cis mime. in PUDZ-A-PL20120000303 Strike-through text is Meted Mirasol XPUD-_ "e Last Revised: August 20, 2012 R CI L t9jr rmm?g*m LIL To? 7, IT w T taya a WL ex Ell I i ENGWEERING f4af**kA xzr we CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAIN EXmB rr"cr RffiE7 , OF 3 Page 8 vgf 19 t� VA IT JAI 06T 1 s nAP AM , ut k axt Y 4 4 4. IM M-03 —03 t *•• ♦ i () ,•.. • Y fr i £• a'r VAAAW .* TERAftKA - °M - (tO0} SEE SHEET # 1 FOR CONTINUATION NOTE: FOR PLAN UGEM ANO SFFOM NOTES SEE SBEET ! OF 3 PUDZ- A- PL20120000303 Strike- tfrough text is deleted Mirasol RPUD r ine textli air did Last Revised: August 20, 2012 i c w g m I FROMM MUMMY (A) YACANT {�.A�K � 1�•Y Ek19YYBif �LLMI{ �nw ao+m auux rws -v�s� w�m�wir. nu�sr A PRtdOSTTR h Bi+841i OYtt a. a:�.n.nu,avt..1/JIF3MRGYT�% -w.w MIRASOL R.F.UD. At11 CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN EXH®IT "C2" SHEET 2 OF 3 FILE VAMF :27600FA6ffLdwg UPDATED 2012 -07-12 Page 4 of 15 L CONCEPTUAL LAKE LOCATIONS *RIG RESIDENTIAL/ OOLF PRESERVE RIGHT -OF -WAY LAND USE AREAS ARE CONCEPTUAL AND SUBJECT TO RELOCATION /CHANGE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING. SPECIAL NOTES: 11 WHERE APPLICABLE ALONG PROJECT BOUNDARY AND UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED PRESERVE AREAS SHALL SERVE AS BUFFERS. IF AFTER EXOTIC REMOVAL THE PRESERVE VEGETATION FAILS TO MEET MINIMUM CODE BUFFER STANDARDS ADDITIONAL PLANT MATERIAL MAY BE REQUIRED, PUDZ- A- PL20120000303 Strike- through text is deleted Mirasol RPUD bnderline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 AL ENGINEEIRING e�ew�evraa.wiwn srtww 0. - •wacaw �aMrML Mtq ii il14OL7lT/ F pN04TlIp MIMSOL RF.UD. AMEND Grr CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT "C2" SHEET 3 OF 3 Page 14 of 19 NATIVE HABITAT SUMMARY: EXISTING NATIVE HABITAT = 845.6 As. REQUIRED NAME HABITAT — 337.4 As. ± PROVIDED NATIVE HABITAT 100 SITE) = $37.4 A& t ACREAGE SUMMARY: it- --6122 = 425.8 Aa. SECTION Is = 634.6 A& -_* SECTION 10 = V8.2 As.:- TOTAL = 1,638.6 Ae. -.L TOTAL AREA OUTSIDE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY = 428.8 Ae. '* � TOTAL AREA WITHIN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY = 709.8 Ae. i- t PUDZ- A- PL20120000303 Strike- through text is deleted Mirasol RPUD bnderline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 AL ENGINEEIRING e�ew�evraa.wiwn srtww 0. - •wacaw �aMrML Mtq ii il14OL7lT/ F pN04TlIp MIMSOL RF.UD. AMEND Grr CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT "C2" SHEET 3 OF 3 Page 14 of 19 EXHIBIT D FOR MIRASOL RPUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS AND EXCEPTING THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4) PARCELS: 1) THE SOUTH ;/2 OF THE 'HE NORTHEAST 'f4 OF THE NORTHWEST' /4, 2) THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST ,4 OF THE SOUTHEAST V,, 3) THE %ORTHEAST' /4 OF THE SOUTHEAST A OF THE SOUTHEAST'f4, 4) THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST' /4 OF THE SOUTHEAST' /4 OF THE SOUTHEAST!/, AND ALL OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA F{WI7 ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; THE NORTHEAST '/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1 /a, AND THE EAST OF THE NORTHWEST `/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 14, THE WEST !/z OF THE SOUTHEAST', /4 OF THE NORTHWEST', /4, THE EAST V2 OF THE NORTHWEST' /4 OF THE SOUTHEAST' /d, THE EAST '//20F THE SOUTHEAST' /4 OF THE NORTHWEST '14, THE NORTHWEST %4 OF THE NORTHEAST' /4; AND THE WEST' /z OF THE NORTHEAST/40F THE NORTHEAST -A, THE EAST/ OF THE NORTHEAST ,4 OF 'I'I-IE NORTHEAST'. /; THE WEST 1/z OF THE SOUTHWEST' /4 OF THE NORTHEAST'A, THE EAST l' OF THE SOUTHWEST/40F THE NORTHEAST '/4, THE EAST '12 OF THE NORTHEAST'4 OF THE SOUTHWEST %4, THE EAST ' /z OF THE WEST %z OF THE SOUTHEAST/ 40F THE SOUTHWEST' /, THE WEST ;/2 OF THE EAST V2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 