Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Agenda 01/23/2018 Item #11C
01/23/2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to direct staff to initiate the Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment process for the proposed changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) and approve the application of the updated Collier Interactive Growth Model (CIGM) to assist in plan implementation. OBJECTIVE: To draft and bring forward for Transmittal the GMP amendments related to the GGAMP in furtherance of the area restudies directed by the Board of County Commissioners (Board). CONSIDERATIONS: On February 10, 2015, the Board directed staff to initiate GMP restudies in four areas of eastern Collier County. The second restudy, the GGAMP, was undertaken beginning in April, 2016. As with all restudies, staff focused on complementary land uses, economic vi tality, mobility and environmental sustainability through a public outreach effort. The Community Planning staff of the Growth Management Department provides this White Paper to describe the history, current conditions, planning process, outreach, data and analysis in Golden Gate. A list of the recommendations flowing from the public process appears within the White Paper and as Exhibit A. The attached White Paper (Exhibit B) provides the framework of outreach and analysis to address the Goals, Objectives, Policies and Future Land Use Designations within the GGAMP. It serves as a vehicle to further vet and inform staff, community leaders and the public in advance of the public hearing process required to consider and adopt amendments. The Golden Gate area includes three diverse geographic areas: the eastern or rural Estates (east of CR 951), the western or urban Estates (west of CR 951) and Golden Gate City, an unincorporated urban area. Outreach generally reflected these geographic areas, and recommended changes reflect the fundamental difference in character and need between Golden Gate City and the Estates areas. At its meeting on December 7, 2017, the Growth Management Oversight Committee found the White Paper and its recommendations consistent with public participation direction, supportive of sustainability and economic vitality, and, so far as known, consistent with other area restudies. Implementation strategies for this Master Plan, as well as for those identified for the other Eastern Collier restudy initiatives, will benefit from the application of the updated Collier Inter-Active Growth Model (CIGM), a Board approved supplemental planning tool. Staff and the consultant will provide the Board an overview of the CIGM schedule and update process at the conclusion of this item. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of the proposed GMPA process has been accounted for within the approved budget for the Zoning Division. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: The various recommendations are expected to result in amendments to the GGAMP of the GMP, to be considered in a public hearing context at Transmittal before the Planning Commission (CCPC) and the Board, by the state Department of Economic Opportunity, and again at Adoption by the CCPC and Board. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed by the County Attorney, is approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for approval. --HFAC 11.C Packet Pg. 55 01/23/2018 RECOMMENDATION: To direct staff to initiate the Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment process for the proposed changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) and approve the application of the updated Collier Interactive Growth Model (CIGM) to assist in plan implementation. Prepared by: Marcia Kendall, Senior Planner, Comprehensive Planning ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Exhibit A List of Recommendations (PDF) 2. final January 23rd 2018 (PPTX) 3. [Linked] Exhibit B GGAMP White Paper (PDF) 11.C Packet Pg. 56 01/23/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 11.C Doc ID: 4407 Item Summary: Recommendation to direct staff to initiate the Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment process for the proposed changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) and approve the application of the updated Collier Interactive Growth Model (CIGM) to assist in plan implementation. (Kris VanLengen, Community Planning Manager, Zoning Division) Meeting Date: 01/23/2018 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Senior – Zoning Name: Marcia R Kendall 01/03/2018 10:43 AM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 01/03/2018 10:43 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Michael Bosi Additional Reviewer Completed 01/03/2018 10:46 AM Growth Management Department David Weeks Additional Reviewer Completed 01/03/2018 12:40 PM Growth Management Department Jeanne Marcella Level 1 Reviewer Completed 01/04/2018 10:13 AM County Attorney's Office Heidi Ashton-Cicko Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Completed 01/09/2018 1:19 PM Growth Management Department Thaddeus Cohen Department Head Review Completed 01/10/2018 1:16 PM Growth Management Department James French Deputy Department Head Review Completed 01/10/2018 1:55 PM Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 01/10/2018 4:49 PM Budget and Management Office Mark Isackson Additional Reviewer Completed 01/11/2018 11:44 AM County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 01/11/2018 2:53 PM County Manager's Office Leo E. Ochs Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 01/12/2018 9:32 AM Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 01/23/2018 9:00 AM 11.C Packet Pg. 57 A. Golden Gate City 1. Land Use and Economic Vitality • Establish land use designations to protect established, stable, neighborhoods and provide opportunity for redevelopment and renewal through development practices that promote compatibility. • Support redevelopment of Golden Gate Parkway to provide for a viable pedestrian environment adding to the vibrancy and walkability of Golden Gate City. • Add land uses within the designated Activity Center intended to promote job growth and strengthen the economic health of Golden Gate City. • Protect the land uses allowing for diversity of residential housing. • Engage with the Golden Gate Civic Association and MSTU to further community planning programs. • Consider redevelopment tools such as an Innovation Zone to further economic development and redevelopment strategies. • Develop amendments to the Land Development Code to support and implement redevelopment initiatives including incentives for building remodeling and renovation. • Develop a branding and marketing plan for Golden Gate City. • Ensure pertinent incentive programs are made available to those seeki ng business creation and redevelopment opportunities in Golden Gate City. • Modify the land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway to create a consistent development pattern. • Add target industry uses to the Activity Center. • In the Santa Barbara Commercial Subistrict remove the one acre project minimum. 2. Transportation and Mobility • Support all transportation needs within Golden Gate City with an emphasis on walkability. Walkability will be improved through the implementation of the recommendations of the MPO’s Walkability Study. • Within the Activity Center, maintain multiple connections to the surrounding neighborhoods and through the Activity Center while providing safe and direct access to transit stops within or adjacent to the Activity Center. • Consider protecting alleys from vacating process where there is reasonable connection and continuity for future pathway corridors. • Initiate periodic speed studies in Golden Gate City and when appropriate, utilize traffic calming measures and speed limit reductions to ensure a safe pedestrian environment. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy 12/19/2017 Page 1 of 5 11.C.1 Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Exhibit A List of Recommendations (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) 3. Environmental Stewardship • Maintain and expand sewer and water service in accordance with the Collier County Water and Sewer District Implementation Plan. B. Golden Gate Estates 1. Land Use and Economic Vitality • Protect the low-density character of the Estates by resisting private petitions to change existing residential land use designations in the GGAMP, other than the limited locations described below. • Allow applications for rezoning to upsize existing Neighborhood Centers to accommodate ingress and egress, parking, buffering, water management, well, septic or package plant siting, future right-of way expansion or additional open space not to exceed 20 acres per quadrant. This provision does not guarantee that u psizing will be granted, but provides an opportunity to request commercial rezoning based on the above-stated needs. • Allow conditional use or C-1 rezone applications for the Immokalee Rd. corridor (Oaks area). This provision does not guarantee approval, but allows application without amendment to the GMP (5 parcels affected). • Add an additional locational criterion for conditional uses to include major roadway intersections, defined as the intersection of a 4-lane roadway (or greater) with a 4-lane roadway (or greater), as identified in the LRTP. • Adjust the Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions to allow conditional use applications for properties at the intersection of Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd. • Adjust the Collier Blvd. Special Provisions to allow the same conditional use locational criteria as currently allowed at other locations in Golden Gate Estates. • Allow conditional use applications at any location in Golden Gate Estates for the erection of communication towers, without need to also amend the GGAMP. • Develop architectural standards in the Land Development Code that apply to commercial, conditional and public facility uses in the rural Estates to create coherence and area identity that reflect the rural character of the area. • Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for “park and ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. • In its review and adoption of GMP amendments to the RFMUD and th e RLSA, the County should reflect the need for appropriate buffers and setbacks from adjoining Golden Gate Estates properties, with specific development standards in the LDC. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy 12/19/2017 Page 2 of 5 11.C.1 Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Exhibit A List of Recommendations (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) • Where GMP Amendments or Rezoning actions require written notice to homeowners wit hin a given distance of the subject parcel, notice requirements shall also be extended the length of any dead-end street or avenue where a direct transportation or aesthetic impact can be reasonably anticipated. • Following the completion of the Randall Bou levard and Oilwell Road Corridor Study, the Zoning Division shall evaluate the future land uses along Immokalee Road in the vicinity of Randall Boulevard and Oil Well Road and make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for any proposed changes to the future land use. 2. Transportation and Mobility • The County Transportation Planning Section shall provide an update to the 2008 East of CR 951 Bridge Study with recommendations based on emergency response, evacuation times, cost components and other considerations to the Board within 2 years of adoption of this policy. • Everglades Blvd. between Golden Gate Blvd. and I-75 shall not be expanded beyond 4 lanes. • The County shall coordinate with FDOT and the MPO’s 2045 LRTP to submit a revised Interchange Justification Report for an interchange at I -75 in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd (T 49, R 28, S 31-34). • The County will update and report on the timing of the paving of lime rock roads, including a cost/benefit analysis, within 2 years of adoption of this policy. Alt.: The County will budget the full completion of the paving of lime rock roads in fiscal years 2018 through 2020. • Planning, funding and implementation of potential greenway trails shall be coordinated among the County’s Parks and Recreation Division and the MPO. • The County will consider public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for “park and ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. 3. Environmental Stewardship Water Resources • The County will continue to pursue the Watershed Management Plan initiatives in Golden Gate as financial and staff resources become available. • The County will periodically coordinate with the South Florida Water Management District to review the Level of Service Standards for primary water management canals within the County. • The County will encourage the combination of parcels less than 2.25 acres in size with adjacent parcels, to preserve the low-density advantages within Golden Gate Estates. Within Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy 12/19/2017 Page 3 of 5 11.C.1 Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Exhibit A List of Recommendations (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) 2 years, GMD staff will recommend to the Board potential incentives to apply to developed and undeveloped lots. • The County will evaluate the potential for a second transfer of development units/rights program (TDU) to transfer density from Estates lots to the urban area, and will consider transfer of ownership options, in a timeframe directed by the Board. • The County will commence a formal study on the feasibility of dispersed water management (DWM) for single-family Estates lots, and determine whether a DWM initiative should be voluntary or mandatory and the extent to which the program should apply to developed and undeveloped properties. • The County will continue to identify and implement educational opportunities related to water resources for use by parcel owners, home owners, builders, real estate professionals and the public to aid in understanding and addressing the owner’s financial and personal interests as well as area-wide impacts. • Acquisitions of parcels in Golden Gate Estates by Conservation Collier shall be consistent with Watershed Management Plan objectives, and shall prioritize hydrologic benefits above other review criteria. Fire Control • The County shall explore options for funding wildfire prevention measures, including funding support for the Florida Forestry Service and Independent Fire Districts, including but not limited to a Golden Gate Estates MSTU and general fund revenue. • The County will review and update as necessary all interlocal agreements and mutual aid agreements to assure coordination of legal, procedural and educational components of Wildfire prevention. • Update references to Independent Fire Districts. Lighting • Eliminate the specificity found in Policy 5.1.1; consider standards for the LDC. • County owned facilities shall comply with the Collier County Lighting Standards. • The County shall continue to coordinate with FDOT and FPL to provide guidance and reach agreement on roadway standards and security lights. • The County will consider lighting standards for commercial and other non -residential uses, and may provide specific Land Development Code standards for such uses within Golden Gate Estates according to its overall rural character and specific lighting zone classifications within. • The County will consider lighting standards for residential locations within Golden Gate Estates within the Land Development Code, and determine whether such standards will be Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy 12/19/2017 Page 4 of 5 11.C.1 Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Exhibit A List of Recommendations (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) encouraged or mandatory and the extent to which they apply to new or existing residential development. Other • The County will continue to pursue a best management practices approach to making septage treatment available within Collier County, as a component of bio -solid processing, either directly or through a public private partnership. • The subdivision of tracts 13 acres or less in size within Golden Gate Estates shall not trigger preserve requirements under CCME Policy 6.1.1. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy 12/19/2017 Page 5 of 5 11.C.1 Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Exhibit A List of Recommendations (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) 1/17/2018 1 Collier County Interactive Growth Model (CIGM) January 23, 2018 Dr. Paul Va n Buskirk, P.E., AICP David Farmer, P.E., AICP What is the CIGM Ver 3? CIGM is a Proactive Planning Tool •The CIGM Ve r 3 is a powerful, proactive planning and growth management tool that forecasts when and where development (i.e. housing units, population, household size, vacancy rate) will take place for each, of 783 zones (TAZs), in which the county is divided into and forecasted in 5 year increments to build out. •It can identify deficiencies in land use regulations and forecast economic trends. What is the CIGM Ver 3? A P roactive Planning Tool •It can be programmed to predict the need for and timing of commercial centers, schools, parks, fire stations, and utility expansions in order to optimize the return on public capital investments. •It can demonstrate alternative growth scenarios and their impacts (i.e. changes in the regulations of the RFMUD, RLSA). 11.C.2 Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: final January 23rd 2018 (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) 1/17/2018 2 What is the CIGM Ver 3? •Housing and population •Commercial •Parks •Fire Stations •Sheriff Sub-stations •Libraries •Hotel/Motels •Industrial •Water/Utilities •Stormwater/ Impervious Area •Schools The CIGM Ver 3 has several sub models: 11.C.2 Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: final January 23rd 2018 (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) 1/17/2018 3 Collier County Inflection Point 2000 2020 2040 Benefits of the CIGM •To ol for the analysis of Comp Plan Amendments •Common Data Bank •Received National Recognition Article Publish in Planning Magazine Consequences of Inaccurate Forecasts How accurate forecasting affects optimal return on public capital investments: 11.C.2 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: final January 23rd 2018 (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) 1/17/2018 4 Housing Net Growth Summary F-00 Housing and Population Report Copyright©2015 Metro Forecasting Models, LLC. All rights reserved. No reproduction or copy, whole or in part, without express written permission from Metro Forecasting Models, LLC MFM Cape Coral 2015 Report Summary Zone 2015-2020 2020-2025 2025-2030 2030-2035 2015-2020 2020-2025 2025-2030 2030-2035 TAZ2596 25 21 17 13 14 11 9 7 TAZ2597 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TAZ2598 33 25 20 15 11 9 6 5 TAZ2599 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TAZ2600 19 15 13 9 0 1 0 1 TAZ2601 8 6 5 4 0 0 0 0 TAZ2602 6 6 4 4 4 3 4 2 TAZ2603 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TAZ2604 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 TAZ2605 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 TAZ2606 70 72 74 70 0 0 0 0 TAZ2607 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TAZ2609 19 16 14 12 0 0 0 0 TAZ2610 17 15 12 10 0 0 0 0 TAZ2611 20 18 15 12 0 0 0 0 TAZ2612 50 41 31 25 27 26 24 21 SINGLE FAMILY MULTIFAMILY Housing Units added in 5 year increments Housing Units added in 5 year increments Common Data Bank Shared data bank for all departments and agencies for optimal economic efficiency National Recognition IGM is nationally recognized by APA 11.C.2 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: final January 23rd 2018 (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) 1/17/2018 5 Future Workshops MEETINGS and TASKS DECEDMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL May-July TASKS 1. Bassline, Buildout, Clusters, Scenario Constants 2. Population and Housing Model, Commercial Sub model, Industrial Sub Model 3. Government Sub Models -Schools, Parks, Fire, Police, Library 4. Hotel/Motel, Utility and Storm Water Sub Models 5. Review IGM Data Results and Alternate Scenarios to test Policy Proposed Changes MEETINGS Orientation Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 Metro Forecasting Models December 2017 Dave@metroforecasting.com 239-913-6949 Metroforecasting.com 11.C.2 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: final January 23rd 2018 (4407 : GGAMP Amendment Recommendations) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper Prepared by the Growth Management Department, Community Planning Section Staff December 2017 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 1 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Table of Contents Page Section 1: Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………1 Section 2: Background………………………………………………………………………………………….4 Section 3: Public Outreach, Data and Analysis………………………………………………………10 Section 4: List of Initial Recommendations……………………………………………………….…73 Appendix A: Public Outreach………………………………………………………………………………78 List of Figures Page Figure 1: Golden Gate Master Plan Update 3 Areas………………………….……………….….2 Figure 2: Golden Gate Area South Blocks……………….………………………………….………….5 Figure 3: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Developed/Vacant Parcels………….……….…….6 Figure 4: Golden Gate Western Estates Developed/Vacant Parcels…………….………...7 Figure 5: Golden Gate City Aerial……………………………………………………………………….….8 Figure 6: Golden Gate City Vacant Parcels………………….……………………………………..….9 Figure 7: Golden Gate City Residential Parcels…….………………………………………………11 Figure 8: Golden Gate City Future Land Use Designations……………………………………12 Figure 9: Proposed Golden Gate City Future Land Use Designations…………………….14 Figure 10: Golden Gate City Redevelopment and Renewal Focus Area………………..15 Figure 11: Golden Gate City Activity Center Aerial……………………………………………….16 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 2 of 220 Figure 12: Golden Gate City Planned Transportation Improvements…………………….21 Figure 13: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Distribution of Residential Development…26 Figure 14: Golden Gate Western Estates Distribution of Residential Development..27 Figure 15: Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Study Area…………………………………28 Figure 16: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Neighborhood Centers…………………………….30 Figure 17: Neighborhood Center at Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevard……….…….31 Figure 18: Immokalee Road and Oakes Boulevard Interface……………………………….32 Figure 19: Area 1 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional Uses…………………………………………………………………………………………………….33 Figure 20: Area 2 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional Uses………….…………………………………………………………………………………………34 Figure 21: Area 3 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional Uses………….…………………………………………………………………………………………35 Figure 22: Long Range Transportation Plan Highway Cost Feasible Plan………………42 Figure 23: Long Range Transportation Plan Needs Assessment…………………………...43 Figure 24: Long Range Transportation Plan New Bridges..……………………………………44 Figure 25: North Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration Project……………………52 Figure 26: Belle Meade Area RESTORE Project Area…………………………………………….53 Figure 27: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Non-Conforming Lots…………………………….55 Figure 28: Golden Gate Western Estates Non-Conforming Lots…………….…………….56 List of Tables Table 1: Watershed Management Plan Initiatives……………………………………………….60 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 3 of 220 Section 1: Introduction This White Paper provides a conceptual framework to address elements of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy. The GGAMP is a separate element within the County’s Comprehensive Plan. This framework serves as a vehicle to further vet and inform staff, community leaders and the public in advance of the specific language that will be incorporated into the transmittal documents for Growth Management Plan amendment, and the public hearing process. The GGAMP is the second of four restudies focused on eastern Collier County, as directed by the Board of County Commissioners (Board) on February 10, 2015. Focus areas of all four restudies include complementary land uses and economic vitality, including housing affordability, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship. As the staggered restudies unfold, relationships and synergies between the study areas are identified and maximized. The Community Planning staff in the Zoning Division of the Growth Management Department provide this document to describe the history and status the GGAMP (Section 2), the planning process, outreach, data and analysis (Section 3) and the list of Initial recommendations (Section 4). Appendix A includes the full documentation of the public outreach process and resu lts. The Golden Gate area includes three diverse geographic areas: the eastern or rural Estates (east of County Road 951), the western or urban Estates (West of County Road 951) and Golden Gate City, an unincorporated area. With these differences in mind, public outreach was designed and pursued along these three geographic lines. However, this report will generally follow a format that separates Golden Gate City from both Estates areas. As understood from public outreach, the eastern and western estates have a great deal in common. Where differences exist, they are described in Section 3. Golden Gate City is fundamentally different than either of the Estates areas. The basic structure of the current GGAMP is divided into two main parts: The Goals, Objectives and Policies (GOPs) section and the Land Use Designation Description section. The former section sets forth vision, values, requirements and aspirations; the latter describes specific subdistricts and their land uses within the GGAMP. Both sections guide the Code of Ordinances and Land Development Code in enactment and updated amendments. As a non-substantive consideration, staff proposes that the GOPs and Land Use Descriptions remain as the organizational framework, but within two parts. One part will be the Golden Gate Estates, the other will be Golden Gate City. In this way, the GOPs pertaining to these very different areas will lend more geographic clarity. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 4 of 220 As with all restudy efforts, the fundamental premise is that any proposal for amendment to the existing Plan must reflect the goals and vision of residents and stakeholders. Residents responded well to outreach efforts and provided a foundation built on community vision and individual preferences. Non-resident stakeholders include interests that extend beyond the boundaries of the Golden Gate. For example, public water utilities in Collier County and City of Naples draw potable water from beneath the Golden Gate Estates area. The issues and potentials involved in water must be considered, along with other shared policy matters. Note on terminology in this White Paper: As shown on Figure 1, the Estates area east of Collier Blvd. (C.R. 951) will be alternatively described as the eastern Estates or the rural Estates; the Estates area west of Collier Blvd. will be alternatively described as the western Estates or the urban Estates. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 5 of 220 Throughout this White paper are several figures or maps used for reference. These are also maintained in PDF format on our website, so that the public may view and zoom in, as needed, with greater picture clarity: http://www.colliergov.net/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning- division/community-planning-section/golden-gate-area-master-plan-restudy/library. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 6 of 220 Section 2: Background History of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan The Golden Gate area was first conceived, platted and developed by the Gulf American Land Corp. Development began in the late 1950’s and the subdivision was approved by the Board of County Commissioners in 1960. By 1965, 90% of the land was platted and marketing was well underway. The Estates portion of Golden Gate comprised 163 square miles (111,000 acres), nearly 8% of the County’s total land area, and was believed to be the world’s largest subdivision. It included 813 miles of roadway (mostly lime rock) and 183 miles of canal to drain the area for habitability. Prior to development, the area was regularly inundated by several feet of water during the wet season. The Estates subdivision included mostly 1.25, 2.5 and 5 acre parcels. It was intended to include single family, multi-family and commercial land uses, but was rezoned into low-density single family residential uses in 1974. By 1982, the minimum (legal conforming) lot size for all areas of the Estates became one unit per 2.25 acres. In 1983, the County entered into a settlement agreement with Avatar Corp., the successor to the defunct Gulf American Land Corp. By that time, leaders recognized additional acreage and funds would be needed to provide public services. The agreement included the provision of 1,062 acres under County ownership to be managed for the purposes of recreation, utilities, community services and essential services. The land was also provided as a source of funds to construct the facilities. Prior to 1991, the Golden Gate area was governed by the County’s Future Land Use Element (FLUE), part of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) first adopted in 1989. As mandated by the first GMP, the unique characteristics of the area were recognized in 1991 by the adoption of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP), a separate element in the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Citizens and County leaders recognized the unique quality of the area, and gave special consideration to natural resources, land use, water management and public facilities, as identified by a Citizen’s Steering Committee. In doing so, former Objective 1, Policies 1.1 and 1.3 and Future Land Use Maps for Golden Gate were superseded. Nevertheless, other Goals, Objectives and Policies in the FLUE remain applicable to the Golden Gate area. In 1996, the Board adopted the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) for Collier County. As a result of that effort, the original Master Plan was replaced by a new G GAMP, pursuant to Ordinance 97- 64. In 2001, the Board directed a restudy of the GGAMP, undertaken by the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Committee. The Committee met on more than twenty occasions between June 2001 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 7 of 220 and June 2003 and proposed amendments to the Board for consideration in two phases. The stated goal of this restudy was to guide future decision making in a manner that balances the residents’ need for basic services with natural resource and preservation concerns. Importantly, many of the topics heading todays restudy were closely reviewed by the Committee: commercial uses, conditional uses, rural character and transportation. Subsequently, amendments to the GGAMP were adopted in 2003 and 2004, reflecting community vision for the future of th e area. Since the 1990’s, the State of Florida had been purchasing parcels in the South Golden Gate Estates/NRPA area. Under the Florida Forever and Save our Everglades programs, Picayune Strand State Park was envisioned and pursued, along with significant restoration activity. The acquisition process was completed around 2006. Since then, miles of roadway and canals have been recontoured and three large pump stations and levies installed, with the aim of rehydration to restore natural sheetflow for the benefit of wetlands, aquifers and estuaries, under the direction of South Florida Water Management District and the Army Corps of Engineers. Accordingly, as shown in green on Figure 2, approximately 39,000 acres that comprised the “south blocks” are no longer part of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 8 of 220 Current Conditions Following the completion of the purchase and assemblage of Southern Golden Gate Estates by the State of Florida, the remaining area of the rural Golden Gate Estates remains at approximately 58,000 acres. The urban Estates comprise about 8,300 acres and Golden Gate City approximately 2,500 acres. The characteristics of these areas vary greatly. The rural Estates retains the most “rural” character of the three areas, given its size and residential distribution. Because of the development pattern and changes in condition over the past 5 decades, flooding, wildfire and wildlife conditions play a more important role in eastern Estates residents’ lives as compared to the urban area. As of 2016, the rural Estates was nearly 50% built out, as shown in Figure 3, with a higher concentration of dwelling units located nearest the urban area. The population projection for 2016 was Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 9 of 220 approximately 32,000 persons. For several decades, this area has been described as a de facto “affordable” housing area, given the land costs in comparison to urban locations. Though its developers built canals to “drain” and lower the water table, remnant wetlands remain on a significant portion of the eastern Estates, including areas within the Horsepen Strand flowway. Meanwhile, the pace of development remains high in the eastern Estates. In fact, building permits issued in this area increased from 273 to 408 year to year, as measured second quarter, 2016 to 2017. In contrast to the rural, eastern Estates, the western Estates is more associated with the urban area, although large lots predominate. This relatively smaller area is in closer proximity to goods, services and job opportunities. Because of its location, it is closer to build-out with 86% of the lots developed, leaving only 14% vacant as of 2016. Figure 4 illustrates the number of residential parcels developed and the number of parcels vacant. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 10 of 220 Golden Gate City is at the heart of the GGAMP. As illustrated on Figure 5, the City comprises a denser population in close proximity to a mix of uses which include commercial, office, schools and parks. Although some canals create impediments, and some infrastructure needs improvement, the City is well connected to support a more walkable and bikeable community. Creating a vibrant, walkable community has been identified as a top priority by its residents. The projected 2016 population of Golden Gate City was 24,000. Golden Gate City has a unique demographic; different than what is typically found in urban Collier County. The average age of its residents is 30, compared to 47 county-wide. There are 42% more persons per household (3.38 v. 2.38) and 65% less median household income ($40,000 v. $66,000). Nearly all parcels within Golden Gate City have existing development, however a few parcels remain vacant. Figure 6 shows the current vacant parcels, along with the underlying land use designation. Several vacant parcels exist in both residential and commercial designations. Many of the existing residential and business structures date back to the 1960’s with land values exceeding structure Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 11 of 220 values. In addition, some of the larger commercial parcels within the Activity Center are now vacant big-box retailers. These circumstances are a foreshadowing of future redevelopment. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 12 of 220 Section 3: Public Outreach, Data and Analysis The Golden Gate area includes three diverse geographic areas: the eastern or rural Estates (east of County Road 951), the western or urban Estates (West of County Road 951) and Golden Gate City, an unincorporated area. With these differences in mind, the restudy effort included public outreach and planning analysis along these three geographic lines. This Section provides information reflective of the unique conditions of Golden Gate City and the Estates. As understood from public outreach, the eastern and western estates have a great deal in common and are discussed in this Section under the same Golden Gate Estates heading. Where differences exist, they are described. The focus areas of complementary land use and economic vitality, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship are addressed under both Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates. The Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy public outreach process included extensive public engagement. Residents and stakeholders were encouraged to provide input through multiple platforms including eight public workshops, staff presentations to both the Golden Gate City Civic Association and the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association, a user-friendly website with surveys, and communications through email distribution lists with approximately 330 stakeholders. Appendix A includes the public workshop summaries, polling and survey results, and other communications from stakeholders. The public workshops for both Golden Gate City and the western and eastern Estates kicked-off with a visioning process. The intent was to determine if any of the community values had changed. The visioning process lead to each community developing their own vision statements. These community- defined vision statements should provide guidance for implementing planning goals, objectives and policies. These are provided as a preface to the following Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates sections. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 13 of 220 Golden Gate City The residents of Golden Gate City created a vision statement during the public workshops. This vision statement reflects the need for the County to adopt land use and transportation policies in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan that are people-oriented and support economic development and redevelopment. Each adopted policy should relate to and further the community’s vision. This vision of a family-oriented community gives direction to consider residents of all ages, children, adults and the elderly, and how they safely move about town, and what destinations are available to help them thrive. Golden Gate City Vision Statement “Golden Gate City is a safe, diverse, family-oriented community that offers easy access to education, parks, shopping and services within a vibrant, walkable community.” Land Use and Economic Vitality Within Golden Gate City there are numerous future land use designations ranging from single family residential use to heavy commercial use. Golden Gate City is a true mixed-use community. Within Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 14 of 220 Golden Gate City’s four-square-miles, residents are in close proximity to schools, parks, goods and services. The majority of Golden Gate City is designated as residential (approximately 2,255 acres). Commercial areas (291 acres) are distributed throughout the community along the major arterials including Golden Gate Parkway, Santa Barbara Boulevard and Collier Boulevard. To accommodate both residential and commercial uses, the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map provides six different commercial designations, each with different allowed uses, intensities and development standards. Figure 7 shows the Golden Gate City areas designated residential in yellow , school sites, and the six designated commercial or mixed-use areas. The majority of Golden Gate City is designated residential as seen on Figure 8. Well established, stable neighborhoods are the building blocks of any community and should be protected and enhanced. According to the most recent Collier County Property Appraise rs information there are approximately 7,887 residential units, which includes 4,213 single family homes and 3,674 multi- family homes. The multi-family homes are condos, apartments, and a good number of duplexes. This Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 15 of 220 housing mix supports great diversity in housing choices within Golden Gate City and allows for aging in place within the same community. While the Golden Gate Master Plan offers a full range of commercial uses, many commercial areas remain under-utilized. Some of the largest stores, including K-Mart and Sweet Bay, have recently closed. During the public workshops, the majority of participants felt there isn’t a need for additional commercial areas, but instead want to focus on redevelopment of the existing areas to bring in new businesses, shops, restaurants and services. Along with community public workshops, Collier County Community Planning staff organized a workshop specifically for all property owners within a commercial land use designation. The purpose of the workshop was to identify opportunities and constraints to developing commercial uses. In addition to noting desires to unify and simplify the uses, design standards and processes throughout the commercial designations, there was strong sentiment supporting the evaluation of redevelopment programs and tools for Golden Gate City. To set the stage for redevelopment and creating an authentic s ense of place, it is proposed to simplify the commercial land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway, and provide consistency in the mix of uses and development standards. The following modifications are proposed to the land use designations and Future Land Use Map. 1. Modify the designation of the Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict (shown on Figure 7 above) to redesignate it and make consistent with the Golden Gate Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict. This change will simplify the effort to create design themes and development standards to benefit the community’s desire for future redevelopment that is vibrant and walkable. 