The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 04/28/2015 Item # 9B 4/28/2015 9.B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for a project to be known as the Vincentian Village MPUD, to allow construction of a maximum of 224 multifamily residential dwelling units, up to 250,000 gross square feet of commercial land uses, and a hotel limited to 150 rooms and an assisted living facility (ALF) at 0.6 FAR. The commercial uses are subject to conversions and limitations if the project is developed as mixed use or if a hotel or ALF is constructed. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Southwest Boulevard and U.S. 41 in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 30.68+/- acres; providing for the repeal of Ordinance Number 99-37, the Vincentian PUD; and by providing an effective date [PUDZ-PL20130001726]. This is a companion item to the Growth Management Plan Amendment establishing the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict, PL20130001767/CP-2013- 10]. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) review staff's findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above referenced petition and render a decision regarding the petition; and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner is asking the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) to consider an application for an amendment to the existing PUD zoned project to allow numerous changes in conjunction with a proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment. For details about the project proposal, refer to "Purpose/Description of Project" in the attached staff report prepared for the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC). FISCAL IMPACT: The PUD amendment by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There is no guarantee that the project, at build out, will maximize its authorized level of development. However, if the PUD amendment is approved, a portion of the land could be developed and the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities. The County collects impact fees to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as needed to maintain adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in order to meet the requirements of concurrency management, the developer of every local development order approved by Collier County is required to pay a portion of the estimated Transportation Impact Fees associated with the project in accordance with Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Finally, Packet Page-80- 4/28/2015 9.B. additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates, and that revenue is directly related to the value of the improvements. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP)IMPACT: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): Comprehensive Planning staff finds that the proposed PUD Amendment may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element subject to the approval of the companion GMP amendment. Please refer to the attached Consistency Review Memorandum for the Growth Management Plan Amendment establishing the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict, P L20130001767/CP-2013-10. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard petition PUDZ-PL20130001726, Vincentian Village MPUD on March 19, 2015. The CCPC unanimously voted 5 to 0 to forward this petition along with the companion Growth Management Plan Amendment, PL20130001767/CP-2013-10 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval. The approval is subject to the following CCPC conditions of approval which have been incorporated into the PUD document: 1. Incorporate Comprehensive Planning's recommended Land Use Conversion Factor regarding portions of an acre into the PUD Exhibits. 2. The minimum lake width is 120 feet. 3. The minimum preserve width is 65 feet. 4. Amend footnote number 5, third bullet to state: "the frontage providing vehicle access....." 5. Revise the Land Use Conversion Factor note on the Master Plan (to incorporate Comprehensive Planning's new language). 6. Change the preserve area from 2.78 acres to 2.98 acres. Staff is recommending denial of the companion Growth Management Plan Amendment establishing the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict, PL20130001767/CP-2013-10. Therefore,the subject PUDA petition has been placed on the Regular Agenda. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: [Quasi-judicial, Four-fifths vote for approval] This is a site specific rezone from a PUD Zoning District to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Zoning District for a project which will be known as the Vincentian MPUD. The burden falls upon the applicant to prove that the proposed rezone is consistent with all the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), should it consider denying the rezone, to determine that such denial would not be arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below. Packet Page-81- 4/28/2015 9.B. Criteria for MPUD Rezones: Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for approval or not. 1. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. 2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contract, or other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense? Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. 3. Consider: Conformity of the proposed MPUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. 4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. 5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development? 6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. 7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. 8. Consider: Conformity with MPUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. 9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan? 10. Will the proposed MPUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern? 11. Would the requested MPUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts? Packet Page-82- 4/28/2015 9.B. 12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. 13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. 14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood? 15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety? 16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem? 17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas? 18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area? 19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations? 20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. 21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ("reasonably") be used in accordance with existing zoning? (a"core" question...) 22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county? 23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. 24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. 25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed MPUD rezone on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, art.II], as amended. Packet Page-83- 4/28/2015 9.B. 26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the MPUD rezone request that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare? The BCC must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons and the oral testimony presented at the BCC hearing as these items relate to these criteria. The proposed Ordinance was prepared by the County Attorney's Office. This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval. (SAS) RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs with the recommendation of the CCPC and further recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approves the request for PUDZ- PL201300001726, Vincentian Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD), subject to the approval of the companion Growth Management Plan Amendment establishing the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict, PL20130001767/CP-2013-10. Prepared by: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA Zoning Services Division Attachments: 1) Staff Report 2) Consistency Review Memorandum 3) Proposed Ordinance 4) Ordinance number 99-37 5) Location Map 6) Master Plan 7) Neighborhood Information Notes-go to: http://www.colliergov.net/ftp/AgendaApril2815/GrowthMgmt/NIM Notes from July 17-2014-9C- PUDZ-PL20130001726-Vincentian Village 7o20MPUD.pdf 8) Application- go to: http://www.col liergov.net/ftp/AgendaApri 12815/GrowthMgmt/Application.pdf Packet Page-84- 4/28/2015 9.B. rOLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 9.9.B. Item Summary: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended,the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for a project to be known as the Vincentian Village MPUD,to allow construction of a maximum of 224 multifamily residential dwelling units, up to 250,000 gross square feet of commercial land uses, and a hotel limited to 150 rooms and an assisted living facility(ALF) at 0.6 FAR. The commercial uses are subject to conversions and limitations if the project is developed as mixed use or if a hotel or ALF is constructed.The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Southwest Boulevard and U.S. 41 in Section 32,Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 30.68+/- acres; providing for the repeal of Ordinance Number 99-37, the Vincentian PUD; and by providing an effective date. [PUDZ-PL20130001726. This is a companion item to the Growth Management Plan Amendment establishing the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict, PL20130001767/CP-2013-10]. Meeting Date: 4/28/2015 Prepared By Name: GundlachNancy Title: Planner, Principal, Comprehensive Planning 3/31/2015 2:23:58 PM Submitted by Title: Planner, Principal, Comprehensive Planning Name: GundlachNancy 3/31/2015 2:24:00 PM Approved By Packet Page-85- 4/28/2015 9.B. Name: BosiMichael Title: Division Director-Planning and Zoning, Comprehensive Planning Date: 4/7/2015 3:24:56 PM Name: BellowsRay Title: Manager-Planning, Comprehensive Planning Date: 4/7/2015 4:20:00 PM Name: StoneScott Title: Assistant County Attorney, CAO Land Use/Transportation Date: 4/8/2015 4:44:43 PM Name: PuigJudy Title: Operations Analyst, Community Development&Environmental Services Date: 4/10/2015 9:53:23 AM Name: CasalanguidaNick Title: Deputy County Manager, County Managers Office Date: 4/15/2015 6:30:53 AM Name: IsacksonMark Title: Division Director-Corp Fin&Mgmt Svc. Office of Management&Budget Date: 4/15/2015 1:36:33 PM Name: KlatzkowJeff Title: County Attorney, Date: 4/15/2015 1:36:41 PM Name: CasalanguidaNick Title: Deputy County Manager, County Managers Office Date: 4/15/2015 3:28:22 PM Packet Page-86- 4/28/2015 9.B. AGENDA ITEM 9-t. C.fo 'e-r County STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING SERVICES—PLANNING&ZONING DEPARTMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION--PLANNING &REGULATION HEARING DATE: MARCH 19,2015 SUBJECT: PETITION PUDZ-PL20130001726; VINCENTIAN VILLAGE PUD (COMPANION TO PETITION CP-2013-10/PL20130001767) OWNER/APPLICANT: Global Properties of Naples,LLC c/o Christopher Shucart 2614 Tamiami Trail N, Suite 615 Naples, FL 34103 AGENTS: Robert J. Muthere, FAICP Richard Yovanovich,Esquire Hole Montes, Inc. Yovanovich&Koester,P.A. 950 Encore Way 4001 Tamiami Trail North Naples, FL 34103 Naples,FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is asking the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) to consider an application for an amendment to the existing PUD zoned project to allow numerous changes in conjunction with a proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment as noted above. For more details,please refer to the"Purpose and Description of Project"section of this staff report. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, consisting of 30.65E acres, is located at the southeast corner of Southwest Boulevard and U.S. 41 in Section 32,Township 50 South,Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (see location map on the following page) PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 1 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page -87- 4/28/2015 9.B. alive Vegetation and Open Space , C-5 ZONING Existing Native Vegetation= 29.77 Ac. ,' Min On-site Native Preservation Rec1'd STATION/ 20'TYPE '+D" WHISTLER'S 29.77x15°i°=4.a6A�. LANDSCAPE COVE - PUD Open Space Req'd(Comm.or Mixed-Use) ;8 x 30% =9.20 Ac i Min Open Space Required(Residential Only) P� ," �/// \c BUFFER \ 30.68 x 60% =18.41 Ac �P-'' /j le. C.S), �, 20' TYPE •'D" �\ yf\.` Ja �� LANDSCAPE \ .♦ �° & 1/7 -TRAIL ACRES -:-'.42,' BUFFER \ °' \ O'7 �/ 0 200 400 ` RSF-4ZONING '� 4`a pS;� '1' r �*o� . . �. �� TR ACT M � \- MIXED USE \ t �� LANDSCAPE BUFFER , EXISTING 15'U.E. PER LDC REQUIREMENTS 1-:-,` :�♦ `\\\ EXISTING 15'U.E. — 4 0. a\ DEVIATION #2 II N \�� WALL LOCATION POTENTIAL FUTURE ° ? C,y ♦♦ �� BIKEIPED . i1+U,o. tj . .\` 15' "B" INTERCONNECTION i J I s ; ♦ 15 TYPE B 2' 'G ♦ \\ LANDSCAPE ; E s•, , 15'TYPE "B,. I i W ♦ BUFFER t .�\ �\ LANDSCAPE p ` BUFFER 1 0 _ 1 Z W 4 TRACT ��P., = m a • TRACT t ~ 2 � PRESERVE �I = VII Ulf . Land Use Summary • - ■ EXISTING 15'U. .� LAKE Description Acreage Percent �, Mixed-Use(Tract MU) 22.05 71.9% , ♦ �\.. EXISTING 15'U.E. Lake(Tract L) 4.17 13.6% Preserve(Tract P) 4.46 14.5% - TOTAL 30.68 100.0% a — EXISTING 15'U.E. - Maximum Dwelling Units:224 TRAIL ACRES RSF-4 ZONING LAND USE CONVERSION FACTORS A. Commercial Only Development: Commercial uses shall be limited to a maximum of 250,000 square feet of gross floor area(GFA),and one hotel(maximum of 150 rooms),and an assisted living facility (maximum FAR 0.6). Additionally, for every acre of hotel or Assisted Living Facility, the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet. B. Mixed Use(Residential and Commercial)Development: The commercial portion of the project shall not exceed 10 acres in size and a maximum of 128,000 square feet of GFA of commercial uses,and a 150-room hotel and an Assisted Living Facility at a 0.6 FAR.Additionally,for every acre of hotel or Assisted Living Facility,the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet.Residential density shall be limited to 224 multifamily residential dwelling »nits,calculated on the gross acreage of the property,exclusive of any commercial portions. grain 950 Encore Way VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD M .H. o 'i2°'4 Naples,FL.34110 ��rr MK 01/2814 Phone:(239)254-2000 MASTER PLAN prif/P.u. "01/21114 HOLE MONTES Florida Certificate of wmi N/A ENitEERS1'Ui1NERSSURUEYORS Authorization No.1772 EXHIBIT C "rte z-1z-2o1s Packet Page-89- 4/28/2015 9.B. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject site is currently undeveloped and wooded with large portions occupied by Pine Flatwoods and Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm combinations. The subject site was originally rezoned to PUD in Ordinance #85-27 as the Vincentian Residence PUD, which was repealed by Ordinance#91-88, which was repealed by Ordinance #99-77. That ordinance is the current PUD ordinance governing uses on this site. That PUD rezone changed the name to just the "Vincentian PUD." That ordinance allows up to 40 residential units (4 units r! per acre (upa); up to 115,000 square feet of commercial uses; and assisted living facilities or other group care facilities at a FAR of 0.45. The allowable commercial uses include all C-2 uses, and some C-3 and C-4 uses. The agent provided the following list of changes contained in this amendment as shown below: • Both allow a mix of commercial and residential uses • Residential: o Original PUD: • Allowed 4 d.u. 's per gross acre on approximately 9.8 acres, for 39 du. 's o Proposed MPUD: • Allows 7.3 du/acre on entire site, max. 224 du. 's • Limits to multifamily residential uses • Commercial: o Original PUD: • 8.5 acre tract • Up to 115,000 SF retail/office or hotel(13,529 SF per acre) it C-2 uses (in effect as of date of ordinance, which included automobile service station and group care facilities) it Additional C-3 and C-4 uses allowed: amusement and recreation services, auto and home supply stores, business services, drinking places, hospitals, membership organizations, misc. retail, museums and art galleries, paint/glass/wallpaper stores, public administration, non- depository credit institutions, real estate, retail nurseries, social services, used merchandise stores, USPS • ALF at 0.45 FAR o Proposed MPUD: • Up to 250,000 SF of commercial(8,148 SF per acre) • C-3 zoning district uses, including those allowed as conditional uses, and department store, hotel, dental laboratories, and nursing and personal care facilities. • ALF at 0.60 FAR PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 2 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page-90- 4/28/2015 9.B. e Intensity/density standards: o Proposed MPUD: • Site can be developed as residential OR commercial OR a mixture of commercial and residential. • Total intensity/density allowed to be capped by trip generation rate — limited to average weekday, pm peak hour trip entering/exiting generation of 1,107 total trips. • Limits, in a mixed-use scenario, the amount of commercial to 10 acres and a maximum of 128,000 SF. • Reduces, in a commercial only scenario, the amount of commercial by 10,000 SF for every 1 acre developed as hotel or ALF. • Height limitations: o Original PUD: • 55'for multifamily residential • 50'for commercial o Proposed MPUD • 35'for multifamily residential(limited to two-story) • 45'for commercial • Setbacks from adjacent properties(perimeter PUD setbacks): o Original PUD: • None o Proposed MPUD: • From US 41 &Southwest Blvd: 50' • From RSF-4 zoned property: 75' • From MH zoned property: 75' • From C-3 zoned property: 25' • Native preservation: o Original PUD: • 11.7 acre reserve/conservation tract o Proposed MPUD: it Abide by current regulations, depending on how developed: • If commercial: 15%of existing native vegetation(4.46 acres) • If residential or mixed-use: 25% of existing native vegetation (7.44 acres). • The site contains approximately 29.77 acres of native vegetation, of which approximately 37 percent(11.12 acres) is covered with more than 75 percent exotic vegetation. Proposed MPUD contains the option to mitigate for up to 2.78 acres (25% of 11.12 acres) off-site, either by monetary payment or PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 3 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2126/15 Packet Page -91- 4/28/2015 9.B. land donation, consistent with the Vincentian Subdistrict of the GMP. • Open space: o Original PUD: • Min. 30% o Proposed MPUD: • Min. 30%if commercial or mixed-use • Min. 60%if residential only • Residential design standards: o Original PUD: • None o Proposed MPUD: • Architectural theme • Residential amenities n` • Resort-style swimming pool. • Clubhouse. • Fitness center. • Dog park • Children's playground area/tot lot. • Tennis court or bocce ball court. • Gated entry. • On-site property management if developed as a rental community. • Residential construction standards: o Original PUD: • None o Proposed MPUD: • Concrete Masonry Unit construction and stucco, or approved equivalent. • Cement or slate tile roof or approved equivalent. • Minimum 9-foot ceiling heights within first floor of units. • Concrete pavers at entrance/exit. Although not noted above,the applicant is also seeking to change the project name from the Vincentian PUD to the Vincentian Village PUD. Access to the site is proposed to be garnered from one access point on Tamiami Trail and two access points on Southwest Blvd. The applicant is seeking approval of three deviations. PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 4 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2126115 Packet Page-92- 4/28/2015 9.B. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: US 41 (Tamiami Trail East), then Whistler's Cove PUD, a developed rental apartment community approved at a density of 10 units per acre(Ordinance#97-1) East: Hitching Post Mobile Home Park, a co-operative park owned by the residents with 368 lots on 44± acres (8.4 units per acre), and a Collier County Utility use, then the Hitching Post Commercial Parcel, a developed commercial center that is zoned C-3 with a Conditional Use to allow a coin operated amusement arcade(Resolution#11-102) South: Trail Acres subdivision, a developed single-family neighborhood zoned RSF-4, developed at 4 units per acre West: Trail Acres subdivision, a developed single-family neighborhood zoned RSF-4, developed at 4 units per acre, and a commercial strip along US 41 developed with a gas station and j various vacant commercial structures zoned C-5 -im 7 ,„,' `F * r ' ,, ,:•' v. y' if_ '..f.-'111'.^`-*4 ry ! „ ♦ of tt .,.'t,-", ',' ' ;,'' -7"tic.e.:.1*--;.4 ".-4,.. ''',V4,14%.„ '*e '^ i"yy.. 'br i' �•% &�� ,� 4 I * i r � x . y( - , sx .. +ill ;. -'4o '..4)"-:."V°' ' 'At.v,..„,,4*"4" V.4,,. 4,-,44 4,--4,),,,, r "' '.;. * - .. ,*:/,,,., „_ 4,14 4, 4.: ,,.",,i,,44-41:1";,4.......7 ----, 4{.}M Al �/ 9 �y�. Aerial Photo (subject site depiction is approximate) PUDZ-PL20130001726:Vincentian PUD Page 5 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page -93- • 4/28/2015 9.B. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: Please see attached February 25, 2015 memo from Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section. Conservation and Coastal Management Element(CCME): Environmental review staff found this project to be consistent with the Conservation& Coastal Management Element (CCME). A minimum of 4.5 acres of native vegetation are required to be retained if the PUD is developed as r' commercial. If the PUD is developed as residential or mixed-use (residential& commercial), then a minimum of 7.44 acres of native vegetation are required to be retained. The PUD will allow up to 2.78 acres of native vegetation to be satisfied off-site in accordance with the provisions of the ?; LDC and proposed Vincentian GMP Subdistrict. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the application. The P 1� g Pp � Vincentian Village PUD demonstrates significant impacts, but does not cause adverse impacts. It can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to 1: as the "PUD Findings"), and Subsection 10.02.08.F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report(referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal bases to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the bases for their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support its action on the rezoning or amendment request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning Services Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document to address environmental concerns. Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances, the PUD does not require review by the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). The deviation on when native vegetation can be satisfied off-site is being requested by the GMP amendment, not the PUD. The applicable provision from Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances is included below. (m) Scope of land development project reviews. The EAC shall review the following: (1) Any PUD that requests a deviation from environmental standards of the LDC or any development order that requests a deviation from the provisions identified in GMP CCME Policy 6.1.1 (13). CCME Policy 6.1.1 (13) identifies the deviation process for several CCME provisions, including Policy 6.1.1 (10), the provision for off-site retention of native vegetation. Staff's analysis of the PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 6 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page-94- 4/28/2015 9.B. applicant's request for this deviation is included in the transmittal staff report for the proposed GMP amendment. The above referenced CCME Policies are as follows. (10) The County shall adopt land development regulations that allow for a process whereby a property owner may submit a petition requesting that all or a portion of the native vegetation preservation retention requirement to be satisfied by a monetary payment, land donation that contains native vegetative communities equal to or of a higher priority as described in Policy 6.1.1 (4) than the land being impacted, or other appropriate method of compensation to an acceptable land acquisition program, as required by the land development regulations. The monetary payment shall be used to purchase and manage native vegetative communities off-site. The land development regulations shall provide criteria to determine when this alternative will be considered. The criteria will be based upon the following provisions: a. The amount, type, rarity and quality of the native vegetation on site; b. The presence of conservation lands adjoining the site; c. The presence of listed species and consideration of Federal and State agency technical assistance; d. The type of land use proposed, such as, but not limited to, affordable housing; e. The size of the preserve required to remain on site is too small to ensure that the preserve can remain functional; and f. Right of Way acquisitions for all purposes necessary for roadway construction, including ancillary drainage facilities, and including utilities within the right of way acquisition area. The land development regulations shall include a methodology to establish the monetary value, land donation, or other appropriate method of compensation to ensure that native vegetative communities not preserved on-site will be preserved and appropriately managed off site. ****** (13) The County may grant a deviation to the native vegetation retention requirements of sub- sections 2, 4, 5, 10, and 12 of this Policy, and shall adopt land development regulations to set forth the process for obtaining a deviation. The regulations shall allow for the granting of a deviation by the appropriate review board after a public hearing, and for the granting of a deviation administratively. The County shall consider the amount and type of native vegetation and the presence of listed species in determining whether the granting of a deviation requires a public hearing, or may be granted administratively. The County may grant a deviation if a. County, Federal or State agencies require that site improvements be located in areas which result in an inability to meet the provisions of this Policy, or b. On or off:site environmental conditions are such that the application of one or more provisions of this Policy is not possible or will result in a preserve area of lesser quality, or c. The strict adherence to these provisions will not allow for the implementation of other Plan policies that encourage beneficial land uses. PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincenfian PUD Page 7 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page-95- 4/28/2015 9.B. School Board Review: At this time there is sufficient capacity for the proposed development for the elementary, middle and high school levels. This finding is for planning and informational purposes only and does not constitute either a determination of concurrency for the proposed project. At the time of site plan or plat, the development would be reviewed for concurrency to ensure there is capacity either within the concurrency service area the development is located in or adjacent concurrency service areas such that the level of service standards are not exceeded. Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document and Master Plan for right-of-way and access issues as well as roadway capacity, and recommends approval subject to the Developer/owner commitments as provided in the PUD ordinance. Appropriate mitigation measures in the form of proportionate share for signal improvements, and turn lane improvements/access management restrictions are proposed at the intersections of Southwest Boulevard and US-41, and on Southwest Boulevard at both 1st Street and 2nd Street. Zoning Services Review: FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses and intensity on the subject site, the compatibility analysis included a review of the subject proposal comparing it to surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location. Zoning staff had concerns about this project. Staff believes in its present form, it will be compatible with and complementary to, the surrounding land uses. Staff offers the following analysis of this project. The original PUD approved residential and commercial uses, with the commercial uses located within 8.5 acres that fronted US 41 and that were in line with the C-3 and C-5 uses, as show on the excerpt from the PUD map below in gold. . ffI Tl -.IL ` ''''E Commercial Residential !' r :: , portion portion The currently proposed Master Plan would allow commercial uses to be developed anywhere on site either alone or with residential development. Staff still is of the opinion the previous site plan layout would be more compatible with the adjacent residential uses in the mobile home park and in the Trail Acres subdivision. However the applicant has made revisions since the project was first submitted to address staff's concerns. The application has been revised. The list of uses had been modified to remove some more intense commercial uses, the residential density has been reduced, the size of the commercial area has been limited, any Automotive Vehicle dealer use PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincen#ian PUD Page 8 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page -96- 4/28/2015 9.B. would require a conditional use application, and the number of fast food uses has been limited to two restaurants. The applicant has agreed to include an amenity package no later than issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the 100`h dwelling unit. Amplified sound has been limited as to location and timing. Relationship to Existing and Future Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship of the uses that would be permitted if the proposed zoning action is approved, to the requirement or limitations set forth in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The proposed uses, as limited in the PUD document, are consistent with the GMP if the proposed amendment is approved, as previously noted. The actual uses proposed, as limited in the PUD document, should be compatible with the land uses that have been developed on adjacent tracts with the additional limitations that have been included in the PUD document. The Master Plan show a 20 foot type D landscape buffer along US 41 and Southwest Blvd., and a 15 foot type B landscape buffer along the boundary shared with Trail Acres. Along the eastern boundary, the buffer would be determined by the LDC requirements based upon what is developed on site. Deviation #3 seeks relief from the Group Housing standards to allow a 0.6 FAR for Group Housing units which is appropriate. All references to an FAR for a hotel use should be removed from the PUD document. Deviation Discussion: The petitioner is seeking three deviations. The petitioner has provided justification in support of the deviations. Deviations are a normal derivative of the PUD zoning process following the purpose and intent of the PUD zoning district as set forth in LDC Section 2.03.06 which says in part: It is further the purpose and intent of these PUD regulations to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design, and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership or control. PUDs. . . . may depart from the strict application of setback, height, and minimum lot requirements of conventional zoning districts while maintaining minimum standards by which flexibility may be accomplished, and while protecting the public interest. . . Staff has analyzed the deviation requests and has provided the analyses and recommendations below. Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N, requiring a minimum right-of-way width of 60 feet for local street rights-of-way, to allow for a minimum 42 foot right-of-way internal to the proposed development. PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 9 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised; 2/26/15 Packet Page-97- 4/28/2015 9.B. Petitioner's Rationale: The justification is a 42 foot right-of-way will be sufficient for the scale of the proposed (t development and will provide an adequate cross-section to meet ingress/egress, drainage, le and utilities requirements while maintaining public safety. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h,the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.H Wall requirement between residential and nonresidential development, which requires, wherever a nonresidential development lies contiguous to a residentially zoned district, that a masonry wall, concrete or pre-fabricated concrete wall and/or fence be constructed on the nonresidential property, no less than 6 feet from the residentially zoned district, to allow the wall to be located more than 6 feet from the residentially zoned district, as generally depicted on Exhibit C, Master Plan. Petitioner's Rationale: The justification is that placing the wall along the nonresidential development side of the preserve and buffer areas will allow a more natural, less developed view into the property from adjacent residentially zoned lands, more consistent with existing conditions, and yet still provide adequate buffering between residential and nonresidential uses. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community." and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h,the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.04.D.1 Group Housing, which establishes a maximum floor area ratio of 0.45 for care units, assisted living units, continuing care retirement communities, nursing homes, and dwelling units that are part of an aging-in-pace [sic} living environment,to allow a maximum floor area ratio of 0.6 for an Assisted Living Facility. Petitioner's Rationale: The justification is that this deviation is typically granted and the increased FAR is consistent with that needed in order to accommodate Assisted Living Facilities. PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 10 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2126/15 Packet Page-98- 4/28/2015 9.B. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety. and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." FINDINGS OF FACT: LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below. [Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in bold, non-italicized font]: PUD Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria" Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in bold font): p p ): 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and believes the uses and property development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The commitments made by the applicant and staff's recommended stipulations should provide adequate assurances that the proposed change should not adversely affect living conditions in the area. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. Additionally, the development will be required to gain platting and/or site development approval. Both processes will ensure that appropriate stipulations for the provision of and continuing operation and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion and the zoning analysis of this staff report. Based on those staff analyses, planning zoning staff is of the opinion that this PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 11 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page -99- 4/28/2015 9.B. petition may be found consistent with the Future Land Use Element contingent upon Board approval of the companion Growth Management Nan amendment, Petition GMPA- PL2014-113,to amend the Subdistrict language. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include II restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. Staff has provided a review of the proposed uses. The uses in the existing PUD were deemed compatible, but the uses are changing as part of this amendment. Staff initially had concerns about the potential intensity of the proposed project. The petitioner has revised the list of uses and added other safeguards to address staff's concerns. Staff is of the opinion that the uses will be compatible. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of native preserve aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time, i.e., GMP consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation Element consistency review. The project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought. Additionally, the PUB document contains additional developer commitments that should help ensure there are adequate facilities available to serve this project. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as road capacity,wastewater disposal system, and potable water supplies to accommodate this project based upon the commitments made by the petitioner and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will be addressed when development approvals are sought. S. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The petitioner is seeking approval of three deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06.A). This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development I" standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff has provided an PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 12 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page -100- 4/28/2015 9.B. analysis of the deviations in the Deviation Discussion portion of this staff report, and is recommending approval of the deviations. Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.08 F. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable" (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in bold font): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, &policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. The zoning analysis provides an in-depth review of the proposed amendment. Staff is of the opinion that the project as proposed is consistent with GMP FLUE Policy 5.4 requiring the project to be compatible with neighborhood development. Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed PUDZ application consistent with the Future Land Use Element contingent upon Board approval of the companion Growth Management Plan amendment, Petition GMPA-PL2014-113,to adopt the Subdistrict language. The petition can be deemed consistent with the CCME and the Transportation Element. Therefore, staff recommends that this petition be deemed consistent with the GMP contingent upon Board approval of the companion Growth Management Plan amendment if staff's stipulations are adopted. 