14 OF THE SOUTHWEST' /, THE EAST %2 OF THE EAST/ 20F THE SOUTHEAST/ 40F THE SOUTHWEST'/4 THE NORTH ,/2 OF THE WEST %2 OF THE NORTHWEST %4 OF THE SOUTHEAST' /4, THE SOUTHWEST/40F TIIE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST' /4, THE WEST/ 20F SOUTHWEST/ 40F THE SOUTHEAST ' /4, THE WEST 3/4 OF THE EAST % OF THE SOUTHWEST/40F THE SOUTHEAST 'A, THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY; FLORIDA, AND PUDZ- A- PL20120000303 Strike - through text is deleted Page 11 of 19 Mimol RPUD Underline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOXVNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTII, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTH '/2 OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOUrNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. Dal EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TONVNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINING 1638 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. PLTDZ- A- PL20120000303 Strike - through text is deleted Page 12 of 14 hlirasol RPF D Underline text is udder Last Revised: August 20, 2012 EXHIBIT E FOR TWIR ASOL RPUD DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation #1 seeks relief from Appendi)E B of the LDC Section 6.06.01.0, entled it "Typieal Sl+eet See�iefis and Rig-44 ef way Design which requires cul-de-sacs and local streets less than ene theusand feet (1000') in le*-_4k to have a minimum sixty (60') right- of-way width and two (2) ten foot (10') wide travel lanes, to allow a minimum right-of-way width of 40' for private local streets and fil eel 50' for private spine, eelleeter aftd-41—emeaffeemg roads. 2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.011 Street System Requirements, to allow cul-de-sates in excess of 1,000' in length. For any cul-de-sac exceeding 4—,24G 1,600 feet in length, the roadway must include at approximately 4-,?*4 1,600 feet intervals design features which provide for the ability of emergency vehicles to turn around. Traffic roundabouts, eyebrows, hammerheads or similar design features shall be allowed. 3. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.Q. Street System Requirements, which requires that street name markers shall be approved by the County Manager or designee for private streets or in conformance with U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. This requirement shall be waived, However, breakaway posts shall be used. 4. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 6,06.01.R. Street Requirements, which requires that street pavement painting, striping and reflective edging of public roadway markings shall be provided by the developer as required by the U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. This requirement shall be waived for private roadways with 40' •id . Traffic circulation signage shall be in conformance with U.S.D.O.T.F.H,W.A. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device standards. 5, Deviation 4-5. scds reliel' firo S Luart test of office;[ObWp I -gillughli clulv' 355ociaied cuun;v_s, reclijestcd deviation is 1�� f(tr I park-int, sv=CS per 1.()00 --luare ect 01 offiecilobby/pri) shup; tsst �Iholes. �exteri�or rKc �galion _iciated �y��msed gojf cgur,;q. Paj:L�11U Spaces t�fr fz� uses and maintenance buildings will be provided per the LDC. 6. Deviation #6 seeks relieffroin LDC Section 4.06.04.A.. which limits the de%,61ciaer To 100 acres of residential, commercial, or industrial lots or building sites to store excess fill generated by lake excavations within the PUD, The requested deviation is to allow the developer to-elcar u12 to 300 acres of residential. commercial. or industrial lots or building sites to store excess fill generated by take excavations within the PUD or project where the excavation is taking place. This is not a deviation from the Collier County Excavation Ordinance. Deviotion ft-j wCi!ks Lreiief-fir")m 1,DC Si ction 5.031.02,C. which nermits a ruoJmu.rri %vall heiuhl o.176' it, res'idential zo-ning distric(s. TAie requested deviation is to allow a mAximum well height of S' 1Fjr(,Ut1'jj()U' e jejrJC�J�ipment_ When abuttim-t an existin!