2. Add two properties along Golden Gate Parkway, not currently included in this designation. One property is at the northeast corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara, where a CVS store is currently located. The second property is the Coral Palm Apartments located between the Activity Center and the Downtown District . Including this property meets the intent of creating a mixed-use corridor. The addition of these two properties is forward looking to provide for greater development consistency along Golden Gate Parkway in the event of future redevelopment. 3. The final proposed change is to include the Wheels BMX skate park and band shell within the boundary of the Activity Center. The Activity Center provides many civic uses and including this park is consistent with the mixed-use intent of the Activity Center. This will provide Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 16 of 220 greater certainty that the park is well connected into the Activity Center and a focal point for community celebrations. There are two policies in the current GGAMP that call for community-planning and neighborhood- based planning programs, however, these policies have not been implemented. During the public workshops, residents expressed a clear willingness to participate in the planning process for their community. When asked, “would you be willing to participate in community -based planning program?”, the majority of workshop participants were willing to engage in such a program. Continued community participation will be needed for future planning efforts such as redevelopment, urban design themes, development standards, and the creation of branding and marketing materials. To best facilitate community and neighborhood-based planning programs Collier County staff should engaged with and support the established Golden Gate City Civic Association and the Municipal Services Taxing District (MSTU), utilizing these established groups to involve residents in future planning efforts. Working with these associations builds cohesion, recognition and support for Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 17 of 220 community leadership to continue their focus for improvements in Golden Gate City. It is proposed to work within the established Civic Association and the MSTU, their leadership, administration and outreach platforms, rather than creating a new community planning group administered by Collier County staff as currently called for in the Master Plan. Supporting Golden Gate City Redevelopment Golden Gate City contains several commercial areas that are centrally located to the population. The available acreage for commercial development is sufficient to support the residents of Golden Gate City and the surrounding area; therefore, there is not a need to designate additional areas. Instead, focus is needed within the current commercial areas. These areas are dated, auto-oriented and have some significant “dark boxes” resulting from big box store closures. For the community vision to be realized, redevelopment that is people-oriented is needed. The proposed areas to emphasize renewal efforts are the Activity Center and along Golden Gate Parkway (Figure 10). Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 18 of 220 There are three distinct areas within the Activity Center; one is the civic area where the community center, library and other civic uses are located, the second area is where the Winn-Dixie is located, and the third area is where the vacant K-Mart building is located. Both the Winn-Dixie plaza and the vacant K-Mart plaza each have a single owner, making these large aggregated parcels more viable for redevelopment (Figure 11). As developed, these three areas within the Activity Center do not interconnect or relate to one another. They were clearly developed separately without a vision or consideration for the whole. This is a shortcoming of the full potential of this Activity Center. Moreover, the Activity Center plazas were developed in an auto-oriented pattern with access and circulation favoring the automobile. This form of urban development, also found along Golden Gate Parkway, creates impediments to the community’s desire to be a safe, walkable, vibrant community. The typical auto-oriented pattern creates an “anywhere USA” and lacks authentic community identity. Opportunity Naples (2014) has been a guidepost for Collier County economic development. Opportunity Naples found a need for shovel ready sites for target industries in Collier County. The report also found “growth trends in Collier County’s age dynamics risk the future sustainability of the local workforce. Collier County’s 25 to 44-year-old population is proportionally smaller than every comparison area except Sarasota County, as is Collier’s percentage of 0 to 19-year-old residents. Without an influx of younger workers migrating to the County or a spike in birth rates, Greater Naples could face a significant shortfall of replacement workers for future retirees. Likewise, there will be an occupational shortage in Collier County if qualified workers aged 24 to 44 are not recruited to the area to replace retirees.” This age group, and most specifically the millennials, is one of the most sought-after market segments. Fortunately for Golden Gate City the median age is 30, falling right into that desirable workforce age range. Study after study shows millennials are increasingly choosing vibrant , healthy, walkable communities and rejecting the automobile-centric land use patterns of the generations before them. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 19 of 220 Golden Gate City has the basis to be just the type of place the young workforce and their employers are searching for. Further supporting mixed-use, allowing employment centers, and improving the walking infrastructure can become an economic development strategy—a tool to retain and attract a skilled workforce and to build a sustainable economic base. To increase job opportunities within Golden Gate City, and provide nearly shovel ready sites, it is proposed to add several specific land uses to the Activity Center designation. These uses support target industries such as, advanced manufacturing, software development, and data and information processing. To ensure a process to determine compatibility with the surrounding area, these new uses within the Activity Center are proposed as conditional uses, hence nearly shovel ready. Alternatively, the Board could allow these as permitted uses and promoted development standards within the Land Development Code to address compatibility. There are several redevelopment programs that could assist in furthering economic development within Golden Gate City. Collier County uses two of these tools. First , the Community Redevelopment Area (CRA). Collier County currently has two CRAs, one in Immokalee and one in the Bayshore Triangle area. The establishment of a CRA is a very lengthy and bureaucratic process. At the state legislative level, CRAs have recently come under scrutiny with some legislators supporting their disbandment. The advantage of the CRA is the County’s administration, engagement and oversight of the redevelopment area projects, along with Tax Increment Financing (TIF). However, Golden Gate City’s demographic and economic profile is similar to that of Immokalee and Bayshore and while a CRA may benefit Golden Gate City, it is likely to compete for grants with the other two CRAs therefore inhibiting the potential of the all CRAs. The second tool the County uses is the Innovation Zone. Ave Maria town centers are designated Innovation Zones. The Innovation Zone, created by BCC Ordinance 2010-20, is a local TIF tool to promote economic growth and diversity. Innovation Zones may be designated by the BCC through the implementation of Economic Development Plans adopted by resolution for each Innovation Zone. Per the Ordinance, “the use of available TIF revenues within an Innovation Zone as a dedicated economic development tool and funding source enhance the general welfare of the County through the advancement of new employment opportunities, the implementation of redevelopment initiatives, the creation of new economic development opportunities and locations and the expansion of existing employment centers.” By permitting specific light industrial uses and employment centers for target industries within the Golden Gate City Activity Center, there is a clear intent to promote economic growth in Golden Gate City, thereby making the Innovation Zone an applicable and viable tool for redevelopment. As a local tool, the BCC is able to designate Innovation Zones without State oversight. Measuring the pros and cons of each redevelopment tool, it is proposed for the Board to designate an Innovation Zone which Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 20 of 220 encompasses the Activity Center and Golden Gate Parkway to promote economic growth and redevelopment. In the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict there is a provision for a minimum project size of one acre. Most parcels are half or a quarter of this size making it less feasible for the property owners to develop or redevelop their properties under this requirement. It is proposed to remove this limitation in effort to support the property owners desire to develop their property consistent with the uses allowed. The Land Development Code may be revised as necessary to address any development standards needed to support this change. The Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, located along the western side of Collier Boulevard between Golden Gate Parkway and Green Boulevard allows heavy commercial with some properties presently zoned C-5, the most intense commercial district. Sustainable communities need appropriate locations for heavy commercial zoning. This land use designation is well located and there are no changes proposed. However, it should be noted that some homeowners located within the western portion of this Subdistrict were very surprised to learn their home had a heavy commercial land use designation. The previous restudy expanded this subdistrict boundary back into a single-family neighborhood. Careful consideration should be given within the Land Development Code to ensure design standards are in place so homeowners are not negatively impacted. Growth Management Plan Policies The following goals, objectives, policies and land use designations outline the land use provisions currently adopted. The policies are relatively non-descript and do not necessarily form a clear the direction for Golden Gate City. This outline is followed by policy recommendations proposed to identify and further the community’s vision. Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP Goal 4: To preserve and enhance a mix of residential and commercial land uses within Golden Gate City that provides for the basic needs of both the local residents and the residents of the surrounding area. Objective 4.1: Provide for residential and commercial land uses that meet the needs of the surrounding area in the development and redevelopment within Golden Gate City. Policy 4.0.1: Development and redevelopment with Golden Gate City shall be guided by the residential and commercial needs of the surrounding area. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 21 of 220 Policy 4.1.1 Collier County shall develop an implementation schedule for the creation of a community-planning program for Golden Gate City… Policy 4.1.2 Collier County shall begin to examine, by holding community meetings, the feasibility of establishing neighborhood-based planning programs within Golden Gate City that focus on the unique or distinct features of the different portions of the community. While focusing on distinct areas within the community, such neighborhood planning efforts as may be established shall not neglect Golden Gate City as a whole. Policy 4.1.3: Collier County shall examine the feasibility of crafting land development regulations specific to the Golden Gate City community. Such regulations shall focus on the unique circumstances of this community. Existing Non-residential Land Use Designations (synopsis) High Density Residential Subdistrict To encourage higher density residential and promote mixed -uses in close proximity to Activity Centers, those residential zoned properties permitting up to 12 dwelling units per acre. Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: The primary purpose of the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict is to encourage redevelopment along Golden Gate Parkway in order to improve the physical appearance of the area and create a viable downtown district for the residents of Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates. Mixed-use Activity Center Subdistrict The Activity Center designated of the Future Land Use Map is intended to accommodate commercial zoning within the Urban Designated Area. Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character. Golden Gate Urban Commercial In-fill Subdistrict This Subdistrict is located at the southwest quadrant of C.R. 951 and Golden Gate Parkway. Commercial uses are limited to low intensity and intermediate commercial uses similar to C-1, C-2, or C-3 zoning. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict The intent of the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict is to provide Golden Gate City with an area that is primarily commercial, with an allowance for certain conditional uses. Thy types of uses permitted within this Subdistrict are low intensity retail, offices, personal services and institutional. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 22 of 220 The provisions of this Subdistrict are intended to provide Golden Gate City with a viable professional office district with associated small-scale retail. Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict The primary purpose of the Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict is to encourage redevelopment along Collier Boulevard in order to improve the physical appearance of th e area. This Subdistrict is intended to allow a mix of uses, including heavy commercial within those areas presently zoned C- 5. Recommended Policies • Establish land use designations to protect established, stable, neighborhoods and provide opportunity for redevelopment and renewal through development practices that promote compatibility. • Support redevelopment of Golden Gate Parkway to provide for a viable pedestrian environment adding to the vibrancy and walkability of Golden Gate City. • Add land uses within the designated Activity Center intended to promote job growth and strengthen the economic health of Golden Gate City. • Protect the land uses allowing for diversity of residential housing. • Engage with the Golden Gate Civic Association and MSTU to further community planning programs. • Consider redevelopment tools such as an Innovation Zone to further economic development and redevelopment strategies. • Develop amendments to the Land Development Code to support and implement redevelopment initiatives including incentives for building remodeling and renovation. • Develop a branding and marketing plan for Golden Gate City. • Ensure pertinent incentive programs are made available to those seeking business creation and redevelopment opportunities in Golden Gate City. • Modify the land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway to create a consistent development pattern. • Add target industry uses to the Activity Center. • In the Santa Barbara Commercial District, remove the minimum project size of one acre. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 23 of 220 Transportation and Mobility Golden Gate City has a well-connected neighborhood roadway network. However, nearly all streets lack sidewalks or other infrastructure to support walking. This severely limits safe transportation for Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 24 of 220 children and those that don’t drive. During the public workshops, there were few complaints of traffic congestion, apart from a few residents’ concern about peak-hour traffic on Santa Barbara Boulevard at the Green Boulevard intersection. The primary transportation focus of residents is improving walking, bicycling and transit access. This is reflected in the Golden Gate City vision statement. It was reported during the public workshops that many Golden Gate City residents are bicycling to work in the coastal area. Recognizing Golden Gate City is a family oriented community, many of the citizens are not of driving age; rather, they are children and seniors that are no longer driving trying to get to services, schools, parks and friends homes. The 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Needs Assessment shows a needed demand to improve Santa Barbara Boulevard north of Golden Gate Parkway, and that is the only roadway improvement shown as “needed.” The critical need for transportation improvements in Golden Gate City are those that s upport walking, bicycling and transit. Figure 12 shows the existing sidewalk systems is limited to those areas surrounding schools. A few planned sidewalk construction projects are mainly along arterial roads. Very few streets have bike lanes. The Collier MPO has identified the transit need in Golden Gate City by including a future transit transfer point, indicated with a blue circle in the center of Golden Gate City. Additionally, recognizing the transportation needs of pedestrians, the Collier MPO recently initiated the Golden Gate City Walkable Community Study. This study will assess and prioritize pedestrian facility needs for Golden Gate City based on quantitative and qualitative factors. This study will provide guidance to improving the waling conditions in Golden Gate City. Further, it will help the Golden Gate City achieve their vision of a safe, family-oriented community. Following completion of the study and acceptance by the Collier MPO, the approved study recommendations should be incorporated into the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Growth Management Plan Policies The following goals, objectives, policies outline the related transportation provisions currently adopted. This outline is followed by policy recommendations proposed to identify and further the community’s vision. Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP Policy 6.2.3: Sidewalks and bike lanes shall provide access to government facilities, schools, commercial areas and the planned County greenway network. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 25 of 220 Objective 6.3: Coordinate with local emergency services officials in planning and constructing road improvements within Golden Gate Estates and Golden Gate City to ensure that the access needs of fire department, police and emergency management personnel and vehicles are met. Objective 7.3 Develop strategies through the County Growth Management Division – Planning and Regulation for the enhancement of roadway interconnection within Golden Gate City and the Estates Area including interim measures to assure interconnection. Recommended Policies • Support all transportation needs within Golden Gate City with an emphasis on walkability. Walkability will be improved through the implementation of the recommendations of the MPO’s Walkability Study. • Within the Activity Center, maintain multiple connections to the surrounding neighborhoods and through the Activity Center while providing safe and direct access to transit stops within or adjacent to the Activity Center. • Consider protecting alleys from vacating process where there is reasonable connection and continuity for future pathway corridors. • Initiate periodic speed studies in Golden Gate City and when appropriate, utilize traffic calming measures and speed limit reductions to ensure a safe pedestrian environment. Environmental Stewardship The primary concern for potential environmental degradation in Golden Gate City is associated with the many private wells and septic tanks. As reported by Collier County Utilities Department, residences so near one another pose a significant risk of contamination to individual water wells or supply-sources for the entire region. Private water wells and septic tanks age over time, have a limited lifecycle, and have a wide disparity in the level of maintenance by various property owners, affecting the life and functionality of the tanks. Currently, only one complete quadrant of four within Golden Gate City has access to a treated potable water supply from a private utility, Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA). At their June 27, 2017 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners provided direction to County staff to initiate a due diligence process and negotiate terms of acquisition of FGUA. Integrating the Golden Gate City system into the Collier County Public Utilities system and expanding utility services to homes and businesses within Golden Gate City provides a long-term strategy to address potential environmental impacts and system reliability. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 26 of 220 Growth Management Plan Policies While Golden Gate City doesn’t encompass significant natural resources, it is important to focus on policies related to utilities for the reasons stated above. The adopted policies are related to the Florida Governmental Utilities Authority. The proposed provisions reflect the County’s initiative to assume responsibility of maintenance and expansion of utilities for Golden Gate City. Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP Objective 1.2: Ensure public facilities are provided at an acceptable level of service. Policy 1.2.3: Consistent with Chapter 89-169, Florida Administrative Code, the Florida Governmental Utilities Authority, or its successor, shall provide updated water and sewer service data to the Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority on an annual basis. Policy 1.2.4: Due to the continued use of individual septic systems and private wells within a densely platted urban area, the Florida Governmental Utilities Authority, or its successor, is encouraged to expand their sewer and water service area to include all of that area known as Golden Gate City at the earliest possible time. Recommended Policy • Maintain and expand sewer and water service in accordance with the Collier County Water and Sewer District Implementation Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 27 of 220 Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Eastern Estate Vision Statement “The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community with limited goods and services in neighborhood centers, defined by a rural character with an appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings.” Golden Gate Western Estate Vision Statement “Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density, large-lot residential neighborhood in a natural setting with convenient access to the coastal area.” Land Use and Economic Vitality Within the GGAMP, there are Goals, Objectives and Policies (GOPs) as well as a Land Use Description Section that pertain specifically to Estates land uses. This section describes the status, review and community recommendations pertaining to GOPs and Estates land use descriptions, both east (rural) and west (urban) of CR 951. Generally, the land uses can be divided into these categories: Residential, Commercial and Conditional. Additionally, policies related to public facilities, adjacent land uses and notice provisions are considered. Residential Land Uses Golden Gate Estates is an area primarily intended for residential uses. Of the 66,000 acres that make up today’s Golden Gate Estates, over 95% is reserved for residential use under the current plan. This is consistent with Goal 5 of the GGAMP that balances the preservation of rural character, wooded lots, the keeping of livestock, the ability to grow crops. wildlife activity and low density residential with limited commercial and conditional uses. As of 2016, the rural Estates residential lots total almost 24,000 in number. Approximately half have been developed. Absent future changes in conservation of parcels for environmental or recreational purposes, the current population of 31,100 can be expected to double by build-out. Figure 13 shows the existing distribution of developed residential areas with in the rural Estates. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 28 of 220 By contrast, Figure 14 shows the development of urban Estates lots is much closer to build-out. In this area, 86% of the parcels have been developed, leaving only 430 vacant parcels in this much smaller portion of Golden Gate Estates. An analysis of building activity in Golden Gate Estates suggests that development is currently accelerating. When comparing annual totals as of second quarter, 2017 to second quarter, 2016, permit applications rose from 273 to 408, an increase of almost 50%. Taken together, 681 housing starts over this 2- year period suggests economic vigor in a post- high foreclosure market. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 29 of 220 During public outreach, residents and stakeholders did not advocate any major changes in residential land use. Most individuals polled preferred to maintain a low density residential environment with few changes. In fact, the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association (GGEACA) voiced the preference for a “low density overlay” to protect its character well into the future. The minimum lot size would remain unchanged, with the possibility of recombining some legal non-conforming (smaller) lots. No new designations of residential areas to Neighborhood Centers were suggested. The sole conversion of residential areas endorsed by the public was for office type commercial along a short length of Immokalee Road in the Urban Estates and the possibility of non-residential land uses near the Randal Rd. curve on Immokalee Rd. Residents were polled about some specific aspects of Residential land use. Polling questions included allowing group homes as a permitted use and changing the rules surrounding home-based businesses. Public sentiment was against any change in either topic area. When asked about the desirability of allowing rental of guest houses, polls found mixed results. At a public workshop held in November 2016, 56% of respondents were in favor. In contrast, only 26% responded favorably at a February 2017 public workshop. Currently, there are approximately 700 guest homes in the Estates area. Based on the strong environmental preferences in response to other issues, staff does not recommend guest house rentals, as it would tend to weaken the desire to retain a lower density, lower impact community. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 30 of 220 Some requested changes, as described in the environmental portion below, relate the desire to recombine legal non-conforming lots and to require or incentivize on-site stormwater retention and other water-related initiatives to maximize water quality, percolation and floodplain protection. Also, noted in the environmental section, are recommendations for strengthening wildfire prevention and lighting standards. These provisions cross several land uses, including residential land use. Public Notice Although the concept of strengthening various notice provisions was not queried or mentioned in public outreach workshops, staff has observed one notice issue in the context of public petitions. Currently, mailed notices are required in advance of Neighborhood Information Meetings (NIMs) as well as certain public hearings. Where required, it would be beneficial for all involved to provide notices along the entire length of dead-end Estates avenues or streets where a project makes direct impact, if the length is greater than the required linear distance of 1,000 feet. (See Non-Residential Uses/Notice provisions, below.) Specific Property Re-designations From time to time staff was queried about specific properties and whether there would be any specific land use changes recommended. Staff understood its Restudy scope as one essentially limited to universal principles- either in land use or other GOPs. However, it is always possible that, during the Public Hearing process, public officials will endorse land use changes in a parcel specific manner. For example, parcels owned by the County may be the subject of Board direction at Transmittal to effect affordable or senior housing needs, or to accommodate other public uses such as park and ride locations, or other land uses. One specific location that gained attention following public outreach is the area in the vicinity of the Immokalee Rd. curve near Randall Blvd. This is a location where significant transportation planning is underway, and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 31 of 220 area may be suitable for non-residential uses such as an activity center or other designation. The recommendations below include this area as a future study area to det ermine appropriateness of re-designation, following the completion of the Randall Blvd. and Oil Well Road Corridor Study. The depiction of the future study area, below, extends from 33d Ave NE to properties west of Wilson Blvd., and may be adjusted before the study begins. Staff recommends that the study commence upon the completion of the Oil Well Rd. and Randall Blvd. transportation study. Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in GGAMP: Designation Description/Residential Estates Subdistrict: Single family residential development is allowed within this Subdistrict at a maximum density of one unit per 2.25 gross acres, or one unit per legal non-conforming lot of record, exclusive of guest houses. Objective 5.3: Provide for the protection of the rural character of Golden Gate Estates. Policy 5.3.0.1: Rural character protection provisions shall provide for the preservation of such rural amenities as, but not limited to, wooded lots, the keeping of livestock, the ability to grow crops, wildlife activity, and low-density residential development. Policy 5.3.2: The Land Development Code shall continue to allow and further encourage the preservation of native vegetation and wildlife indigenous to the Estates area. Objective 1.4: Provide a living environment within the Golden Gate area, which is aesthetically acceptable and protects the quality of life. Policy 1.4.0.1 Collier County shall provide a living environment that is aesthetically acceptable and protects the quality of life through the enforcement of applicable codes and laws. Policy 1.4.1: The County’s Code Enforcement Board shall strictly enforce the Land Development Code and other applicable codes and laws to control the illegal storage of machinery, vehicles and junk, and the illegal operation of commercial activities within the Golden Gate area. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 32 of 220 Recommended Policies • See Non-residential Land Uses and Environmental Recommendations. Neighborhood Centers and Non-residential Uses Presently, there are three (3) Neighborhood Center designations in the Rural Estates and one (1) on the eastern edge of the urban Estates. In addition to Neighborhood Centers, there are four (4) mixed-use or commercial Sub-districts in the rural Estates and six (6) within the urban Estates. The locations can be seen below in Figure 16. During the public outreach meetings in the rural Estates and in the urban Estates, no new Neighborhood Centers were suggested or desired. Rather, there was strong sentiment to increase the availability of commercial uses in adjoining RFMUD and RLSA areas. In this way, the predominant Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 33 of 220 rural, residential character of the Estates could be maintained. Importantly, by placing office, commercial, business and industrial parks in these adjoining Districts, shopp ing, employment and entertainment opportunities would emerge in closer proximity to the Estates, and within easier drive times. As noted in the Master Mobility Plan (2012), reverse trips and shorter trips (fewer vehicle miles travelled) yield benefits to infrastructure demand, local economy, quality of life, environmental protection and public safety. Resizing the Neighborhood Centers Although no new Neighborhood Centers were desired by the public, there was a clear desire by those within the rural Estates that the three Neighborhood Centers should be “right-sized”, to function appropriately within a rural context. For example, Figure 17 shows the three quadrants within the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center contains development areas of 8.45, 7.15 and 4.86 acres, as seen in the figure below. As stated by the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association (GGEACA), these Centers should be allowed “sufficient (increased) area for road development, septic/wastewater treatment, and water retention.” Additional rationale would include parking, future right- of-way expansion and effective buffering from residential uses. The GGEACA recommended an 80-acre maximum node for each of the three rural Neighborhood Centers. This equates to a maximum of 20 acres per quadrant- an important measure because at least 2 of the 3 rural Neighborhood Centers will not develop all 4 quadrants. In most instances 20 acres will not be required to build an efficient development area, but can serve as a maximum under the Master Plan. Upsizing of any Neighborhood Center would require a rezoning of the property. The maximum acreage per quadrant is not an entitlement but allows the applicant to request zoning greater than the current Future Land Use Map would indicate, under criteria, without a requirement to amend the GGAMP. In all, there are 10 commercial or mixed-use subdistricts in Golden Gate Estates. For the most part, these subdistricts emerged over the past 20 years through private plan amendment applications and Board approvals. As noted, the scope of this Restudy does not include additional site-specific Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 34 of 220 recommendations. Further, stakeholders do not presently support additional site -specific commercial designations. Immokalee Rd./Oaks Blvd. Interface There is one location within the urban Estates best described as a potential corridor re-designation. This is an area along the Immokalee Road/Oaks Estates interface as shown in Figure 18. Currently zoned uses among the 16 parcels located in this corridor include 2 com mercial uses (C-1), 8 conditional uses and 6 residential uses. One of the residential uses is entitled to a transitional conditional use application. Another is a County-owned parcel for water retention. Thus, five parcels could retain existing residential zoning or apply for a CU or rezone to C-1, under the recommendation below. When asked about additional conditional uses in the western Estates, a slight majority felt that additional locations were not needed. However, when asked whether the Immokalee Road/Oaks interface should have future land uses to include office and conditional uses, over 75% were in favor. The public understood that a more unified planning approach to this corridor could result in better outcomes, including access points and continu ity. For this reason, the recommendation below suggests a FLUE designation that allows rezone applications for C-1 uses as well as conditional uses in this corridor. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 35 of 220 Conditional Uses Conditional use opportunities in Golden Gate Estates include churches, social and fraternal organizations, child care and adult day care centers, private schools, group care facilities (such as nursing homes and assisted living facilities) and model homes. As conditional uses, they are generally appropriate if compatible with neighboring uses, and should be limited as to location and number. A GGAMP allowance for conditional use provides a right to seek approval, not a right for the use at any location. Typically, if granted, conditional uses are subject to numerous conditions of development and operation. The GGAMP allows conditional use applications for properties designated as residential. However, the locational criteria are extremely limited, except for essential services. The Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use provisions allow such applications if immediately adjacent to a designated Neighborhood Center (there are 4 in total). The Transitional Conditional Use provisions allow applications for conditional uses if adjacent to some, but not all non -residential uses. In addition, there are further restrictions along Golden Gate Parkway from Livingston to Santa Barbara Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 36 of 220 and on the west side of Collier Blvd. The limited availability for conditional use applications can be gleaned from the analytic Figures 19, 20 and 21. The areas marked in yellow indicate conditional use potential under the current GGAMP. Because Golden Gate Estates is 50% built out, it is likely that additional locations would be useful for conditional uses as development progresses. With this in mind, staff sought public feedback on the possibility of expanding location potentials. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 37 of 220 Arterial Intersections Surveys in the rural Estates indicated a preference to allow some additional potential CU locations if limited as to location and type. A majority stated that additional CUs should be allowed at more locations, and specifically allowed at arterial intersections (described as 4 or more lane roads intersected by 4 or more lane roads). Slightly less than half of those surveyed in the urban Estates thought that CUs should be considered at major intersections (45% v. 50%). While suitability of land use underlies this recommendation, we note that there is a possibility that the conversion of use from residential to conditional use could potentially increase future ROW acquisition costs for future road expansion. A compilation of the intersections that would qualify as include: Rural Estates • Everglades Blvd. and Oil Well Rd. • Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. (east quadrants) • Vanderbilt Beach Rd. and Wilson Blvd. (future) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 38 of 220 • Everglades Blvd. and Randall Rd. (future) • Wilson Blvd. and Immokalee Rd. (future, south quadrants) Urban Estates • Logan Blvd. and Pine Ridge Rd. • Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd. (west quadrants) • Logan Blvd. and Vanderbilt Beach Rd. (future, SW quadrant only) (Note: “future” designation derived from 2040 LRTP) Based on this recommendation, a total of 6 quadrants in the rural Estates could qualify for CU application, not considering current land uses at those locations. An additional 10 quadrants could support conditional use applications in the rural Estates, based on improvements indicated in the MPO’s LRTP. In the urban Estates, a total of 6 quadrants could qualify for CU application not considering current uses. An additional quadrant could qualify based on the MPO’s LRTP. Public opinion differed when individuals spoke about church uses. Opinions ranged from allowing churches along major road corridors to eliminating any additional locations for churches. Staff’s recommendation, below, is the addition of the major arterial intersections (as defined) as a locational criterion for CU applications; plan language would allow parcel assemblage where minimum ingress/egress requirements dictate. The CU applicant should demonstrate the need for the requested acreage in the context of the intended use and facilities and ingress/egress recommendations. Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd. Special Provisions As noted in the Related Existing Provisions section, below, there are special provisions related to Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd. frontages. As described above, the only change to the Golden Gate Parkway provisions would be a change allowing CU applications for properties located at the corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Blvd. The two quadrants at that location are currently zoned PUD or CU. With respect to the Collier Blvd. Special provisions, the GGAMP currently requires adjoining conditional uses on two sides, rather than the transitional conditional use provision requiring certain non-residential uses on one side only. Staff observes that, during a public hearing for a zoning change request at 13th Ave SW and Collier Blvd, a conditional use was not available under the GMP due to this provision. However, the property in question was located next to an industrial type (PUD) use, Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 39 of 220 which could make a CU a suitable transition to adjoining residential. For this reason, the recommendation below would remove the Collier Blvd. Special Provision. We also note that this specific recommendation was not vetted during public outreach workshops. Accordingly, this fact should be noted during the Transmittal process. Communication Towers Communication towers are listed conditional uses in Golden Gate Estates. As such, they are limited to the locational criteria found in the Designation Description section. The available locations for cell towers are extremely limited, as these are not “essential services” as defined in the Land Development Code. As technologies quickly advance, the applications for communication transmission devices may look considerable different in just a few years than they do today. Individual consideration of proposed installations should be reviewed in each instance. A solid majority of residents surveyed, both in the rural Estates and the urban Estates, indicated dissatisfaction with existing cell service. Over 75% of the rural estates resident s surveyed believed that communication towers should be conditional uses, available at any location in the Estates. The recommendation below retains this land use as a conditional use, requiring application, notice and public hearing, but available for application at any location in the Estates (at least 2.25 acres in size). Conditional Use Acreage At present, conditional uses are generally limited to 5 acres. Although not specifically queried in public outreach, staff sees the 5-acre limitation as creating problems similar to the acreage limitations within currently approved Neighborhood Centers. Th e issues noted there are adequacy of stormwater retention, buffering, parking, roadway needs and septic provisions. In some cases, the current 5-acre standard may prove sufficient. However, applicants may wish to request a greater acreage. This request would remain subject to the public hearing requirements of the Conditional Use, but the provision for greater acreage in the GGAMP would relieve the applicants from amending the GMP to creating otherwise unnecessary sub-districts. Rather than suggesting 20 acres as recommended by the GGEACA for Neighborhood Centers, a more modest 10 -acre maximum is recommended. If embraced, staff also supports enhanced buffering requirements similar to those required for the Neighborhood Centers. Public Facilities In addition to the growing transportation network in and near the Estates, numerous public facilities serve Estates residents. The eastern Estates is served by: two high schools, several elementary and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 40 of 220 middle schools; three fire stations; 2 EMS stations; Sheriffs stations; a library; community parks and a regional park under design. Additional public facilities are planned to accommodate the growth in population, as monitored by the County’s Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and coordinated through the Growth Management Department and associated County departments, including the Collier County School District and independent agencies. With regard to public facilities as a land use, members of the public stressed compatibility within a predominantly residential area. Specifically, there is interest in developing rural architectural standards for public buildings as well as other non -residential structures. A unified architectural standard can provide a greater sense of identity to the Estates District. In addit ion, there is interest in updating development standards such as setbacks and buffers, particularly as public uses intensify at existing or future locations. Firebreak Staging and Park and Ride Park and ride facilities are essentially parking areas that can serve several purposes. As many rural estates residents commute to the urban area for daily work, or for occasional shopping and entertainment, a park and ride area can support voluntary ride sharing to and from proximate urban locations. Ride sharing applications for mobile devices have emerged as a helpful tool for commuters. At an appropriate time, bus/transit service could also serve these locations. The importance of park and ride and ride sharing for community-wide benefits was underscored by the Master Mobility Plan (accepted by Board, 2012) and by ULI in their review of housing affordability (2017). Additionally, as part of the initiative to support natural disaster prevention and response programs, portions of these facilities could be used for staging equipment, vehicles and operations. Nearly 40% of the citizens polled reported that they would consider using such facilities. It is suggested that the County consider appropriate locations for these facilities, with locational criteria including direct access to arterial roadways and buffering, and apply for Board approval through the Conditional Use public hearing process. Adjacent Future Land Use Districts The eastern Estates is bounded by The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) on 2 sides and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) on another. There are two essential parameters of interest to eastern estates residents. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 41 of 220 First, residents are very enthusiastic about the possibility of more robust economic development in the RFMUD and RLSA. Residents desire more proximate commercial areas for shopping and services, and want employment opportunities. For these reasons, residents were highly supportive of RFMUD Village centers, RLSA towns, and freestanding business and industrial park locations in these Districts. The potential for eastern Estates residents to shop and work within shorter distances and outside of the urban area is a great benefit to them, and this advantage redounds to County taxpayers through reduced miles travelled, lower capital and maintenance costs for roads, and a reduced carbon footprint. Second, eastern Estates residents desire compatibility of uses where adjoining Districts develop adjacent to the Estates. Enhanced buffers and setbacks are suggested at the interface of t hese Districts. These development standards will be specified by LDC review and amendment, and reflected in the Policies of the GGAMP. Notice Provisions Although not discussed in the Restudy outreach workshops, staff has observed past private petitions that involved Estates re-designation and rezoning. In the Estates, written notice provisions related to Neighborhood Information Meetings (NIMs) and public hearings extend 1,000 feet from the property lines of the project (compared to 500 feet in the urban area). In reality, affected Estates residential uses may extend the length of a dead-end street. A typical dead-end street in the Estates is approximately one mile. Accordingly, many affected residents are not provided with written notice. The recommendation associated with this topic would require written notice beyond 1,000 feet, where traffic impacts can be reasonably anticipated, as a result of the land use change, on a dead - end street or avenue in the Estates. In such a case, notice should be provided along the entire length of the affected street or avenue. Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP: Objective 5.3: Provide for the protection of the rural character of Golden Gate Estates. Objective 1.2 Ensure public facilities are provided at an acceptable level of service Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 42 of 220 Goal 3: To provide for basic commercial services for purposes of serving the rural needs of Golden Gate Estates residents, shortening vehicular trips, and preserving rural character. Existing Land Use Designations (synopsis) Neighborhood Center Subdistrict: Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents, Neighborhood centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future land use map. T he Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Various types of conditional uses are permitted in the estates zoning district within the Golden Gate estates area. In order to control the location and spacing of new conditional uses, one of the following four sets of criteria shall be met: a) Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions: … b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd. Special Provisions: … c) Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Uses Provisions: … d) Transitional Conditional uses: … Recommended Policies: • Protect the low-density character of the Estates by resisting private petitions to change the GGAMP existing residential land use designations in the GGAMP, other than the limited locations described below. • Allow applications for rezoning to upsize existing Neighborhood Centers to accommodate ingress and egress, parking, buffering, water management, well, septic or package plant siting, future right-of way expansion or additional open space not to exceed 20 acres per quadrant. This provision does not guarantee that upsizing will be granted, but provides an opportunity to request commercial rezoning based on the above-stated needs. • Allow conditional use or C-1 rezone applications for the Immokalee Rd. corridor (Oaks area). This provision does not guarantee approval, but allows appl ication without amendment to the GMP (5 parcels affected). • Add an additional locational criterion for conditional uses to include major roadway intersections, defined as the intersection of a 4-lane roadway (or greater) with a 4-lane roadway (or greater), as identified in the Long-Range Transportation Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 43 of 220 • Adjust the Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions to allow conditional use applications for properties at the intersection of Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd. • Adjust the Collier Blvd. Special Provisions to allow the same locational criteria as currently allowed at other locations in Golden Gate Estates. • Allow conditional use applications at any location (of at least 2.25 acres) in Golden Gate Estates for the erection of communication towers, without need to amend the GGAMP. • Develop architectural standards in the Land Development Code that apply to commercial, conditional and public facility uses in the rural Estates to create coherence and area identity that reflect the rural character of the area. • Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for “park and ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. • In its review and adoption of GMP amendments to the RFMUD and the RLSA, the County should reflect the need for appropriate buffers and setbacks from adjoining Golden Gate Estates properties, with specific development standards in the LDC. • Where GMP Amendments or Rezoning actions require written notice to homeowners within a given distance of the subject parcel, notice requirements shall also be extended the length of any dead-end street or avenue where a direct transportation or aesthetic impact can be reasonably anticipated. • Following the completion of the Randall Boulevard and Oilwell Road Corridor Study, the Zoning Division shall evaluate the future land uses along Immokalee Road in the vicinity of Randall Boulevard and Oil Well Road and make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for any proposed changes to the future land use. Transportation and Mobility Estates residents expressed their views on several transportation-related topics. Among other issues, peak hour conditions capture the attention of residents who face congestion on a recurring basis. Beyond immediate concerns, the public expressed preferences for long term considerations. These include bridge priorities, I-75 access, lime rock roads, route alternatives, greenways and pathways, road design and park and ride facilities. Many transportation projects are expressed in existing Plan language. Augmentation of these provisions are suggested to convey preference and direction for future consideration. At the heart of the transportation discussion is the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), adopted in 2015 by the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Of note , as shown on Figure 22, within the road network are planned improvements to Wilson Blvd. North and South, as well as the extension of Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to 8th Ave, NE. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 44 of 220 The Collier MPO is a federally mandated and federally funded transportation policy-making organization and is made up of representatives of local governing bodies. The MPO has the authority to plan, prioritize, and select transportation projects for federal funding appropriated by the US Congress through the US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration. In addition to Estates residents, Collier County citizens, taxpayers and visitors are also stakeholders in the transportation and mobility concepts involving Golden Gate Estates. The synergy expected between the surrounding Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District and Rural Land Stewardship Area village and town development with the largely resident ial Estates area is a prime example. Retail, service and job opportunities in and around future towns and villages will result in shorter trip lengths for current and future Estates residents, when compared with trip lengths today. In addition Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 45 of 220 to shorter trip lengths, north-south and reverse direction trips, particularly at peak hours, will be a positive factor in road infrastructure demand and resulting levels of service. This synergy was also highlighted in recommendations in the County’s Master Mobility Plan (MMP), accepted by the Board in 2012. Recommendation #3 in the MMP calls for incentivized goods, services and jobs in Neighborhood Centers, the RFMUD Villages and the Orangetree Settlement area to reduce the vehicle miles travelled by estates residents. Mobility related to the Estates is also addressed by Recommendation #9, enhanced localized connectivity through bridges and other connectors, and by Recommendation #13, development of park and ride lots. These concepts are further discussed below. As noted on the 2040 LRTP cost feasible plan, the MPO has designated additional study areas in and around the Estates. The Randall Rd./Oil Well Rd. study is currently underway. The North Belle Meade Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 46 of 220 study area is not yet funded. Staff recommends funding f or route alternatives study of the North Belle Meade east/west corridors in order to accommodate area planning efforts in the North Belle Meade Receiving area and to provide linkage for Estates residents travelling to south Collier County and the urban area. Funding will need to be identified for alignment, design and ROW acquisition. Bridge Connectivity within Golden Gate Estates Existing GGAMP objectives stress the importance of increasing linkages within the local road system to reduce traffic on arterial roadways, shorten trips and increase overall road capacity. In addition, coordination with emergency services officials is mandated for County staff and MPO. In August 2008, the Collier County Transportation Services Division produced the East of 951 Horizon Study for Bridges. The study included stakeholder input from Emergency service providers, environmental groups and other County Divisions. The study considered emergency service response times, evacuation needs, public service efficiencies, general mobility improvements and public sentiment. Design and cost considerations were components of the study, but costs have increased significantly since that study was completed. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 47 of 220 The outcome of the study prioritized eleven bridge construction projects in eastern Golden Gate Estates. Subsequently, three (3) bridges have been programmed : • 8th St. NE at Cypress canal (fully funded) • 16th St. NE at Cypress Canal (partially funded) • 47th Ave NE at Golden Gate Canal (partially funded) Staff is currently seeking full funding via gas tax revenue funding for the 16th St. NE and 47th Ave. NE bridges. Each bridge costs approximately $8m to $9m (2016 figures) to construct. During public outreach, the GGEACA urgently requested consideration for a fourth high pr iority bridge, located at 10th Ave. SE at the Faka Union canal. This request was based on public safety concerns, in the contexts of emergency response and emergency evacuation. The recommendation was endorsed by North Collier Fire and Rescue. For this rea son, the initial recommendation below calls for an update to the bridge study within the next 2 years. As of this writing, County staff has begun planning for the public outreach associated with the updated study. A provision currently in the GGAMP specifically calls for the construction of a north-south bridge on 23d St., SW, as one of three alternatives to address emergency evacuation. As emergency services and evacuation concepts will be foremost in the bridge evaluation and update, this provision is recommended for removal from the GGAMP. Concerns were raised about the cost components of sidewalks and bike lanes on and leading to all bridges, both with respect to right-of-way acquisition and construction. Therefore, the updated study should include prioritization, design alternatives and cost components. The requirement for sidewalks and bike lanes leading to new bridges should be reviewed in the context of the individual bridge location. Eight of the initial eleven bridges are depicted on Figure 24. Additional locations will be studied as part of the Bridge Study Update. I-75 Interchange The GGAMP currently calls for coordination between the County and FDOT to implement a study of a potential interchange “in the vicinity of I-75 and Everglades Blvd.” In 2012, the County petitioned FDOT to consider an interchange through the submission of an Interchange Justification report (IJR). At that time, FDOT concluded that it could not recommend forwarding the IJR to the federal Highway Administration. Subsequently, the Board approved a course of action that would request emergency access to I-75 (now approved), consider an updated IJR between 2020 and 2025, and to “continue Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 48 of 220 to work with FDOT, other permitting agencies and NGOs to complete an environmental impact assessment and mitigation plan”. By the use of the term “in the vicinity of I-75 and Everglades Blvd., staff understands this as allowing alternative locations within Sections 31 through 34, T49 S, R28 E, and proposes this specificity for the GGAMP. Accordingly, the current GGAMP language should be updated to include the IJR submission in coordination with the MPO and its LRTP, and continuation of environmental assessments in coordination with all stakeholders, if feasible from a cost/benefit standpoint. It should be noted that emergency (limited) access to I-75 was granted subsequent to the 2012 IJR submission. In addition to I-75 access, concerns were raised by residents and by the GGEACA regarding traffic conditions on Everglades Blvd. The residents and association would like to protect against the possibility of expanding Everglades Blvd. beyond 4 lanes. For this reason, a recommendation appears below to limit expansion of Everglades Blvd. to no more than 4 lanes, as shown on the 2040 LRTP Needs Assessment. At a GGEACA meeting in November 2017, it was suggested that the 4-lane design maximum apply to all future roads to and through Golden Gate Estates. That idea does not appear as a recommendation because its more appropriate path for consideration is through the Collier County MPO. Lime Rock Roads The GGAMP calls upon the Transportation Department to explore alternative financing methods to accelerate paving of lime rock roads in the Estates. As of 2016, there were 29 miles of unpaved roads remaining in the Estates. At the current rate of nearly 3 miles per year, all lime rock roads would be paved in approximately 10 years. Residents have commented that an acceleration of paving may be more cost -efficient. Lime rock roads require maintenance costs that may be somewhat higher than paved roads. Additionally, the added ad valorem revenue potential from home values that appreciate due to improved road access may also influence the cost/benefit assessment. Staff recommends that the County update the study the relative costs and benefits of paving lime rock roads on an accelerated basis, and provide the study result to the Board with 2 years of adoption. More recently, the BCC embarked on a budgeting schedule that would provide sufficient funds over a three-year period to complete the paving of lime rock roads. Accordingly, the recommendations Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 49 of 220 include an alternative recommendation that the County will budget for the completion of paving in fiscal years 2018 through 2020. Greenways The GGAMP calls for a public network of greenway corridors that connect public lands and permanently protected green space, emphasizing use by non-motorized vehicles and using the existing or future public rights-of-way. The Collier MPO 2012 “Comprehensive Pathways Plan” provides the vision for a Greenways and Trails Program as a separate network from the overall Pathways Program. It notes that the provision of off -road facilities addresses safety and comfort concerns of pedestrians and bicyclists. This would allow a more focused approach to greenways and the identified entity to secure funding and expertise. As noted in the public outreach surveys, a majority of citizens favor the retention of this concept to create a greenways program. The GGAMP policy should be updated, however, to encourage coordination between the County Parks and Recreation Division and the MPO to identify areas of responsibility in planning, funding and implementation of a greenway plan. Road Design Eastern Estates residents commented on various aspects of road design for both new and expanded roadways. As communicated through the GGEACA, preferences include a rural road design without curbs and gutters, Florida Friendly (depressed) medians to the extent landscaping would be employed, and a preference for eminent domain on one side of an existing local street rather than partial takings on both sides. While these preferences are noted here, the MPO and the County Transportation Division design with specific site requirements that vary from one location to another. Moreover, these elements are best suited for review and public comment under the statutory public vetting requirements of those agencies. As such, the GGAMP should remain silent on these design preferences. Park and Ride Lots See Land Use/Non-residential Uses. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 50 of 220 GOAL 6: To provide for a safe and efficient county and local roadway network, while at the same time seeking to preserve the rural character of golden gate estates in future transportation improvements within the golden gate area. OBJECTIVE 6.1: Increase the number of route alternatives for traffic moving through the Golden Gate Area in both east-west and north-south directions, consistent with neighborhood traffic safety considerations, and consistent with the preservation of the area’s rural character. Policy 6.1.1: In planning to increase the number of route alternatives through the Estates Area, the Collier County Transportation Division will prioritize the following routes over other alternatives: a. The extension of Vanderbilt Beach Road from its current terminus to DeSoto Boulevard. b. The development of a north-south connection from the eastern terminus of White Boulevard to Golden Gate Boulevard. c. The development of a new east-west roadway crossing the Estates Area south of Golden Gate Boulevard. Policy 6.1.2: Collier County shall continue to coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation to implement a study of a potential interchange in the vicinity of I-75 and Everglades Boulevard. OBJECTIVE 6.2: Increase linkages within the local road system for the purposes of limiting traffic on arterials and major collectors within Golden Gate Estates, shortening vehicular trips, and increasing overall road system capacity. Policy 6.2.1: The County shall continue to explore alternative financing methods to facilitate both east- west and north-south bridging of canals within Golden Gate Estates. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 51 of 220 Planning and right-of-way acquisition for bridges within the Estates Area local road system shall make adequate provision for sidewalks and bike lanes. Policy 6.2.3: Sidewalks and bike lanes shall provide access to government facilities, schools, commercial areas and the planned County greenway network. OBJECTIVE 6.3: Coordinate with local emergency services officials in planning and constructing road improvements within Golden Gate Estates and Golden Gate City to ensure that the access needs of fire department, police and emergency management personnel and vehicles are met. Policy 6.3.1: The Collier County Transportation Planning Section shall hold at least one annual public meeting with Golden Gate Area emergency services providers and the local civic association in order to ensure that emergency needs are addressed during the acquisition of right-of-way for design and construction of road improvements. Policy 6.3.2: The Collier County Transportation Division shall continue to coordinate with Golden Gate Area emergency services providers to prioritize necessary road improvements related to emergency evacuation needs. GOAL 7: To protect the lives and property of the residents of the greater Golden Gate area, as well as the health of the natural environment, through the provision of emergency services that prepare for, mitigate, and respond to, natural and manmade disasters. OBJECTIVE 7.2: Ensure that the needs of all applicable emergency ser vices providers are included and coordinated in the overall public project design for capital improvement projects within the Golden Gate Area. Policy 7.2.1: Preparation of Collier County’s annual Schedule of Capital Improvements for projects within the Golden Gate Area shall be coordinated with planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Fire Districts, public and private utilities, Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier County Sheriff’s Department to ensure that public project designs are consistent with the needs of these agencies. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 52 of 220 Policy 7.2.2: Planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier County Sheriff’s Department will receive copies of pre-construction plans for capital improvement projects in the Golden Gate Area and will be invited to review and comment on plans for the public projects. OBJECTIVE 7.3: Develop strategies through the County Growth Management Division – Planning and Regulation for the enhancement of roadway interconnection within Golden Gate City and the Estates Area, including interim measures to assure interconnection. Policy 7.3.1: The Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services, the Collier County Transportation Division, Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, and other appropriate Federal, State or local agencies, shall begin establishing one or more of the following routes for emergency evacuation purposes: a. An I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard. b. Improved emergency access from Everglades Boulevard to I-75. c. Construction of a north-south bridge on 23rd Street, SW, between White Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. Policy 7.3.2: All new residential structures shall comply with NFPA (National Fire Protection Association, Incorporated) 299 Standard for Protection of Life and Property from Wildfire, 1997 Edition, as adopted by reference in the Florida Fire Code or the most recent edition. Policy 7.3.3: Modified portions of existing structures shall meet NFPA Standards through the adoption of appropriate regulations in the County Building Codes. Policy 7.3.4: County-owned property within Golden Gate Estates shall be subject to an active, on-going management plan to reduce the damage caused by wildfires originating from County-owned properties. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 53 of 220 • The County Transportation Planning Section shall provide an update to the 2008 East of CR 951 Bridge Study with recommendations based on emergency response, evacuation times, cost components and other considerations to the Board within 2 years of adoption of this policy. • Everglades Blvd. between Golden Gate Blvd. and I-75 shall not be expanded beyond 4 lanes. • The County shall coordinate with FDOT and the MPO’s 2045 LRTP to submit a revised Interchange Justification Report for an interchange at I -75 in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd (T 49, R 28, S 31-34). • The County will update and report on the timing of the paving of lime rock roads, including a cost/benefit analysis for accelerated programming, within 2 years of adoption of this policy; Alt.: The County will budget the full completion of the paving of lime rock roads in fiscal years 2018 through 2020. • Planning, funding and implementation of potential greenway trails shall be coordinate d under the MPO’s Comprehensive Pathways Plan in coordination with the County’s Parks and Recreation Division. • Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for “park and ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. • Encourage the MPO’s identification of funding sources for design and ROW acquisition of an east-west arterial roadway into North Belle Meade to facilitate land use planning in that area. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 54 of 220 Watershed and Related Water Resource Topics In 2011, the Board accepted the Collier County Watershed Management Plan (WMP), which was developed over several years by staff and consultants. The WMP covered the major basins within Collier County, including the Golden Gate/Naples Bay Watershed. The underlying study included an evaluation of the surface water and groundwater, wetlands and related environmental resources, and the performance of the current water management facilities in providing the desired levels of services for flood control, water supply, water quality and environmental protection. It recommended initiatives that would serve as a guide for staff in developing policies, programs, ordinances and regulations for further consideration by the Board. The major water resource concerns identified for the GGAMP region include: • Excessive fresh water discharges from canals into Naples Bay • Lack of appropriate levels of flood protection • Pollutant loading associated with development and land use activities • Aquifer impacts due to reduced recharge and increased withdrawals Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 55 of 220 Notably, among the WMP ranking of projects for ben efit to cost ratio, the Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration project scored highest. Accordingly, the North Golden Gate Estates (NGGE) Flowway Restoration Project ensued. Its purpose was to reconnect the primary wetland flowways in the Estates area, particularly the major wetlands of Horsepen Strand and Winchester Head for eventual restoration of the flowway connection from NGGE to the historic Henderson Creek/Belle Meade watershed as shown on Figure 25. The Study was completed in 2013, funded in part by FDEP and SFWMD. As a result of the Study, the historic and remnant flowway connections were identified and a plan was recommended. As a first phase of its implementation, 42 new culverts were installed in selected sections of NGGE and the project was completed in August 2014. The study also yielded a conceptual design for diversion of stormwater into North Belle Meade. In 2016, as part of an application for BP settlement “RESTORE” funds, the Collier County Comprehensive Watershed Improvement Plan was developed and accepted by the Board. This plan, co-sponsored by Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, outlines a rehydration effort designed to provide greater balance between the Rookery Bay and Naples Bay estuaries, through diversion of a portion of Golden Gate Canal flows to the Belle Meade area. The RESTORE funds are intended to aid in design and implementation of the project. A depiction of the area in relation to watersheds appears in Figure 26. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 56 of 220 In 2017, as part of the implementation of a non-structural WMP recommendation, the Board adopted newly revised surface water maximum allowable discharge rates, now applied to development in 16 additional County basins, including the main Golden Gate Canal Basin. The reduced allowable discharge rates convey County-wide benefits, but it should be noted that they do not apply to single family parcels, such as those previously platted in Golden Gate Estates. Additionally, the Board amended stormwater standard s in 2017, directly impacting Estates lot development. The amendment requires a stormwater plan for all lots and provides a new threshold for engineered plans based on percentage of impervious lot coverage. This addresses site specific issues but does not address area-wide stormwater concerns. The aquifers beneath the Estates provide potable water supplies to residents of the Estates, and to customers of the two major public water utilities serving City of Naples and County residents. In meetings with Golden Gate Estates residents and with the GGEACA, a strong preference emerged regarding conservation principles related to the protection of water resources. Ideas and support for those ideas included wetland preservation initiatives and aquifer health. Residents and community leaders value the relationships among components of water policy: floodplain management (dispersion and diversion), water quantity and quality, aquifer recharge, salt water intrusion and estuary health. The following subsections reflect ideas and comments presented by residents and considered by County staff. Necessarily, most of these ideas will require additional study and debate, and therefore appear as aspirational recommendations. Lot Combinations Most of Golden Gate Estates was platted into 5 acre tracts by Gulf American Land Corporation (GAC), the developer of the Estates, although many larger and smaller lots were also platted . The Land Development Code currently allows lot splits into parcels no smaller than 2.25 acres with frontage of at least 150 feet. However, that was not always the case. Smaller lot splits were allowed in the past: prior to Oct. 14, 1974 in the former “Coastal Area Planning District” and prior to Jan. 5, 1982 in the former “Immokalee Area Planning District”. These legal non-conforming lots (sometimes referred to as “band-aid lots”) abound in the Estates, both in the western area, Figure 27, and in the eastern area, Figure 28. Of the 27,250 total parcels in the Estates, 7,275 are non-conforming. Of those, 3,397 (nearly half) are not yet developed. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 57 of 220 Citizens and representatives of the GGEACA suggested that these lots might be re -combined, if possible, through an incentive- based system. The rationale behind recombining these smaller lots relates to water benefits- watershed, floodplain, aquifer and estuary related. It has been said by a former District 5 Commissioner, that protection of this low-density area translates to a “County DRGR (density reduction, groundwater recharge) area without cost to the County.” It follows that further density reduction in the Estates can enhance these benefits. Larger lot sizes with relatively less impervious area generate less run-off per lot, and contribute to surface water attenuation, water quality benefits, floodplain storage capacity, aquifer recharge and less flow or “pulse” to canals and estuaries. Ideas to incentivize small lot recombination have included tax incentives, impact fee reduction and credits for stormwater stewardship, if a stormwater utility is created. Not all potential solutions will suit every situation. For example, it would be possible to recombine vacant parcels to create a larger parcel with any of the above suggestions. On the other hand, combining a vacant 1.14-acre parcel with another developed lot takes impact fee credits out of the equation. Moreover, the legal and fiscal basis for implementing incentives requires further study and Board direction. Ad valorem tax abatement would require a referendum before County voters. Impact fee credits may necessarily require a study to keep overall impact fees in a neutral revenue position. The costs and benefits of all incentives need further study to determine fiscal impact and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 58 of 220 quantifiable benefits. For these reasons, the recommendation related to this initiative supports further study within a defined time period to implement any incentives for recombination. Following the study, if the Board directs implementation, its provisions would be contained in the Land Development Code or Code of Ordinances. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) credits in the Estates Community Planning staff attended numerous Comprehensive Watershed Improvement Plan Ad Hoc Technical Advisory Board (CWIP) meetings, exchanging concepts related to the existing TDR program (RFMUD) and potential Golden Gate Estates initiatives. One idea that gained attention was the potential issuance of TDR credits as part of a sale or donation proposal for parcels within current or future acquisition areas. The examples of two specific wetland sites, Red Maple Swamp and Winchester Head within the Conservation Collier acquisition areas were discussed and studied. The “Gore” properties and surrounding area could also be considered. The CWIP committee understood its role as a technical advisory committee, and not a policy advisory committee. Accordingly, by motion at its March 7, 2017 meeting, CWIP recommended the concept of using TDRs for acquisition of select wetland parcels as “consistent with CWIP goals in improving the floodplain, surface hydrology, aquifer recharge and connectivity of the watershed”. In the Committee’s view, a recommendation beyond consistency would have exceeded their scope. In the meantime, the Board considered the idea of external (outside of RFMUD Sending lands) sources of TDR credits at its RFMUD Workshops in January, May and June of 2017. Staff had Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 59 of 220 recommended a modest allowance of TDR credits as part of an acquisition program in Golden Gate Estates, if the number of credits would have a nominal effect on overall TDR supp ly and price. Staff also noted that implementation could be difficult within the same RFMUD currency or domain, because property values are much different in the Estates as compared to RFMUD Sending Lands. The Board did not reach any consensus on this issu e, but held it open for later discussion. Given the complexity of the evaluation and completion of the RFMUD Restudy, staff is now of the opinion that acquisition of Estates lots for stormwater benefits using RFMUD TDR credits should not be pursued. As stated by some RFMUD stakeholders, a closed system, at least on the supply side, should be more predictable while avoiding the dilution of currency to Sending Land owners. One alternative is the further study of a second credit system, (Transfer of Developm ent Units or TDUs), which could direct Estates density values to urban development. This could be considered in the context of County (or other agency) ownership of quality wetland or high habitat value locations. The related recommendation, below, suggests an evaluation in a timeframe directed by the Board. Dispersed Water Management The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association has also been in favor of the concept of dispersed water management (DWM) as a means of attenuating stormwater to the benefit of residents. The typical Estate lot is 660 feet deep, encouraging the owner to construct a home and accompanying impervious areas (driveways, parking, etc.) close to the roadway. This leads to stormwater run -off to roadside swales with eventual conveyance to the nearest primary or secondary canals. Several recent studies (including the Watershed Management Plan (2011), have indicated that the present system of conveyance and treatment of stormwater run -off in the Estates is deficient in providing the desired levels of service for flood protection, water quality improvement, groundwater recharge, fire protection and restoration of historic flowways. Protection of water resources in this area is critical to the health of the public water supply, including wellfields for Collier County and the City of Naples. The road and drainage infrastructures have virtually eliminated some of the historic wetland flowways, leading to exotic infestation, draw-down of the water table and severity of wildfires. As the extent of impervious area continues to grow, the antiquated canals and swales cannot fully accommodate runoff, leading to frequent nuisance flooding. Major structural modifications to the current conveyance system does not appear feasible, either environmentall y, economically, or socially (if private property rights are encroached). Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 60 of 220 DWM is a means to reduce the full impact of single family development on water resources and management. To the extent that homeowners can attenuate stormwater runoff in quantity and quality before it reaches swales and canals, the better County water goal s may be achieved. To be sure, DWM is not a “one size fits all” solution. Parcels with very little wetlands on or nearby may be able to detain some water toward the back of the lot, so long as detention is very temporary, its elevation is sufficiently above the wet season water table and does not interfere with the proper functioning of septic systems. Properties with high percentages of wetland areas might require an engineered solution and/or an incentive-based approach to convey drainage easements to the County at relevant locations. The best proposal for DWM on single family Estates lots will be simple to understand and apply. Consideration should be given to regulatory approaches (required detention or limited fill quantity) and incentive-based approaches and whether to apply various rules to developed and undeveloped properties. Among other ideas, abatement of stormwater utility billing can be considered. Study and public input on a regulatory approach for new home construction should be included. The Restudy recommends a formal study of solutions that will be equitable, reasonable in cost, and understandable to land owners. The study feasibility should commence as funding becomes available. At its meeting on November 8, 2017, the Floodplain Management Advisory Committee found, by motion, that DWM would be an important feasibility study for application to the Estates. Potential of the C-1 Canal and other Golden Gate Canal Relievers The GGEACA spoke in favor of further improvements to the connector C-1 canal. The C-1 connector provides a 1.7 mile east-west link from the Golden Gate Main Canal to the Miller Canal. Due in part to numerous crossings that have constrained its effectiveness, the C-1 has historically played a minor role, serving as an equalizer depending on the head differential between the Golden Gate and Miller Canals. In view of its strategic location, improvements to the canal’s capacity could add operational flexibility and allow Golden Gate Main outflows to be moved south by the Miller Canal. In addition, this initiative would also require design and placement of an in-line gated structure to control flow exchanges, and ensure that desired flow directions are achieved. The concept of Aquifer Storage and Recovery systems was also encouraged by the GGEACA to divert wet season flows from the Golden Gate Canal. This is another capital-intensive initiative, and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 61 of 220 County should continue to study costs, feasibility and possible implementation as a lon g-term beneficial initiative. Finally, flood control can be more easily measured, predicted and accommodated by coordinating with the South Florida Water Management District to review their Level of Service Standards for primary water management canals within the County. Educational Components Many of the concepts noted above or measures currently in place should be augmented by public education efforts where possible. Residents, potential buyers and builders of single family homes in the Estates would be well served by a better understanding of water-related issues and programs, and how these serve their self-interests. Wetland maintenance, aquifer recharge, floodplain protection and Firewise concepts should be stressed. As an example, builders and land owners should become aware of the benefits of adding “freeboard” to building plans, which will provide even greater flood prevention beyond current base flood elevations (BFE) standards, as well as providing National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) discounts in premium. Other Watershed Management Plan Initiatives The structural (S) and non-structural (NS) projects listed in the table below were derived during the development of the County’s Watershed Management Plan, and have particular relevance to Golden Gate Estates. These projects have the potential to benefit the Golden Gate Estates community by addressing flood control, water supply, water quality, and environmental protection and restoration. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 62 of 220 Table 1: Selected Structural (S) and Non-structural (NS) Water management Improvements in GGAMP Recommended by WMP Project Name Watershed Project Description Comments/Status (S) North Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration Project (Winchester Head and Horsepen Strand) Golden Gate Canal, Naples Bay and Henderson Creek – Belle Meade Reestablish habitat and hydrologic connectivity along two wetland strands for eventual restoration of the historic flowway to the Rookery Bay Watershed * Two feasibility and modeling studies have been completed; and, a network of 42 culverts was installed in project’s first phase. *Funding and evaluation of other project segments are needed (NS) North Golden Gate Estates Land Acquisition for Winchester Head Wetlands Preservation Golden Gate Canal, Naples Bay & Faka Union Canal Multi-parcel (60 ) acquisition within the Winchester Head area *Land donations are accepted through the offsite preservation provision of the LDC *Funding for acquisition and/or additional land donations is needed (S) Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed/East Bird Rookery Swamp Hydrologic Restoration Enhancement Golden Gate Canal & Cocohatchee Hydrologic restoration by berm removal, vegetation control, ditch blocks and flowway redirection *Project scope has been defined *Funding is needed (S) Northern GGE, Unit 53 Acquisition and Restoration Golden Gate Canal & Cocohatchee Wetland restoration in the area of Shady Hollow Rd. Ext.and 38th Ave. N.W. Ext. by berm removal and exotic vegetation control *Project scope has been defined *Funding for land acquisition and restoration is needed (S) Golden Gate Canal Water Quality Improvements Golden Gate Canal & Naples Bay Six Tracts conveyed by GAC to Collier County totaling 33 acres, with 3,646 ft. of frontage along the GG canal system, to be used for isolated water quality treatment *Funding for feasibility study needed (NS) Stormwater Retrofit Project All Watersheds Restoration and protection of existing natural systems by establishing retrofit programs to address existing developments, public facilities and other areas that lack treatment *Retrofit options such as sewer inlet protection, debris collectors, and bio- swales have been identified by staff *Pond inventory and SOPs established for county owned facilities *County staff, in cooperation with the Water Symposium, to monitor county stormwater ponds and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 63 of 220 establish Best Management Practices. *Ongoing efforts to establish new programs to meet project objectives Project Name Watershed Project Description Comments/Status (NS) Water Quality Monitoring Program All Watersheds Define water quality conditions in estuaries and along canal networks to achieve greater distribution in the groundwater monitoring network *Ongoing program that is periodically reevaluated and adaptively managed by the County’s Pollution Control staff. (Specific recommendations for monitoring completed in 2014) (NS) Verification of No Floodplain Impact All Watersheds Implement requirement for development to verify no impact upstream and downstream for the 100 yr./72-hr. design storm event *Modeling was used to evaluate future development alternatives on DFIRM base flood elevations (BFE) in GGE. The analysis of future build-out shows an increase of BFEs in the range of 0.25 – 0.5 feet assuming current development practices (fill placement for SF homes). This is well below the NFIP threshold of 1 ft. increase. *Consider implementation (NS) Flood Protection Levels of Service All Watersheds Propose a standard 25-yr design storm for drainage on arterial roads and 10-yr. design storm for collector and neighborhood roads to increase flood protection levels of service * SFWMD is modeling the primary canal system *County to follow with modeling of the secondary system *Staff to continue to refine concept for inclusion within the planning process for the CIP (NS) Low Impact Development (LID) Program All Watersheds Implementation of a LID program that would apply to all new development countywide *The Pollution Control Section is developing a LID manual to be used as a technical working document by the community At its November 8, 2017 meeting, the Floodplain Advisory Committee approved a motion in support of the Watershed Plan Initiatives as important to include within the GGAMP. Related to that, the GGEACA stressed the importance of hydrologic connections by suggesting that future acquisitions by Conservation Collier should prioritize hydrological benefits above other review criteria. The Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 64 of 220 recommendations include language in support of these concepts, and staff believes that the Conservation Collier recommendation should be fully vetted during the public hearing process. Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP OBJECTIVE 1.3: Protect and preserve the valuable natural resources within the Golden Gate area. Policy 1.3.0.1: The County shall protect and preserve natural resources within the Golden Gate area in accordance with the Objectives and Policies contained within Goals 6 and 7 of the Collier County Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Policy 1.3.1: The Collier County Environmental Services Department shall coordinate its planning and permitting activities within the Golden Gate Area with all other applicable environmental plannin g, permitting and regulatory agencies to ensure that all Federal, State and local natural resource protection regulations are being enforced. Policy 5.3.2: The Land Development Code shall continue to allow and further encourage the preservation of native vegetation and wildlife indigenous to the Estates Area. Policy 7.1.4: The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services shall hold one or more annual “open house” presentations in the Golden Gate Area emphasizing issues related to wildfires, flooding, emergency access and general emergency management. Generally: Conservation and Coastal Management Element Capital Improvement Element Stormwater Management Sub-element Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 65 of 220 Recommended Policies • The County will continue to pursue the Watershed Management Plan initiatives as financial and staff resources become available. • The County will periodically coordinate with the South Florida Water Management District to review the Level of Service Standards for primary water management canals within the County. • The County will encourage the combination of parcels less than 2.25 acres in size with adjacent parcels, to preserve the low-density advantages within Golden Gate Estates. Within 2 years, GMD staff will recommend to the Board potential incentives to apply to developed and undeveloped lots. • The County will evaluate the potential for a second transfer of development units/rights program (TDU) to transfer density from Estates lots to the urban area, and will consider transfer of ownership options, in a timeframe directed by the Board. • The County will commence a formal study on the feasibility of dispersed water management (DWM) for single-family Estates lots, and determine whether a DWM initiative should be voluntary or mandatory and the extent to which the program should apply to developed and undeveloped properties. • The County will continue to identify and implement educational opportunities related to water resources for use by parcel owners, home owners, bu ilders, real estate professionals and the public to aid in understanding and addressing the owner’s financial and personal interests as well as area-wide impacts. • Acquisitions of parcels in Golden Gate Estates by Conservation Collier shall be consistent with Watershed Management Plan objectives, and shall prioritize hydrologic benefits above other review criteria. Wildfire Preparedness According to the Florida Forestry Service, Fire has always been a natural occurrence in South Florida. Sparked by lightning, wildfires cleared old brush and other fuels within forested areas. Biologists know the value of these periodic burns, as habitat and other natural values become refreshed. However, as population has moved further into the “wildlands” and development ha s dried the landscape, wildfires emerge as a very serious threat to people and property. Golden Gate Estates is situated within this urban/wildland interface. Community leaders have been aware of this threat for many years. The “Firewise” standards created for development in the Rural Fringe have been a part of the Land Development Code for well over Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 66 of 220 10 years. Policy provisions within the GGAMP are numerous, and have been part of the Master Plan for many years (see existing provisions, below). Concurrent with the GGAMP Restudy, the Board directed the Bureau of Emergency Services (BES) to provide an overview and recommendations related to wildfire risks, responsibilities and funding. In early 2017, current mitigation practices were outlined with recommendations for improvement. It was noted that brush fire calls per year have reached an average of 130. Springtime, 2017 came with hundreds of wildfires across the state, following a severe “dry season” that resulted in area-wide and state-wide drought. Collier County was particularly hard hit. A March wildfire burned over 7,000 acres in Picayune Strand State Forest. In April, the “3d Avenue Fire”, stoked by high winds, tore across the North Belle Meade area and narrowly missed more developed portions of Golden Gate Estates. Thousands of acres burned, thousands were evacuated, and seven homes were lost. At the Board’s direction, a multi-agency technical working group was formed under the existing structure of the Emergency Management Advisory Group. This working group was tasked with making recommendations to the Board by September, 2017, to address priorities for bolstering the County’s defenses against wildfires. It was noted that educational programs continue to provide excellent resources for self-help in mitigating individual property risks. Likewise, the Florida Forestry Service and the Independent Fire Districts, supported by mutual aid, were roundly applauded and appreciated for the excellent work performed in response to these events. While this working group has not reported its findings at time of this writing, funding issues in support of landscape scale mitigation activities will be at the center of attention. Funding for fire Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 67 of 220 break creation and maintenance and for prescribed burn activities needs augmentation. Several alternatives have been suggested to supply the Forest Service and Independent Districts with the tools and resources for a higher level of safety, including a Golden gate “fire utility fee” through an MSTU and general revenue funding. Also under review will be Land Development Code standards and Collier County Water Sewer District raw water access issues. Improvements to LDC language or permitting procedures are under review. A number of strategically located raw water wells have already been retrofitted for Fire Department use. As stated by Mr. Dan Summers, Division Director, BES, a community-wide effort to improve wildfire mitigation “is a marathon, not a sprint”. In other words, this is a hazard that must stay on the County’s radar for continual opportunities to enhance and support wildfire mitigation for many years to come. Continual opportunities should consider: • Effective and fair funding options • Resource readiness • Clear legal and procedural boundaries • Notifications and alerts • Mutual aid agreements and Interlocal Agreements • Educational components • Land planning opportunities Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP: GOAL 7: To protect the lives and property of the residents of the greater golden gate area, as well as the health of the natural environment, through the provision of emergency services that prepare for, mitigate, and respond to, natural and manmade disasters. OBJECTIVE 7.1: Maintain and implement public information programs through the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services, Collier County Sheriff’s Department, Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, and other appropriate agencies, to inform residents and visitors of the Greater Golden Gate Area regarding the means to prevent, prepare for, and cope with, disaster situations. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 68 of 220 Policy 7.1.1: The County, fire districts that serve the Golden Gate area, and other appropriate agencies, shall embark on an education program to assist residents in knowing and understanding the value and need for prescribed burning on public lands in high risk fire areas. Policy 7.1.2: The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services shall actively promote the Firewise Communities Program through public education in Golden Gate Estates. Policy 7.1.3: The Collier County Land Development Services Department of the Growth Management Division shall evaluate the Land Development Code for Golden Gate Estates and shall eliminate any requirements that are found to be inconsistent with acceptable fire prevention standards. This evaluation process shall be coordinated with the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services. Policy 7.1.4: The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services shall hold one or more annual “open house” presentations in the Golden Gate Area emphasizing issues related to wildfires, flooding, emergency access and general emergency management. OBJECTIVE 7.2: Ensure that the needs of all applicable emergency services providers are included and coordinated in the overall public project design for capital improvement projects within the Golden Gate Area. Policy 7.2.1: Preparation of Collier County’s annual Schedule of Capital Improvements for projects within the Golden Gate Area shall be coordinated with planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Fire Districts, public and private utilities, Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier County Sheriff’s Department to ensure that public project designs are consistent with the needs of these agencies. Policy 7.2.2: Planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier County Sheriff’s Department will receive copies of pre-construction plans for capital improvement Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 69 of 220 projects in the Golden Gate Area and will be invited to review and comment on plans for the public projects. OBJECTIVE 7.3: Develop strategies through the County Growth Management Division – Planning and Regulation for the enhancement of roadway interconnection within Golden Gate City and the Estates Area, including interim measures to assure interconnection. Policy 7.3.1: The Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services, the Collier County Transportation Division, Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, and other appropriate Federal, State or local agencies, shall begin establishing one or more of the following routes for emergency evacuation purposes: d. An I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard. e. Improved emergency access from Everglades Boulevard to I-75. f. Construction of a north-south bridge on 23rd Street, SW, between White Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. Policy 7.3.2: All new residential structures shall comply with NFPA (National Fire Protection Association, Incorporated) 299 Standard for Protection of Life and Property from Wildfire, 1997 Edition, as adopted by reference in the Florida Fire Code or the most recent edition. Policy 7.3.3: Modified portions of existing structures shall meet NFPA Standards through the adoption of appropriate regulations in the County Building Codes. Policy 7.3.4: County-owned property within Golden Gate Estates shall be subject to an active, on -going management plan to reduce the damage caused by wildfires originating from County-owned properties. Recommended Policies: • The County shall explore options for funding of wildfire prevention measures, including funding support for the Florida Forestry Service and Independent Fire Districts, including but not limited to a Golden Gate Estates MSTU and general fund revenue. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 70 of 220 • The County will review and update as necessary all interlocal agreements and mutual aid agreements to assure coordination of legal, procedural and educational components of Wildfire prevention. • Update references to Independent Fire Districts. Lighting Standards A recent policy guide created at the request of the Board, entitled “Collier County Lighting Standards”, describes the importance of proper lighting for the health and welfare of County residents: “Well coordinated and designed lighting systems are an effective way to enhance the feeling of security and comfort throughout the County.” This policy guide became effective in 2017, and is intended to be updated periodically as standards and conditions change. It applies to County facilities such as roads, parks, public facilities and utility sites and will be incorporated into new and retrofitted lighting at all such locations. Consistency, economy and best management practices (BMP’s) are underscored. This policy guide mirrors a longstanding desire of Golden Gate Estates residents to protect their rural environment from light pollution. It is important to Estates residents for environmental reasons- both natural and human environments. Safety, aesthetics and the natural environment are fostered by best management practices lighting standards. Currently, the GGAMP provides specific guidance for street, parking and recreational lighting including appropriate fixture types such as “low pressure sodium” lamps. Appropriate shielding is also called out. These standards are well intentioned but in some cases limiting in that lighting technology changes more frequently than the Master Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 71 of 220 The desire for “dark sky” lighting standards in the Estates was strong- 90% of the public polled supported “dark sky” lighting standards. The public was not polled as to a voluntary or a regulatory approach. Given the County’s leadership role in researching and updating standards for its own facilities, this research can greatly benefit the Estates residents, both directly as public spaces are improved, and as a template for broader application moving forward. As the County transitions its lighting at new and renovated locations, more feedback and best practices can be discovered. In addition, a study of commercial lighting county-wide is planned. Given these advances, the recommended lighting policies for the Master Plan should reflect a flexible and updated approach. Broad language may be most suitable. More specific provisions will be incorporated into the LDC or referenced therein. Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing provisions in the GGAMP: Objective 5.1: Provide for new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers. Policy 5.1.1: Consistent with public safety requirements, street, recreational and structure lighting within Golden Gate Estates shall be placed, constructed and maintained in such a manner as to prevent or reduce light pollution. In implementing this Policy, the County shall apply the following standards: a. If a streetlight or an area light is required, it shall be of the type specified to protect neighboring properties from direct glare. Area lighting shall be shielded such that direct rays do not pass property lines. Low-pressure sodium lamps are encouraged while halogen type lamps are discouraged. 1. Where required, the street lamp shall be of the high pressure sodium type and have a “cobra head with flat bottom” style or be fully shielded so that light is directed only downward. Street lamps shall be mounted on a wood pole at a height and wattage recommended by the appropriate electric utility and as appropriate for a rural area. 2. Parking lot lamps shall be low-pressure sodium type lamps and shall be mounted so that they point downward without direct rays extending past the parking lot, building entrance, walkway or other area intended to be illuminated. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 72 of 220 b. Where lighting of recreational areas is required, such lighting shall be mounted so as to focus illumination on the areas intended to be illuminated, and to limit th e amount of light that extends outside of the intended area. c. This Policy shall not apply to Tract 124 and the north 150 feet of tract 126, Unit 12, Golden gate Estates, located in the southwest quadrant of the Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards Neighborhood Center. Objective 5.3: Provide for the protection of the rural character of Golden Gate Estates. Recommended Policies: • Eliminate the specificity found in Policy 5.1.1; consider standards for the LDC. • County owned facilities shall comply with the Collier County Lighting Standards. • The County shall continue to coordinate with FDOT and FPL to provide guidance and reach agreement on roadway standards and security lights. • The County will consider lighting standards for commercial and other non -residential uses, and may provide specific Land Development Code standards for such uses within Golden Gate Estates consistent with its rural character and specific lighting zone classifications within. • The County will consider lighting standards for residential locations within Golden Gate Estates within the Land Development Code, and determine whether such standards will be encouraged or mandatory and the extent to which they apply to new or existing residential development. Septic Tank Service Golden Gate Estates is a very low density subdivision, where maximum allowed density is 1 unit per 2.25 acres. Given the cost and in-feasibility of supplying centralized water and wastewater service, residential development relies on well and septic systems. Centralized service was considered during the “East of 951 Services and Infrastructure Horizon Study” (2006). However, the estimated cost per parcel for water and wastewater ($112,000) far exceeded the benefit. Maintenance of septic systems in the Estates requires periodic pumping and removal of septage, among other maintenance costs. Residents expressed the concern over cost of service and legal disposal during the public outreach meetings, suggesting that the County should provide a processing facility within Collier County to keep costs and compliance within check. In addition, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 73 of 220 transport of this material outside the County typically involves more road miles traveled compared to in-County disposal. In a broader initiative, Collier County has embarked on an initi ative to create a “Bio-solids Management Facility” (BMF). The BMF would ideally result through solicitation for a build, design and operate entity selected by the Board, providing efficient and compliant processing of bio -solids, oils, grease, septage and similar by-products. The likely location for this facility would be the Resource Recovery Business Park located near the landfill. The outcome of the BMF initiative is expected to result in cost effective and environmentally sustainable treatment of these waste streams, producing energy and high quality fertilizer by-products. The BMF solicitation is currently in Step 2 of the solicitation, having narrowed the search to three qualified forms. Step 2 proposals are due in 2017, and an award of contract is an ticipated in early 2018. The selected entity will operate the facility for a minimum of 25 years, and design the facility so that it is expandable for future needs. Septage collection and treatment is part of the RFP; its efficacy is yet to be demonstrated. Growth Management Plan Policies Related existing provisions in the GGAMP: Objective 1.2: Ensure public facilities are provided at an acceptable level of service. Objective 1.3 Protect and preserve the valuable natural resources within the Golden Gate area. Objective 5.2 Balance the provision of public infrastructure with the need to preserve the rural ch aracter of Golden Gate Estates. Recommended Policy: • The County will continue to pursue a best management practices approach to making septage treatment available within Collier County, as a component of bio -solid processing, either directly or through a public private partnership. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 74 of 220 Preserve Exemption Currently the GMP and LDC require a portion of the native vegetative present on property to b e set aside as preserve when property is developed. Exceptions to this requirement include single -family home sites situated on individual lots or parcels, single lot splits or where property is used for agricultural purposes. Subdivision of land into three or more lots or parcels requires approval of a subdivision plat, which in turn triggers the requirement for a preserve, among other requirements. As the platting of the Golden Gate Estates predated this requirement, no preserves were required as part of its establishment. There are a limited number of lots within the Golden Gate Estates subdivision (depicted as the Estates Designation on the County’s Future Land Use Map (FLUM)) which could be divided into three or more lots, each a minimum of 2 ¼ acres size. Analysis by staff shows a total of 75 lots remaining in the Estates Designation, north of I-75, which could be subdivided as such (6.75 acres or more). These lots range from 6.78 acres to 12.97 acres, with all but two of these lots less than ten acres in size. Lot splits allow 2 parcels from a single tract, and because a re -plat is not required, lot splits fall squarely within the exemption to a required “preserve” area. Environmental staff believes it excessive to require small preserves for the remaining few lots that could be subdivided into three or more 2.25 acre single family lots. If subdivided as such, preserve requirements for all but two of these would be less than 1.33 acres, assuming they were entirely covered with native vegetation. Long term viability of these preserves is also a concern given their small size and location within a large single-family subdivision, with no other preserves or greenways to provide connection. Moreover, preserve exemptions for a limited number of 3 way splits would be consistent with the requirements of all other (12,000+) undeveloped Estates parcels. Related existing provisions in the GGAMP: Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 6.1.1: “…native vegetation shall be preserved through the application of the following minimum preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria…except for single family dwelling units situated on individual parcels…” Note; As interpreted by the LDC, “the single-family exception is not to be used as an exception from any calculations regarding total preserve area for a development containing single family lots” (Sec. 3.05.07 B). Recommended Policy: • The subdivision of tracts 13 acres or less in size within Golden Gate Estates shall not trigger preserve requirements under CCME Policy 6.1.1. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 75 of 220 Section 4: List of Initial Recommendations A. Golden Gate City 1. Land Use and Economic Vitality • Establish land use designations to protect established, stable, neighborhoods and provide opportunity for redevelopment and renewal through development practices that promote compatibility. • Support redevelopment of Golden Gate Parkway to provide for a viable pedestrian environment adding to the vibrancy and walkability of Golden Gate City. • Add land uses within the designated Activity Center intended to promote job growth and strengthen the economic health of Golden Gate City. • Protect the land uses allowing for diversity of residential housing. • Engage with the Golden Gate Civic Association and MSTU to further community planning programs. • Consider redevelopment tools such as an Innovation Zone to further economic development and redevelopment strategies. • Develop amendments to the Land Development Code to support and implement redevelopment initiatives including incentives for building remodeling and renovation. • Develop a branding and marketing plan for Golden Gate City. • Ensure pertinent incentive programs are made available to those seeki ng business creation and redevelopment opportunities in Golden Gate City. • Modify the land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway to create a consistent development pattern. • Add target industry uses to the Activity Center. • In the Santa Barbara Commercial Subistrict remove the one acre project minimum. 2. Transportation and Mobility • Support all transportation needs within Golden Gate City with an emphasis on walkability. Walkability will be improved through the implementation of the recommendations of the MPO’s Walkability Study. • Within the Activity Center, maintain multiple connections to the surrounding neighborhoods and through the Activity Center while providing safe and direct access to transit stops within or adjacent to the Activity Center. • Consider protecting alleys from vacating process where there is reasonable connection and continuity for future pathway corridors. • Initiate periodic speed studies in Golden Gate City and when appropriate, utilize traffic calming measures and speed limit reductions to ensure a safe pedestrian environment. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 76 of 220 3. Environmental Stewardship • Maintain and expand sewer and water service in accordance with the Collier County Water and Sewer District Implementation Plan. B. Golden Gate Estates 1. Land Use and Economic Vitality • Protect the low-density character of the Estates by resisting private petitions to change existing residential land use designations in the GGAMP, other than the limited locations described below. • Allow applications for rezoning to upsize existing Neighborhood Centers to accommodate ingress and egress, parking, buffering, water management, well, septic or package plant siting, future right-of way expansion or additional open space not to exceed 20 acres per quadrant. This provision does not guarantee that u psizing will be granted, but provides an opportunity to request commercial rezoning based on the above-stated needs. • Allow conditional use or C-1 rezone applications for the Immokalee Rd. corridor (Oaks area). This provision does not guarantee approval, but allows application without amendment to the GMP (5 parcels affected). • Add an additional locational criterion for conditional uses to include major roadway intersections, defined as the intersection of a 4-lane roadway (or greater) with a 4-lane roadway (or greater), as identified in the LRTP. • Adjust the Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions to allow conditional use applications for properties at the intersection of Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd. • Adjust the Collier Blvd. Special Provisions to allow the same conditional use locational criteria as currently allowed at other locations in Golden Gate Estates. • Allow conditional use applications at any location in Golden Gate Estates for the erection of communication towers, without need to also amend the GGAMP. • Develop architectural standards in the Land Development Code that apply to commercial, conditional and public facility uses in the rural Estates to create coherence and area identity that reflect the rural character of the area. • Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for “park and ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. • In its review and adoption of GMP amendments to the RFMUD and th e RLSA, the County should reflect the need for appropriate buffers and setbacks from adjoining Golden Gate Estates properties, with specific development standards in the LDC. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 77 of 220 • Where GMP Amendments or Rezoning actions require written notice to homeowners wit hin a given distance of the subject parcel, notice requirements shall also be extended the length of any dead-end street or avenue where a direct transportation or aesthetic impact can be reasonably anticipated. • Following the completion of the Randall Bou levard and Oilwell Road Corridor Study, the Zoning Division shall evaluate the future land uses along Immokalee Road in the vicinity of Randall Boulevard and Oil Well Road and make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for any proposed changes to the future land use. 2. Transportation and Mobility • The County Transportation Planning Section shall provide an update to the 2008 East of CR 951 Bridge Study with recommendations based on emergency response, evacuation times, cost components and other considerations to the Board within 2 years of adoption of this policy. • Everglades Blvd. between Golden Gate Blvd. and I-75 shall not be expanded beyond 4 lanes. • The County shall coordinate with FDOT and the MPO’s 2045 LRTP to submit a revised Interchange Justification Report for an interchange at I -75 in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd (T 49, R 28, S 31-34). • The County will update and report on the timing of the paving of lime rock roads, including a cost/benefit analysis, within 2 years of adoption of this policy. Alt.: The County will budget the full completion of the paving of lime rock roads in fiscal years 2018 through 2020. • Planning, funding and implementation of potential greenway trails shall be coordinated among the County’s Parks and Recreation Division and the MPO. • The County will consider public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for “park and ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. 