2. The existing land use pattern; Staff has described the existing land use pattern in the"Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report and discussed it at length in the zoning review analysis. Staff believes the proposed amendment is appropriate given the existing land use pattern if limitations are imposed to keep the project more in scale with a neighborhood center commercial development, and development restrictions included in the PUD Ordinance. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; The proposed PUD amendment would not create an isolated zoning district because the subject site is already zoned PUD. No land is being added to the PUD as part of this amendment. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. Staff is of the opinion that the district boundaries are logically drawn given the current property ownership boundaries and the existing PUD zoning. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed amendment is not necessary,per se; but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such the amendment to allow the owner the opportunity to develop the land with uses other than what the existing zoning district would allow. PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 13 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page -101- 4/28/2015 9.B. Without this amendment, the property could be developed in compliance with the existing PUD ordinance regulations. 6, Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; Staff is of the opinion that the proposed amendment, with the commitments made by the applicant and the stipulations offered by staff, can been deemed consistent County's land (' use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. The project includes numerous restrictions and standards that are designed to address compatibility of the project. Development in compliance with the proposed PUD amendment should not adversely impact living conditions in the area. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project with the mitigation that will be provided by the developer (Developer Commitments). Staff believes the petition can be deemed consistent with the Transportation Element of the GMP. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem; The proposed amendment should not create drainage or surface water problems. The developer of the project will be required to adhere to a surface water management permit from the SFWMD -in conjunction with any local site development plan approvals and ultimate construction on site. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; If this amendment petition is approved, any subsequent development would need to comply with the applicable LDC standards for development or as outlined in the PUD document. The setbacks and project buffers will help insure that light and air to adjacent areas will not be substantially reduced. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market conditions. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 14 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page-102- 4/28/2015 9.B. The proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; If the proposed development complies with the Growth Management Plan through the !k proposed amendment, then that constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; The subject property could be developed within the parameters of the existing zoning designations; however, the petitioner is seeking this amendment in compliance with LDC provisions for such action. The petition can be evaluated and action taken as deemed I' appropriate through the public hearing process. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County; As noted previously, the applicant has reduced the intensity and density of the proposed project which keeps the proposed project more in line with the scale of the neighborhood. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the proposed GMPA and the LDC; and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. The proposed amendment is consistent with the GMP as it is proposed to be amended as discussed in other portions of the staff report. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Additional development anticipated by the PUD document would require considerable site alteration. This project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site development plan or platting approval process and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 15 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2126/15 Packet Page -103- 4/28/2015 9.B. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments J, contained in the PUD document. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING: L'h The applicant's agents conducted a duly noticed NIM on July 17, 2014, at South Regional Library. Please see the attached NIM synopsis and Question and Answer sheets provided by the agent. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office reviewed the staff report for this petition on February 19,2015. RECOMMENDATION: Zoning and Land Development Review Services staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward PETITION PUDZ-PL20130001726 to the BCC with a recommendation of approval subject to the approval of the companion Growth Management Plan amendment, Petition GMPA-PL2014-113,to amend the Subdistrict language. PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 16 of 17 March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/26/15 Packet Page -104- I 4/28/2015 9.B. PREPARED BY: B.44,4,4_- 4i ? (I1A1 ESELEM,AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DA ' DEP TMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING REVIEWED BY: 743/". /ill's- 'RA ND V. BELLOWS,ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING MIKE BOSI, AICP,DIRECTOR DATE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING APPROVED BY: 3 \ -'NICJ(CASALA�TGUIDA,7�DMI S7 TOR DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION Tentatively scheduled for the April 28,2015 Board of County Commissioners Meeting Attachment: NIM synopsis February 25, 2015 memo from Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section PUDZ-PL20130001726;Vincentian PUD Page 17 of 17 . March 19,2015 CCPC Revised: 2/17/15 Packet Page -105- 4/28/2015 9.B. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/PLANNING AND REGULATION PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT CONSISTENCY REVIEW MEMORANDUM To: Kay Deselem, AICP, Principal Planner, Zoning Services Section From: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section Date: February 25, 2015 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review of the Proposed Vincentian Village Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (5th memo) PETITION NUMBER: PUDZ-PL20130001726 [REV: 5] PETITION NAME: Vincentian Village PUD Rezone REQUEST: To rezone the ±30.7 acre site from the Vincentian Planned Unit Development (PUD), to the Vincentian Village Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) to allow mixed use development — up to 224 multi-family dwelling units; up to 250,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses; up to 150 hotel rooms; and, an assisted living facility. LOCATION: The subject property is located south and east of Southwest Boulevard, south and west of US 41 (Tamiami Trail East), and west of the Hitching Post Mobile Home Park, in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is designated Urban, Urban — Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict and the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and addressed in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). This petition relies on recently transmitted [final adoption hearing anticipated to be on or about April 28, 2015] amendments of provisions in the FLUE to achieve consistency. That amendment [ref. CP-2013- 10/PL20130001767] establishes the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District for: up to 7.3 DU/acre for 224 residential dwelling units; and, up to 250,000 square feet of gross floor area for uses allowed in the C-3, Commercial General zoning district by right and by conditional use, dental labs, skilled nursing facilities, department stores, a hotel of 150 units maximum, and, a recreational site for use by residents in the adjacent mobile home development. The provisions of the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict proposed in the companion GMP amendment are listed below, followed by staff analysis in [bold text]. • Main Subdistrict provisions state "The Subdistrict is intended to include commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. In order to comply with Policy 1.10 of the Housing Element of the Growth Management Plan, residential development shall be limited to market-rate units so as to avoid the concentration of affordable housing in one location in the County. The property may be developed entirely as commercial, entirely as residential, or as a mixture of residential and commercial uses." [Provisions for this aspect of the PUD are found in Exhibit A, Permitted Uses, Tract MU - Mixed-Use Development, Principal Uses,subsection I.A.,and are consistent with Subdistrict provisions.] -1 — Packet Page-106- 4/28/2015 9.B. • Subdistrict section a. provides that "The maximum intensity of commercial uses shall be limited to those allowed in the C-3 zoning district, both by right and by conditional use, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict. Additionally, the following uses are allowed: Department store (5311), Hotel (7011, hotel only), Dental laboratories (8072), and Nursing and personal care facilities (8051)". [Provisions for allowable commercial land uses are found in Exhibit A, Permitted Uses, Tract MU - Mixed-Use Development, Principal Uses, subsection I.B. and Accessory Uses, subsection II.B. All of the principal uses listed in the PUD are listed as either permitted [principal] or conditional uses in the C-3 zoning district, or are the four additional uses allowed by the Subdistrict. The Subdistrict generally does not address accessory uses, except as noted further below regarding fuel pumps.] • Subdistrict subsection b.1. provides that "Commercial uses shall be limited to a maximum of 250,000 square feet of gross floor area (GFA), and one hotel (maximum FAR 0.6 and a maximum of 150 rooms), and an assisted living facility (maximum FAR 0.6). Additionally, for every acre of hotel or ALF, the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet". [Provisions for commercial land use restrictions and intensity standards are found in Exhibit A, Permitted Uses, Tract MU - Mixed-Use Development, Principal Uses, subsection LB. and Exhibit B, Development Standards, Land Use Conversion Factors Section III,and are consistent with Subdistrict provisions.] • Subdistrict subsection b.2. provides that "Residential development shall be limited to a maximum density of 7.3 units per acre, calculated on the gross acreage of the property exclusive of any commercial portions, for a maximum of 224 multi-family dwelling units". [Provisions for residential density are found in Exhibit A, Permitted Uses, Tract MU - Mixed-Use Development, Principal Uses, subsection I.A. and Exhibit B, Development Standards, Land Use Conversion Factors, subsection III.B., and are consistent with Subdistrict provisions.] • Subdistrict subsection b.3. provides that "If the project is developed as mixed use (residential and commercial uses), the residential density allowance is as provided for in Number 2. above, and the commercial portion of the project shall not exceed 10 acres in size and a maximum of 128,000 square feet of GFA of commercial uses, and a 150-room hotel not to exceed 0.6 FAR, and an Assisted Living Facility at a 0.6 FAR. Additionally, for every acre of hotel or ALF, the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet". [Provisions for mixed use land use restrictions and intensity standards are found in Exhibit A, Permitted Uses, Tract MU - Mixed-Use Development, Principal Uses, subsection I.B.and Exhibit B, Development Standards, Land Use Conversion Factors Section III, and are consistent with Subdistrict provisions.] • Subdistrict subsection b.4. provides that "A stand-alone automobile service station (i.e. retail fuel sales in conjunction with a convenience store) is prohibited; however, accessory fuel pumps in association with a grocery store or membership warehouse type facility greater than 15,000 square feet of GFA are allowed". [Provisions for accessory fuel pumps are found in Exhibit A, Permitted Uses, Tract MU - Mixed-Use Development,Accessory Uses,subsection II.B.4.,and are consistent with Subdistrict provisions.] • Subdistrict subsection b.5. provides that "A recreational site for the use of the adjacent RV or mobile home parks may be developed on a maximum of 3 acres. The recreational site may include facilities such as a pool, clubhouse, and tennis courts". [Provisions for a recreational site are found in Exhibit A, Permitted Uses, Tract MU - Mixed-Use Development, Principal Uses, subsection I.B.3., and are consistent with Subdistrict provisions.] • Subdistrict subsection c.1. provides that "Rezoning of this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The rezone ordinance shall contain development and design standards to ensure compatibility with internal uses as well as adjacent external uses, and shall include additional restrictions and standards necessary to ensure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses". [This development is being proposed as a PUD. Provisions for development and design standards to ensure compatibility are found in Exhibit B, Development Standards, and Exhibit F, List of Developer Commitments, Planning Section V.] -2- Packet Page-107- 4/28/2015 9.B. • Subdistrict subsection c.2. provides that "The subject site will be developed with a common architectural and landscaping theme, to be submitted with the first Site Development Plan". [Provisions for common architectural and landscaping themes are found in Exhibit B, Development Standards, Design Standards Section II,and are consistent with Subdistrict provisions.] • Subdistrict subsection c.3. provides that "The unified planned development submitted at time of the first Site Development Plan will reflect, to the maximum extent feasible, internal connectivity through shared parking and cross-access agreements". [Provisions for internal connectivity are found in Exhibit F, List of Developer Commitments, subsection V.H., and are consistent with Subdistrict provisions.] • Subdistrict subsection c.4. provides that "Pedestrian connections are encouraged, both with perimeter properties, where feasible, and between internal buildings". [Provision for pedestrian connections is found in Exhibit C, MPUD Master Plan, which indicates a "POTENTIAL FUTURE BIKE/PED INTERCONNECTION", and is consistent with Subdistrict provisions.] • Subdistrict subsection c.5. provides that"At the time of Site Development Plan approval, the required on-site vegetation retention may be satisfied off-site, pursuant to Policy 6.1.1(13) of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the Growth Management Plan. At a minimum, 15 percent of the on-site native vegetation must be retained on-site. If the portion of native vegetation satisfied off-site is met by land donation to the County, the specific off-site property shall be taken to the Board of County Commissioners for acceptance. However, a hearing before the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee will not be required". [Provisions for this requirement are found in Exhibit F, List of Developer Commitments, section II. Comprehensive Planning staff defers to Environmental Review staff to determine consistency with this requirement.] FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new developments to be compatible with the surrounding land area. [Comprehensive Planning leaves this determination to the Zoning Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety.] In order to promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following FLUE policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, where applicable. Each policy is followed by staff analysis in [bold text]. Objective 7: In an effort to support the Dover, Kohl & Partners publication, Toward Better Places: The Community Character Plan for Collier County, Florida, promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, where applicable. Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [This site fronts US 41 East. Exhibit C, MPUD Master Plan, depicts a single, direct access to US 41 East (Tamiami Trail), classified as a major arterial road in the Transportation Element, and; two connection points onto Southwest Boulevard (a local road), which provides access to US 41 East.] Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [Exhibit C, MPUD Master Plan, does not depict any internal accesses or roads. Parts of the development without an access point to US 41 or Southwest Boulevard as shown on PUD Master Plan can reasonably be expected to internally connect all uses eventually developed in the MU, Mixed Use land use area.] Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of -3 - Packet Page -108- 4/28/2015 9.B. local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. [Exhibit C, MPUD Master Plan, does not depict vehicular interconnection with any abutting properties; local street connections do not appear to be feasible, as existing development (wall, water management, structures, etc.) presents obstructions on abutting sites.] Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [With regard to walkable communities,the application proposes sidewalks located on both sides of all streets. Also with regard to walkable communities, application materials depict non-vehicular interconnection, as follows: Non-vehicular interconnection is feasible and proposed in at least one location - to the southeast - in order to provide interconnection to a potential, shared recreational site. Application materials indicate a potential future non-vehicular interconnection along the SE boundary with this adjacent property. Interconnection does not appear to be feasible on the remaining sides,as existing development obstructs interconnection points. With regard to a blend of densities, the application proposes a uniform density- distributing up to 224 multi-family units, with identical minimum floor areas, across the site (or across the non-commercial portion of the site, if project develops as mixed-use). Regarding common open spaces, the application proposes "recreation uses and facilities that serve the residents, such as swimming pools, tennis courts, volleyball courts, walking paths, picnic areas, playgrounds and recreation/amenity buildings". With regard to civic facilities, principal uses allowed in the Mixed Use area include civic organizations; essential services, which includes government offices; schools; etc.; and, accessory uses include a clubhouse which potentially could be used for civic purposes, e.g.polling place. With regard to a range of housing prices and types, the PUD application proposes only market rate residential units, and only a singular dwelling unit type - multi-family units - with 1,250 sq. ft. minimum floor areas.] Based upon the above analysis, the proposed Planned Unit Development Amendment may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. Please note this PUD amendment petition is contingent upon approval of the companion GMPA petition CP- 2013-10/PL20130001767. The GMPA petition is subject to possible changes through the Adoption public hearing process. GMPA Adoption hearings are tentatively scheduled for March 19, 2015 (CCPC) and, April 28, 2015 (BCC). PETITION ON CITYVIEW cc: David Weeks,A/CP, Growth Management Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section Ray Bellows,Zoning Manager,Zoning Services Section Mike Bosi,AICP, Director, Planning&Zoning Department G:Comp\Consistency Reviews\2015 G:ICDES Planning Services\Consistency Reviews120151PUDZIPUDZ-13-1726 Vincentian REV5_2-25 FNL.docx -4- Packet Page -109- 4/28/2015 9.B. ORDINANCE NO. 15- I AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ZONING DISTRICT TO A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 224 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000 GROSS SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL LAND USES, A HOTEL LIMITED TO 150 ROOMS, AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY (ALF) AT 0.6 FAR. THE COMMERCIAL USES ARE SUBJECT TO CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF THE PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE OR IF A HOTEL OR ALF IS CONSTRUCTED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41 IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 30.68+1- ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 99-37, THE VINCENTIAN PUD; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDZ-PL20130001726] WHEREAS, Robert J. Mulhere of Hole Montes, Inc., representing Global Properties of Naples, LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Southwest Boulevard and Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41) in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning District to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Zoning District for a 30.68+/- acre project to be known as the Vincentian Village MPUD, to allow construction of a maximum of 224 multifamily residential dwelling units, up to 250,000 gross square feet of commercial land uses, a hotel limited to 150 rooms, and an assisted living facility (ALF) at 0.6 FAR, in accordance with Exhibits A through F attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps as described in [14-CPS-01292/1167551/1]73 Vincentian MPUD/PUDZ-PL20130001726 Page 1 of 2 Rev.4/3/15 Packet Page-110- 1CA 4/28/2015 9.B. Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: Ordinance Number 99-37, known as the Vincentian Planned Unit Development, adopted on May 25, 1999 by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of , 2015. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: _ By: Deputy Clerk TIM NANCE, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: SA Scott A. Stone Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A-Permitted Uses Exhibit B - Development Standards Exhibit C - Master Plan Exhibit C-1 —ROW Section Exhibit D - Legal Description Exhibit E- Requested Deviations from LDC Exhibit F -Developer Commitments [14-CPS-01292/1167551/1]73 Vincentian MPUD/PUDZ-PL20130001726 Page 2 of 2 Rev.4/3/15 Packet Page -111- 4 4/28/2015 9.B. EXHIBIT A VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD LIST OF PERMITTED USES PERMITTED USES: The PUD may be developed entirely as residential, entirely as commercial, or a mixture of residential and commercial uses. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered, or used, or land used, in whole or in part,within the Vincentian Village MPUD, for other than the following: TRACT MU—MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT I. Principal Uses A. Multifamily and Townhome residential uses, up to 224 dwelling units. In order to comply with Policy 1.10 of the Housing Element of the Growth Management Plan, residential development shall be limited to market-rate units so as to avoid the concentration of affordable housing in one location in the County. B. Commercial Uses, subject to conversions in Exhibit B, Section III: Up to 250,000 square feet of gross floor area if the PUD is developed without residential dwelling units. If the PUD is developed with residential and commercial uses, the commercial uses shall not exceed 10 acres in size and 128,000 square feet of gross floor area. No single use shall exceed 65,000 square feet of gross floor area (GFA), with the exception of a group care facility, physical fitness facility, hotel, or department store, unless the single use is approved by the conditional use process outlined in the LDC. Commercial uses are further limited in this Section, I.B. 1. Accounting, auditing, and bookeeping (8721). 2. Advertising agencies (7311). 3. Amusement and recreation services, (7911, 7922, community theater only), (7933, 7991, 7999 - miniature golf course, bicycle and moped rental, and yoga only). A recreational site for the use of the adjacent RV or mobile home parks may be developed on a maximum of three (3) acres of the PUD. 4. Apparel and accessory stores(5611-5699). 5. Architectural services (8712). 6. Auto and home supply stores (5531). 7. Automotive services (7549) except that this shall not be construed to permit the activity of"wrecker service (towing) automobiles, road and towing service." No outdoor paging or amplified sound systems shall be used. 8. Banks, credit unions and trusts (6011-6099). 9. Barber shops (7241, except for barber schools). 10. Beauty shops (7231, except for beauty schools). 11. Business consulting services (8748). 12. Business credit institutions (6153-6159). Page 1 of 16 H\2013\2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx f~NN, Packet Page -112- o1 A 4/28/2015 9.B. 13. Business services-miscellaneous (7311, 7322-7338, 7371-7379, 7384, 7389, except for except auctioneering service, automobile recovery, automobile repossession, batik work, bottle exchanges, bronzing, cloth cutting, contractors' disbursement, cosmetic kits, cotton inspection, cotton sampler, directories- telephone, drive-away automobile, exhibits-building, filling pressure containers, field warehousing, fire extinguisher, floats-decoration, folding and refolding, gas systems, bottle labeling, liquidation services, metal slitting and shearing, packaging and labeling, patrol of electric transmission or gas lines, pipeline or powerline inspection, press clipping service, product sterilization, recording studios, repossession service, rug binding, salvaging of damaged merchandise, scrap steel cutting and slitting, shrinking textiles, solvent recovery, sponging textiles, swimming pool cleaning, tape slitting, textile designers, textile folding, tobacco sheeting, window trimming, and yacht brokers). 14. Child day care services (8351). 15. Civic, social, and fraternal associations (8641). 16. Computer and computer software stores (5734). 17. Department stores (5311). Accessory fuel pumps for membership warehouse facilities subject to Section II, Accessory Uses, B.iv. 18. Drug stores (5912). 19. Eating and drinking places (5812 and 5813, excluding bottle clubs). All establishments engaged in the retail sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption are subject to the Iocational requirements of section 5.05.01. 20. Educational plants and services (8211, 8221-8222). 21. Essential services, subject to section 2.01.03 22. Food stores (groups 5411-5499). Accessory fuel pumps subject to Section II, Accessory Uses, B.iv. 23. Garment pressing, and agents for laundries and drycleaners (7212). 24. General merchandise stores(5331-5399). Accessory fuel pumps for membership warehouse facilities subject to Section II,Accessory Uses, B.iv. 25. Glass, Paint, and Wallpaper stores (5231). 26. Group care facilities (category I and II, except for homeless shelters); care units, except for homeless shelters; nursing homes; assisted living facilities pursuant to F.S. § 429 and ch. 58A-5 F.A.C.; and continuing care retirement communities pursuant to F.S. § 651; as defined in the LDC and all subject to section 5.05.04. of the LDC (hereinafter collectively or singularly referred to as "Assisted Living Facility"). 27. Hardware stores (5251). 28. Health services, offices and clinics(8011-8049, 8072, 8092. and 8099). 29. Home furniture and furnishings stores (5712-5719). 30. Home health care services (8082). 31. Hospitals (8062). 32. Hotels (7011, hotel only), limited to 150 rooms. 33. Household appliance stores (5722). 34. Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (6311--6399, 641 I). 35. Landscape architects, consulting and planning(0781). 36. Legal services (8111). Page 2 of 16 H.\20I3\20I3043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page-113- ! 'y 4/28/2015 9.B. 37. Management services (8741, 8742). 38. Medical equipment rental and leasing (7352). 39. Membership organizations, miscellaneous (8611, 8699 - excluding Humane society, animal). 40. Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents (6162). 41. Motion picture theaters (7832-except drive-in). 42. Museums and art galleries (8412). 43. Musical instrument stores(5736). 44. Nursing and personal care facilities (8051). 45. Photographic studios,portrait(7221). 46. Public administration (groups 9111-9199, 9229, 9311, 9411, 9451, 9511-9532, 9611-9661). 47. Public relations services (8743). 48. Radio, television and consumer electronics stores (5731). 49. Radio, television and publishers advertising representatives(7313). 50. Real Estate (6512, 6531-6552). 51. Record and prerecorded tape stores (5735), excluding adult-oriented sales and rentals. 52. Religious organizations (8661)with 10,000 square feet or more of gross floor area in the principal structure. 53. Repair services, miscellaneous (7629-7631, 7699 - bicycle repair, binocular repair, camera repair, key duplicating, lawnmower repair, leather goods repair, locksmith shop,picture framing, and pocketbook repair only). 54. Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (5261). 55. Retail services - miscellaneous (5921, 5941-5963 except pawnshops, 5992-5999 except auction rooms, awning shops, fireworks- retail, gravestones, hot tubs, monuments, swimming pools, tombstones and whirlpool baths). 56. Security and commodity brokers, dealer, exchanges and services (6211-6289). 57. Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors (7251). 58. Social services, individual and family (limited to 8322 activity centers for elderly or handicapped only; day care centers for adult and handicapped only). 59. Surveying services (8713). 60. Tax return preparation services (7291). 61. Travel agencies (4724, no other transportation services). 62. United State Postal Service (4311, except major distribution center). 63. Veterinary services (0742, excluding outside kenneling). 64. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the forgoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Hearing Examiner by the process outlined in the LDC. II. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures permitted by right in this MPUD, including, but not limited to: A. Residential Accessory Uses: Page 3 of 16 H\2013\2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPCWincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page -114- 4/28/2015 9.B. 1. Recreational uses and facilities that serve the residents of the PUD, such as swimming pools, tennis courts, bocce ball, volleyball courts, walking paths, picnic areas, dog parks, playgrounds, fitness centers, and recreation/amenity buildings. 2. Customary accessory uses and structures to residential units, including carports, garages, and utility buildings. 3. Temporary sales trailers and model units. 4. Entry gate and gatehouse. B. Commercial Accessory Uses: 1. Outside storage or display of merchandise when specifically permitted by the LDC for a use, subject to LDC Section 4.02.12. 2. One caretakers residence, subject to LDC Section 5.03.05. 3. Temporary display of merchandise during business hours provided it does not adversely affect pedestrian or vehicular traffic or public health or safety as determined by the County. Merchandise storage and display is prohibited within any front yard but allowed within the side and rear yards of lots. 4. Fuel pumps accessory to a grocery store or membership warehouse type facility, greater than 15,000 square feet of gross floor area, no closer than 300 feet to a residential use. 5. Fast food restaurants (with drive-through facilities), limited to two (2) restaurants. This limitation does not apply to coffees shops with on-site brewing. III. Conditional Uses The following use is permissible as a conditional use, subject to the standards and procedures established in section 10.08.00. 1. Automotive vehicle dealers(5511), limited to new automobile dealers only. TRACT L—LAKE & WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES: PERMITTED USES: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered, or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Storm water management treatment, conveyance facilities, and structures, such as berms, swales, and outfall structures. 2. Passive recreational facilities in support of residential and/or commercial uses or for use by the adjacent Hitching Post Mobile Home Park, including but not limited to boardwalks, trails, pervious pathways, picnic areas, and recreational shelters. Should such passive recreational facilities be developed, this shall not affect the maximum intensity or density permitted in this PUD. Page 4 of 16 H.\2013\2013043\WP\PUDA1Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page-115- , 4/28/2015 9.B. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the forgoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Hearing Examiner by the process outlined in the LDC. The stormwater lake depicted on the Master Plan (Tract L) shall be a minimum of 120 feet in width measured from the PUD boundary and inclusive of the perimeter landscape buffer easement and lake maintenance easement. TRACT P—PRESERVE: PERMITTED USES: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered, or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Preservation of native habitat. B. Accessory Uses, allowed if additional acreage, above the minimum required, is provided in Tract P: 1, Storm water management structures. 2. Pervious and impervious pathways and boardwalks, consistent with LDC Section 3.05.07 H.l.h.i. 3. Shelters without walls. 4. Educational signage and bulletin boards located on or immediately adjacent to the pathway. 5. Benches for seating. 6. Viewing platforms. 7. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the forgoing list of permitted accessory uses, as determined by the Hearing Examiner by the process outlined in the LDC. The minimum width of Tract P, or Tract P and the stormwater management lake (Tract L) in combination, as depicted on the Master Plan, shall be 65 feet. DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY STANDARDS: Intensity of uses under any development scenario is limited to the two-way, unadjusted average weekday, pm peak hour trip entering/exiting generation of 1,107 total trips utilized in the TIS dated 10/18/13 (gross trips), allowing for flexibility in the proposed uses without creating unforeseen impacts on the adjacent roadway network. Page 5 of 16 H,\20130013043\WP\PUDAWost CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page-116- 4/28/2015 9.B. EXHIBIT B VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The table below sets forth the development standards for residential and commercial land uses within Tract MU of the Vincentian Village MPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat. I. RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CLUBHOUSE/ RECREATION MULTI-FAMILY TOWNHOUSE t BUILDINGS COMMERCIAL PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MIN.LOT AREA 3,000 S.F.PER UNIT 1,800 S.F.PER UNIT N/A 10,000 S.F. IMIN.LOT WIDTH 90 FEET 21 FEET N/A 100 FEET I MIN.FLOOR AREA 1,250 S.F./D.U, 1.250 S.F./D.U. I N/A 700 S.F.2 1 MINIMUM YARDS(External—measured from the PUD boundary)3 1 From Tamiami Trail and SW 50 FEET 50 FEET 50 FEET(Tamiami 50 FEET Blvd. Trail) 25 FEET(Southwest Blvd.) From adjacent RSF-4 zoned 75 FEET 75 FEET 75 FEET 75 FEET property 1 From adjacent MH zoned 75 FEET 75 FEET 25 FEET 75 FEET property From adjacent C-3 zoned 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET i property MINIMUM YARDS(Internal—measured from internal lot lines) Min.Front Yard 20 FEET4 20 FEET° 20 FEET 10 FEET Min.Side Yard 15 FEET 0 or 10 FEET 15 FEET 10 FEET Min.Rear Yard 15 FEET 15 FEET 15 FEET 10 FEET Min.Preserve Setback i 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET Min,Lake Setback' 20 FEET 20 FEET 20 FEET 20 FEET 1 MIN.DISTANCE BETWEEN 15 FT or 1/2 sum of 10 FT or 1/2 BIt, 10 FEET 20 FT or 1/2 sum of 1 STRUCTURES BH,whichever is whichever is greater BH,whichever is greater greater MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT 35 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET 45 FEET NOT TO EXCEED(ZONED) 1 j MAX.BUILDING I{EIGHT 42 FEET° 42 FEET" 142 FEET 52 FEET I NOT TO EXCEED(ACTUAL) MAX.FAR N/A I N/A N/A 0.6 MAX.GROSS FLOOR AREA N/A j N/A N/A j 250.000 SF" ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FRONT SPS SPS SPS I SPS SIDE 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET ( 5 FEET EREAR 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET 5 FEET PRESERVE SETBACK 10 FEET 10 FEET 110 FEET 10 FEET MIN.LAKE SETBACK is 5 FEET 5 FEET 15 FEET 5 FEET I MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT SPS SPS ` SPS SPS NOT TO EXCEED(ZONED) MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT ! SPS SPS SPS I SPS NOT TO EXCEED(ACTUAL) I 1. Defined as a group of three or more units.Limited to fee-simple lots under individual ownership. 2, Per principal structure,on the finished first floor;not applicable to Kiosks. 3, Dumpsters and dumpster enclosures shall not encroach into the stated perimeter PUD setbacks. ` Page 6 of 16 H.\20I3\2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-2013000I726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page -117- 4/28/2015 9.B. 4. Front yards shall be measured as follows: — If the parcel is served by a public right-of-way,setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. — If the parcel is served by a private road, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement(if not curbed). — If the parcel has frontage on two streets, the frontage providing vehicular access to the unit shall be considered the front yard.The other frontage shall be considered a side yard. — In no case shall the setback be less than 23 feet from the edge of an adjacent sidewalk,except in the case of side-loaded garages,designed such that a vehicle can be parked in the driveway in such a manner so as not to conflict with,or encroached upon,the adjacent sidewalk. 5. As measured from the Control Elevation. 6. Not to exceed two stories. 7. Commercial buildings located within 500 feet of US 41 may be developed at a building height of 50 feet-zoned and 57 feet actual. 8. Applies to the following use:Assisted Living Facilities. 