-, or fut 1.11 -tire public tall t� rid berm. or corribin..ationAvall/bgrm is permitted. PUDZ-A-PL20120000303 Strike-through text is deleted Page 13 of 19 Nfirlsol RPUD Underline lest is udded Last Revised: August 20, 2012 S. th-Viation #8 seeks relief' ?'rom LDC Scofion 5,►1.04.13,5. -w-hich purnhN a maximum '.)f five (51 III(Ald l t r1 s. sr a number come.spo ading, to ten f 101 percent of the total number c)f Platted it )Ls. i-NAlich.ever is less. per platted he res uested deviation -is to allow for a maximum of six (6) model homes per deve--ol2ment tract, not to exceed 60 model homes within the overall RPUD. 9, Deviation N9 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary, signs on Went, Ills zoned pro -questcd &N iatiom ,is tpallgw a imp.cm-ary ;Jun or banner up Iii -i maxinium of -12 squarc fcet in great and a mam-Tri"M of 8 feet in h6aht.The temporary sign or banner shall be limited to 28 days per calendar year, 10. Deviation 010 ,�ccks r-Old frOM LDC Section 5.06-02-13,21. %yhlch germits erne I ! i rcal estate pul Sjum-1 F�' 'trevt rrqnta'= that ki �wtback a mininitim of 10jr0m any proMen-tv junc. -ne reQuested deviation is to allow for a maximum of two (2) real estate . pole signs per street fi-ontage setback a 1. 4 I)eviatiun, PP 1, 1 c.;e,-ks rc!ie!" firom, LICE:" Sectitin 5.06.02R rtquirc-+ on- perm NZ dircctiowd sif-ims to lie scibick a minimum of I W ftorn imemaj ax, lines. The rcowsTed ukviation is to allow fcr on- i1n gmise direction ji. -rpaw to be sg�thack A minimum of 5' wqm internal proms -tv lines. This deviation does not apply to property adia ent to public roadways. 12.1 Deviation #I-I seeks" relief from LQC 5,WO-111.6,-which Nnnits two (2) ground signqs m t:mrimcg to the do.-cloVinent wilh 2t maxim-1j"11 ncight ca f S' and tutal s6imu rt tL i .64 s. f pg r -Pic Eilt-ruestcul &Ykaijug is to allmy lair two (2) ground height of 10' and total sign area of 80 sf, per sign. 13. Deviation #13 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.13.6, which yen-nits Mlo (2) ground signs per I entnifice to the rur L)TIC l I I gro un, 1 393_'9 a hg- ptopgm- gwncrs froming- on existing andr,-roposed public roalways IfIx provide acces's w Ow r.rcje o. in addition io ivvo (2) �?roun sjgn!� tit The L�ruund -siL-n-, Pt 17`2. �)griy com%:T i. ixmmonk, re erred to as, ''boundary murk crs `. y.vllj be VerMitf-ed W 3 ►113:611IL111, height of 10' and sign area of 32. sf per sign. 14. Deyiation # 14 sceks, !7,�Aick'frctm lA)C 'wCctlayn 6,06.0.2YA, which. rcuuirgs.. stele waik,s cyn latath. silts cif rcad'&a v s ir"remal to the I-1 requested deviation is to kilitiw ctr w 8* wide idovalk o side of the spine road internal to the development. and 5' wide sidewalks on one side of all other privatc, logal roadvvqys iniemot tit tile develormy.ent €h. -it gervice •e-,iderifial units on pine _L1 I sie�L Lt the roadway. and/or terminate in a cul-de-sac up to a maximum length of 2,500 Lf. For the purposes of this deviation, the spine road is limited to that portion of the main entry, road shown on the PUD i.dedirvaaccess to residential neighborhoods on both sides of the roadway. PUDZ-A-PL20120000303 Strike - through text is deleted Page 14 of 19 Mirasol RPUD Undarli'lle text is added Last Revised: ,august 20, 2012 1-5. Deviafian 413; secks rViiel, rrom LDC S,-ctioln 1.0,02.04,C--which limits the d-,veiover to Livic ( I ) Sit-- Develamnent Plan 5ubmittal Rir concurm-ng review with the filial U131 at S:LlCh Tifile LIS the ap submits the response to the first staff review comments. The requested deviation is to allow for a maximuni-of-three (3) Site Development