3. Environmental Stewardship Water Resources • The County will continue to pursue the Watershed Management Plan initiatives in Golden Gate as financial and staff resources become available. • The County will periodically coordinate with the South Florida Water Management District to review the Level of Service Standards for primary water management canals within the County. • The County will encourage the combination of parcels less than 2.25 acres in size with adjacent parcels, to preserve the low-density advantages within Golden Gate Estates. Within Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 78 of 220 2 years, GMD staff will recommend to the Board potential incentives to apply to developed and undeveloped lots. • The County will evaluate the potential for a second transfer of development units/rights program (TDU) to transfer density from Estates lots to the urban area, and will consider transfer of ownership options, in a timeframe directed by the Board. • The County will commence a formal study on the feasibility of dispersed water management (DWM) for single-family Estates lots, and determine whether a DWM initiative should be voluntary or mandatory and the extent to which the program should apply to developed and undeveloped properties. • The County will continue to identify and implement educational opportunities related to water resources for use by parcel owners, home owners, builders, real estate professionals and the public to aid in understanding and addressing the owner’s financial and personal interests as well as area-wide impacts. • Acquisitions of parcels in Golden Gate Estates by Conservation Collier shall be consistent with Watershed Management Plan objectives, and shall prioritize hydrologic benefits above other review criteria. Fire Control • The County shall explore options for funding wildfire prevention measures, including funding support for the Florida Forestry Service and Independent Fire Districts, including but not limited to a Golden Gate Estates MSTU and general fund revenue. • The County will review and update as necessary all interlocal agreements and mutual aid agreements to assure coordination of legal, procedural and educational components of Wildfire prevention. • Update references to Independent Fire Districts. Lighting • Eliminate the specificity found in Policy 5.1.1; consider standards for the LDC. • County owned facilities shall comply with the Collier County Lighting Standards. • The County shall continue to coordinate with FDOT and FPL to provide guidance and reach agreement on roadway standards and security lights. • The County will consider lighting standards for commercial and other non -residential uses, and may provide specific Land Development Code standards for such uses within Golden Gate Estates according to its overall rural character and specific lighting zone classifications within. • The County will consider lighting standards for residential locations within Golden Gate Estates within the Land Development Code, and determine whether such standards will be Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 79 of 220 encouraged or mandatory and the extent to which they apply to new or existing residential development. Other • The County will continue to pursue a best management practices approach to making septage treatment available within Collier County, as a component of bio -solid processing, either directly or through a public private partnership. • The subdivision of tracts 13 acres or less in size within Golden Gate Estates shall not trigger preserve requirements under CCME Policy 6.1.1. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 80 of 220 Appendix A Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Public Outreach Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 81 of 220 Introduction The Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) public outreach process included extensive public engagement. Residents and stakeholders were encouraged to provide input through multiple platforms including eight public workshops, staff presentations to both the Golden Gate City Civic Association and the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association, a user-friendly website with surveys, and communications through email distribution lists with approximately 330 stakeholders. As the GGAMP has the three distinct areas of Golden Gate City, the Eastern Estates (east of Collier Boulevard) and the Western Estates (west of Collier Boulevard), staff focused outreach to provide individual attention to each area. In this way, staff was able gauge the public’s perspective on unique differences in values and priorities. In part, these values can be visualized with the outcome of the first set of workshops where staff engaged the stakeholders to envision the future. A series of questions were asked through surveys that were distributed during the workshops and were posted on the dedicated GGAMP restudy website. The following word clouds summarize the values and expectations of those who participated in the process. The surveys and word clouds formed the basis for the communities’ vision statements. Staff first drafted the vision statements based on information provided, and at following public workshops the participants refined the statements. The goals, objectives and po licies of the GGAMP should recognize and implement these vision statements. Golden Gate City Vision Statement “Golden Gate City is a safe, diverse, family-oriented community that offers easy access to education, parks, shopping and services within a vibrant, walkable community.” Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 82 of 220 Golden Gate Eastern Estate Vision Statement “The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community with limited goods and services in neighborhood centers, defined by a rural character with an appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings.” Golden Gate Western Estate Vision Statement “Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density, large-lot residential neighborhood in a natural setting with convenient access to the coastal area.” Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 83 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Eastern Estates - Introduction Public Workshop, April 20, 2016 As guests of the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Introduction: At the invitation of the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association (GGEACA), Collier County planning staff introduced the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy which will result in an update to the GGAMP. The purpose of the staff presentation was to identify the major components of the GGAMP, and particularly as it pertains to the Eastern Estates (east of CR 951) area. Emphasis was placed on major themes and the idea that visioning for the future should consider many factors as they contribute to the well-being of the next generation. Meeting Summary: Michael Ramsey, President of the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association opened the meeting. He greeted elected and appointed County and District officials, as well as various candidates fo r County Commission Districts 5 and 3. Approximately 125 community members or stakeholders attended the meeting. Mr. Ramsey described the purpose of the meeting as an introduction of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan update process, and asked residents to not get sidetracked with other specific topics that are not a part of the GGAMP. As an example, the issue of fracking should not be discussed, as it is not a Master Plan concept. Commissioner Tim Nance provided an overview of GGAMP in the context of other P lanning Restudies and the importance to the Golden Gate area residents. He reminded the group of the relevance of the “green map”, in that 0ver 75% of the County’s area is already in conservation status, and that the Rural Fringe Receiving Areas are among the last development areas left in the County; they can complement the Estates if carefully planned. He indicated that all four Restudy areas would consider the same important elements to help achieve consistency between Restudies: land use; transportation/mobility; water; environment; and economic vitality. He reported that an Oversight Committee has been appointed to help direct public involvement, consistency, sustainability and economic vitality, and introduced Jeff Curl, the Oversight Committee member representing the Golden Gate area. Community Planning Manager Kris Van Lengen provided a PowerPoint presentation, and stated that this would be the first of several GGAMP meetings, and that this first meeting is in the nature of an introduction. Content includes an update of relevant issues in the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 84 of 220 Restudy, concepts currently embedded in the GGAMP, and finally a high-level visioning exercise for the future of the Eastern Estates. Consistent among all Restudies is the planning wheel- a process matrix that describes present plans, public outreach, staff data and analysis, development of alternatives, republication, ultimately with recommendations that reflect stakeholder consensus, and finally re -initiation of public outreach. The process may include several turns if the “wheel” prior to formal public hearings. A reflection of the current progress of the Rural Fringe Restudy included the fact that there was broad support among stakeholders to incentivize uses that are not presently adopted- most particularly free-standing employment centers and sports venues. GGEACA and attendees were encouraged to attend future Rural Fringe meetings- as close neighbors with commercial and mobility issues; they are true stakeholders in that process. The nexus among three Restudy areas, all within 3 miles of North Golden Gate Estates, was also noted, highlighting the total commercial activity in the area that would benefit the Estates while adding no further Golden Gate Estates Neighborhood Centers. A balance is needed among all commercial centers and activities. The discussion on current GGAMP provisions began with an overview of currently scheduled meetings, which will be rotational among Eastern Estates, Western Estates and Golden Gate City. A brief history described the major Restudy between 2001 and 2003 as well as the several private Growth Management Plan amendments that followed. Key features of the current GGAMP, as pertain to the Eastern Estates, were listed under the matrix described by Commissioner Nance. Interpreting the current goals of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan as it relates to the Estates, an “existing vision” was derived and described as a low density residential community with rural character, limited commercial services, safe and efficient roadways, and emergency services coordination. Principal Planner Anita Jenkins provided an interactive visioning session. She began by describing the nature and purpose of a community vision: what the community should look and feel like af ter implementation, as envisioned by residents. After discussing the purpose, Ms. Jenkins challenged the audience to complete brief answers or descriptions to a number of visioning questions: How does the Eastern Estates complement the County as a whole, what is it the best location for, what would you like to read in the newspaper about the area, 10 years from now, what things would you suggest to improve the area? Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 85 of 220 Individual slips were distributed throughout, and attendees wrote their visions in answer t o these questions. A total of 45 full sets of questionnaires were returned. A summary of the written comments can be found here. It was announced that the questions would be available on the web site as a survey questionnaire for those that wished to provide input in that manner. Following the exercise, participants were encouraged to share their ideas. Various themes emerged, particularly the preservation of the rural character of the Eastern Golden Gate area. Some spoke in support of a sense of place, including renaming/rebranding the Eastern Estates and the streets, creating institutional and commercial architectural standards that are more suitable for the rural character. Other areas of importance were protecting important watershed areas, and creating greenways. Residents also wanted to discuss the Rural Lands West project, the Habitat Conservation Plan and noted fracking was a concern. Commissioner Nance addressed these topics and noted other venues and agencies will be covering these issues more thoroughly. The Community Planning agenda item on Golden Gate Area Master Plan introduction, concluded at 8:40; the GGEACA meeting agenda items resumed at this time. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 86 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Western Estates - Introduction Public Workshop, May 11, 2016, 6:30 PM Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: Collier County planning staff provided an introduction to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy which will result in an update to the GGAMP. The purpose of the staff presentation was to identify the major components of the GGAMP, particularly as it pertains to the Western Estates (west of CR 951) area. Emphasis was placed on major themes and the idea that visioning for the future should consider many factors as they contribute to the well -being of the next generation. Approximately 60 people attended. Meeting Summary: Greg Ault, Principal, AECOM, as consultant for public outreach, began by discussing his role in the process and the importance of area-wide planning as we think about future generations. He introduced his staff and County staff, and described his favorable impressions of the area from the point of view of a non-resident. Community Planning Manager Kris Van Lengen provided a PowerPoint presentation, and stated that this would be the first of several GGAMP meetings, and that this first meeting is in the nature of an introduction. Content includes an update of relevant i ssues in the four area Restudies, concepts currently embedded in the GGAMP, and finally a high level visioning exercise for the future of the Western Estates. Consistent among all Restudies is the planning process - one that looks at current provisions and conditions, asks what can be improved, alternatives for improvement, and ultimate decision-making by the Board of County Commissioners. Important focal points include permitted land uses, transportation issues, environment, and economic vitality. Citizens were encouraged to use on-line resources to supplement their understanding and provide input when surveys become available. Mr. Van Lengen presented the idea to study GGAMP in three separate segments: Eastern Estates, Western Estates and Golden Gate City. There were no objections raised to this approach. The history of the GGAMP was discussed, including the fact that ten amendments to the plan have occurred since the last major restudy was completed in 2003. After describing the organization of the GGAMP document, it was noted that the major provisions related to Goals, Objectives and Policies were identical to those of the Eastern Estates; low density, rural character, infrastructure and emergency services needs. Residents might consider whether they wish to emphasize a unique vision and goals. Unlike the Eastern Estates (approximately 50% built out), the Western Estates is 88% built out. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 87 of 220 With respect to Land uses, permitted uses and conditional uses were described. Also noted was the special language in the GMP describing the limitation on additional conditional uses along the Golden Gate Parkway. The vast majority of the citizens who attended appeared to live within close proximity to Golden Gate Parkway. Accordingly, there was significant comment from the attendees related to the fact that they do not wish to change any of the current land use restrictions related to Golden Gate Parkway. Mr. Greg Ault asked for a show of hands in favor of no change to the land uses on the Parkway. There was nearly unanimous agreement, as shown in the photos below and by virtue of the responses received in the visioning session. Principal Planner Anita Jenkins provided an interactive visioning session. She began by describing the nature and purpose of a community vision: what the community should look and feel like after implementation, as envisioned by residents. After discussing the purpose, Ms. Jenkins challenged the audience to complete brief answers or descriptions to a number of visioning questions: How does the Western Estates complement the County as a whole, what is it the best location for, what would you like to read in the newspaper about the area, 10 years from now, what things would you suggest to improve the area? Individual slips were distributed throughout, and attendees wrote their visions in answer to these questions. A total of 45 full sets of questionnaires were returned. A summary of the written comments is shown below. It was announced that the questions would be available on the web site as a survey questionnaire for those who wished to provide input in that manner. Attendees expressed a strong desire to maintain the low-density residential character of their neighborhood with no commercial uses. Below is a summary of questionnaire responses: Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 88 of 220 I. The Western Estates will be Distinctive for: Large lots near town with quiet, open and peaceful character Rural beauty with traditional neighborhoods consisting of dead -end streets where neighbors know one another No commercial uses or special uses, maintaining uncluttered thoroughfares Natural habitat with areas for wildlife and environmental protection Single-family living for local working families Agriculturally and livestock friendly per allowances II. The Western Estates will be a premier location for: Peaceful living with private single-family homes Beautiful gateway to the City of Naples Quiet estates residential living Family and neighborly atmosphere safe for children Low traffic Small town feel Wildlife and agriculture A remote animal services substation to support domestic animals found in the area Accessible to services while maintaining a rural character Well maintained infrastructure A predominantly residential community with supporting uses including senior housing along arterials. Maintain distinction from Golden Gate City III. How does the Western Estates area complement Collier County? Untouched and quiet nature maintains the charm of Naples area A respite from commercial blight Peaceful living close to town Provides a non-gated, peaceful, estates-living neighborhood between the City of Naples and Golden Gate City Serves as the gateway to Naples Gives long-term residents a place to raise generations Maintains the value of environmentally friendly neighborhood with little commercial uses Unit 29 should be its own neighborhood, rather than part of Western Estates Clean, crime-free area Maintains true to the existing master plan Provides affordable living for year-round residents Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 89 of 220 High value residential housing with limited commercial and special uses Desire to be the “Pine Ridge Estates” of the area IV. What is the full potential for your community? Safe, cohesive neighborhood for families Desire to maintain privacy Maintain the existing character, no need for further enhancements or intrusions For the area of Unit 29 to be sub divided into its own area similar to Pine Ridge Estates Commercial and additional uses will only destroy the potential Country living close to town Enhance the “Gateway to Naples” Most desired residential acreage in Collier County Ability for growth of environmental protection services Addition of public services including parks and libraries with small, neighborhood commercial development to support local neighborhood V. Reading the newspaper in 10 years, what would the headline say about the Western Estates? “One of the best places to retire with friendly people” “Unique and faithful community that supports the integrity and charm of Naples” “A great and convenient place to live” “We are not a part of Golden Gate City” “Local homeowners rejoice over being left alone” “A pearl of beauty that truly complements Collier County” “A wonderful residential community to live in” “Commissioners gave in to their supporters and turned it into another Pine Ridge Road” “This community stayed the same” “Premier Estates living 3 miles from the beach” “Beautiful corridor to the City of Naples” “Excellent quiet location close to town provides solitude from busy work life” Depends on how much “commercial” money changes hands with commissioners “This master plan has not changed in 50 years. What a wonderful place” Hardly anything- this area is quiet. “Estate living still exists” “Close to everything in town while maintaining privacy” Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 90 of 220 VI. What three things would really improve the future of the Western Estates? Not amending the master plan No commercial uses Maintain privacy Maintain traffic flow without addition of lights or stops Enhance Golden Gate Parkway west of I-75 into a lush landscaped corridor serving as gateway to Naples Uncouple the 4-block area from the GGAMP Increase wall height for I-75 to reduce noise permeation Enforce existing laws and ordinances Small localized sub-neighborhoods with neighborhood commercial development that supports rural areas Establish additional wildlife and environmental preservation areas Provision of public services and access to schools, museums, parks, etc. To never build a RaceTrac in our area Create a name/identity for our neighborhood Re-study traffic impacts of I-75 interchange Consider traffic light at 66th Street SW Water feature at SW corner of Golden Gate Pkwy and Livingston is a very welcome, positive feature Sidewalks Nature conservancy Community gardens The workshop concluded at 8:35 p.m. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 91 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate City - Introduction Public Workshop, June 8, 2016 Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: The Collier County Community Planning staff provided an introduction to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy, which will result in an update to the GGAMP. The purpose of the staff presentation was to identify the major components of the GGAMP, particularly as it pertains to Golden Gate City and environs. Emphasis was placed on major themes and the idea that visioning for the future should consider many factors as they contribute to the well-being of the next generation. The meeting was noticed and 3 electronic signboards were placed in collector roadways in the City for a period of three days. Approximately 25 people attended. Meeting Summary: Community Planning Manager Kris Van Lengen provided a PowerPoint presentation, and stated that this would be the first of several GGAMP meetings, and that this first meeting is in the nature of an introduction. Content included an overview of all area restudies, concepts currently embedded in the GGAMP, and finally a high level visioning exercise for the future of Golden Gate City. The presentation explained the interrelationships between studies and the timing of each. Discussion also included the process, identifying current plan provisions of importance to the community, identifying opportunities for improvement and incorporating the community’s vision and values to bring forward to the Board for its consideration. The role of the Growth Management Oversight Committee was also covered. The discussion on current GGAMP provisions began with an emphasis on website content and various opportunities for interaction and input and an overview of currently scheduled meetings, which will be rotational among Eastern Estates, Western Estates and Golden Gate City. A brief history described the major Restudy between 2001 and 2003 as well as the several private Growth Management Plan amendments that followed. Key features of the current GGAMP, as Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 92 of 220 pertain to Golden Gate City, were described under the 2 major portions of the GMP: Goals, Objectives and Policies, and Land Use Designations. Interpreting the current goals of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan as it relates to the Golden Gate City, an “existing vision” was derived and described as a recognition of distinct neighborhood areas within the City, the value of sub-area plans along with City-wide plans, consideration of a GG City Land Development Code, the importance of connections to the greater Naples area, and a reference to utilit y expansion. Various Land Use categories were described and discussed, most notably the Mixed -Use Activity Center, the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict and the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict. The Golden Gate Parkway entryway into the City was also discussed. Questions and comments related to GMP and zoning overlays followed. Of note were comments related to the desire for a focal point within the Activity Center or nearby, roadway concerns and beautification. Principal Planner Anita Jenkins provided an interactive visioning session. She began by describing the nature and purpose of a community vision: what the community should look and feel like after implementation, as envisioned by residents. Key subject areas are land use, transportation, environment, economic and social activity and identity. After discussing the purpose, Ms. Jenkins challenged the audience to complete brief answers or descriptions to a number of visioning questions: How does Golden Gate City complement the County as a whole, what is it the best location for, what would you like to read in the newspaper about the area 10 years from now, what things would you suggest to improve the area? Consultants from AECOM also provided examples of streetscapes, walkability and City entryway features to stimulate imaginations. Overall, citizens seemed most interested in enhanced community facilities, infrastructure, and expression of art and culture native to the area. Specifically, a recommendation was made to extend the private utilities water to greater portions of the City (not wastewater), small business incubation, international food and arts locations, and the use of existing canals for recreation such as kayak and paddleboard. Individual slips were distributed throughout, and attendees wrote their visions in answer to these questions. A total of 35 questionnaires were returned. Below is a summ ary of questionnaire responses: I. Golden Gate City will be known for: Cleanliness Affordability New Growth and Development Celebrated Diversity Safety Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 93 of 220 II. Golden Gate City will be a great location for: Raising Families Affordability Community Services Mobility Recreation III. How does Golden Gate City complement Collier County? Diversity Center of Activity Accessibility to workforce IV. What is the full potential for your community? Unifying to accomplish goals A place of flourishing families, business, and community services Safe and effective for all modes of transit A downtown destination V. Reading the newspaper in 10 years, what would the headline say about the Western Estates? Clean safe and friendly with a lush landscape Third fastest growing city in the state of Florida Golden Gate notes first million-dollar home sale A great place to raise a family Number one most inviting community Golden Gate wins state championships in sports, music, arts and more More full-ride scholarships provided to residents per capita than anywhere in Florida Community rallies to improve image The remarkable turnaround and revitalization of Golden gate The city that met the needs of its people VI. What three things would really improve the future of Golden Gate City? Code enforcement Safety of mobility (pedestrian, bicyclists) Infrastructure Creation of a CRA Reduced public transit headways Creation of a community trolley Lighting Preservation of green space Increased homeownership Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 94 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate City Public Workshop, October 13, 2016 Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy- Golden Gate City Public Workshop was attended by several Golden Gate residents, county staff members, and local elected officials. The client team introduced the current GGAMP and presented a draft vision statement derived from the results of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. Finally, an aud ience polling session was conducted to obtain attendee feedback. Meeting Summary: Attendees revised the draft vision statement to read: “Golden Gate City is a safe , diverse, family-oriented community that offers easy access to education, parks, shopping and services within a vibrant, walkable community.” Audience polling was conducted to obtain additional feedback in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience polling are attached. Dialogue included: • active code enforcement day and night as opposed to the current complaint -driven code enforcement model • safety for all dimensions of Golden Gate City • additional lighting • limits to additional density • concern for the limited service area of potable water infrastructure and high costs associated with water infrastructure within existing service area o representatives of FGUA cited need to maintain and repair existing aging infrastructure prior to expanding service areas o understanding the importance of this discussion, the Golden Gate Civic Association offered to invite FGUA to a future civic association meeting where they could fo cus on the infrastructure concerns specifically • desire for additional distribution of commercial in the north area of Golden Gate City (Green Boulevard) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 95 of 220 • support for enhanced and uniform development rules for commercial and mixed -use areas • additional entertainment and recreation options for young adults • support for citizen-driven planning efforts. Golden Gate City Workshop: 10/13/2016 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Do you live in Golden Gate City No Yes 0%20%40%60%80%100% Which option best represents your relationship to Golden Gate City? Resident Business Owner Developer/ Representative Elected Official Other 0%20%40%60%80%100% How Satisfied are you with the locations of existing commercial uses in Golden Gate City? How satisfied are you with the potential locations of commercial uses in Golden Gate City?Very Unsatisfied Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 96 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Do you support a more uniform set of development rules for commercial or mixed- use areas? Do you agree with existing policies about citizen-driven planning efforts? Would you volunteer one evening per month to serve on a planning committee? Do you have adequate health care resources in Golden Gate City? Do you think Golden Gate City should have its own unique standards for architecture or landscaping? No Not Sure Yes 0%20%40%60%80%100% What type of commercial use is most needed in Golden Gate City? Retail Personal Services Dining Offices Other 0%20%40%60%80%100% What type of institution is most needed in Golden Gate City? Government Services Places of Worship Adult and Child Care Centers Other Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 97 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Should home-based businesses change in any way in Golden Gate City? Expanded Reduced Stay the Same Not Sure 0%20%40%60%80%100% How often do you walk to get somewhere in Golden Gate City? Never Monthly Weekly Daily 0%20%40%60%80%100% Do you have school-aged children that walk or ride bikes to school? No Yes I don't have children 0%20%40%60%80%100% Of the following options, what is your top priority for improvement in Golden Gate City? Street Lighting Traffic Calming Sidewalks Bike Routes/ Lanes Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 98 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Have you ever used Collier Area Transit (CAT) service? No Yes 0%20%40%60%80%100% How satisfied are you with the current CAT routes? How satisfied are you with the current CAT service times and schedule? How satisfied are you with gateway design for Golden Gate City along Golden Gate Parkway? Very Unsatisfied Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 99 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate Western Estates Public Workshop, October 20, 2016 Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate Western Estates Public Workshop was attended by several Western Estates residents, county staff members, local elected officials, as well as developers and their representatives. The client team introduced the current GGAMP. Greg Ault presented a draft vision statement derived from the results of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. Finally, an audience polling session was conducted to obtain attendee feedback. Meeting Summary: Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, provided an overview of the Western Estates in the context of the entire GGAMP and the urban area of Collier County. He noted the Western estates is a little more than 10% of the area and population or the Eastern Estates, but is 86% developed compared to 47% in the East. Also discussed was the structure and content of the Master Plan. Permitted and conditional uses were reviewed, and the locational restrictions for conditional uses were presented. Attendees agree that the corridor along the south side of Immokalee Rd. should be unified under a designation allowing C-1 uses. The concept of additional CU locations at major intersections was presented, along with incentive-based lot combinations. Attendees revised the draft vision statement to include the terms “natural”, “large-lot/estate-lot”, “limited-commercial/non-commercial” to read: “Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density large-lot residential neighborhood in a natural setting with convenient access to the coastal area.” Audience polling was conducted to obtain additional feedback in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience polling are attached. Dialogue included: • requests for transparency in notifications of conditional uses • requests for information regarding future plans for county-owned parcel at Vanderbilt and Collier Blvd • outlook and vision for attendees with properties fronting major arterials as well as the I-75 interchange is very different than others Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 100 of 220 o higher noise levels o higher traffic o less desirable to residential buyers o the word “commercial” is undesirable, but residents need the services that commercial brings with it • desire to incorporate pedestrian/bike trails/passive recreation using creative thinking with limited R.O.W. • lack of traffic lights along Golden Gate Parkway makes left turns difficult during rush hours • existing Parks & Recreation facilities’ programming is at maximum capacity and unable to accommodate all desired users • call to resist external pressure to change or develop further • desire for more inclusive dialogue relating to areas outside of the Golden Gate Parkway corridor • strong opposition to any commercial uses • concern for poor or lack of cellular reception in the Western Estates • mixed support to allow rental of guest homes • strong support for incentivized voluntary small-lot combination program • desire for the recognition of smaller “sub-areas” that comprise Western Estates Golden Gate Western Estates Workshop: 10/20/2016 0%20%40%60%80%100% Do you live in Golden Gate Western Estates?No Yes Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 101 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% How long have you lived in Golden Gate Western Estates? Less than 1 Year 1>5 Years 5>10 Years 10>20 Years Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City 0%20%40%60%80%100% Which option best represents your relationship to Golden Gate Western Estates? Resident Business Owner Developer/ Representative Elected Official Other 0%20%40%60%80%100% What type of commercial use is most needed in the Western Estates? Retail Personal Services Dining Offices Other 0%20%40%60%80%100% Should home-based businesses change in any way in the Western Estates? Reduced Stay the Same Not Sure Expanded Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 102 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% How satisfied are you with the locations of existing commercial uses in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of social organizations in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of child care and adult day care in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of religious institutions in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with cellular reception/service in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of group housing options for seniors or persons with special needs in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of assisted living facilities and nursing homes in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the neighborhood identity for the Western Estates? Very Unsatisfied Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 103 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Do you support office uses at major intersections? Do you support conditional uses at major intersections? Do you support conditional uses at any other locations not currently allowed? Would you support office or conditional uses along Immokalee Road? Would you support an Interchange Activity Center at the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and I-75? Should there be a change to allow rental of your guest house? Should there be a change to allow rental of your guest house? (Do-over) Would you be in favor of a voluntary "small lot combination" incentive program? Would you volunteer one evening per month to serve on a planning committee for the Golden Gate Area? Do you agree that raising livestock and crops should be allowed in the Urban Estates? Do you have adequate access to neighborhood parks in or near the Western Estates? Do you have adequate access to public spaces in or near the Western Estates? Do you have adequate access to ped/bike trail system in or near the Western Estates? No Not Sure Yes Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 104 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Would you consider a voluntary association for the Western Estates? No Not Sure Yes, sub-areas Yes , as a whole 0%20%40%60%80%100% How often do you walk to another destination? Never Monthly Weekly Daily 0%20%40%60%80%100% How do your school-aged children get to school? Bus Car Bike or Walk I don't have school-aged children 0%20%40%60%80%100% How do you feel about existing public street lighting in the Western Estates? Not Enough Light Perfect Amount Too Much Light Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 105 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Of the following options, what is your top priority for improvement in the Western Estates? Street Lighting Traffic Calming Sidewalks Bike/Ped Trail System Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 106 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate Eastern Estates Public Workshop, November 3, 2016 UIFAS Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate Eastern Estates Public Workshop was well-attended by approximately 130 Eastern Estates residents, stakeholders, and county staff members. The client team introduced the current GGAMP and presented a draft vision statement that was produced as a result of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. An audience polling session was then conducted to obtain additional feedback. Meeting Summary: Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, provided an overview on the Master Planning process, demographics of the area, existing public facilities, existing approved GMP locations for Neighborhood Centers and conditional uses, and coordination with the RFMUD restudy in providing nearby opportunities for retail, service and jobs for Estates residents. Transportation study areas were discussed as were watershed and other environmental topics. The following draft vision statement was presented to workshop attendees: “The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community with limited goods and services in neighborhood centers, defined by a rural character with an appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings.” Upon presenting the draft vision statement, attendees were asked to provide feedback and potential revisions. Responses included the following terms and subject areas: • No interference • Nature/natural/environment/park/recreation Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 107 of 220 • Family-oriented • Health and safety • Code enforcement • Rural/country-living • Protection of natural character • Desire for services including: postal, medical, governmental, community and recreation • Access to retail goods and personal services • Desire to change the wording “limited” presented within the draft • Acknowledgment of watershed/sheetflow • Sidewalks, bus stops, and refuge for school-aged children Audience polling was conducted to obtain additional feedback in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience polling session are attached. Additionally, attendees were encouraged to provide additional comments and feedback using written comment cards. Dialogue and comments received during and after the polling session included: • desire to preserve foliage on properties and only clearing necessary areas for wildfire protection • concern for the high volume of heavy equipment operating within and traveling through the Eastern Estates • mixed support for additional conditional uses including churches and assisted living facilities general satisfaction with availability/locations of social organizations mixed satisfaction with availability/locations of child care/adult day care, religious institutions, group housing options, assisted living facilities, general dissatisfaction with cellular reception/service • desire for roadway expansion and additional connectivity to the west • mixed support for additional commercial land designations, with general support for small shopping centers as opposed to large centers • call for effective code enforcement • desire for equestrian and other recreational trail networks Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 108 of 220 • request to prohibit fireworks and pyrotechnics in an effort to protect wildlife and prevent wildfires • requests for improved drainage • strong support for an I-75 interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard • general support for industrial areas or business parks to provide jobs and support trade near to the Eastern Estates • strong support for non-residential architectural standards specific to the Eastern Estates • support to allow rental of guest houses • overwhelming support for an incentivized small-lot combination program • general support for an incentivized transfer of ownership program Golden Gate Eastern Estates Workshop: Instant Polling Results, 11/03/2016 0%20%40%60%80%100% Do you live in Golden Gate Eastern Estates?No Yes 0%20%40%60%80%100% How long have you lived in Golden Gate Eastern Estates? Less than 1 Year 1>5 Years 5>10 Years 10>20 Years Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 109 of 220 (This space intentionally left blank.) 