9. Subject to Land Use Conversion Factors,Exhibit B,Section ill. 10. Zero feet if a 20'Lake Maintenance Easement is provided in a separate tract at time of platting. H. Design Standards A. Architectural Theme. i. All buildings, signage, landscaping, and visible architectural infrastructure shall be architecturally and aesthetically unified. Said unified architectural theme shall include: a similar architectural design and use of similar materials throughout all of the buildings, signs, and fences/walls to be erected on the subject parcel. ii. Landscaping and streetscape materials shall also be similar in design throughout the subject site. An architectural plan shall be submitted concurrent with the first application for the Site Development Plan approval demonstrating compliance with these standards. B. Residential Amenities. The following amenities shall be provided in association with any residential development (other than a caretaker's residence), no later than issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the 92nd dwelling unit: i. Resort-style swimming pool. ii. Clubhouse. iii. Fitness center. iv. Dog park. v. Children's playground area/tot lot. vi. Tennis court or bocce ball court. vii. Gated entry. viii. On-site property management if developed as a rental community. ix. Fence, wall or hedge along adjacent public right-of-way (i.e. Tamiami Trail and/or Southwest Boulevard, as applicable). When planting a hedge, it shall include decorative columns minimum of 24" x 48", spaced no more than 30 feet on center, and a hedge a minimum of 30 inches in height at time of planting, that achieves 80 percent opacity and a minimum 4 feet in height within one year of planting. Page 7 of 16 H:\20I3Q013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vinccntian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page -118- ) 4/28/2015 9.B. C. Residential Construction. For residential development, the following shall be required: i. Concrete Masonry Unit construction and stucco, or approved equivalent. ii. Cement or slate tile roof or approved equivalent. iii. Minimum 9-foot ceiling heights within first-floor of units. iv. Concrete pavers at entrance/exit. III. Land Use Conversion Factors: A. Commercial Only Development: Commercial uses shall be limited to a maximum of 250,000 square feet of gross floor area (GFA), one hotel (maximum of 150 rooms), and an assisted living facility (maximum FAR 0.6). Additionally, for every acre, or portion thereof, of hotel or Assisted Living Facility, the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet or portion thereof for fractional amount under an acre. B. Mixed Use (Residential and Commercial) Development: The commercial portion of the project shall not exceed 10 acres in size and a maximum of 128,000 square feet of GFA of commercial uses, a 150-room hotel, and an Assisted Living Facility at a 0.6 FAR. Additionally, for every acre, or portion thereof, of hotel or Assisted Living Facility, the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet or portion thereof for fractional amount under an acre. Residential density shall be limited to a maximum density of 7.3 units per acre, calculated on the gross acreage of the property, exclusive of any commercial portions, for a maximum of 224 multi-family and/or townhouse dwelling units. Page 8 of 16 H:\20I3\2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015).docx Packet Page -119- 4/28/2015 9.B. !Native Vegetation and Open Space N C-5 ZONING Existing Native Vegetation• 29.77 Ac. I Min On-site Native Preservation Req'd STATION 20'TYPE "D" WHISTLER'S • 1.29.77x15%•4.46Ac. , COVE- PUD IMin Open Space Req'd fComm.or Mixed-Use)' LANDSCAPE i I{30.68 x 30 .9.20 Ac I \ Min Open Space Required(Residential Oniy)1 OP�K ♦'r BUFFER ` k,30.68x60. e18.41Ac .4' �� J t i >' 20'TYPE"D" 1p�\.� ti '.. LANDSCAPE �� TRAIL ACRES ,��' �� BUFFER \\ '0 `i"'�� RSF-4 ZONING ti5 O0 �/� '� :�' .p 47 "P4,1 •, 0 200 402 �. .\ TRACT "MU" ■� / MIXED USE \� f • �,� LANDSCAPE BUFFER ) EXISTING 15'UE. t F�PER LDC REQUIREMENTS•` ' EXISTING 15'U.E.---i n0.<� ,� DEVIATION#2 1, �\,, A WALL LOCATION POTENTIAL FUTURE 1 ?-I M �`+. BIKEIPED Fzi,a , \\a INTERCONNECTION / rI r =```U �-4s `\� 15' TYPE.,B„ �� z■ , o„ " LANDSCAPE ,, �' \-. " BUFFER 15'TYPE"B" r,_ 1- w LANDSCAPE O I BUFFER Y _ / ZC� TRACT "P" ~U m ; TRACT . 'A' PRESERVE Land Use Summary ' EXISTING 15 U E", LAKE ([Description lAcreape3 Percent '� i Mixed-Use(Tract MU)I 22.05 I 71.9'' I `, A. EXISTING 15'U.E. t (Lelia(Tract L} I 4-17 I 1$C% 4 i Preserve(Tract P) I 4.46 I 14 5% N G IITOTAL . .— EXISTING I5'U.E. 30.88 I 140 0. TRAIL ACRES RSF-4 ZONING MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS:224 MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA:250,000 SF,SUBJECT TO LAND USE CONVERSION FACTORS,SEE EXHIBIT B,SECTION III. 1 950 Encore Way VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD o," 14K MD1/'02 Naples,FL.34110 DI/2014 Phone:(239)254-2040 MASTER PLAN `RU`/Pa►t. 'ait2ou ■'!_= V rp 7E Florida Certificate of 5.92eierePtatefitS T095 Authonzaton No.1772 EXHIBIT C ".""--3-23-2o15 s-oats Page 9 of 16 H\2013\20130431WP\PUDA\Post CCPCVincentian PUDA PL-2013000I726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page-120- , '-.. 4/28/2015 9.B. 1 a i $ 6 3 r) o 1C) 4ri a o 4, o N N Nj Itj cc U ._— it, O 1.--.:1\::: /may , Z ,--W 3 -0 z z O a Q lz— 0 �— a's P: u.2 Li // ! 0 W CO r 1 o Z _ o So. X 0 =LJ w y 1 J w• fi ' ` wD w _z y 0 W y , • w Ln Yr Q.:J C4 .. N. "y:� F- m $a rev?' * 2 S ....1 O § G r 4 u o ,. W a H U m o fV7 0 'i u) a o �� 0 G O N 0 ° E.LL 4 w z = s Fe "csi a ; _ Z 5 I O 8 w z Q PI { f r / a w O ,,0 t, c4 tai" = O at 4 N J:w w Q 0 `�: Q O h .[ Q�'. :?` 0 r V=• Z CS n n • 2 f 24 n 1 b Eoc ,x_;,' g ‹i p 4 Page 10 of 16 H:\2013\2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2.2015)docx Packet Page -121- 4/28/2015 9.B. EXHIBIT D VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land located in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND RUN SOUTH 02°48'46" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 32, A DISTANCE OF 1718.03 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL) AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUE SOUTH 02°48'46" WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SECTION 32, A DISTANCE OF 884.02 FEET TO THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32 AND THE NORTH LINE OF LOTS FORMERLY IN TRAIL ACRES UNIT 3 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 94 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (VACATED BY INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 189, PAGE 792); THENCE RUN NORTH 87°30'18" WEST ALONG SAID FORMER NORTH LINE OF TRAIL ACRES UNIT 3 AND THE NORTH LINE OF TRAIL ACRES UNIT 4 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 103 OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, A DISTANCE OF 695.96 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 39°04'37" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF TRAIL ACRES UNIT 4 AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRAIL ACRES UNIT 3, A DISTANCE OF 1081.98 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD; THENCE RUN NORTH 50°56'59" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 1007.85 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL); THENCE RUN SOUTH 39°03'26" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 77.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE BEING CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 3210.55 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14°34'44" AND A CHORD BEARING AND DISTANCE OF SOUTH 46°20'49" EAST, 814.73 FEET, RESPECTIVELY; THENCE RUN SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 816.93 FEET TO THE SAID POINT OF BEGINNING. Subject to easements, reservations or restrictions of record. Page 1 1 of 16 H1201312013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PIMA P1:20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page -122- 4/28/2015 9.B. EXHIBIT E VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC Deviation 1: From LDC Section 6.06.01.N, requiring a minimum right-of-way width of 60 feet for local street rights-of-way, to allow for a minimum 42 foot right-of-way internal to the proposed development. Deviation 2: From LDC Section 5.03.02.H Wall requirement between residential and nonresidential development, which requires, wherever a nonresidential development lies contiguous to a residentially zoned district, that a masonry wall, concrete or pre-fabricated concrete wall and/or fence be constructed on the nonresidential property, no less than 6 feet from the residentially zoned district, to allow the wall to be located more than 6 feet from the residentially zoned district,as generally depicted on Exhibit C, Master Plan. Deviation 3: From LDC Section 5.05.04.D.1 Group Housing, which establishes a maximum floor area ratio of 0.45 for care units, assisted living units, continuing care retirement communities, nursing homes, and dwelling units that are part of an aging-in-place living environment, to allow a maximum floor area ratio of 0.6 for an Assisted Living Facility. Page 12 of 16 H:\2013\2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page -123- 4/28/2015 9.B. EXHIBIT F VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS PUD MONITORING One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the MPUD. At the time of this PUD approval, the Managing Entity is Global Properties of Naples, LLC. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document, to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of the commitments required by the MPUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity will not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the MPUD is closed out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. IL ENVIRONMENTAL The site contains approximately 29.77 acres of native vegetation, of which approximately 37 percent (11.12 acres) is covered with more than 75 percent exotic vegetation. For a commercial or industrial project within the Coastal High Hazard Area, 15 percent of existing native vegetation must be retained (15% of 29.77 acres = 4.46 acres). The preserve as depicted on the Master Plan contains 4.46 acres. For a residential or mixed- use project within the Coastal High Hazard Area, the minimum required is 25 percent, or 7.44 acres (25% of 29.77 acres). Therefore, at time of site development, the developer will either: A. Preserve all required native vegetation on-site (25% for residential only or mixed use, 15% for commercial only development), or B. Preserve a minimum of 15% of native vegetation on-site and mitigate for up to 2.98 acres (7.44 acres — 4.46 acres) of the on-site native vegetation preservation retention requirement off-site, either by monetary payment or by land donation, consistent with the provisions of the Vincentian Subdistrict of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan and Section 3.05.07 H.1.f of the Land Development Code. Page 13 of 16 H:\2013'2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page-124- 4/28/2015 9.B. III. TRANSPORTATION A. Intensity of uses under any development scenario for the PUD is limited to the two-way, unadjusted, average weekday, pm peak hour trip entering/exiting generation of 1,107 total trips utilized in the TIS dated 10/18/13 (gross trips). B. Owner, its successor or assigns, shall convey a road right-of-way easement to Collier County, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, for the widening of Southwest Boulevard for the purpose of constructing turn-lane improvements to service the Subject Property if turn lane improvements are required as a result of the development. The easement shall be at no cost to Collier County and shall be for the same width and length as the turn-lane improvements being constructed to service the Subject Property. Any required turn-lane improvements at the intersection of Southwest Boulevard and Tamiami Trail East shall be exempt from the compensating ROW provision. Developer shall have the option, so long as the improvements meet Collier County standards and subject to County approval, to construct and relocate the existing County stormwater and utility improvements on the East side of SW boulevard onto the subject property in lieu of any compensating ROW easement. Drainage and utility easements to accommodate these improvements will be conveyed by Owner to the County, at no cost to the County, free of any encumbrances or liens. The utilities and stormwater to be relocated shall only be in the area where the required turn lane improvements servicing the site are to be constructed. C. The owner and developer are responsible for actual construction costs associated with intersection improvements at Southwest Blvd. and U.S. 41 necessitated as a result of impacts from this development and proportionate share for signal upgrades. The owner and developer of Vincentian PUD are only responsible for modifications and intersection upgrades needed as a result of this development, which will not include any cost reimbursement for the traffic signal at Southwest Blvd. and US 41. IV. UTILITIES County water and sewer service is available via transmission mains located along US 41, Southwest Blvd and the eastern boundary of the subject property. The owner and developer are responsible for providing necessary connections to supply the site with County water and sewer service. V. PLANNING A. If the PUD is developed with residential uses only, the project will provide a minimum of 60 percent open space. Otherwise, the minimum open space shall be 30 percent. Page 14 of 16 H:12013\2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page -125- 4/28/2015 9.B. B. The developer of any group housing or retirement community, its successors or assigns, shall provide the following services and be subject to the following operational standards for the units in the retirement community, including, but not limited to, independent living units, assisted living units,or skilled nursing units: Operational Characteristics for Senior Housing Senior housing may be composed of one or more types of care/housing facilities. These care/housing types are limited to independent living, assisted living, and skilled nursing units, each of which can have varying operational characteristics. The following characteristics of senior housing care units distinguish them from residential land uses, and all of the characteristics must be provided for and maintained to be considered a senior housing care unit: • The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; • There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered; • Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; • There shall be an onsite manager/activities coordinator to assist residents who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; • An on-site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents; • Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; • Independent living units shall be designed so that a resident is able to age in place. For example, kitchens may be easily retrofitted by lowering the sink to accommodate a wheelchair bound resident or bathrooms may be retrofitted by adding grab bars. C. Landscape buffer easements (LBEs) are shown on the Master Plan within utility easements. At time of SDP, letters of no objection from all utility holders shall be obtained by owner or developer. If such approvals cannot be obtained, LBEs shall be relocated outside of utility easements. D. Tract P, Preserve, where it is dense enough to provide equivalent buffering per the LDC, may count towards minimum buffering requirements. The minimum width of Tract P, or Tract P and the stormwater management lake (Tract L) in combination, as depicted on the Master Plan, shall be 65 feet. E. A 15' Type B Landscape Buffer is required if residential development occurs on the subject site adjacent to the Hitching Post Plaza property. Page 15 of 16 H:\2013\2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page-126- AMEN 4/28/2015 9.B. F. The stormwater lake depicted on the Master Plan (Tract L) shall be a minimum of 120 feet in width measured from the PUD boundary and inclusive of the perimeter landscape buffer easement and lake maintenance easement. G. The Master Plan is conceptual in nature and is subject to modifications at time of Plans and Plat (PPL) or Site Development Plan (SDP) approval due to agency permitting requirements. H. For commercial uses, amplified sound shall not be permitted within 125 feet of the PUD perimeter boundary adjacent to RSF-4 or MH—Mobile Home zoning. In order to further buffer existing and potential new adjacent residential development from noise associated with amplified sound and outdoor dining areas, such areas shall be separated from existing and potential new adjacent residential development by the principal commercial structure and shall not break the side plane of the building. Amplified sound of any type shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 11:00 PM. These restrictions do not apply to drive-through ordering devices. Any deviation from this standard shall be approved by the conditional use process outlined in the LDC. C. If developed as mixed-use or commercial, at time of the first Site Development Plan, the developer shall provide, to the maximum extent feasible, internal connectivity through shared parking and cross-access agreements. VI. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT If more than 92 dwelling units are constructed, the developer shall provide, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the 93`d dwelling unit, a new, quiet-running, extended run-time towable 45kw (minimum-kw) generator per Emergency Management's specifications. The towable generator will be a one-time developer contribution based on the number of units permitted at time of SDP to meet the hurricane mitigation impact for evacuation concerns. The generator specifications must be pre- approved by the Department of Emergency Management as the County has certain inter- operable standards and required safety options. Page 16 of 16 H 12013\2013043\WP\PUDA\Post CCPC\Vincentian PUDA PL-20130001726(4-2-2015)docx Packet Page-127- 4/28/2015 9.B. 1999 ORDINANCE 99- 37 L. MEWED \; perk of Board AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-102, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP NUMBERED 0632N BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM "PUD" TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS VINCENTIAN, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST (U.S. 41) , IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 5:7 co SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, . co FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 30± ACRES; PROVIDING ( -71 FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-88, t •AS AMENDED, THE FORMER VINCENTIAN PUD; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 73 y] r) WHEREAS, Greg Stuart of Stuart E. Associates, representing The Diocese of Venice, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property; NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; ,SECTION ONE: The Zoning Classification of the herein described real property located in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development in accordance with the PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", which is incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof. The Official Zoning Atlas Map numbered 0632N, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: Ordinance Number 91-88, as amended, known as the Vincentian PUD, adopted on September 16, 1991 by the Board of County Commissioners of -"'ollier County, is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. Packet Page-128- 4/28/2015 9.B. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, thisa day of( , 1999. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E.• BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA • ,^44 1iiP444 .A1 .•S aS to Chair*iN'= ' ELA S. MAC'KIE, Cha'rwoman IfiratLra • App4Ved as. to Fotm and Legal'.Sufficiency '.i ,�. . This ordinvnc, f;'--a ,.4'h th7. 52^crc•t. o' <' Marjo�iie M.`•S dent t i,, •::c.::,. .7`- -"' clay Assistant County Attorney of °; «� D:n..ty Clerk f/PUD-84-11(2) Packet Page -129- 4/28/2015 9.B. Exhibit A r:;-{ _ PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT -' - cn FOR The Vincentian PUD A Mixed Use Development Prepared by: Stuart and Associates 2180 West First Street, Suite 210 • Fort Myers, Florida 33901 Date Reviewed by CCPC: Date Approved by BCC: Ordinance Number. Packet Page-130- 4/28/2015 9.B. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE 3 SECTION I Property Ownership&Description 5 SECTION Il Project Development 7 SECTION III Residential District 12 SECTION IV Community Commercial District 16 SECTION V Reserve District 19 SECTION VI General Development Commitments 21 LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT"A" PUD Ordinance EXHIBIT"B" Master Plan &Water Management Plan Packet Page-131- 4/28/2015 9.B. ; L7 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE -" • d -1 • The development of approximately 30+/-acres of property in Section 32, Townshi 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, as a Planned Unit Development to be known as Tirttecyin6tntiarri PUD will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier Count sgfort in the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The commercial and residential/grdUp'housing facilities of the Vincentian PUD will be consistent with the growth policies, land development regulations, and applicable comprehensive planning objectives for the following reasons: 1. The subject property is located along the South US 41 corridor, between Rattlesnake Hammock Road and CR 951, and is classified as Urban Coastal Fringe as identified on the Future Land Use Map. The Future Land Use Element permits commercial infill, residential and group housing land uses in this area. Bounded to the north and south by highway commercial uses,the site is well suited as a commercial infill property for the US 41 frontage and for residential/group housing along Southwest Boulevard. 2. The subject property's location in relation to existing or proposed community facilities and services permits the development's intensity of land use as required in Objective 2 of the Future Land Use Element, and Policies 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6. 3. The project development promotes sound planning and ensures land use compatibility as required by Objective 5 of the Future Land Use Element. The project development is compatible with and complementary to existing and future surrounding commercial land uses to the north and south,and existing and future surrounding residential land uses to the northwest,west and southwest, as required by the Commercial In-fill policy and Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element. 4. The project shall be in compliance with all applicable County regulations including the Growth Management Plan. 5. All final development orders for this project are subject to Division 3.15,Adequate Public Facilities, of the Collier County Land Development Code as set forth in Policy 3.1 of the Future Land Use Element. 6. Group Housing,which includes adult living facilities and nursing homes, is permitted in the Urban Coastal Fringe Area per Policy 5.8 of the Future Land Use Element. 7. The Vincentian PUD is planned to incorporate natural systems for water management in accordance with their natural functions and capabilities as may be required by Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. Packet Page-132- 4/28/2015 9.B. 8. The project will be served by a complete range of services and utilities as approved by the County. 9. The entire subject property qualifies for a base density of four dwelling units per acre. The subject property qualifies for group housing densities consistent with LDC Section 2.6.26 and is therefore consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 5.1. Packet Page-133- 4/28/2015 9.B. SECTION 1 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the name of The Vincentian PUD 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land located in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING AT THE COUNTY MONUMENT MARKING THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION 32,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST,THIS MONUMENT BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN NORTH 02 DEGREES 47 MINUTES 30 SECONDS EAST,ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SECTION 32,A DISTANCE OF 826.25 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SECTION 32 AND THE SOUTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF TAMIAMI TRAIL(U.S.41),SAID INTERSECTION BEING 200 FEET AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE CENTER LINE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL AND 9.27 FEET WEST OF THE POINT OF TANGENT OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY CURVE;THENCE,FROM SAID INTERSECTION POINT,RUN ALONG THE RIGHT- OF-WAY ARC,A DISTANCE OF 884.45 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVE,SAID CURVE HAVING A DELTA ANGLE OF 15 DEGREES AND 21 MINUTES RIGHT,A TANGENT LENGTH OF 438.76 FEET, A RADIUS OF 3255.85 FEET AND A DEFLECTION ANGLE OF 00 DEGREES 52 MINUTES 40 SECONDS;THENCE,FROM SAID POINT OF CURVE RUN NORTH 39 DEGREES 04 MINUTES WEST, ALONG THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TANGENT,FOR A DISTANCE OF 76.11 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT SET ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF TRAIL ACRES SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3 AT PAGE 50 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 50 DEGREES 56 MINUTES WEST,ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF TRAIL ACRES SUBDIVISION,A DISTANCE OF 958.37 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT;THENCE SOUTH 39 DEGREES 40 MINUTES EAST,A DISTANCE OF 1082.32 FEET,TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT SET ON THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 32;THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4,BEARING SOUTH 87 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST,A DISTANCE OF 696.20 FEET TO A COUNTY CONCRETE MONUMENT,THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION 32,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST,AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; Containing 30.00 acres, more or less. Subject to easements, reservations or restrictions of record. 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The subject property is currently owned by the Diocese of Venice. 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA A. The subject property Is located along South US 41 of unincorporated Collier County, Florida. The subject property is located within the Urban Coastal Fringe as designated on the Future Lard I Ica Wren Packet Page-134- 4/28/2015 9.B. • • B. The property is currently vacant. The entire site currently has PUD zoning. 1.5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Vincentian PUD will include a mixture of land uses for commercial and residential/group housing. The Vincentian PUD intends to establish commercial development guidelines and standards to ensure a high and consistent level of quality for proposed features and facilities. Uniform guidelines and standards will be created for landscaping, lighting, fences and buffers. The Master Plan is illustrated graphically on Exhibit"A" PUD Master Plan. Individual Tract land use acreages are identified within the master plan. 1.6 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the"Vincentian Planned Unit Development Ordinance." Packet Page-135- 4/28/2015 9.B. rL • r . SECTION II r' cn- PROJECT DEVELOPMENT c, c , �. a, 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the respective land uses of the tracts included in the project,as well as other project relationships. 2.2 GENERAL A. Regulations for development of The Vincentian PUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this document, PUD-Planned Unit Development District, applicable sections and parts of the Collier County Land Development Code and Collier County Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of local final development order or building permit application. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the Collier County Land Development Code shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted,the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the date of adoption of this PUD. C. All conditions imposed and graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of The Vincentian PUD shall become part of the regulations that govern the manner in which the PUD site may be developed. D. Unless specifically waived through any variance or waiver provisions from any other applicable regulations,the provisions of those regulations not otherwise provided for this PUD remain in full force and effect. E. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subjected to a concurrency review under the provisions of Division 3.15 Adequate Public Facilities of the Collier County Land Development Code at the earliest, or next, to occur of either Final Site Development Plan approval, Final Plat approval,or building permit issuance applicable to this development. 2.3 PROJECT PLAN AND PROPOSED LAND USES A. The project Master Plan is illustrated graphically by Exhibit"A", PUD Master Plan. B. Minor modifications to Exhibit"A"may be permitted at the time of Site Development Plan approval,subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code or as otherwise permitted by this PUD Document. Packet Page-136- 4/28/2015 9.B. • • C. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown in Exhibit"A", easements (such as utility, private,semi public,etc.)shall be established and/or vacated within or along the property, as may be necessary. 2.4 LAND USE A. Exhibit"A", PUD Master Plan, constitutes the required PUD Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided within this PUD Document,any division of the property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with the Subdivision Regulations and the platting laws of the State of Florida. B. The provisions of Division 3.3, Site Development Plans of the Land Development Code,when applicable,shall apply to the development of all platted tracts, or parcels of land as provided in said Division 3.3 prior to the issuance of a building permit or other development order. C. Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructure improvements regarding any dedications and the methodology for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities. 2.5 AMENDMENTS TO PUD DOCUMENT OR PUD MASTER PLAN Amendments may be made to the PUD as provided in Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 2.6 MODEL HOMES Model Homes and Model Home Sales Centers shall be permitted as provided for in Section 2.6.33.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 2.7 LIMITATIONS OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL This PUD is subject to the sunsetting provisions as provided for within Article 2, Division 2.7, Section 2.7.3.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 2.8 PUD MONITORING An annual monitoring report shall be submitted pursuant to Article 2, Division 2.7, Section 2.7.3.6 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 2.9 DEDICATION AND MAINTENANCE OF FACILITIES, The Developer shall create appropriate property ownership association(s),which will be responsible for maintaining the roads, streets,drainage, common areas, and water and sewer improvements where such systems are not dedicated to the County. Packet Page-137- 4/28/2015 9.B. • • 2.10 OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS A minimum of thirty percent(30%)of the project's gross area shall be devoted to open space, pursuant to Article 2, Division 2.6, Section 2.6.32 of the Collier County Land Development Code. The total project is 30+/-acres requiring a minimum of 9 acres to be retained as open space throughout The Vincentian PUD. This requirement shall not apply to individual development parcels. 2.11 NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS Pursuant to Article 3, Division 3.9, Section 3.9.5.5.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code, 25%of the viable naturally functioning native vegetation on site shall be retained. 2.12 POLLING PLACES Pursuant to Article 3, Division 3.2, Section 3.2.8.3.14 of the Collier County Land Development Code, accommodation shall be made for the future use of building space within common areas for the purposes of accommodating the function of an electoral polling place. 2.13 SIGNS Signs shall be in accordance with Article 2, Division 2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 2.14 LAKE SETBACK AND EXCAVATION The lake setback requirements described in Article 3, Division 3.5, Section 3.5.7.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code may be reduced with the administrative approval of the Collier County Engineering Review Manager. All lakes greater than two(2)acres may be excavated to the maximum commercial excavation depths set forth in Section 3.5.7.3.1; however, removal of fill from The Vincentian PUD shall be limited to an amount up to 10 percent per lake(to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards)of the total volume excavated unless a commercial excavation permit is received. 2.15 EXCAVATION AND VEGETATION REMOVAL A. Improvement of property shall be prohibited prior to issuance of a building permit. No site work,removal of protected vegetation, grading, improvement of property or construction of any type may be commenced prior to the issuance of a building permit where the development proposed requires a building permit under the Land Development Code or other applicable County regulations.Exceptions to this requirement may be granted by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator for an approved Subdivision or Site Development Plan to provide for distribution of fill excavated on site or to permit construction of an approved water management system,to minimize stockpiles and hauling off-site or to protect the public health,safety and welfare where clearing,grading and filling plans have been submitted and approved meeting the standards of Section 3.2.8.3.6.of the Code. Removal of exotic vegetation shall be Packet Page -138- 4/28/2015 9.B. exempted upon receipt of a vegetation removal permit for exotics pursuant to Division 3.9 of the Land Development Code. B. A site clearing, grading,filling and revegetation plan where applicable shall be submitted to the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator or his designee for review and approval prior to any clearing, grading or filling on the property.This plan may be submitted in phases to coincide with the development schedule. The site-clearing plan shall clearly depict how the improvement plans incorporate and retain native vegetation.The site specific clearing, grading, and filling plan for a Subdivision or Site Development Plan may be considered for review and approval under the following categories and subject to the following requirements: 1. Removal of exotic vegetation is permitted upon receipt of a vegetation removal permit pursuant to Division 3.9.Additional site alteration may be permitted or required to stabilize and deter reinfestation by exotics subject to the following: a. Provision of a site filling and grading plan for review and approval by the County; b. Provision of a revegetation plan for review and approval by the County; c. Payment of the applicable review fee for site alteration plan review. 2. Site filling exceeding 25 acres to properly utilize fill generated on site, but which does not require the removal of more than 25 acres of protected vegetation, may be approved by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator subject to submission of the following: a. A site-clearing plan shall be submitted for review and approval that shows the acres to be cleared.A minimum of 25%of the natural functioning vegetation shall be retained. b. The applicant shall submit a detailed description of the fill and site work activity including a plan indicating fill placement locations and depths, grading plan and water management improvements. c. The applicant shall submit a detailed revegetation plan including a cost estimate.The cost estimate shall include the cost of grading, revegetation and yearly maintenance cost and a time specific schedule on completion of the revegetation work. d. The permittee shall post a surety bond or an irrevocable standby letter of credit in an amount of 110%of certified cost estimate as previously detailed including the maintenance cost for 3 years.The amount of the security may be reduced upon completion of the approved revegetation plan and upon occupation of the site. A separate security will not be required if such costs are included in the subdivision security. Packet Page-139- • 4/28/2015 9.B. • 3. A vegetation removal permit is not required for the removal of protected vegetation prior to building permit issuance if the conditions set forth in Division 3.9 of the Land Development Code have been met. 2.16 ARCHITECTURE AND SITE DESIGN All commercial buildings, signage, lighting, landscaping and other visible architectural infrastructure shall have a similar architectural theme and be aesthetically unified. Said unified architectural theme shall include: a similar architectural design and use of similar materials and colors throughout all of the buildings, signs, and walls to be erected on the site. Landscaping and streetscape materials shall also be similar in design throughout the site. A conceptual design master plan shall be submitted concurrent with the first application for Site Development Plan approval demonstrating compliance with these standards. All commercial buildings shall comply with Division 2.8 of the Collier County Land Development Code(Architectural and Site Design Standards and Guidelines) prior to issuance of a building permit. Packet Page -140- 4/28/2015 9.B. • • • SECTION III RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within The Vincentian PUD designated on Exhibit"A", PUD Master Plan as "Residential". 3.2 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS A maximum number of Four Dwelling Units(4 DUS)per gross acre may be constructed on lands designated"Residential"on the PUD Master Plan. For assisted living facilities, the maximum number of units shall not exceed a factor of 0.45(0.45 times the area of the property equals the gross floor area). 3.3 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. Areas designated as Residential on the PUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate Single-family, Multi-family and Group Housing,along with associated recreational facilities,essential services, and customary accessory uses. B. The approximate acreage of the Residential district is Nine and eight-tenths(9.8) acres. Actual acreage of all development tracts will be provided at the time of Site Development Plan approval in accordance with Division 3.3 of the LDC. The Residential tract is designed to accommodate internal roadways,open space, parks, amenity areas, lakes and water management facilities, and other similar uses. 3.4 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected,altered,or used, or land or water used, in whole or part,for other than the following: A. Principal Uses 1. Single-family detached dwelling units. 