Plan submittals for concurrent review with the final plat at such time as the applicant submits the response to the staff review comments. PUDZ-.4L-PL20120000303 Strike-through text is deleted Page 15 of 19 Mirasol RPUD Underline- test is-added- Last Revised: Auggusi 20, 2012 EXHIBIT F FOR MIRASOL RPUD LIST OF DEVELOPER COMAlITMENTS Regulations for development of the Mirasol RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this RPUD Ordinance and applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order in which said regulations relate. Where this RPUD Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. A. RPUD MASTER PLAN 1. Exhibit "C2 ", the RPUD Master Plan, illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed tract, lot or land use boundaries or special land use boundaries, shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as platting or site development plan application. Subject to the provisions of Section 10.02.13 of the LDC, RPUD amendments may be made from time to tune. B. TRANSPORTATION Upon the County's adoption of a CR -951 extension corridor alignment, and within 180 days of the County's request, the Developer Owner, its successors or assigns, shall dedicate to County fee simple right -of -way for the roadway and drainage system at the predetermined amount of $45,400 per acre, for those areas located outside the limits of the residential/Golf Course areas depicted as "RIG" on the PUD master plan. Upon recordation of the deed or other conveyance instrument in the public records of Collier County for the dedication of the right -of -way, the Developer shall become eligible for Transportation Impact fee credits in accordance with the consolidated impact fee Ordinance in effect at the time of recordation of the dedication. If the project is built out or has prepaid transportation Impact Fees to be assessed for the project, then the Developer or its successors or assigns shall be eligible to request cash reimbursement. The Developer shall not be responsible to obtain or modify any pennits on behalf of the County related to the extension of CR -951. 2. The Developer shall construct a 10' multi -use pathway to be located along the Immokalee Road right -of -way on the North side of the Cocohatchee Canal as a part of the entrance construction. Completion of construction of the pathway shall be completed concurrently with the vehicular connection to the existing bridge over the Cocohatchee Canal. 3. •r-= , ti `,, �=� •c�s � C,�:2?#?�i:i on May rcl 7 b `iu`�7� ended on Apr-fl 27 2010. Pars n�rcto i2�{�-r- `3'�ii��uzaS�uvJf' ii r +e +fl .,s .f +i,�t— ixg�o „ +� + t, he . oe+ +3 a for 7119 a.t.ett: units, f, thee PUDZ A- PL20120000303 Strike - through text is deleted Page 16 of 19 Adirasol RPUD Underline text is adcz'ed Last Revised: August 20, 2012 As set forth by the Mirasol PUD Developers Ccittribat o.7 ALureement (l t . }. ilrs e€1 May ,, 2007. the Det`ejo 0" 5'.'s for a tot;31 :iiriati .ial commie cnt of:_�?.229_ .t}t►; rlid upon satis action. N rasc)l N)"ould be vosted for mans ort:rt. in cc urrpip, or, 799 residential lttlit . "flee: Det' rovenic ni to Ifig lrniric�l�� see I�c�ad- Chili {.,�rr��tir�c�•arcl €n[ers;s�tif�rY..;z�l7i�;h �c °ere. con�r��: #ed b��'tfi:h � +1. ?fi�J9 at a ,:test o `� �,1 fi7 ��1 �.C�B ;il� =� tilt rerilainir � balance oil �� i ��-�2 was 11aid to the C� tril?�. - letter, cc3ntirrr�il K� .,:it; 4f faction of the f rtsutt�ial obliga.ior;s and Orpic t t : _. vesting was issued by Collier County on April 23, 2009. 