80%85%90%95%100% Which option best represents your relationship to Golden Gate Eastern Estates? Resident Business Owner Developer/ Representative Elected Official Other Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 110 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% How satisfied are you with the locations of existing commercial uses in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the potential locations of commercial uses in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of social organizations in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of child care and adult day care in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of religious institutions in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with cellular reception/service in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of group housing options for seniors or persons with special needs in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of assisted living facilities and nursing homes in or near the Eastern Estates? Very Unsatisfied Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 111 of 220 (This space intentionally left blank.) 0%20%40%60%80%100% What type of commercial use is most needed in the Eastern Estates? Retail Personal Services Dining Offices Other Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 112 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Should there be a larger commercial center central to the Eastern Estates? Should there be more neighborhood commercial centers throughout the Eastern Estates? Do you want specific architectural standards for non-residential uses in the Eastern Estates? Should there be a change to allow rental of your guest house? Would you use a Transit Park & Ride or Ride Sharing Facility? Do you support an I-75 connection in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard? Watershed Concept 1: Would you support an incentive to owners who wish to combine a 1.14-acre lot with an adjoining lot? Watershed Concept 2: Would you support a voluntary transfer of ownership program for undeveloped parcels identified by a watershed committee? Should there be usable public spaces in the Eastern Estates? Should there be trails and greenways in the Eastern Estates? No Not Sure Yes Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 113 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Is there a need for an industrial area or business park to provide jobs and support trade in or near the Eastern Estates? No Not Sure Yes, nearby- not in Yes, in the Estates 0%20%40%60%80%100% Should home-based businesses change in any way in the Eastern Estates? Reduced Stay the same Not Sure Expanded 0%20%40%60%80%100% Should potential Conditional Use applications change in any way in the Eastern Estates? Allow everywhere Allow along arterials Only at select locations Only certain kinds at additional locations They should not change Not Sure Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 114 of 220 Golden Gate City Commercial Property Owners Meeting February 16, 2017 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Introduction: To better understand the Golden Gate City commercial properties opportunities and constraints, a public workshop was scheduled specifically for these property owners. Staff mailed a meeting notice to all owners of record with property designated existing o r future commercial use. The meeting was well-attended by approximately 60 property owners, various county department staff members, the Chamber of Commerce, Economic Development staff, and County Commissioner Burt Saunders. Meeting Summary: Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, provided an overview of the Master Plan restudy process. Anita Jenkins, Principle Planner, discussed the previous Golden Gate City public workshops and specifically the vision statement the Golden Gate residents drafted for their community. Staff described the different commercial land use districts within Golden Gate City and how it these districts applied to their property. To invite discussion related to improvements that could be made to the Master Plan, staff asked questions related to future plans for commercial properties, and what obstacles in redevelopment had been identified. Property owner’s provided the following comments: ▪ Wants to redevelop within the next five years (Santa Barbara district) to do medical. o Problem is traffic safety concerns along Santa Barbara, o LDC requires project minimum of 1 acre rather than 1 parcel. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 115 of 220 o It would be helpful if the rezoning to commercial happened because properties are being advertised as residential rather than commercial. o Would like to build more duplex or triplex; city water is not available but would like it to be. o Thinks septic is a good optional because of the cost to install central sewage • Development standard and setbacks need to be amended to accommodate change from residential to commercial. • Plan for affordable housing in the in the residential area in the Golden Gate City. o When rezoning property it was discussed how to capture pass by traffic to be viable commercial. What happens to the displaced people when switching from residential to commercial? o Vertical mixed-use was discussed and identified as an option to maintain residences within commercial properties. • Golden gate parkway discussion that nobody is required to redevelopment the property. Can it be kept as residential if the owner does not live in it? Big concern so that owners can keep property regardless of who lives there. • Concerns about too many parcels changing from residential to commercial which will entail to pushing out those who want to stay residential. • If a CRA what percent would go into the pool? o It varies as the property values increase. Sliding scale based on the value of the property. • How many properties would have to agree to transfer from residential to commercial in Golden Gate section. o Mike Bosi, Zoning Director, discussed possible restrictions for creating a PUD. Parcel number would vary based on the LDC codes such as parking and square footage. • Traffic control to protect residents if conversation rate increased. • Would like more cafés and restaurants in Golden Gate City. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 116 of 220 • Realtor participating in the meeting provided perspective that if a community is more mixed-use the property values will increase • Promote remodeling without putting restrictions, better to let the owner based their remodels based off being grandfathered in rather than having to meet current LDC codes. • Discussion how the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce can help Golden Gate City by promoting pad ready sites on their website. • Commissioner Saunder’s provided concluding remarks encouraging redevelopment of the Golden Gate City commercial areas and mentioned the potential for utility conversion and state funding to help off-set costs. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 117 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate Eastern Estates Public Workshop, February 22, 2017 UIFAS Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate Eastern Estates Initial Recommendations Public Workshop was attended by approximately 31 Eastern Estates stakeholders, and county staff members. The client team introduced the current GGAMP and presented a revised vision statement that was produced as a result of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. An audience polling session was then conducted to obtain level of support for existing and newly recommended GGAMP policies specific to the Eastern Estates. Meeting Summary: Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, presented information on the status of the restudy, prior meetings, area demographics and key topic areas. Anita Jenkins, Principal Planner, presented results of visioning from prior meetings, including the community’s consensus on its distinctive qualities. Audience polling was conducted to obtain level of support for potential new policies and existing policies in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience polling session are attached. Additionally, stakeholders were encouraged to provide comments and feedback through written comment cards and group dialogue. Dialogue and comments received during and af ter the polling session included: • Conditional Uses at arterial intersections o Desire to preserve arterial intersections for potential future commercial as opposed to conditional uses since they are the most desirable to commercial property developers. o Need for larger conditional use parcels to be compatible with the surrounding community. • Transportation and mobility o Desire for an increased rate of road paving. o Concern for increased congestion on Everglades Blvd with a potential I-75 interchange. o Increased need for designated refuge/waiting areas for students waiting for school buses. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 118 of 220 o Desire for the interchange to be aligned with RFMUD receiving areas due to future increased population densities. o Concern for the future character of streets adjacent to a potential interchange. o Desire to limit access to or from the interchange. • Desire for larger buffers and setbacks for non-residential uses. • Need for appropriate lighting at rural intersections, without over-lighting entire corridors. • Need for reflective street signage and way finding o Strong concern for an increase of built guest homes and the overall effects on the community and population density if a policy were changed to allow for the lease of guest homes as well as adverse impacts on infrastructure, watershed, and code enforcement. o Desire to make senior centers and wellness centers a conditional use. Golden Gate Eastern Estates Workshop – Instant Polling Results: 02/22/2017 0%20%40%60%80%100% Which option best represents your relationship to Golden Gate Eastern Estates? Resident Business Owner Developer/ Representative Elected Official Other 0%20%40%60%80%100% Do you live in Golden Gate Eastern Estates?No Yes Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 119 of 220 (This space intentionally left blank.) 0%20%40%60%80%100% How long have you lived in Golden Gate Eastern Estates? How long have you lived in Golden Gate Eastern Estates? (do-over) Less than 1 Year 1>5 Years 5>10 Years 10>20 Years Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 120 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Retain existing policy allowing for livestock and crops. Retain existing policy to preserve the rural character of the Eastern Estates. Add new provision to allow Conditional Uses at arterial intersections. Add new provision to allow Conditional Uses at arterial intersections. (do-over) Add new provision to allow Group Homes (7-14 people). Add new provision to allow communications towers. Accommodate growing demand for employment, goods, services, and entertainment with provisions adjacent to the Estates. Neighborhood centers may be increased in size to accommodate stormwater, septic and buffer requirements. The County will develop rural architectural standards for commercial and institutional development in the Estates. Retain existing policy to pave lime rock roads. Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree Not Sure Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 121 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Retain existing policy to schedule (or update) and fund bridge improvements. Retain existing policy to create a greenway plan. Retain existing policy to increase north- south and east-west route alternatives. Retain existing policy to coordinate a future I-75 interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard. The County will update setback and buffer standards for non-residential uses in the Estates and for adjoining uses in the RFMUD and RLSA. Retain existing policy to conduct wildfire mitigation education and prevention programs. Retain existing policy that the County will consider incentives for wetland preservation. Retain existing policy that the County will encourage "dark sky" lighting standards. The County will promote the combination of 1.14-acre or similar "small lots" into adjoining lots through incentives The County will consider a TDR program for natural resource protection. Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree Not Sure Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 122 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% The County will consider dispersed water storage and watershed connectivity to, through, and from the Estates. The County will continue efforts to support independent fire districts and Florida Forestry Service in public education, planning, and resourcing related to wildfire prevention and response. The County shall continue to work toward the goal of providing a septic disposal facility located in Collier County. The County will create new lighting standards within the LDC. Do you support the ability of owners to rent/lease their guest homes. Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree Not Sure Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 123 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate City Public Workshop, April 26, 2017 Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy Golden Gate City Initial Recommendations Public Workshop was attended by approximately 10 Golden Gate City stakeholders, and county staff members. The county staff introduced the current GGAMP and public outreach to-date. An audience polling session was then conducted by the client team to obtain level of support for existing and newly recommended GGAMP policies specific to Golden Gate City. Areas of focus included complementary land uses, economic vitality, transportation and mobility, and environment. Meeting Summary Audience polling was conducted to obtain consensus for potential new policies and existing policies in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Additionally, stakeholders were encouraged to provide comments and feedback through group dialogue. Dialogue during and after the polling session included: • Code Enforcement ─ While discussing the information on page 10 of the PowerPoint, some of the attendees recommended that code enforcement be added as an additional “focus” idea. Some of the attendees were concerned with the way that environmental code – such as the removal of invasive trees – is enforced. • Architectural Review ─ Some of the attendees voiced that they would like to establish a review board to oversee architectural standards. • Stormwater improvements. ─ After the conclusion of the meeting, there was discussion of opportunities in future construction for stormwater systems improvements. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 124 of 220 Golden Gate City Workshop – Initial Recommendations: 04/26/2017 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Do you live in Golden Gate City?No Yes 0%20%40%60%80%100% How long have you lived in Golden Gate City? Less than 1 Year 1>5 Years 5>10 Years 10>20 Years Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City 0%20%40%60%80%100% Which option best represents your relationship to Golden Gate City? Resident Business Owner Developer/ Representative Elected Official Other Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 125 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Commercial sub-districts should be simpler and more cohesive, emphasizing mixed-use and supporting redevelopment opportunities. (do-over) Mixed-use provisions and Land Development Code standards should strive for uniformity The County should consider one or more zoning overlay(s) to reduce the cost and complexity of individual rezone petitions. Consider provision in zoning overlay to allow property improvements even if not to some of today's development standards (ex: parking, landscape, setback, etc.) Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: Remove prohibition on rental housing. Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards, including vertical mixed-use. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict: Remove prohibition on rental housing. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards, including vertical mixed-use. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict: Remove 1-acre rezone requirement. Golden Gate Professional Office Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards, including vertical mixed-use. Disagree No Opinion Agree Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 126 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Golden Gate Professional Office Subdistrict: Expand uses to C-3 (commercial) and residential. Golden Gate Professional Office Subdistrict: Increase height to allow 3 stories adjacent to Golden Gate Parkway. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict: Should the boundaries of the Subdistrict be expanded? Collier Boulevard Commercial Sub-District: Do you agree with the uses within this Subdistrict? Collier Boulevard Commercial Sub-District: Should certain light industrial uses be allowed if adding jobs to GG City? Enhance community participation in area and sub-area planning through a county- fostered initiative with the ultimate goal of self-sustained community planning. Enhance community cultural assets, international focus, and community identity. Adopt appropriate tools for business enhancement, such as incubators or accelorators. Explore feasibility of CRA, Business Improvement District (BID), or Innovation Zone within Golden Gate City. Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: Retain Plan language related to pedestrian connectivity and alternative modes of transportation. Disagree No Opinion Agree Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 127 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Identify and prioritize traffic-calming locations. Express need to conduct a pedestrian bridge connectivity study over canals. Study potential for utility service conversion from Florida Government Utility Authority to Collier County Water Sewer District. Continue canal/outfall water monitoring for surface and groundwater contamination as it relates to septic. Seek appropriate grant funding opportunities for conversion of septic to sewer service. Continue stormwater outfall and connectivity improvements for flood control. Develop a program requiring removal of all exotic vegetation using Golden Gate City as a pilot. Disagree No Opinion Agree Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 128 of 220 0%20%40%60%80%100% Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict: Should the Uses include "light industrial" if compatible with neighborhood? No No Opinion Yes Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 129 of 220 Correspondence Regarding Golden Gate City Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 130 of 220 Office of Business and Economic Development Research Memo: (April 18, 2017) Golden Gate Area Master-Plan (GGAMP)1 Overview: Collier County’s Economic Development is inclusive of Golden Gate City particularly with respect to retail and commercial business. However, various sources reveal that there is limited Industrial land which has been retarding the County’s capabilities for investment attraction and expansion 2. This update provides a great opportunity to create an environment to bring more development to the area covered by the Golden Gate Area Master-Plan (GGAMP). Big Boxes are increasingly becoming vacant big–box stores i.e. ‘dark boxes’3 at a time when the GGAMP remains heavily focused on Commercial use. Commercial Zoning is defined by Florida statutes4, to include activities predominantly connected with the sale, rental and distribution of products or performance of services while industrial-use means activities connected with manufacturing, assembly, processing, or storage of products. Industrial-use facilitates greater value-added activities associated with improved jobs and wages, while lower value-added investments usually promoted by commercial use activity, are generally subject to greater job termination, and this seems the opposite of the vision for the GGAMP. Industrial areas would indeed serve as a major economic boost for the county and in the Golden Gate area. However, industrial zoning would require buffers and other ways to separate business use from the residential areas. Heavy industrial-use has been associated with negative community impacts including environmental pollution. Proposing Mixed-use, or allowing certain light-industrial 5 uses as a conditional-use would be a great way to update the GGAMP. Conditional-use would allow for county staff to review and ensure that each proposed use will not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhoods. The main objectives for Golden Gate City could be further promoted and facilitated where the GGAMP includes mixed use and conditional use zoning that promotes light-industrial-uses and business parks in Goals 4 and 5 of the plan. This could also enable greater investments in some of Golden Gate City’s currently unused and underutilized ‘big-box’ spaces e.g. Sweet Bay, Sears and K-Mart. Points: • The 44 respondents included in the GGAMP survey 6 indicated they wanted Golden Gate City to: o facilitate new business as a top priority for improving Golden Gate City’s future; 1 http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=66933 2 http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=764 3 http://ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/bbtk-factsheet-blight.pdf 4 https://floridaldr.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/relevant-florida-statutes-definitions.pdf 5 Light or limited industrial zoning is intended for lands appropriate for low-intensity, light and medium industrial activities. Typical uses include assembly and fabrication industries, warehousing, distribution centers, administrative offices, and business support services that typically do not cause noise, air, or water disturbances or pollution. (see http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fairfield/html/Fairfield25/Fairfield2506.html retrieved April 18, 2017. 6 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/17Yols-i6vU-QMxD6RLNvPoW6NbkZFNfjwGJzBWWRgBo/viewanalytics Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 131 of 220 Office of Business and Economic Development o be distinctive for middle-class workers and new growth; o be a premier location for investment; • The Office of Business and Economic Development(OBED) reviewed the GGAMP and encourages more mixed or conditional-use zoning that promotes light-industrial activities and business parks. Goals 4 and 5 could be revised to include specific reference to advanced manufacturing, including automated apparel, light assembly and 3D printing, as well as call centers. • Several large retailers, including Payless, K-Mart, Sweet Bay and Sears are closing a significant number of stores in Collier County. That provides an opportunity for timely amendment to the Land Development Code (LDC) development standards and permitted uses that could help to bring new businesses to the area. For example, Sears in Chicago has repurposed a 127,000 square-foot store into a multitenant data center 7. This could be replicated in Golden Gate City if developers were allowed the proposed flexibility in development standards. Currently, there is vacant commercial and retail space, and a revision to the LDC to include mixed or conditional-use developments that promote light- industrial activities and business parks could help to meet resident’s needs. Throughout the nation, transforming plaza districts to mixed-use developments is a growing trend (see http://newsok.com/article/5545159 and http://mixeduse.sochaplazas.com/work/ ). Revising the GGAMP to allow such transitions could help improve the area’s economic competitiveness. Some tracts within Golden Gate Area are designated as Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Zones and mixed-or conditional-use could aid in their development. Action: OBED to- • coordinate with Zoning Division, GGCRA-MSTU and other affected parties at meetings prior to the public workshops this summer to work on discussions and drafting considerations for incorporating greater mixed-and conditional-uses that promotes light- industrial use and business park activities in Goals 4 and 5 of the GGAMP; and • participate in the GGAMP Public Workshops. 7 http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/06/former-sears-kmart-stores-become-data-centers/ Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 132 of 220 1 From:Michael Currier <mcurrier@govmserv.com> Sent:Monday, October 17, 2016 11:10 AM To:VanLengenKris Cc:Donna Lizotte; Ron Jefferson; JenkinsAnita Subject:RE: Golden Gate City and FGUA Attachments:GG-MAP SERVICE AREA-W & WW-UPDATED_2011.pdf Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Kris: I am not aware of FGUA sponsored line extensions since purchase in 1999. The most recent line extensions were constructed and paid by development; Publix on CR 951 and Collier schools. From: VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, October 14, 2016 11:29 AM To: Michael Currier Cc: Donna Lizotte; Ron Jefferson; JenkinsAnita Subject: Golden Gate City and FGUA Hello Michael: Many thanks to you and Donna for attending the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy public workshop last evening. I appreciate that you shared maps of your served area for water and wastewater service in Golden Gate City. I have two follow-up requests: 1. Can you provide those maps in PDF format so that the detail and color is more evident? 2. Can you share any examples of extending service to new street areas and how it worked out? For example, number of new residences included, cost per customer for impact fee and connection charge, etc.? Have you made any new connections in the past 10-20 years either in GG City or in your Service area just west in GG Estates? Thanks for helping us understand the underlying issues and business plans of FGUA, and thanks too for planning to meet again with residents at an upcoming Golden Gate Civic Association meeting. Respectfully, Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 133 of 220 1 From:DelateJoseph Sent:Friday, October 07, 2016 1:00 PM To:MoscaMichele Cc:JenkinsAnita; VanLengenKris Subject:RE: GG City improvements Attachments:GoldenGateCityStormwaterDrainageSystemImprovementPlan_CurrentConditions_2016.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_NE1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_NW1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_SE1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_SW1.pdf Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged This is a multi- year project that may take 20 years from start to finish. It is a maintenance project to replace the stormwater pipes and catch basins (stormwater inlets) in the 4 square mile GG City only. There are no ponds or new improvements planned. The total estimated construction cost is $15M in 2012 dollars. This amount obviously will be higher by the time is fully constructed due to inflation, construction cost increases, etc… The design costs are approximately 15-20% so that would add an approximate $3M to the 2012 total. Funding will be in small amounts as it is available and budgeted on a yearly basis. The County has requested a $1M FLA legislative earmark for this upcoming session but that is only a possibility of receiving funding. Attached are maps of the 4 Quads plus a relatively recent current conditions map that is mostly up to date. As a side note, we like to call it stormwater management, not drainage or flood control, even though the graphics say otherwise. Thank you. From: MoscaMichele Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 2:04 PM To: DelateJoseph Cc: JenkinsAnita; VanLengenKris Subject: RE: GG City improvements Hi Joe, The County’s Community Planning staff would like information about the stormwater improvements slated for Golden Gate City (refer to below email). I provided them with the below excerpt/information from a recent presentation given by Jerry. In addition, the 2016 AUIR identifies funding for the project in fiscal years 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 for “DC” – design, permitting, and construction. GG City Outfall Replacements Proposed Funding in FY 17: $500,000 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 134 of 220 2 Four-square-mile area of Golden Gate City Replacement and improvements to existing aging infrastructure: Replaced old catch basins with ditch bottom inlets with grates Installation of sumps at catch basins Re-grading and sodding of swales to prevent erosion When you have a moment, would you please provide Kris with the requested map(s) or graphics and any other pertinent project details. Thank you, Michele Michele R. Mosca, AICP Principal Planner Growth Management Department Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees & Program Management Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 tel. 239.252.2466 From: VanLengenKris Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 11:40 AM To: MoscaMichele Cc: JenkinsAnita Subject: GG City improvements Hi Michelle: You mentioned the outfall replacement project for GG City stormwater, ($.5m, FY 17). Do you have a map of the improvement locations, or graphics from studies to show improvement areas in flood control for certain blocks? Also, are there any other future stormwater improvements in the next 5-10 years? Thanks, Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 135 of 220 1 From:VanLengenKris Sent:Thursday, February 02, 2017 3:08 PM To:'Sandra Mediavilla' Cc:JenkinsAnita Subject:RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan Attachments:text GGAMP City Downtown Center Comm Sub.pdf; FLUM Downtown Commercial Subdistrict.pdf Hello Sandy: Thank you for your inquiry. I am attaching language and a reference map currently contained in our Comprehensive Plan within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan section. This material dates back to 2004. The Subdistrict containing your address is called Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict. We are in the process of a “restudy”, which means we want to obtain public comments and make changes reflecting public consensus and changed conditions. The area shaded on the map indicates one of many Subdistricts that was identified more than 10 years ago for redevelopment. You can read the language describing the intent. The Future Land Use (FLU) designation is a bit different than zoning. I believe your property is zoned residential. Nevertheless, the FLU would give a property owner the right to request a zoning change, subject to compatibility with surrounding areas and other considerations. As you will be unable to attend the meeting, please feel free to let me know whether you agree with this designation. I infer from your comments that you would prefer that addresses along 23d Ave SW not be a part of this FLU designation. Please feel free to confirm or expand. We will provide written comments to the hearing bodies after we assemble initial recommendations for change. Meanwhile, please feel free to contact me with further questions and comments. Very truly yours, Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies From: Sandra Mediavilla [mailto:SandraMediavilla@napleslaw.us] Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 2:04 PM To: VanLengenKris <KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net> Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan Kris: I am a property owner within the City area of Golden Gate. I received your letter yesterday regarding the GGAMP and informing me of the meeting to be held on February 16, 2017 at 5:30 pm. Unfortunately, I work until 5:30 therefore will not be able to attend the meeting. But let this email serve as my comments on the information contained in your letter. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 136 of 220 2 Your letter indicates that my property (which is clearly residential) is “allowed to have commercial uses”. I am hopeful you are not referring to the residential portion of Golden Gate City. I live at 4340 23rd Ave. SW. I have owned the house and resided in the house since 1976. While the entire area and population of Golden Gate City has greatly changed over my 41 years in the area, I cannot and will never agree to this residential area becoming in any way commercial. I am hopeful that when you refer to “commercial property owners”, you are referring to those areas of the City which are already commercial in nature, i.e. 951, the Parkway, Santa Barbara Blvd. etc. I cannot imagine that any portion of the residential areas of the City of Golden Gate would be deemed or somehow turned into a commercial area. As it is now, I live in an area which is now filled with people who are not of the nature as when I first moved into this neighborhood. If I were able to afford it, I would remove myself from this area to an area more to my liking. If this is not the case, please let me know and I will see if I can get the time off to attend your meeting in person. I look forward to hearing back from your office. Thank you. Sandy Sandra B. Mediavilla Florida Registered Paralegal Parrish, White & Yarnell, P. A. 3431 Pine Ridge Road, Suite 101 Naples, FL 34109 Phone: 239-566-2013 Fax: 239-566-9561 E-mail: SandraMediavilla@napleslaw.us Both Sandra Mediavilla and Parrish, White & Yarnell, P.A. intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Sandra Mediavilla immediately at (239) 566-2013. Thank you. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 137 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 138 of 220 Correspondence Regarding Eastern Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 139 of 220 1 From:MottToni Sent:Friday, April 01, 2016 5:28 PM To:VanLengenKris Cc:DowlingMichael Subject:1983 Agreement - GAC Land Trust Attachments:1983 Agreement.pdf; Reserved and Available List with Folio 2016.xlsx Follow Up Flag:Flag for follow up Flag Status:Flagged Hi Kris, Sorry I missed your call. Please find attached the 1983 Agreement between Avatar Properties Inc, f/k/a GAC Properties Inc. and Collier County. Michael Dowling is the liaison with the Golden Gate Land Trust Committee. Also attached is the list of remaining properties. I’ll be out of the office next week Monday through Wednesday and perhaps we can meet and discuss and questions you may have after that. Just let us know. Thanks Toni A. Mott Toni A. Mott, Manager, SR/WA Collier County Real Property Management 3335 Tamiami Trail East - Suite 101 Naples, FL 34112 Telephone Number: 239-252-8780 Fax Number: 230-252-8876 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 140 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 141 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 142 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 143 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 144 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 145 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 146 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 147 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 148 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 149 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 150 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 151 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 152 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 153 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 154 of 220 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 A B C D E F G H I J March 29, 2016 GAC Land Sales PHASE UNIT TRACT LEGAL ACRES OR BK/PG RESERVED FOR PER ACRE APPRAISED VALUE FOLIO NUMBER I 7 81 All of Tract 81 9.11 1257/794 Parks and Recreation (3 - 2016)$50,000 $455,500 36915200008 I 20 2 All of Tract 2 8.78 1257/794 School Board $40,000 $350,800 37590080008 I 195 85 All of Tract 85 4.77 1257/794 School Board $38,000 $181,260 45967400009 I 95 53 W 180 3.92 1257/794 School Board (3 - 2016)$60,000 $235,200 41824360008 I 96 121 All of Tract 121 4.52 1257/794 School Board (3 - 2016)$60,000 $271,200 41887560007 III 67A 110 All of Tract 110 1.49 1361/2029 North Naples Fire and Rescue $9,000 $13,410 40120440005 II 93 48 W105/W180 1.17 1361/2019 Greater Naples Fire and Rescue $10,000 $15,900 41714000009 II 93 48 E75/W180 1.14 1361/2019 Greater Naples Fire and Rescue $10,000 $11,400 41713880000 I 14 127 All of Tract 127 5.77 1257/1757 Future Marketability $50,000 $289,500 37289560004 I 17 89 All of Tract 89 4.62 1257/1757 Future Marketability $50,000 $250,000 37445840005 I 24 97 All of Tract 97 5 1257/1757 Future Marketability $50,000 $250,000 37807880001 I 49 126 All of Tract 126 5.61 1257/1757 Future Marketability $34,000 $190,740 39271840002 I 18 55 All of Tract 55 4.43 1257/794 Future Marketability $50,000 $250,000 37493920003 II 78 116 E75/W180 1.17 1361/2019 Future Marketability $9,000 $10,530 40749320001 II 78 116 E75/E150 1.17 1361/2019 Future Marketability $9,000 $10,530 40749320001 II 78 158 All of Tract 158 6.66 1361/2019 Future Marketability $9,000 $56,070 40752400002 III 42 1 All of Tract 1 7.38 1361/2029 Future Marketability $14,000 $103,320 38840040001 50 66 S 105, S 180 1.59 Available 39326920000 51 3 N 75, N 150 1.17 Available 39380200009 51 35 S 75 / S 150 1.13 Available 39384040003 73 59 E 75 / W 180 1.14 Available 40474920006 73 83 E 75 / W 150 1.14 Available 40476840003 73 103 S 75 / S 150 1.17 Available 40478280001 47 52 W 105 / W 180 1.59 Available 39145640008 Total Acres 85.64Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017Page 155 of 220 1 From:Heidi Liebwein <heidi.liebwein@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Wednesday, January 13, 2016 2:08 AM To:VanLengenKris Subject:Golden Gate Growth Management meeting at Collier Extension Good morning, During the meeting it was said we were to go on the website and provide feedback. I tried and was not successful as to where, so I am sending my thoughts in this email. I do not think you should build in Golden Gate, the people who bought out there were aware of the drive when they bought out in Golden Gate. IF they are willing to accept being very rural and the drive in to retail stores, then that is how they wanted it, or they would not have bought out so far. Please do not build in Golden Gate. Thank you, Heidi Liebwein Property owner in GG Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 156 of 220 1 From:Susie Mahon <susiemahon@comcast.net> Sent:Wednesday, October 05, 2016 9:40 PM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Future of Golden Gate Estates We won't be able to get to the meeting tomorrow evening but wanted to give our input. We would love it if Green Blvd could be extended to 16th. We live at what used to be at the corner of White Blvd and 23rd street sw - but now it's a "sweeping curve". Drivers love to speed around that curve and there have been several accidents - they don't all show up in accident reports because they're mostly one car accidents - people being stupid and running into our fence or mailbox- then they leave. The traffic on this corner is really bad especially between 3 and 6 pm - it's very difficult to get out of our driveway safely during that time. Is there a way to reroute the landscape trucks and trailers? - all the landscape companies out here seem to have grown by leaps and bounds - Stahlmans, Renfroe and Jackson, Case and then there's American Farms - some of their trucks are now double semis. The 45 mph speed limit is way too fast when they're going around this curve and many times people are passing each other on the curve or when they straighten out in front of our house. Also, all these trucks are going to tear the roads up. Also, would it be possible to widen the lanes on White Blvd a little- some of the vehicles/ trucks are so wide they hardly fit in the lane. Thank you, Charlie and Susie Mahon Sent from my iPhone Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 157 of 220 1 From:Ron and Lilianne <militorl@rogers.