2. Single-family and zero lot line dwellings. 3. Two-family and duplex dwellings. 4. Single-family attached and townhouse dwellings. 5. Multiple-family dwellings including Garden Apartments. 6. Assisted Living Facilities(ALF's)pursuant to Section 2.6.26 CCLDC. Packet Page-141- 4/28/2015 9.B. 7. Group Care Facility(category I and category II)pursuant to Section 2.6.26 CCLDC, excluding Homeless Shelters. 8. Nursing home facility pursuant to Section 2.6.26 CCLDC. 9. Group Care units, except homeless shelters, pursuant to Section 2.6.26 CCLDC. 10. Guard houses and entrance gates. 11. Management offices and recreational facilities that serve the group housing development including but not limited to administrative offices,tennis courts, pools, pool cabanas, clubhouses and gazebos. 12. Any other principal use,which is comparable in nature with the foregoing, uses. B. Accessory Uses 1. Uses and structures that are necessary and incidental to uses permitted as a right including, but not limited to, garages and carports. 2. Parks, passive recreational areas, boardwalks, observation platforms. 3. Biking, hiking, health and nature trails. 4. Water management facilities and lakes, including lakes with seawall and other types of architectural bank treatment, and essential services. 5. Recreational shelters, restrooms, off-street parking, lighting and signage. 3.5 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Table 1 sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Residential District. 1. Site development standards for categories 1 -4 uses apply to individual residential lot boundaries. Category 5 standards apply to platted parcel boundaries. 2. Standards for parking,landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein are to be in accordance with Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of Site Development Plan Approval. Unless otherwise indicated, required yards,heights,and floor area standards apply to principal structures. 3. Development standards for uses not specifically set forth in Table 1 shall be established during the Site Development Plan Approval as set forth in Division 3.3 of the Land Development Code in accordance with those standards of the zoning district which is most similar to the proposed use. 4. In the case of residential structures with a common architectural theme,the required development regulations may be reduced provided a site plan is approved pursuant to Division 3.3 of the Land Development Code. Packet Page -142- • 4/28/2015 9.B. • • • 5. Single-family and zero lot line dwellings are identified separately from single-family detached dwellings with conventional side yard requirements to distinguish these types of residences for the purpose of applying the development standards under Table 1. Zero lot line dwellings shall be defined as any type of detached single family structure employing a zero or reduced side yard as set forth herein. TABLE 1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL TRACTS SINGLE TWO SINGLE FAMILY MULTI- PERMITTED USES FAMILY ZERO LOT FAMILY& ATTACHED AND FAMILY AND STANDARDS DETACHED LINE , DUPLEX TOWNHOUSE DWELLINGS Category 1 2 3 4 5 Minimum Lot Area , SF 5,000 SF 3,500 SF�4 3,000 SF 1 AC Minimum Lot Width*S 60 50 35 30 150 Front Yard 25 20 20 20 25 Front Yard for 10 10 10 10 15 Side Entry Garage Side Yard 5 0 or 5 1317 0 or 7.56 0 or.5 BH% 0.5 BH Rear Yard Princi all 20 10 20 20 BH Rear Yard Accessory 10 8 10 10 15 Maximum Building Height*2 35 35 35 35 55 Distance Between 10 10 15 .5 SBH .5 SBH Principal Structures Floor Area Min. SS.F.) 1200 SF _ 1200 SF 1200 SF 1200 SF .g • BH:Building Height • SBH:(Sum of Building Height):Combined height of two adjacent buildings for the purposes of determining setback requirements. • SF:Square feet • All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. • Front yards shall be measured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by a public ROW,setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. B. If the parcel Is served by a private road,setback Is measured from the back of curb(if curbed)or edge of pavement(if not curbed). C. If the parcel is served by a platted private drive,the setback is measured from the road easement or property line. • •1-Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut a non-jurisdictional open space or native vegetation preservation area may be zero(0')feet except that when abutting a lake or water body,an architectural bank treatment shall be incorporated into the design. • '2-Building height shall be the vertical distance measured from the first habitable finished floor elevation to the uppermost finished ceiling elevation of the structure. Packet Page-143- — • 4/28/2015 9.B. s. • • • • .3-Zero feet(0')or a minimum of five feet(5')on either side except that where the zero feet(0')yard option is utilized,the opposite side of the structure shall have a ten foot(10')yard. The first structure built within a series of zero lot line homes shall determine the zero lot line setback for the subsequent development within that specific housing tract. • '4-Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3,500 SF for a total minimum lot area of 7,000 S.F. • *5-Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20%for cul-de-sac lots provided minimum lot area requirement is still maintained. • *6-Zero(0')foot provision does not apply to any exterior wall of a structure,and is intended to apply to the common wall or wall along interior lot lines within a series of townhouse or semi-detached units. • •7-Accessory uses such as any authorized recreational amenity(i.e.pools,spas,landscape features, etc.)may be located within zero(0)feet of a side lot line when adjacent the wall of a residence with no window openings. Accessory uses for Zero lot line homes must be setback a minimum of 5 feet from the adjoining building wall that is permitted along the lot line. All other setbacks shall be as required by Division 2.6.2 of the Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit application. • *8-Group care facility(category I and category II other than homeless)—1,500 sq.ft.plus 200 sq.ft.per live-in person,beginning with the seventh live-in person. Packet Page-144- 4/28/2015 9.B. • t° r-r . xy SECTION IV U'- �" COMMERCIAL INFILL DISTRICT m Cn 4.1 PURPOSE = The purpose of this section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within The Vincentian PUD designated on the Exhibit"A", PUD Master Plan as "Commercial". 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. Areas designated as"Commercial"on the Master Plan are designed to accommodate a full range of commercial uses, hotel/motel, essential services, and customary accessory uses. B. The approximate acreage of the"Commercial"district is eight and one-half (8.5)acres. Actual acreages of all development tracts and outparcels will be provided at the time of Site Development Plan or Preliminary Subdivision Plat approvals in accordance with Article 3, Division 3.2 and Division 3.3 respectively, of the Collier County Land Development Code. Commercial tracts are designed to accommodate internal roadways,open spaces, lakes,water management facilities, and other similar uses. C. Up to one hundred and fifteen thousand (115,000) square feet of retail or office development is permitted within this Commercial area of the Planned Unit Development 4.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part,for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures 1. All permitted uses of the C-2 commercial convenience district consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code in effect as of the date of approval of this PUD. 2. Amusements and recreation services(Groups 7911,7922 community theaters only, 7933,7991, miniature golf course, bicycle and moped rental). 3. Auto and Home supply stores (Groups 5531). 4. Business Services(Groups 7311,7313,7322 through 7338,7361 through 7379, 7384, 7389 except auctioning service,field warehousing, bottle labeling, packaging and labeling,salvaging of damaged merchandise,scrap steel cutting and slitting. Packet Page-145- 4/28/2015 9.B. • 5. Drinking places (5813)excluding bottle clubs. All establishments engaged in the retail sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption are subject to the locational requirements of section 2.6.10. 6. Hospitals(Groups 8062 through 8069). 7. Membership Organizations(Groups 8611 through 8699). 8. Miscellaneous Retail(Groups 5912 through 5963). 9. Museums&Art Galleries(8412) 10.Paint, Glass&Wallpaper Stores (5231) 11.Public Administration (All Groups) 12.Non-Depository Credit Institutions (Groups 6111 through 6163). 13.Real Estate (Groups 6531, 6541, 6552). 14.Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (5261). 15.Social services (Groups 8322 through 8399). 16.Used merchandise stores(5932,except pawnshops and building materials). 17.United States Postal Service(4311 except major distribution center). 18.Any other general commercial use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses including buildings for retail, service and office purposes consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of the C-2 Commercial Intermediate District. 4.4 ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES A. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted. B. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Current Planning Manager determines to be compatible. 4.5 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Minimum lot area: Ten thousand(10,000)square feet. B. Minimum lot width: Seventy-five(75)feet,as measured by the exterior project lines. C. Minimum yard requirements: Packet Page-146- 4/28/2015 9.B. 1. Front yard: Twenty-five(25)feet. 2. Side yard: Fifteen(15)feet. 3. Rear yard: Fifteen(15)feet. 4. Any yard abutting a residential parcel: Twenty-five(25)feet. D. Distance between principal structures:The distance between any two principal structures on the same parcel shall be fifteen(15)feet or a distance equal to one half the sum of their heights,whichever is greater. E. Minimum off-street parking and off-street loading: As required in Division 2.3. F. Minimum floor area of principal structure: seven hundred (700)square feet._gross- floor area for each building on the ground floor. G. Maximum height: Fifty(50)feet above Mean Flood Elevation as measured by the finish floor elevation to the building eave. H. General application for Setbacks: Front yard setbacks shall comply with the following: 1. If the parcel is served by a public or private right-of-way,the setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. 2. If the parcel is served by a non-platted private drive,the setback is measured from the back of curb or edge of pavement. 3. If the parcel is served by a platted private drive,the setback is measured from the road easement or property line. I. Architectural and site design standards: All commercial buildings and projects shall be subject to the provisions of Division 2.8. J. Merchandise storage and display: Unless specifically permitted for use, outside storage or display of merchandise is prohibited. K. Landscaping: As required in Division 2.4. L. Signs: As required in Division 2.5. Packet Page-147- 4/28/2015 9.B. aT c t _ z . if- cn- SECTION V n1 -11 RESERVE DISTRICT °--+ N 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within The Vincentian PUD designated on Exhibit"A", PUD Master Plan as Reserve. 5.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as Reserve on the PUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate a full range of conservation and limited water management uses and functions.The primary purpose of the Reserve District is to retain an on-site wetland system, to allow for the restoration and enhancement of impacted or degraded wetlands, to provide an open space site amenity for the enjoyment of The Vincentian PUD residents, and to provide a native vegetative buffer for adjoining residential properties. 5.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: A. Passive recreational areas, boardwalks, and recreational shelters. B. Nature trails,excluding asphalt paved surfaces. C. Water management facilities, structures and lake bulkheads or other architectural treatments. D. Mitigation areas. E. Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Current Planning Manager determines to be compatible in the Reserve District. 5.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. All structures shall setback a minimum of fifteen(15)feet landward from the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging twenty-five(25)feet from the landward edge of reserve District boundaries and roads,except for pathways,boardwalks and water management structures,which shall have no required setback. Packet Page -148- 4/28/2015 9.B. • • 5.5 RESERVE DISTRICT CONSERVATION EASEMENT A non-exclusive conservation easement or tract is required by the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 3.2.8.4.7.3 for preservation lands included in the Reserve District. In addition to Collier County, a conservation easement may also be required by other regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over Reserve District lands. In addition to complying with provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code,said easement shall be provided in accordance with the terms set forth in the applicable permit granted by said agencies. The developer or owners of The Vincentian PUD shall be responsible for control and maintenance of lands within the Reserve District. Packet Page-149- • 4/28/2015 9.B. cD LO rr' r �x D SECTION VI '' _° _ r�.. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS m 6.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to set forth the standards for development of the project. 6.2 GENERAL All facilities-shall-be constructed in accordance with the final site development plans,the Final subdivision plats, and all applicable state and local laws, codes and regulations relating to the subdivision of the land,except when specifically noted or otherwise set forth In this document, or as otherwise approved by Collier County. All state and federal Permits shall be effective according to the stipulations and conditions of the permitting Agencies. Final master plans, final site development plans or final subdivision plats, and standards and specifications of the Collier County Land Development Code relating to the same shall apply to this project, except as otherwise set forth herein. 6.3 PUD MASTER PLAN A. Exhibit"A", PUD Master Plan illustrates proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed area, lot or land use boundaries or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as Final Platting or Site Development Plan approval. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code, amendments may be made from time to time. B. All necessary easements, dedications or other instruments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities and all common areas in the project. 6.4 WATER MANAGEMENT A. Excavation permits will be required for the proposed lakes in accordance with Division 3.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code, as amended. Excavated material from the property is intended to be used within the project site. _ B. Detailed paving, grading and site drainage plans shall be submitted to Engineering Review Services for review. No construction permits shall be issued unless and until approval of the proposed construction in accordance with the submitted plans is granted by Engineering Review Services. C. In accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), Chapters 40E-4 and 40E-40,this project shall be designed for a storm event of 3-day duration and 25-year frequency. Packet Page-150- t 4/28/2015 9.B. •D. Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with the appropriate provisions of Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 6.5 TRANSPORTATION A. The developer shall provide a fair share contribution toward the capital cost of a traffic signal at Southwest Boulevard if and when the project is warranted by the County. The signal will be owned, operated and maintained by Collier County. B. The developer shall provide arterial level street lighting at the project entrance prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. C. Evidence of an FDOT Connection Permit or Notice of Intent to Issue a Connection Permit shall be provided prior to the issuance of any development permit for the project. 6.6 UTILITIES A. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission facilities to serve the project are to be designed, constructed, conveyed,owned and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 88-76, as amended, and other applicable County rules and regulations. 6.7 ENGINEERING A. Except as otherwise provided within this PUD document,this project shall be required to meet all County Ordinances in effect at the time final construction documents are submitted for development approval. 6.8 ENVIRONMENTAL A. Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the state of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Review Staff. Removal of exotic vegetation shall not be counted towards mitigation for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. B. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat with protective convenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes. Buffers shall be provided in accordance with 3.2.8.4.7.3 CCLDC. C. Buffers shall be provided around wetlands,extending at least fifteen(15)feet landward from the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging twenty-five(25) feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approved by Current Planning Environmental Staff. • D. Petitioner shall comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service(USFWS)and Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Packet Page-151- • 4/28/2015 9.B. • • (FGFWFC)regarding potential impacts to protected wildlife species. Where protected species are observed on site, a Habitat Management Plan for those protected species shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval prior to Final Site Plan/Construction Plan approval. E. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance(exotic-free) plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Review Staff for review and approval prior to Final Site Plan/Construction Plan approval. F. The project shall comply with the environmental sections of the LDC and the GMP in effect at the time of final development order approval. G. An Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)shall be included with the next development order submittal. H. At the time of the first development order submittal the 25%required native vegetation shall be identified. • Packet Page -152- 4/28/2015 9.B. EXHIBIT B THE VINCENTIAN PUD MASTER&WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Packet Page-153- 4/28/2015 9 B • - -•• ,- • - ) .. .• ) • ----.::_------:----------- ..----_, ---------------...--------- ____----_-_,0:!...:- ----- -_---t.,..---------_,,g.