4. The Developer, its successors, or assigns, agree that at the time of and= subsegtten del issuance of a building,pgIn t far the 40e residential dwelling unit authorized by this PUD, or commencement of construction of the intersection improvements. whichever occurs first, the Developer, or its successors or assigns, shall be responsible for their respective fair share of the North leg of the CR- 951;Broken Back Road intersection with Inunokalee Road, which includes modification, replacement, or relocation of the at -grade bridge crossing the Cocohatchee Canal. The development shall be limited to a maximum of 781 Two Way, unadjusted PM Peak hour trips, C. EN-VIRONMENTAL -F-4h-c— Sr-- 4x:i - �-- it "3Fti�3 a • • x ��ir-i3 t e; -� cl Fcl�' c rFst'i�i i i i E t' - � r� } iiii -�-?i —rr czr r =iG- l'lk;.'L x'14 Wildlife Ge .,tie f �SY trru�sxrsxx -ii i'�ircC�l.Y2YiY�tfiL i T ,i Q +.. +�, i::.,1, ��3 Wildlife Ser-Aeo T 5 y the P ilq 4 i- 3 :1£'.Ei3t`4-' %r s?-�rS 1 f? i!t se tlei'mitsr Ii , t;,..t be previded for- preteeted l.iStedrpeeies. 2 I_ rc +ir*t villa ed 3r 1 ; re e -9 r +t'- titk;e h ita 1t s_ 1 f?e done +r g f + d off-site preseEvatien. The project shall retain a mil itfil im of 5.17.4 acres of nafive et4etaljon on -smite in colrnlisnce with r, the Growen Management Plan Easements or ROW created for access to outpareels within the preserve or for future extension of the CR -971 corridor shall not cause the preserve to fall below the minimum native vegetation retention requirement. J tffi-g-as defined in the Mir-asel Water Qii - ' .i _L - + OF 1- ` .,'" h il`- cti.it :r=S J i �L - —11 01031 12 A, y deviat'en from these testing ,-.,1 f, ter-ir'g ..`,7.fes to �iF �ui� *r y a -?tr :ls t qt � autx7 Flt la "" SIHPk Ruch Feii S 6 9 `. r �hie�hli''Iae a j PUDZ .A- PL20120000303 Sinke- through text is deleted Page 17 of 19 Mirasol RPUD Uadertine text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012 feSkil -IL i'G�"'►!"i- 453i-t-tt `�i'- z-��-'- r�-z.�iz- er�czf.� `; �} Iii. - ,. irrs€'r— #EEii ��rr�"� ?? 3 }gH +ems '- - .:.i Et t t�i� E1 2f? flel4iiAller i 4+Li�iifii�r =?E' SFALMD, , L i�z- 71 -tl z 1 ' . ;,t rz f - er : ,� 1 E: �. v tall ti' • - �E-3'?�3•.`t��"��fl ...cif: �-.� ,. «� .� }-� ,. •.. {` i'�r-i�':�- �i�-ti-��' D, EXCAVATION Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a commercial. or development excavation pursuant to Section 22 -106 of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County Florida. The entire water management pass -thru will be constructed at one time as per South Florida Water Management permit 4'11- 02031 -P, as amended, prior to the residential development under an administratively issued "development' excavation permit as long as no more than 20,000 c.y. of material is removed off -site. As per Section 22 -106 of Code of Laws and Ordinances, a commercial excavation permit will be required for removing more than the approved 20,000 e.y. of material off -site. E. OUTPARCEL IN SECTION 10 A temporary access easement shall be granted by the Owner to the owner of parcel number of 00178760007, at a location specified by IM Collier Joint Venture it's successors and assigns. At such time that the northern portion of the Mirasol RPUD has access to a public road, the developer shall provide reasonable access from the parcel number 00178760007 across the Mirasol RPUD to the public road. Both the temporary and permanent easements shall be granted to the owner of this parcel, at no cost to the County or the owner of this outparcel. PUDZ- A- PL20120000303 Strike - through text is deleted Page 18 of 19 Mirasol RPUD - (Inderline text is added - Last Revised: August 20, 2012 F. UTILITIES 1. The developer shall connect to the Collier Comity Water Sewer District (CCWSD) —y a - - p ?t4ble t�vger sx-stt tnl a a Incaiion cictu -nn' ed b CCWSD t>yRmc - capacity is ms aliabl 2 The developer shall connect to the CCWSD wastewater collection and conveyance system at a location determined by CCWSD when capacity is available. 3. The developer shall connect to the CCWSD Irrigation Qualitywater system at a location CCWSD when capacity is available. PU DZ-A-PL20 1200003 03 :Strike- through text is deleted Page 19 of 19 Viirasol RPiJD Underline text is added Last Revised: August 20, 2012