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:50 PM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Future of Rural Golden Gate Good afternoon Thank you for the invitation to the community meeting held October 6th. Unfortunately we are in Canada right now and could not attend. We own a home at 4325 10th St. N.E. which intersects with 47th Ave N.E. 47th Ave is a well travelled street that runs off of Immokalee Road. In term of safety, this is a very narrow street with many children meeting their school buses every weekday morning. Many parents can be seen waiting at each corner with their kids in the car because it is not safe for them to wait for the school bus on the side of the road. The entrance to our neighborhood where 47th intersects with Immokalee needs a face-lift. It would be very nice to see nice landscaping and lighting on both corners to welcome residents and guests coming into the area Thank you Sincerely Ron and Lilianne Milito Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 158 of 220 1 From:castillaglass120@gmail.com Sent:Friday, September 30, 2016 12:05 PM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Future Plan recommendation Please open I-75 and Everglades Exit the ramp is there, we need acces Thank you Angel and Ingrid Castilla Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 159 of 220 1 From:Octavio Sarmiento Jr <sammyosjr@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, September 21, 2016 5:06 PM To:JenkinsAnita Cc:Kitty Paz Subject:PARADISE FACILITIES Attachments:BROSURE_0301.pdf; collier_2016_sde031519696081546.jpg; EMAIL_0305.pdf; LETTER_ 0304.pdf; patio and legalization-Model.pdf 1 (6 files merged) (2).pdf; PROPERTY APPRAISER_0302.pdf; SURVEY.pdf Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Hi Anita, How are you? Hope you are doing well, we spoke on the phone few times in reference of a Church and now we also have this other Project that we had start prior, We are now also informing you of the intend and plans of Extension to the Existing Home Care Facility. I am attaching letter, documentation of the Home Care Facility, Parcel ID, Site Plan, Additions and Expanding Plans and more, so you can be aware of our intentions. Plans of expanding and adding from Six Residents to a total of 14 Residents and we love for you to add us and help us, so we can count with you and the County to be part of this new changes to the Golden Gate Master Plan, that will allow us to Expand. We like obtain that window of opportunities and continue our project, which then will continue with SDP building permits and others. Let me know if there is anything else you may need from us. My best Regards Thank you Octavio OCTAVIO SARMIENTO JR ASSA-AGENCIAS SARMIENTO S.A Permit Consultant 239-601-0485 sammyosjr@yahoo.com www.permitandplans.com 1100 Commercial Blvd #118 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 160 of 220 1 From:JenkinsAnita Sent:Thursday, October 06, 2016 7:55 AM To:ScottTrinity; WilkisonDavid Cc:VanLengenKris Subject:FW: Future of Golden Gate Estates Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged FYI - sharing issues identified -----Original Message----- From: Susie Mahon [mailto:susiemahon@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 9:40 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Future of Golden Gate Estates We won't be able to get to the meeting tomorrow evening but wanted to give our input. We would love it if Green Blvd could be extended to 16th. We live at what used to be at the corner of White Blvd and 23rd street sw - but now it's a "sweeping curve". Drivers love to speed around that curve and there have been several accidents - they don't all show up in accident reports because they're mostly one car accidents - people being stupid and running into our fence or mailbox- then they leave. The traffic on this corner is really bad especially between 3 and 6 pm - it's very difficult to get out of our driveway safely during that time. Is there a way to reroute the landscape trucks and trailers? - all the landscape companies out here seem to have grown by leaps and bounds - Stahlmans, Renfroe and Jackson, Case and then there's American Farms - some of their trucks are now double semis. The 45 mph speed limit is way too fast when they're going around this curve and many times people are passing each other on the curve or when they straighten out in front of our house. Also, all these trucks are going to tear the roads up. Also, would it be possible to widen the lanes on White Blvd a little- some of the vehicles/ trucks are so wide they hardly fit in the lane. Thank you, Charlie and Susie Mahon Sent from my iPhone 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 161 of 220 1 From:ScavoneMichelle Sent:Wednesday, October 19, 2016 4:07 PM To:militorl@rogers.com Cc:VanLengenKris; WilkisonDavid; JenkinsAnita; ScottTrinity; KhawajaAnthony; AhmadJay; WilkisonDavid; PutaansuuGary; LulichPamela Subject:RE: TO 6153 / RE: Future of Rural Golden Gate Mr. and Mrs. Milito, Thank you for providing your comments. We appreciate your input. Staff will be reviewing all input received and forwarding to appropriate staff for future planning and programming as funding availability permits. On behalf of Staff, Michelle Scavone, GMD Operations Coordinator From: Ron and Lilianne [mailto:militorl@rogers.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:50 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Future of Rural Golden Gate Good afternoon Thank you for the invitation to the community meeting held October 6th. Unfortunately we are in Canada right now and could not attend. We own a home at 4325 10th St. N.E. which intersects with 47th Ave N.E. 47th Ave is a well travelled street that runs off of Immokalee Road. In term of safety, this is a very narrow street with many children meeting their school buses every weekday morning. Many parents can be seen waiting at each corner with their kids in the car because it is not safe for them to wait for the school bus on the side of the road. The entrance to our neighborhood where 47th intersects with Immokalee needs a face-lift. It would be very nice to see nice landscaping and lighting on both corners to welcome residents and guests coming into the area Thank you Sincerely Ron and Lilianne Milito 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 162 of 220 1 From:Jayne Sventek <jsventek1@hotmail.com> Sent:Thursday, February 16, 2017 6:27 AM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Possible improvements Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed Good morning... Thanks for the update on the meeting, unfortunately, I have out of town guests coming that day. If things change we hope to attend. My question concerns cell phone towers, which I have been questioning for over fifteen years for our area. It doesn't matter if it is ATT or VERIZON, our area which is directly off 951 between Pine Ridge and Vanderbilt, have limited cell signal. In fact, we built in 1990 and not much has changed near us. When we pass Logan and head towards 951 on Pine Ridge Road, passing Temple Shalom, the signal has always cut out and becomes garbled. My friends know my location while driving when I am on the phone as I pass. Also, the fairly new Publix at 951 and Pine Ridge, is known for no signal once you step inside. Even our street has limited cell reception and we have a unit in our home from ATT to boost cell strength. It is a microcell tower, they call it. I have contacted at numerous times, both cell companies and they inform me a tower is governed by county rules and regulations. They can only be installed on a school, fire station etc grounds. This needs to be looked into and see what areas need the tower, not the best spot for the tower, held by the county. I welcomed one on my nearly three acres years ago. I am not sure if this issue is on the agenda, but needs to be looked into. Come and ride with me for a day and hear how bad the signal is. Is there an agenda at this point, you may send to residents? Thank you and I wait to hear from your office. Have a great day. Mrs. Patrick B. Sventek 4680 First Avenue SW Naples, FL Sent from my iPad Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 163 of 220 1 From:Michael R. Ramsey <michael.r.ramsey@embarqmail.com> Sent:Thursday, February 09, 2017 2:05 PM To:VanLengenKris Cc:JenkinsAnita; Jflan241@aol.com; petergaddy@gmail.com; 'Tim Nance' Subject:RE: Estates bridges The 3 bridges that went through the MPO and were approved for funding and construction, were in the original bridge study from the E of 951 Horizon Report and recommended by all Emergency Response Agencies are: 1. 8th St. NE at Cypress Canal 2. 16th St. NE at Cypress Canal 3. 47th Ave NE at Golden Gate Main Canal As these 3 bridges move through engineering and permitting they have acquired more construction cost and it appears that we may get only 1. The extra costs are coming from items such as sidewalks and tiebacks causing additional permitting costs especially in mitigation The #4 bridge needed is a t 10th Ave SE over the Faka Union Canal. This bridge is needed because south of the Golden Gate Blvd the residents on Desoto and Everglades do not have the ability to have Emergency Agencies respond to them in 8 minutes. In many cases the response time is 15 minutes or more. Second there is only 1 evacuation route on for residents of Desoto. This bridge would allow more evacuation options for residents of both Everglades and Desoto south of Golden Gate Blvd. Third the Bridge would allow more access to Palmetto Elementary School as an Evacuation Shelter. Ramsey From: VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 8:50 AM To: Michael R. Ramsey Cc: JenkinsAnita Subject: Estates bridges Mike: At last night’s meeting, you mentioned “three bridges” that the GGEACA determined to be high safety/evacuation related. The first one you previously provided to me: 10th Ave SE between E’glades and De Soto. Can you please identify the others. We plan to speak with Transportation Dept. about a number of issues, and would like full input and clarity on the GGEACA recommendation. Thanks, Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 164 of 220 1 From:Carol Pratt <tjack730@aol.com> Sent:Saturday, June 17, 2017 6:43 PM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Wildlife and Greenway To All Whom This Concerns: Although wildlife and green spaces weren’t the biggest consideration in GGE community development, it was prominent none-the-less (in the “clouds”, these were some of the larger words). With the many road extensions and expansions slated in future development, now is the time to make plans for wildlife, which many of us in GGE value and consider a quality of life issue. Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension (VBX) has been continually moved forward on the list of projects in the county. Do you know existing natural wildlife corridors will cross this road once it is extended? I hope the county will plan for wildlife underpasses on VBX, and also consider other safeguards to protect the multitude of species which inhabit this area, including protected species such as fox squirrels, gopher tortoises, and Florida Panthers. For all future roads, plans should include the safeguarding of wildlife with underpasses, fences, through education, etc. As you well know, it is easier and more cost effective to get ahead of something like this, then to try to fix something later. Currently, Jim Flanagan (Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, of which I am also a member) and I are trying to get signage to warn drivers to be on the lookout for bears, panthers, and other wildlife on the roadways. This will also inform newcomers of the existence of bears and panthers in the county, which still comes as a surprise to many GGE residents. Signage of this nature should be a part of the Master Plan. A greenway has been brought up many times in the discussion of the Master Plan. A bicycle and pedestrian trail could be made alongside VBX. An independent trail is what I am suggesting - not a narrow path which is actually part of the road. I hope you will put, or keep, wildlife conservation as a part of the GGE Master Plan. If you need more information on anything I have written, please let me know and I will provide it. It has been my experience that the majority of people living in GGE want wildlife as part of their community. Thank you for considering my thoughts and suggestions. Sincerely, Carol M. Pratt Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 165 of 220 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org 11-02-16 GGEACA Board Meeting Discussion – Rural Golden Gate Estates Issues Growth Management Plan Update November 2, 2016 Kris VanLengen Collier County Growth Management Department Growth Management Plan ReStudy Manager GGAMP ReStudy - Rural Estates Mr. VanLengen, The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association held a working session on 10-08-16 in preparation for providing input to the GGAMP ReStudy. The following concepts were presented for discussion and reviewed at our 11-02-16 GGEACA Board Meeting. We present them to you for discussion and incorporation with the public comments for the GGAMP ReStudy. Further consideration and discussion is also suggested for the challenges and opportunities to allow for “agricultural past-times” and agricultural-related “eco-tourism” in the rural areas. As well, further definition and discussion of home-based businesses and recognizing the impacts to neighbors and infrastructure for certain business operations. The following concepts are consistent with a low-density, low-impact, rural residential community. Further definition of “rural character” and “self-sustainability” will help better define the concepts of community character and practical application that many people who consider Golden Gate Estates their home and why they moved here. The large-lot, low-density woodlands/agricultural environment associated with this unique place is rare among community choices - such is rare in Florida real estate as well as across the United States - and what makes Golden Gate Estates so desirable. Thank you for your leadership in this effort and the opportunity to provide input to the future of our community through the GGAMP ReStudy and the overall Comprehensive Growth Management ReStudy Respectfully, Mike Ramsey, President Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association On behalf of the Board of Directors Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 166 of 220 02 November 2016 Page 2 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org A. Complementary Land Uses 1.) Formal Low Density Overlay for the Rural Estates – eliminate densification of E zoning Benefits: * DRGR/Watershed over 90,000 acres at no cost to the taxpayer Complimentary to Corkscrew Community and Sending lands in RFMUD and RLSA • Well Field Protection – county and municipal (Naples) • Community Character • Secondary habitat transition between Conservation land and development 2.) Incentivize the recombination of 1.14 acre lots (legal non-conforming) Development credit (voluntary TDR program) for use in urban density and infill? See also GGWIP 3.) Update LDC regarding compatibility requirements, setbacks, and buffers for all non-residential uses in the Estates including but not limited to Convenience Commercial, Churches, Schools, utilities. 4.) Update LDC regarding land clearing regulation and setbacks, for all uses to be consistent with Wildfire safety and management recommendations established by the Collier County Fire Districts and the Florida Forest Service. 30 feet of defensible space and acceptable setbacks for all Estates lots to allow access of emergency vehicles and equipment Consideration: Completion of the Estates Community Wildfire Protection Plan 5.) Establish appropriate Setbacks and Buffers and compatibility standards for all adjacent RFMUD and RLSA land uses. Previously recommended changes permitting non residential land uses in the RFMUD must be applied so as to preserve the rural residential character of Golden Gate Estates. To that end, it will be essential to establish appropriate buffers and transitional uses, together with appropriate controls over the location of utility service lines and transportation corridors. To achieve these goals the following recommendations are submitted: a.) Projects directly abutting residential property shall provide, at a minimum, a one-hundred (100) foot wide buffer in which no parking or water management uses are permitted. Twenty- five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer type C as outlined in the LDC. A minimum of fifty (75) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained or created native vegetation and must be consistent with appropriate subsections of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The 100 foot buffer shall not be part of a setback, but will be a separately platted tract. Setbacks shall be a minimum of 50% of the height of any structure other than single family. b.) A solid masonry or concrete wall 8’ high and on a 3’ berm at the development (RFMUD) side of the 100’ buffer shall be required. The buffer area shall be supplemented where needed to assure an 80% opacity is reached within one year. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 167 of 220 02 November 2016 Page 3 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org c.) All lighting shall be consistent with the Dark Skies initiative. Parking lot lighting shall be restricted to bollards except as may be required to comply with lighting standards in the Land Development Code (Ordinance #04-41, as amended) and other governing regulations. d.) Rural roadways as typically used within the Golden Gate Estates neighborhoods shall not be used for access or utility conveyance to any new development. Appropriate truck route management tools need to be employed to limit Community impact from adjacent development. All adjacent RFMUD and RLSA residential and commercial uses should be considered. 6.) Develop Rural Architectural Standards 7.) Develop Rural Median Landscape Standards B. Transportation and Mobility -Roads 1.) Complete the study for a New I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd. Consideration: Restricting expansion of Everglades Blvd. to 4 lanes to service Estates needs. RLSA growth Management planning should address appropriate right of way and developer contribution to meet RLSA transportation needs for the predicted population growth (est. 300,000+) in this planning area. No unreasonable impact on the established low density Estates. 2.) Prioritization of the improvement of Wilson Boulevard North to commercial services, and the Wilson Extension south to White Lake Boulevard to link Golden Gate Estates to North Belle Meade Receiving lands and future economic development. Provide a needed road corridor to the north, south, and west. Wilson-Benfield Corridor Study. 3.) Extend White Lake Boulevard east to the proposed new I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd. 4.) Complete the Green Boulevard Extension Study to identify an East-West corridor linking North Belle Meade Receiving lands to CR 951 and points west. Consideration: Extension of Golden Gate Parkway rather than Green Blvd., to improve connectivity and reduce the need for excessive Eminent Domain through the Estates. 5.) Complete the Randall Boulevard Extension Study to identify an East-West corridor to the RLSA. S Curve Concept review. Consideration: Improvements to intersection of Randall Blvd and Immokalee Road are a critical infrastructure need and the choke-point of Randall/Oilwell/Immokalee Rd. Consider an emergency declaration to accelerate needed improvements at this intersection due of impending transportation failures. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 168 of 220 02 November 2016 Page 4 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org C. Economic Vitality – Commercial Development 1.) Commercial Goods, Services, Jobs for the Estates provided primarily from zoning in adjacent areas including: Orange Tree PUD, RFMUD Receiving Lands (846 Partners, N. Belle Meade), and RLSA (Rural Lands West) 2.) Possible focused Commercial Overlay within the Estates adjacent to existing Commercial in the Randall Blvd. / Oil Well Rd. area east to the intersection of Wilson Blvd. and Immokalee Rd. * Along Randall Blvd. adjacent to Publix (already zoned/) * Randall Curve / Golden Gate Land Trust 40 acre parcel across from Orangetree * Wilson Blvd. / Immokalee Rd. intersection 3.) Update Standards/Size of Convenience Commercial parcels in the Estates to provide sufficient (increased) area for road development, septic/wastewater treatment, and water retention D. Environmental Stewardship / Watershed Management Water Resources Management: 1.) Incentivize single family Water retention/detention and Dispersed Water Storage in the Estates to retain / detain storm water and promote groundwater recharge. Ponds, swales, other 2.) Support completion of the North Golden Gate Watershed Improvement Plan. GGWIP to improve drainage, support aquifer recharge, integrate with Picayune restoration. 3.) Consideration of ASR Wells in Receiving lands, especially Sec15 T49S R27E to retain/detain water from the Golden Gate Main Canal. 4.) Development of the C-1 Connector Canal and weirs to divert storm water east from the Golden Gate Main Canal to points south and east. 5.) Update regulation of impervious surface/percolation on different size Estates Lots. a. Special treatment (more restrictive) for legal, non-conforming 1.14 acre lots 6.) Review impacts and unintended consequences of a recent Ordinance (1 acre impervious rule) requiring berming and containment of water on residential properties as this impedes natural sheetflow. Intent of ordinance may have an urban coastal zone purpose and intent, however rural woodlands interface functions differently 7.) Plan for County Septic Disposal Facility to facilitate proper maintenance and legal disposal of septic waste and encourage responsible, legal management of waste from private on-site sewage treatment and disposal systems. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 169 of 220 02 November 2016 Page 5 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org Environmental/ Conservation: 1.) Develop policies that discourage the migration of climax predators from conservation lands and RFMUD and RLSA Sending lands into the residential interface in Golden Gate Estates other and adjacent areas. 2.) Consider the development of a Voluntary TDR program and Bank to facilitate the transfer process of development credits granted for the recombination of 1.14 acre lots and wetland lots that are fundamentally unbuildable and included in the GGWIP overlay 3.) Consider Dark Sky lighting standards for rural areas for lighting at transportation infrastructure, commercial development centers, conditional use areas, and for residential standards. 4.) Consider planning for future landfill in RLSA area given the planned population, proximity of waste disposal to eastern-drifting center of the County’s residential population, and expected life and capacity of existing Collier County landfill. General Perspectives for Consideration: General recognition, distinction and acknowledgement that one size does not fit all relative to County-wide application of standards of law and community character. Consideration: Urban Coastal Zone functions differently than eastern rural areas, and as such, review processes for growth management plan changes and Land Development Plan changes should take into consideration the local application and applicability and evaluate for unintended consequences and diverging, inconsistent and incongruent intents of such changes. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 170 of 220 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org 28 November 2016 Kris VanLengen Collier County Growth Management Department Growth Management Plan ReStudy Manager GGAMP ReStudy - Rural Estates RE: Follow up on 02 November 2016 letter regarding GGAMP Mr. VanLengen, The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association have received more input after the 03 November 2015 GGAMP workshop regarding the Eastern Golden Gate Estates future growth. Thank you for your leadership in this effort and the opportunity to provide input to the future of our community through the GGAMP ReStudy and the overall Comprehensive Growth Management Restudy. Respectfully, Mike Ramsey, President Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association On behalf of the Board of Directors Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 171 of 220 28 November 2016 Page 2 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org Surface Water Management / Drainage This is considered to be the highest priority for determination for the Rural Estates and is dependent on the water management through and around the N Belle Meade Area of the RFMUD. The continued buildout of the Rural Estates and the RFMUD north of I-75 and west of the RLSA, will significantly increase impervious surface area and storm water runoff. Concurrently, there is concern for protecting groundwater recharge for the multiple areas that depend on Rural Estates groundwater resources. This issue directly effects future Residential property protection, Economic Development, Water Resources, Wildfire Protection and Transportation Design. The planning effort that needs to be undertaken would update the drainage of water from the Rural Estates to the Henderson Creek Canal. Both Marco Island Utilities and Rookery Bay are looking for more water. Economic Diversification / Development This would be the second prioritization after future surface water management has been reviewed. Economic Diversification / Development within the Rural Estates is small commercial nodes at selected intersections with each node totaling approximately 80 acres maximum. Planning of the Rural Estates nodes and zoning will be significantly influenced by the larger commercial diversification / development in the adjacent areas of the RFMUD and RLSA. The Rural Estates seeks coordination of with the RFMUD and RLSA with the larger commercial areas. Also, the design, planning and zoning for the Rural Estates Small Commercial Node areas with be greatly influenced by drainage and ground water availability. Transportation Design These would the 3rd area of Prioritization after Surface Water Management and Economic Diversification / Development have been reviewed. These are to be added to the recommendations in the First Letter of 02 Nov 2016. These recommendations should be added to the GGAMP for Rural Estates because they are not discussed or transmitted in any other part of planning for the Rural Estates. These recommendations are not to replace the MPO efforts. a. No expansion of roads from 2 lane to 4 lane, East of Everglades Blvd. b. Prioritize transportation design that moves traffic North and South within the Rural Estates. a. Prioritize installing a bridge on 8th St. SE @ Frangipani. c. Prioritize expansion of Randall Blvd, 2 lanes to 4 from Immokalee Road to Everglades d. Do not allow "S" curve from Randall to Oil Well. e. Prioritize Future I-75 interchange at or east of Desoto Blvd. f. No more "chicanes" or other traffic slowing designs that prevents school buses or other vehicles from safely traveling a 2 lane road in opposite directions. Cell Towers More locations should be identified for Cell Tower Construction. Residents favor improving cell tower coverage. Prioritizing land zoning for this development is needed. 1 acre Impervious Rule This rule was imposed on residential development in the Rural Estates without study or discussion. This rule requires singly family lot owners to implement surface water retention if the amount of impervious surface on their lot exceeds 1 acre. This rule needs to be eliminated. The impacts of these rule are: a. Significant increase to the road drainage swales b. Significant increase to the Big Cypress Basin Canals without planning c. Ecolcogical damage to adjacent wetlands by drying them out, preventing water flow. d. Significant increase in wildfire danger by draining wetlands faster in the dry season. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 172 of 220 Collier Soil & Water Conservation District Dennis P. Vasey, Chairman 14700 Immokalee Road, Suite B Naples, Florida 34120-1468 February 17, 2017 Mr. Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager County Manager's Office 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34112-5746 Dear Mr. Ochs, The Board of Supervisors believes that wetland parcels constitute a valuable resource for carbon sequestration. Ecosystem enclosures 1, 2 and 3, attached. The District has a keen interest in parcels purchased to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the residents of Collier County. Specifically, the Board of Supervisors believes that Conservation Collier Program parcels, when evaluated for their carbon sequestration value, could serve as a bank for funding maintenance and salaries, annually, and provide a substantial water quality and incentive opportunity for mitigation purposes in response to code enforcement and permit activity. The District reviewed the "Wetlands and Climate Change" article in light of using county-owned Conservation Collier Program wetland parcels to provide Transfer of Development Rights incentives from a "Bank." To create the Bank would require a list of Conservation Collier Program wetland parcels. Once provided, the District would create and manage, under an Interlocal Agreement, a log of wetland sequestration value, prepare documents of sale of whole or fractional share sales, and undertake monitoring activities. Sincerely, Dennis P. Vasey Attachments: a/s Cc: The Honorable Penny Taylor, Chairman, 3299 E Tamiami TRL, STE 303, Naples, FL 34112 Mr. Steve Carnell, Department Head, Public Services Department, 3299 E Tamiami TRL, Naples, FL 34112 Vacant Group 1 Nancy Richie Group 2 Dennis P. Vasey Group 3 Clarence Tears Group 4 Rob Griffin Group 5 Web Site: http://www.collierscd.org Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 173 of 220 NORTH COLLIER FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS M. James Burke Christopher L. Crossan Norman E. Feder J. Christopher Lombardo John O. McGowan February 14, 2017 Leo Ochs, County Manager Collier County Manager’s Office 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34112 Mr. Ochs: Please allow this letter to evidence the support of the North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District for the approval and construction of the following bridges currently contained in the Golden Gate Estates Bridges project: 10th Avenue S.E. between Everglades and Desoto 8th Street N.E. from Golden Gate Blvd. to Randall Blvd. 16th Street N.E. from Golden Gate Blvd. to Randall Blvd. 47th Avenue N.E. from Immokalee Road to Everglades Blvd. The connectivity that these bridges would increase public safety with enhanced mobility allowing for faster response times for emergency services (EMS, Fire, CCSO) and improved evacuation routes during hurricanes, wildfires or other natural disasters. These bridges are supported by both the Horizon Study and the Bridge Study (2009). We ask that Collier County Growth Management seriously consider approving these bridges within the Golden Gate Estates Bridges project which will assuredly enhance life safety for the residents and communities in the area. Sincerely, James Cunningham Fire Chief Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 174 of 220 Correspondence Regarding Western Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 175 of 220 1 From:Chris Henning <chenning@continentalfin.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 4:06 PM To:VanLengenKris Cc:rrosin@peat.com; ELLEN ROSENBERG (ellenrosenbergdesign@gmail.com) Subject:RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy. Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed Mr. Van Lengen: To carry forward from our previous discussion, we own 2 parcels in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan- Urban Estates. These parcels are 6715 Golden Gate Parkway (currently a residence) and the approximately 7 acre parcel (as referenced here- the “Undeveloped Parcel”) at the north-west corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Blvd. Our objective with these parcels is to develop a commercially-viable project. Our group purchased the Undeveloped Parcel in 2007 with the intention of building a medical office building for Anchor Health. At the time, one of the partners formerly associated with our group, Paul Zampell, was in the process of building a medical office for Anchor Health on 951. Paul believed that Anchor wanted to proceed with our parcel as well. Unfortunately, after acquiring the Undevleoped Parcel, Anchor Health, the prospective tenant, decided that it no longer wanted to expand its office locations and withdrew from the project. Having lost our intended tenant and unable to locate an alternate medical office user, we ordered a market study which identified healthcare as a use which would generate sufficient demand to support development. We incurred significant architectural and planning costs in the course of coming up with a mix of assisted living, memory care, skilled nursing, and independent living units on the property. The PUD did not support alternate healthcare uses so we sought zoning relief which ultimately was tabled shortly before Mr. Joseph Rosin, Mr. Zampell’s original partner, passed away. The Undeveloped Parcel is one of 2 parcels designated as Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict on the “Future Land Use Map.” Note that though referred to as “Future” on the map, it is the land use zoning currently in place for the undeveloped parcel. We are limited to a single story structure of not more than 35,000 square feet, and the only permitted use is for medical office. Unfortunately, the limitations imposed make this parcel nearly impossible to develop and none of the prospective purchasers who have contacted us, are interested in the current zoning. We would like to develop this property for commercial purposes consistent with other properties in the area, such as the CVS across the street from us. The corner parcel across from us to the south on Golden Gate has, to our knowledge, been acquired with the intention of commercial development. As more residents move to the area, it is only natural that signalized corner parcels such as ours be developed with retail uses to support them. We appreciate your consideration and would request either that the Commercial Infill Subdistrict restrictions be changed, or that the Development Parcel be moved to a new designation that would allow for more commercial options than currently exist. Should you have any suggestions in terms of participating in the general master plan review process that is going on, please let us know. Sincerely, Chris Henning III Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 176 of 220 2 847-291-3700 From: VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 3:43 PM To: chenning@continentalfin.com; rrosin@peat.com Cc: jenglish@barroncollier.com; dgenson@barroncollier.com; JenkinsAnita Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy. Chris and Robert: We discussed a property of interest to you approximately 2 months ago. It is located in a future land use designation: Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict. It is zoned PUD, and located in the northwest quadrant of the Santa Barbara and Golden Gate Parkway intersection. As an update, we began a series of public outreach meetings, all introductory in nature, pertaining to Rural Estates, Urban Estates and GG City. We will resume in the fall with topics more granular in nature, such as comp plan and zoning subdistrict overlays. A meeting summary of the Urban Estates introductory meeting can be found at: http://www.colliergov.net/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/community-planning-section/golden-gate- area-master-plan-restudy/public-workshops . 1. My notes indicate that you were considering sending an e-mail at some point to express your points of view. 2. I thought you might be interested to know that we met with Barron Collier engineers/planners, who expressed an interest in development in the SW quadrant of the same intersection. In case you think there might be commonality of interest or perspective, I have copied them on this e-mail and you may wish to contact them directly. Sincerely, Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 177 of 220 1 From:WeeksDavid Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2015 6:13 PM To:wconfoy@comcast.net Cc:VanLengenKris Subject:RE: MEETING Mr. Confoy, How about June 24 at 3:00pm? I would be joined by colleague Kris van Lengen, Community Planning Manager. David Weeks David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager Collier County Government, Growth Management Department Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 phone: 239-252-2306; E-fax: 239-252-6689 email: davidweeks@colliergov.net ; website: www.colliergov.net From: wconfoy@comcast.net [mailto:wconfoy@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 1:55 PM To: WeeksDavid Subject: FW: MEETING Dear David Thank you for accepting this email requesting your time to visit with some of your fellow Naples citizens for discussion of the upcoming review of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Specifically we represent the neighborhoods that would be affected by any change proposed to Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Rd. and Santa Barbara. We hope to present our reasons for opposing such changes as not being in the best interests of the surrounding Communities at large. We have a roll up display showing each property owner along this gateway & will demonstrate why the residents on both sides of the street wish it to maintain its residential character. Many of us have lived here 20, even 30, years, have our families close-by & wish to maintain the Master plan as it was written by the County. Yes, it might be a bit early but the summer is upon us and our schedules never seem to be in sync. Better to give you an early look see into what is ahead, than when it is right upon us. We know that the outsiders are working towards the opposite goals & have been visiting persons like yourself to support & endorse a re-zoning change—a change to which we are totally opposed . Obviously we hope to show you why & solicit your support when the time arises. Dan Brundage, Tom Collins & myself will attend; we sometimes have two others & will give you their names when they confirm their availability to us. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 178 of 220 2 We are generally available any weekday in mid afternoon. Right now we can all be there this month between the 23rd and the 29th in the mid to latter part of the afternoon. An hour or less is requested. I don’t believe you would be disappointed in what we can show you. Thank you Bill Confoy-- 262-0802/ 643-0001 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 179 of 220 1 From:Carlos Vasallo <cvasallo@comcast.net> Sent:Friday, October 21, 2016 4:18 PM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Western GG Ests Hello Thank you for the meeting last night and keeping us informed and involved. I would like to know what the county's plan is for the property it owns at the southwest corner of Vanderbilt Bch Rd & Collier Blvd. Last night there was a question about a nature trail/bike path and lack of land for it. You might recall when Collier Boulevard was expanded a few years ago a rec. path was added on the East side of the CR951 canal using the easement. Some units, for example units #1, #2, #95, & #32 have a canal at the end of the streets, using the existing canal easement a loop could be built from Vanderbilt Bch Rd to Pine Ridge Road with a nature/bike path on both sides so residents from both sides could use it. Please add me to your email list for future meetings. Thank you, Carlos Vasallo 4381 5th Ave NW Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 180 of 220 Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com May 1, 2017 Mr. Kris VanLengen, AICP Via Email: KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net RE: Tracts 103 (east 180’), 119, and 120 Golden Gates Estates, Unit 26 Dear Mr. VanLengen: We represent the property owner of the above referenced parcels located at the SW quadrant of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and 13th Avenue S.W. The parcels total approximately 12.5 acres. This property had a pending Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) amendment in 2014, which the property owner requested it to be placed in abeyance, in order to participate in the re-study process. An aerial location exhibit is attached for your convenience. We wanted to provide you with some additional information regarding the parcel as a follow-up to our meeting on April 4, 2017, which we believe will demonstrate that this property should be re-evaluated for the potential of non-residential land uses as part of the re-study effort. Under the current GGAMP, the site is designated Estates, and based on the existing criteria, the site is only eligible for one dwelling unit per 2.25 acres. The site is ineligible for even Transitional Conditional Uses. The property owner recognizes that the property’s proximity to the quasi- industrial FP&L PUD, and the newly 6-lane segment of Collier Boulevard, renders it illogical and incompatible for very low density residential uses. The property owner had previously proposed to amend the GGAMP to re-designate this property as an additional Neighborhood Center, with additional restrictions on buffer and setback standards for the 12.5+/- acre property. It has been our consistent contention that the property is not appropriately designate for only low-density residential dwellings due to the changing neighborhood conditions with the expanded Collier Boulevard and the increasing number of vehicle trips that utilize this major roadway corridor serving the eastern areas of Collier County. An economic analysis had also been prepared in support of the amendment, which demonstrated that the demand for additional office and retail services could be supported by the growing population of both Golden Gate City and the Estates area east of Collier Boulevard. Additionally, with the then impending expansion of Collier Boulevard to a 6-lane arterial roadway, additional pass-by trips were anticipated, also contributing to the market viability for office, retail and service uses. In our prior discussions with Growth Management staff, they were not supportive of an amendment to the GGAMP that would result in retail and office development on this site. They did; however, support an amendment that would re-designate this site as a Conditional Use Sub- District which would then permit the owner to submit a Conditional Use for a variety of non- Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 181 of 220 Mr. Kris VanLengen RE: Tracts 103 (east 180’), 119, and 120 Golden Gates Estates, Unit 26 May 1, 2017 Page 2 of 2 residential uses. Some of these land uses would include churches, schools, day care, group housing/group care, private schools and social/fraternal organizations. In our most recent discussions with you, you too acknowledged that the site may no longer be appropriately designated to only permit low density residential development. In that meeting, we discussed the possibility of possibly modifying the Transitional Conditional Use section of the GGAMP in order to permit this property to qualify to apply for a conditional use. The GGAMP already acknowledges that these conditional uses can be good transitions between non-residential and residential land uses. We believe that a minor amendment to paragraph 3e), Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria would be appropriate to specifically indicate that this property would be eligible to seek a conditional use of the E, Estates zoning designation. The amended language could read: 5. The east 180 feet of Tract 103, Tract 119 and Tract 120, Unit 26, Golden Gate Estates are eligible for conditional uses as identified in Estates zoning district. We would appreciate your consideration of this minor change to the GGAMP as you continue your re-study efforts. We believe the unique location of this parcel adjacent to the existing FP&L PUD, which permits not only electric generating substations, but also open equipment storage, maintenance and fueling facilities and any other use deemed appropriate for FP&L (since the FPL plant is no longer subject to local zoning restrictions) is incompatible with very low density residential use. The property too, is located on a 6-lane arterial, which contributes to the incompatibility of the site for residential use. Attached are photos of the FPL plant, the subject property and its intersection on Collier Boulevard Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Attachments c: Via Email Larry Brooks Bruce Anderson GradyMinor File Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 182 of 220 1 From:Barbara Coen <barbcoen@comcast.net> Sent:Tuesday, May 10, 2016 7:51 PM To:VanLengenKris Subject:RE: GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential. Dear Mr. Van Lengen, I, too live on 68th Street S. W. and am VERY opposed to Edwin Koert's plan for my neighborhood. I would be at the meeting tomorrow, but am in Kansas City dealing with family matters. This man is only concerned about making a buck. He does not care at all about our residential neighborhood I implore you to deny his request to re-zone so that he can make our neighborhood look like Pine Ridge Road. We are not Miami, nor do we want to be! You may contact me at: 239-777-4085 if you need more information. Thank you for your time in this matter, Barbara Coen 2780--68th Street S.W. Naples, FL 34105 barbcoen@comcast. net 239-777-4085 Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID On May 10, 2016 3:51 PM, VanLengenKris <KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net> wrote: Dear Ms. Turner: Thank you for your interest and comment. We will preserve your comment related to Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Western Estates. If you wish to be added to our distribution list for meeting announcements, etc., please let me know. Respectfully, Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 183 of 220 2 From: Angela Turner [mailto:ajturner37@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:33 PM To: TaylorPenny <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; VanLengenKris <KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net> Cc: barbcoen@comcast.net; Dan Dagnall <dan.dagnall@gmail.com> Subject: GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential. After receiving a letter regarding a meeting planned for tomorrow to possibly re-zone our residential neighborhood to commercial I submit the following letter and past correspondence. When Commissioner Taylor was running for election she promised us that this would not happen. I am hoping that that promise will be kept! Golden Gate Master Plan. Keep the Estates Residential. Golden Gate Parkway. We have previously objected to the proposed changes in making the area between Livingston and Santa Barbara with ANY commercializations. We built our home in 1989 and unlike Pine Ridge Road there are too many private homes that feed onto the Parkway. Since exit 105 from 1-75 and the overpass was put in place it is almost impossible to get out of our street as it is, especially in season. We have already had over 3 fatalities at the end of our street and when I wrote to the County to request a light be put in place because of the gym and Bingo hall at the end of our street and the alterations to the other streets that have to utilize ours to make UTurns to head west it is a nightmare. The County flat out said "no, a stop light would cause more accidents". We have too many families with young children and children who are now learning to drive to be put in danger. Again, Golden Gate Estates was built for residential and it was well over 30 years ago. Too many families have taken stake in their properties and homes to be violated by commercialization. The investors who are attempting this change are not for the benefit of the residents...it's money for their pockets. The apartment complex that was just built on the corner of the Parkway and Livingston should prove to be another traffic nightmare. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 184 of 220 3 Subject: GG Parkway From: ajturner37@hotmail.com Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 19:37:33 -0400 To: fredcoyle@colliergov.net Commissioner Coyle, We, the residents off Golden Gate Parkway, recently received correspondence regarding a request to re-zone the one mile radius that impacts our home. I wanted to share the most recent correspondence from them and my response. I am afraid that many of our neighbors did not take into consideration the initial letter that was sent and have not read it. This is very disturbing that these people are trying to modify our existing peace and security. Would you please take the time to read their proposal and let us know if there is anyway they can actually achieve what they are asking for. Thank you. Angela Turner Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Angela Turner <ajturner37@hotmail.com> Date: June 4, 2014 at 7:25:06 PM EDT To: "edwinkoert@msn.com" <edwinkoert@msn.com> Subject: GG parkway Not liking this at all. Your proposing to use our street as a major road and a gas station. I need to know who on 68th Street SW responded to your initial letter. I already tried for a light, as I mentioned before, and the County flat out declined. Why would 68th Street SW want to allow the traffic and further dis-value to our homes, not to mention the safety of our children. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 185 of 220 4 Pine Ridge extension has all the stuff they need getting off I75. That part is hideous. We have a beautiful landscaped exit as it is, it doesn't need to be destroyed by adding anymore commerce to the frontage and making our homes less attractive. Closest gas stations are already good enough for those who choose not to use the Pine Ridge amenities. Why are you concentrating using 68th and 60th when you don't own any properties at the "proposed" sites for first modifications. Mr. Perrine is the realtor for the properties that were acquired and the owners, as well as the original company that purchased the parcels that Wildcat I and II, whom you are the trustee, now own, knew that these were residential. Why is he putting his on the market for 4 million and 2 million with a description that says "Possible commercial usage, ideal for gas station, church, retail shopping, etc". Why is he lying. Putting that out as a possibility is baiting a proposed buyer and misleading! Your initial mailing would have been thrown away but I had the time to actually open and read it. Maybe that is why you have not gotten the responses. I am certain that NO ONE on our street is going to go for these changes. Angela Turner Sent from my iPad On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:36 PM, edwinkoert@msn.com wrote: To all who has responded: The purpose of our rezoning initiative is not to offend anyone, but to inform all of the property owners Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 186 of 220 5 located within the GGPkwy geographic area of our activities to have the corridor rezoned to a commercial application. Believe me, your view "for or against" our rezoning activity does not offend me. Everyone has an opinion, and as such, yours, as- well-as your peers, is just as important and will be considered too. I am an old Florida Boy from youth - 7-years (the East coast - Hollywood / Ft. Lauderdale through high school 1958) My homestead address is now a retirement community off of I-75 Exit 240, known as Sun City Center. However, I, as-well-as Brent have two each 35-year old dogs in the hunt fronting GGPkwy, and as such, I am in the Naples area quite frequently. My specific properties are on the West side of I-75, fronting GGpkwy, one on the North side and one on the South side of GGPkwy. My foot prints in the Naples area goes back to the early sixties. To assist you on Brent and my thoughts, I am attaching two graphic diagrams. The diagrams include all of the properties fronting the East and West Side of I-75, including our suggested modifications. The PDF diagrams can be enlarged by increasing the zoom percent within the PDF. Also, attached a a letter containing our thoughts on the development of the area. You may wish to review them, or discard them. While reading the WORD document you may wish to have the diagrams available. We do make the information available to all. As each of you are aware, initially, I released 700- mailings. Currently, 16 of you have responded, and I thank you for your input. Sincerely, Edwin H. Koert Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 187 of 220 6 239-289-4420 edwinkoert@msn.com <GGPkwy - East Side of I-75.pdf> <GGPkwy - West Side of I-75.pdf> <GGPkwy -032414 - Hard look at the North and South Sides.doc> Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 188 of 220 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 189 of 220 8 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 190 of 220 9 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 191 of 220 10 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 192 of 220 1 From:Elizabeth Foster <elizabeth@judithliegeoisdesigns.com> Sent:Friday, October 28, 2016 12:22 PM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Fwd: Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study Sent from my iPhone Date: October 28, 2016 at 10:58:55 AM EDT To: <GGAMPrestudy@colliergov.net> Subject: Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study To Planning and Zoning Division, Regarding ongoing study of uses for Golden Gate Parkway from Santa Barbara Avenue to Livingston Ave: We request, to maintain rural character of this area, that existing zoning in this area remain in place as currently in effect and no additional commercial use be permitted. Thank you, Elizabeth Foster 2711 68th St. SW. Naples FL34105 239-777.8818 Elifoster@hotmail.com Right-click or tap and hold here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 193 of 220 1 From:Barbara Coen <barbcoen@comcast.net> Sent:Wednesday, September 28, 2016 8:16 AM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy To Whom it may concern: I have lived on 68th Street S.W. since 1989. In that time, I have watched the construction of I-75 Exit 105, the Golden Gate bridge over Airport Road, and the development of a huge apartment complex on the corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Livingston Road. I love my residential area and I am against letting it be taken over by companies like Race Trac and other commercial uses. I am also concerned about any more large apartment complexes being constructed due to the already massive traffic concession that exists now. I wish I could attend one of the three workshops to discuss my views, but I have conflicts all 3 dates Thank you for your consideration of my opinions, Barbara S. Coen 2780 68th Street S.W. Naples, FL 34105 Phone: 239-777-4085 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 194 of 220 1 From:Tony Ojanovac <amoappraisals@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 11, 2016 7:04 PM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951) Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed To Whom It May Concern, I live 2830 66th St SW and attended a meeting held by Collier County on 05/11/2016 regarding the GGAMP. I would like to be on record that I, along with the large majority of other at the above mentioned meeting, am NOT in favor of making any portion of Golden Gate Parkway (between Santa Barbara Blvd & Livingston Rd) commercial. There is no need whatsoever for this proposal, as there are plenty of commercial areas within one square mile of this area. In addition, present traffic in this area is already heavy without potential commercial use parcels. We want the GGAMP to remain as written, as the commissioners promised, and left alone. Anthony M. Ojanovac Cert.Res. RD7070 AMO Appraisals, Inc. Sent from my iPhone Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 195 of 220 1 From:Daniel Jenkins <dwj2790@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, May 09, 2016 2:35 PM To:VanLengenKris Subject:Golden Gate Master Plan Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Mr. VanLengen, I am writing you to express my strong opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the Parkway or Apartments along the Parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the QUIET, RESIDENTIAL character of our neighborhood. Thank You, Daniel W. Jenkins 2718 68th ST SW Naples, FL 34105 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 196 of 220 1 From:Kevin Keyes <kevinkeyes99@aol.com> Sent:Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:00 PM To:VanLengenKris Subject:GGAMP I wish to make known my opinion to any changes to the Golden Gate Area master plan along golden gate parkway between Livingston road and Santa Barbara boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. Sent from my iPhone Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 197 of 220 1 From:eflenney@comcast.net Sent:Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:26 PM To:VanLengenKris Subject:Golden Gate Area Master Plan This correspondence serves as my opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. I oppose any type of commercialization along the Parkway, or any type of apartments along the Parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" Residential zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of my neighborhood; as it was meant to be. Elizabeth Lenney 3220 66th Street SW Resident at this address 21 years Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 198 of 220 1 From:boystravel17@comcast.net Sent:Monday, July 11, 2016 3:26 PM To:VanLengenKris Subject:Commercialization of GG Parkway Follow Up Flag:Follow Up Flag Status:Flagged We wish to make known our opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate area master plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose the commercialization of the Parkway or apartments along the Parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. We are interested in receiving notices of future meetings. Thank you, Carmen and Jorge Lopez 2831 64th Street SW Naples, FL 34105 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 199 of 220 1 From:Jo Gennis <josephinegg@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, May 05, 2016 11:24 PM To:VanLengenKris Subject:GoldenGate Master Plan This email is to notify you of my opposition to ANY changes in the Golden Gate Master Plan (along Golden Gate Pkwy.,between Livingston Rd. and Santa Barbara Blvd.). I oppose the commercialization and/or apartments along the Pkwy. We must keep the "estates zoning" ( as promised ) to keep our neighborhood 100% residential. Currently, large single family homes are being built and sold in this area. Many of the older homes have been upgraded. Children who grew up here, are now adult homeowners. This is a prime residential area and we want to keep it that way. Sincerely, Larry & Josephine Gennis 2711 66 St. S.W. Naples,Fl.34105 Sent from Jo's iPad Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 200 of 220 1 From:dapbrock@comcast.net Sent:Thursday, May 05, 2016 5:56 PM To:VanLengenKris Cc:dapbrock@comcast.net Subject:Golden Gate Area Master Plan - Opposition to Commercialization We wish to make known our strong opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose the commercialization of the Parkway or apartments along the Parkway. We are in favor of maintaining the "Estates" Residential Zoning which protects the quiet residential character of our beautiful neighborhood. Please keep us informed of any changes - proposed or otherwise - at the address below. Thank you. Derek and Pam Brock 2845 66th Street SW Naples, Florida 34105 dapbrock@comcast.net Derek- 239-404-3848 cell Pam- 239-961-5136 cell Sent from Xfinity Connect Mobile App Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 201 of 220 1 From:Whitney Murphy <wnofl@aol.com> Sent:Monday, May 09, 2016 11:20 AM To:VanLengenKris Subject:Oppose Commercialization of Golden Gate Parkway I wish to make known my strong opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. I strongly oppose the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" Residential Zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. Please add me to the Collier County Government email list so that I may receive notices of future meetings regarding this matter. Thank you very much, Whitney Murphy Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 202 of 220 1 From:ohmantrisha@aol.com Sent:Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:08 PM To:VanLengenKris Subject:GGAMP I wish to make known my opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quite, residential character of our neighborhood. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 203 of 220 1 From:JenkinsAnita Sent:Friday, May 13, 2016 8:23 AM To:Tony Ojanovac Cc:GGAMPRestudy; VanLengenKris Subject:RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951) Tony, Thank you for taking the time to attend the meeting and provide your written comments in the email below. Your involvement is very much appreciated and your comments will certainly be maintained as part of the record. We have added your email address to the distribution list and will notify you when the next public meeting is scheduled. In the meantime, please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or would like additional information. Sincerely, Anita Jenkins, AICP Community Planning Section Collier County Growth Management Department 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-8288 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies -----Original Message----- From: Tony Ojanovac [mailto:amoappraisals@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 7:04 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951) To Whom It May Concern, I live 2830 66th St SW and attended a meeting held by Collier County on 05/11/2016 regarding the GGAMP. I would like to be on record that I, along with the large majority of other at the above mentioned meeting, am NOT in favor of making any portion of Golden Gate Parkway (between Santa Barbara Blvd & Livingston Rd) commercial. There is no need whatsoever for this proposal, as there are plenty of commercial areas within one square mile of this area. In addition, present traffic in this area is already heavy without potential commercial use parcels. We want the GGAMP to remain as written, as the commissioners promised, and left alone. Anthony M. Ojanovac Cert.Res. RD7070 AMO Appraisals, Inc. Sent from my iPhone 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 204 of 220 1 From:Lisa Pearl <lisampearl@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 11, 2016 1:24 PM To:VanLengenKris Cc:Lisa; Scott Pearl Subject:Opposition to the commercialization of the parkway Dear Kris, We feel very strongly about voicing our opinion and concern for the proposed development along Golden Gate Parkway. My family and I wish to make known our opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate area master plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We fully opposed the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. We are in favor of maintaining the estates residential zoning which protects the quiet residential character of our neighborhood. Please protect our town and the families that have called Naples home for over 20 years. Scott, Lisa, Zachary and Riley Pearl 2690 66th Street Sw Naples, Fl 34105 Downing Frye Realty 239.248.2705 LisaMPearl@gmail.com 2014 / 2015 Platinum Award Winner www.NaplesHomeSpecialist.com Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 205 of 220 1 From:Eric Solomon <elsolomon65@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 11, 2016 12:22 PM To:VanLengenKris Cc:Jessica Horowitz Subject:Proposed Commercialization of Golden Gate Parkway Dear Mr. VanLengen We have lived at 2760 66th St SW, Naples since August 2013. One of the primary reasons we purchased that particular piece of property was the longstanding developed residential nature of the community and its proximity to all Naples has to offer. It is important that our voices are heard at the County level. Unfortunately we are unable to personally attend tonight's workshop regarding the commercial rezoning efforts due to prior commitments. To be clear we wish to make it known that we vehemently oppose any changes to the Golden Gate Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose commercialization of the Parkway and/or apartments along the Parkway. We are in favor of maintaining the Estates Residential Zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. We welcome all opportunity to be heard. If you wish to speak with us directly my cell number is (239) 293-7138 and Jessica's is (239) 293-6954. You are of course also welcome to email us anytime and would be most appreciative if you would include us on all correspondence pertaining to this matter on a go-forward basis. Thank you for your time. Eric Solomon & Jessica Horowitz 2760 66th Street SW Naples FL 34105 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 206 of 220 1 From:VanLengenKris Sent:Friday, May 13, 2016 9:25 AM To:'Don Stevenson' Cc:Mike Bosi (MichaelBosi@colliergov.net); JenkinsAnita; FrenchJames; SawyerMichael; WilkisonDavid Subject:RE: GGAMP zoning change to allow Commercial Development on Golden Gate Parkway??? Attachments:GGAMP Upcoming Workshops News Release final 4-20-16.pdf; Golden Gate Area Master Plan 2nd Workshop News Release 5-11-16.pdf Dear Mr. Stevenson: Thank you for your interest in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy (“Restudy”). Your communication will be retained for the record, and we will add your contact information to our e-mail distribution list. The attached notices should help explain the nature of the Growth Management Plan Restudy. These notices were provided as press releases to local news outlets and posted on the County’s website. At the request of several residents, this notice was also e-mailed to those residents. As the Restudy ideally involves all 36,000 households in the Golden Gate Area, it was not financially feasible to provide letter notices to all homes. We were pleased to provide an introduction to the Restudy to a group of residents in the Estates area west of Collier Blvd. on May 11, 2016. As you will note, the nature of the project is to examine all aspects of the current GGAMP, determine whether its provisions reflect the values and vision of residents and stakeholders today, and provide observations and recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners. We hope that you will visit our website noted in the attachments, to be updated frequently, so that you can review the current plan provisions, communicate with staff, and plan on attending future meetings as approved by the Growth Management Oversight Committee. To our knowledge, there has been no recent rezone proposal for Golden Gate Parkway properties. Yours, Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies From: Don Stevenson [mailto:Don@DonStevensonDesign.com] Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 7:38 PM To: VanLengenKris <KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net> Cc: FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; HillerGeorgia <GeorgiaHiller@colliergov.net>; HenningTom <TomHenning@colliergov.net>; TaylorPenny <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; NanceTim <TimNance@colliergov.net>; FrenchJames <jamesfrench@colliergov.net>; SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>; WilkisonDavid <DavidWilkison@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; WeeksDavid <DavidWeeks@colliergov.net>; jenkinsanita@colliergov.net; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net> Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 207 of 220 2 Subject: GGAMP zoning change to allow Commercial Development on Golden Gate Parkway??? Importance: High Dear Kris, I have been sent communications stating that the GGAMP is exploring a change in zoning to allow commercial uses on Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. My personal home is located on 66th street SW, literally one lot away from Golden Gate Parkway. My family an I are adamantly opposed to any changes to current zoning of the parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. This topic has come up previously by varied developers and we have opposed them every time they surface. I am not sure if you are the person in charge of the upcoming workshop or not, but I received your name in connection with the proposed workshop to discuss rezoning of the Master plan associated with the Golden Gate Parkway area between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. I will be reaching out to all of my contacts in the Collier County Growth Management Division to voice my opposition, as well as all of the county commissioners. Over the last 20 years I have been involved in countless development projects, PUDs, SDPs Replats and Rezones in Collier County, many of them residential and commercial rezoning projects, therefore I'm very experienced in the process. For the record, No Public Notice was Mailed to my home address which indicates that the public meeting may have not been properly advertised per the Collier County requirements. This is extremely alarming to say the least, especially knowing that the various developers have been trying to sneak this type of zoning change by the residents of this area for years now. I will be in adamant opposition to any change to the parkway zoning, and use all my professional resources, my experience and my company resources to make sure our neighborhood zoning remains unchanged. Commercial applications are not the right use for this area, it is and always has been zoned residential and estates. The traffic impact study reports (TIS) for this section go GG Parkway will also show the danger to the public if any commercial development is considered for this area in question. Please help to keep our residential neighborhood and our children safe from the dangerous traffic and social impacts of a change of this nature to the current zoning. During the installation approval process of the I-75 Interchange installation in December of 2007 the county commissioners adopted language into the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) that specifically and undeniably restricts any new modifications of improvements of Commercial development on the stretch of Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. other than the existing Center Point Church and The David Lawrence Center. Please review the Master Plan language that was adopted in 2007 and forward this information to the county commissioners and your supervisors for review. Please keep my email on your communication list regarding any items or communication related to and changes to the GGAMP between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. Thank you for your time. Don Stevenson, President Don Stevenson Design, Inc. Lotus Architecture, Inc. AA#26001786 2950 Tamiami Trail N. Suite 16 Naples, FL 34103 Phone: 239-304-3041 Email: Don@DonStevensonDesign.com Web: www.DonStevensonDesign.com Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 208 of 220 3 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 209 of 220 1 From:Angela Turner <ajturner37@hotmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:33 PM To:TaylorPenny; VanLengenKris Cc:barbcoen@comcast.net; Dan Dagnall Subject:GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential. After receiving a letter regarding a meeting planned for tomorrow to possibly re-zone our residential neighborhood to commercial I submit the following letter and past correspondence. When Commissioner Taylor was running for election she promised us that this would not happen. I am hoping that that promise will be kept! Golden Gate Master Plan. Keep the Estates Residential. Golden Gate Parkway. We have previously objected to the proposed changes in making the area between Livingston and Santa Barbara with ANY commercializations. We built our home in 1989 and unlike Pine Ridge Road there are too many private homes that feed onto the Parkway. Since exit 105 from 1-75 and the overpass was put in place it is almost impossible to get out of our street as it is, especially in season. We have already had over 3 fatalities at the end of our street and when I wrote to the County to request a light be put in place because of the gym and Bingo hall at the end of our street and the alterations to the other streets that have to utilize ours to make UTurns to head west it is a nightmare. The County flat out said "no, a stop light would cause more accidents". We have too many families with young children and children who are now learning to drive to be put in danger. Again, Golden Gate Estates was built for residential and it was well over 30 years ago. Too many families have taken stake in their properties and homes to be violated by commercialization. The investors who are attempting this change are not for the benefit of the residents...it's money for their pockets. The apartment complex that was just built on the corner of the Parkway and Livingston should prove to be another traffic nightmare. Subject: GG Parkway From: ajturner37@hotmail.com Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 19:37:33 -0400 To: fredcoyle@colliergov.net Commissioner Coyle, We, the residents off Golden Gate Parkway, recently received correspondence regarding a request to re-zone the one mile radius that impacts our home. I wanted to share the most recent correspondence from them and my response. I am afraid that many of our neighbors did not take into consideration the initial letter that was sent and have not read it. This is very disturbing that these people are trying to modify our existing peace and security. Would you please take the time to read their proposal and let us know if there is anyway they can actually achieve what they are asking for. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 210 of 220 2 Thank you. Angela Turner Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Angela Turner <ajturner37@hotmail.com> Date: June 4, 2014 at 7:25:06 PM EDT To: "edwinkoert@msn.com" <edwinkoert@msn.com> Subject: GG parkway Not liking this at all. Your proposing to use our street as a major road and a gas station. I need to know who on 68th Street SW responded to your initial letter. I already tried for a light, as I mentioned before, and the County flat out declined. Why would 68th Street SW want to allow the traffic and further dis-value to our homes, not to mention the safety of our children. Pine Ridge extension has all the stuff they need getting off I75. That part is hideous. We have a beautiful landscaped exit as it is, it doesn't need to be destroyed by adding anymore commerce to the frontage and making our homes less attractive. Closest gas stations are already good enough for those who choose not to use the Pine Ridge amenities. Why are you concentrating using 68th and 60th when you don't own any properties at the "proposed" sites for first modifications. Mr. Perrine is the realtor for the properties that were acquired and the owners, as well as the original company that purchased the parcels that Wildcat I and II, whom you are the trustee, now own, knew that these were residential. Why is he putting his on the market for 4 million and 2 million with a description that says "Possible commercial usage, ideal for gas station, church, retail shopping, etc". Why is he lying. Putting that out as a possibility is baiting a proposed buyer and misleading! Your initial mailing would have been thrown away but I had the time to actually open and read it. Maybe that is why you have not gotten the responses. I am certain that NO ONE on our street is going to go for these changes. Angela Turner Sent from my iPad Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 211 of 220 3 On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:36 PM, edwinkoert@msn.com wrote: To all who has responded: The purpose of our rezoning initiative is not to offend anyone, but to inform all of the property owners located within the GGPkwy geographic area of our activities to have the corridor rezoned to a commercial application. Believe me, your view "for or against" our rezoning activity does not offend me. Everyone has an opinion, and as such, yours, as-well-as your peers, is just as important and will be considered too. I am an old Florida Boy from youth - 7-years (the East coast - Hollywood / Ft. Lauderdale through high school 1958) My homestead address is now a retirement community off of I-75 Exit 240, known as Sun City Center. However, I, as-well-as Brent have two each 35-year old dogs in the hunt fronting GGPkwy, and as such, I am in the Naples area quite frequently. My specific properties are on the West side of I-75, fronting GGpkwy, one on the North side and one on the South side of GGPkwy. My foot prints in the Naples area goes back to the early sixties. To assist you on Brent and my thoughts, I am attaching two graphic diagrams. The diagrams include all of the properties fronting the East and West Side of I-75, including our suggested modifications. The PDF diagrams can be enlarged by increasing the zoom percent within the PDF. Also, attached a a letter containing our thoughts on the development of the area. You may wish to review them, or discard them. While reading the WORD document you may wish to have the diagrams available. We do make the information available to all. As each of you are aware, initially, I released 700- mailings. Currently, 16 of you have responded, and I thank you for your input. Sincerely, Edwin H. Koert 239-289-4420 edwinkoert@msn.com <GGPkwy - East Side of I-75.pdf> <GGPkwy - West Side of I-75.pdf> <GGPkwy -032414 - Hard look at the North and South Sides.doc> Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 212 of 220 5 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 213 of 220 6 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 214 of 220 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 215 of 220 8 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 216 of 220 1 From:vkeyes239@aol.com Sent:Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:34 PM To:VanLengenKris Subject:GGAMP I wish to make known my opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quite, residential character of our neighborhood. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 217 of 220 1 From:Jim Duffy <jim@jimduffyconstruction.com> Sent:Friday, October 28, 2016 10:59 AM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject:Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study To Planning and Zoning Division, Regarding ongoing study of uses for Golden Gate Parkway from Santa Barbara Avenue to Livingston Ave: We request, to maintain rural character of this area, that existing zoning in this area remain in place as currently in effect and no additional commercial use be permitted. Thank you, Gloria L. Cooley James P. Duffy 2760 68th ST. SW Naples FL34105 239-272-6881 Cell Jamespduffy@comcast.net Right-click or tap and hold here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Avast logo This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 218 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 219 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 220 of 220