-5-':""-- ---)----t,-------------------,-......,_____--- --_-_:-.:_,__„,:-.,,,,,-------- Mt. MI r4415Pir, 0=MI s' kr.■.. .■. ..' ---...■—...•-■-• ........----- 1......... 1 7 . ., =T. ..,.. ,. NB ......... IDAN62.11151111111E _- i , „:„._ ,.... ... .„.....„,,„. :,,,,..,c., -I , 1 .; saw. !. \ \ •: Mil figg k*,-..7,Nlarir--W Ell ' P; . ; ...4211.... ,. . ,..,. 4..N. 11.111.12V.MAWI • • • • • • • .1181\ '1111LP'AL 3. .„..... MIsla_11E±3 as•14•4111 • . t 1 i: 5.0 VAIRMIntle1111 *..... •z-e7,7,-;.tiowli --e . , 1 ......WM MM. • ki, Fr-r-L -4-rib. .: 1 '; • 11\ .1\ 4411PRIPIIIMENI I: I 10 Ilt ellIMM.M IR : . 1 J o 1 . .; c • --... ---:___- • -- 0, '''' 0----------- ,... .MOK-Net --.------- ...",„ • . i 1 11 ..,.:.• i':'." , • , . , . L. ' . • •, •- • . . . . .., . . 111 li . if , .• . .. . , . • •• . , .• • V , .. . 1 . ' *, -- :. •. g "'"'•75='°°' / 226...1111..111 •• . . . . - • . .-. 1 ,, . . • / — I.MM.MO TO IC IIIIIMMO 0 14 01.10.101.Wm.V. , MM.r.....aut POMO on I AMMER*OWL ISM WV lal•CIOS m.0 1 I fr 1 .:: • 1 '0111.111■1■......... .. =IIIMMIIIIIMINIMIMIOI elln..... ., .11•MINIIIIMIIMMII■1 .LVOCEIE Of se.= IANCIDITVI KU.O. www•■•• •===111.1MMI=1 riiirinEF:i..... lia su. 111L-11•■■•.... .......1=.11=,31111111121= EE,I3 COICEPRK KAN . .., . ' • ct 8 vt s Packet Page -154- 4/28/2015 9.B. • STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of: ORDINANCE NO. 99-37 Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on the 25th day of May, 1999, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 25th day of May, 1999. DWIGHT E. BROCK ,c k; Clerk of Courts and Clerk 4!v Ex-officio to Board.of. . , C. ty Commissionerit By Lisa Steele‘, ? ' Deputy Clerk,.:, + 01-f Packet Page-155- a 4/28/2015 9.B. M U° Q 8 w O F- 2 Q S gm O 2 J $�Z 4 ',2, Adhe a P4 a. a Q� CN I ', ' F = O a� _ _ Z „ ,,, /1‘it :,:::111::: 1111::::: 11 1::: 1111:1 1111:111 ::44,„ ■4171, mil z R12: i; :;;:l i* 'i! ,141,•41W47"44&** ,V*1* 0,,,014 k.1 illt■A%--'.,).; 1 1 1 1! !.! ljli.' ,1 rt‘'2:#7,OCIN7.I 14'‘S ■ ',V ci i N &'\*N7/.,,A*W4 C..t_..'' ',,,'..4 a e A1,14,” • 44400b ��©®� *• co co � a*/* **** :7-7 N - J CL 31V3$DI ION O 0 CL hit 2 It g 8 a. = "1 a its . 'N / IV , $o..g___ _AR L -L, N _I-1 \ ,A1 d Pi 5 1 b ,SE'WO awn�noe aam0o I F1 a. .W k„..„ 1 or w Er 0 Ill 0 ,tau Q da 0 ♦ \< uss.a.si 2 41-r ZS ma g c _ OQ O / , aav�alnos aam00 ,_.,ii__i_ [--'= V ,;s R2R2 ,Ic s O ��.anns r. h 5 La Illillia E.g� . 2f >Em,_ it _� I- _ Flo \ S ” ,„ o - Fti � d ffik' r< El � a- " m c` 46 -g iW V JS av0a Nave uNncO = � ., B7,< / LI _W e a 668 .■..., ir A i ., MP> ",,, ,,. g Packet Page -156- - a ative Vegetation and Open Space C-5 ZONING 4/28/2015 9.B. Existin• Native Ve•etation= 29.77 Ac. GAS Min On-site Native Preservation Re•'d' STATION 20' TYPE "D" WHISTLER'S 29.77 x 15%=4.46 Ac. COVE - PUD Min Open Space Req'd(Comm.or Mixed-Use) LANDSCAPE 7 x 30% =9.20 Ac c /( L pen Space Required(Residential Only) BUFFER \ 30.68 x 60% =18.41 Ac J' // / �1' ��20' TYPE "D" 140,/\ �, %� LANDSCAPE \ . coo G 1.�� TRAIL ACRES ,C6 BUFFER a . \� 0 200 400 RSF-4 ZONING k?0� �� \� 'App' 49,E �ti xc�o°// \ . 0 50 • , \`42s/, N TRACT "MU N ,/ MIXED USE t LANDSCAPE BUFFER EXISTING 15'U.E. PER LDC REQUIREMENTS o �� \`\ EXISTING 15'U.E. --I a. \ DEVIATION #2 a CD N \ WALL LOCATION POTENTIAL FUTURE I ? co s BIKEIPED if�ct\a o vi, � �\\ INTERCONNECTION � 15' TYPE "B" 1 LANDSCAPE 2 `P' " BUFFER 15' TYPE "B"- 0 w LANDSCAPE -- N BUFFER 0 p Y O = % Z J Q , a TRACT "P" TRACT o PRESERVE Land Use Sornmar s EXISTING 15'U. .\ LAKE ` Description Acreage Percent X `\ Mixed-Use(Tract MU) 22.05 71.9% , • EXISTING 15'U.E. Lake(Tract L) 4.17 13.6% . Preserve(Tract P) 4.46 14.5% TOTAL 30.68 100.0% `� EXISTING 15'U.E. TRAIL ACRES RSF-4 ZONING MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS:224 MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA:250,000 SF,SUBJECT TO LAND USE CONVERSION FACTORS,SEE EXHIBIT B,SECTION III. 'a DESIGNED/gY DATE N� 950 (239)2re O VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD DRARWNBYPMK DO'0?/014 Naples,FL.34110 MASTER PLAN cHECA5D gv DA,E Phone:(239)254-2000 R.M./P.M. 01/20,4 HOLE M ON TES Florida Certificate of AERTICA7CALE ENGINEERS•PLANNERS•SURVEYORS Authorization No.1772 BIT C RE>7sEO A Packet Page-157_ 3-23-2015 4/28/2015 9.B. PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF MEETING OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCES Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday,April 28,2015 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber,Third Floor,Collier County Government Center,3299 E.Tamiami Trail,Naples,FL. The purpose of the hearing is to consider: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COWER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA,SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND•USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ESTABLISHING THE VINCENTIAN MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT IN THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL ONLY, COMMERCIAL ONLY OR MIXED.USE PROJECT AT THE FOLLOWING DENSITY/INTENSITY: UP TO 7.3 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR A MAXIMUM OF 224 • RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS,UP TO 250,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES,A 150 ROOM HOTEL,AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY AT A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 0.6. THE COMMERCIAL USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT ARE ALL PERMITTED USES AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE C-3 COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE ZONING DISTRICT,AND THREE PERMITTED USES AND ONE CONDITIONAL USE IN THE C-4 COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING DISTRICT IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WITH CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT;AND • FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY.THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S.41(TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST)IN SECTION 32,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 30.68±ACRES, [PL20130001767/CP-2013-10] AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41,. AS AMENDED; THE COLLIER COUNTY .LAND DEVELOPMENT.CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE , u1 ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT(PUD)ZONING DISTRICT TO • w A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT TO BE Z -- KNOWN-AS THE VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD,TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 224 • >- MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS,UP TO 250,000 GROSS SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL LAND USES,A HOTEL LIMITED TO 150 ROOMS,AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY(ALF)AT 0.6 FAR. THE COMMERCIAL USES ARE SUBJECT TO CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF THE PROJECT IS O DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE OR IF A HOTEL OR ALF IS CONSTRUCTED.THE SUBJECT PROPERTY to IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41 IN SECTION 32,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,CONSISTING OF 30.68+1- a ACRES;PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 99-37,THE VINCENTIAN PUD;AND BY C PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDZ-PL20130001726] w + to N.nES N.Nn, ,ELT.. .wNNNwTT • 29 28 2' Q g 0 IS) J. uYRILE WOW , IS RS COW t OD � w Q mEE 9rs PROJECT LOCATION >7, ACRES 32 33 J4 MNCENNAN cu (S) C IIENT%pM MATES - - NDTORK fKLS CD All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed ORDINANCES will be made . available for inspection at the Zoning Division,Comprehensive Planning Section,2800 N.Horseshoe Dr.,Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M.and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made 4 available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office,fourth floor,Collier County Government Center,3299 CO East Tamiami Trail,Suite#401 Naples,one week prior to the scheduled hearing.Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Zoning Division,Comprehensive Planning Section.Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Tuesday,April 28,2015,will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he will need a record of that proceeding,and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal Is to be based. • If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled,at no cost to you,to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239)252-8380,at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS-COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA TIM NANCE,CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E.BROCK,CLERK By:Teresa Cannon Deputy Clerk(SEAL) No,231121302 April 8.2015 Packet Page -158- COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN 2013 CYCLE 3 AMENDMENT (ADPOPTION HEARING) Project/Petition #'s: PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10 (Companion PUDZ- PL20130001726) A NAPLES MA4C2 i LELT, A T COMMUNITY in te ;ptf) O 28 27 0� m MICELI I U a (S) J pig VYRTLE +yC70Q5 \ Al iISTLERS rc PROJECT - -- TREE TOP. LOCATION TRAL AGRES 34 NNCENTIAN I �5) I WEN7*MTH ESTATES ACTORiA FALLS CCPC : MARCH 19, 2015 BCC: APRIL 28, 2015 Clerk of Court Minutes & Records EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to deny the single, 2013 Cycle 3 Growth Management Plan Amendment specific to the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict petition. (Adoption Hearing) (Companion to rezone petition PUDZ- PL20130001726, Vincentian Village Mixed Use Planned Unit Development) a OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) to deny (not adopt) the single petition in the 2013 Cycle 3 of amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) and not to approve said amendment for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. CONSIDERATIONS: • Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government's adopted Growth Management Plan. • County Resolution 12 -234 provides for a public petition process to amend the Collier County GMP. • For this Adoption hearing, the sole petition in the 2013 Cycle 3 of GMP amendments being considered is PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10, Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict. • The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), sitting as the "local planning agency" under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held its Transmittal hearings for the subject petition on August 21 and September 4, 2014. The BCC held its Transmittal hearing on October 14 and 28, 2014. Their respective transmittal recommendations /actions are contained in the CCPC adoption hearing Staff Report. • The CCPC held its adoption hearing on March 19, 2015. The staff and CCPC adoption hearing recommendations are presented further below. • After review of the Transmitted GMP amendment, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) rendered its Comment Letter indicating "no comment" within the agency's authorized scope of review, as did the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC), Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) conducted a planning level analysis and rendered comments within their authorized scope of review. FDOT indicates that the proposed amendment is not anticipated to adversely impact important State transportation resources or facilities, and provided an additional comment regarding FDOT access standards; and, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) rendered comments within their authorized scope of review, indicating that the proposed amendment is not anticipated to adversely impact important State resources. The Florida Department of Education (DOE) rendered comments within their authorized scope of review, as follows: The Department recommends the changes associated with the proposed amendment CP- 2013-10 be reviewed as required by Section 8 of the Collier County Interlocal Agreement 1 for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency before adoption consideration. In response to the DOE Comment, staff notes the Transmittal package of materials was provided to School District representatives and subsequently reviewed in accordance with Interlocal Agreement Section 8. Determinations from their Section 8 review are found in a letter dated January 22, 2015, as attached hereto and summarized below. .... ....... aeeordance` wit i rrite`rloeal` Agreemert subsection 8.2 - C oilier County notified "the School District of the proposed GMP amendment that may increase school enrollment. In accordance with Interlocal Agreement subsection 14.2, the Collier County School District subsequently conducted the school planning level review per the Collier County Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency and responded. The School District response indicates at this time there is sufficient capacity for the proposed development for the elementary, middle and high school levels. This finding is for planning and informational purposes only and does not constitute either (sic) a determination of concurrency for the proposed project. At the time of site plan or plat the development would be reviewed for concurrency to ensure there is capacity either within the concurrency service area the development is located within or adjacent concurrency service areas such that the level of service standards are not exceeded. The remaining review agency (Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources) did not provide a Comments Letter. All review agency Comments Letters received are contained in the back -up materials. • This adoption hearing considers amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text and Countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series. Note: Because the support materials are voluminous, and some exhibits may be oversized, the Agenda Central system does not contain all of the related documents pertaining to this GMP amendment petition. The entire Executive Summary package, including all support materials, is included in the binder that is available for review in the Comprehensive Planning Section office at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, as well as in the Clerk of Courts/Minutes and Records office at 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 401, Naples. Petition PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10 is a petition submitted by Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, for Global Properties of Naples, LLC requesting amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to re- designate the subject site from the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict. The Vincentian Subdistrict site comprises 30.7 acres and is located south and east of Southwest Boulevard, south and west of US 41 ( Tamiami Trail East), and west of the Hitching Post Mobile Home Park, in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. With this re- designation, the property would allow for entirely commercial development, for entirely residential development, or for mixed use (commercial and residential) development. Commercial development is limited to 250,000 square feet of gross floor area, one hotel of up to 150 rooms and an assisted living facility. Commercial uses allowed are the permitted and conditional uses of the C -3 zoning district, plus hotel, dental labs, skilled nursing facilities, and department stores from the C -4 Commercial General Zoning District, in the Collier County Land Development Code. Residential development is limited to a maximum of 224 market rate multi- 2 family units. Mixed use development limits commercial intensity to 128,000 square feet of gross floor area, one hotel of up to 150 rooms and an assisted living facility — all on no more than 10 acres, and residential density based on 7.3 units per non - commercial acre. The Subdistrict also provides for conversions if the project is developed with a hotel or assisted living facility, automobile fuel pumps accessory to a grocery store or membership warehouse -type facility larger than 15,000 square feet of gross floor area, and a recreational site no greater than 3 acres for me by rp -,ide its of n,- T-r-fahile Dome narks, Note: A comnanion, petition is scheduled for this same hearing Staff analysis of this petition is included in the Transmittal CCPC Staff Report. There was one public speaker at the CCPC adoption public hearing, who spoke in support of the request. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This GMP amendment is authorized by, and subject to the procedures established in, Chapter 163, Part I1, Florida Statutes, The Community Planning Act, and by Collier County Resolution No. 12 -234, as amended. The Board should consider the following criteria in making its decision: (1) consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, including analysis of impact on public infrastructure; (2) consistency with the Land Development Code, including compatibility analysis; and (3) review of data and analysis to support the proposed amendment. This item is approved as to form and legality. It requires an affirmative vote of four for approval because this is an Adoption hearing of the GMP amendment. [SAS] FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impacts to the County result from this amendment if it is adopted. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This is an adoption public hearing for the single petition in the 2013 Cycle 3 of amendments to the GMP. Based upon statutory changes that occurred during the 2011 Florida Legislative session, this GMP amendment is presumed to be "in compliance" with applicable Florida Statutes. After adoption, the DEO and other applicable review agencies will have 30 days (from the date DEO determines the adoption packages are complete) to review the adopted Plan amendment and, should they believe the amendment is not "in compliance," file a challenge [appeal] to the presumed "in compliance" determination with the Florida Division of Administrative hearings. Similarly, any affected party also has 30 days (from the date of BCC adoption) in which to file a challenge. If a timely challenge is not filed by DEO or an affected party, then the amendment will become effective. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The majority of the subject site is forested with native vegetation. Also on -site are approximately 12.66 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Wetlands on- site are isolated with no hydrological connection to wetlands or waters off -site. No documented occurrences of listed wildlife species or signs of listed wildlife species were observed on the property. The proposed GMP amendment allows for the off -site retention of a portion of the native vegetation required to be retained on the subject property, thus requiring only 15 percent of the native vegetation to be retained on site verse 25 percent, should the property be developed as residential or mixed use. To insure the portion of the preserve can be satisfied off -site, an exemption to the LDC provision allowing off site retention of native vegetation has been included in the GMP amendment. 3 HISTORICAL /ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: According to the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, no significant archaeological or historical sites are recorded for or likely to be present within, the subject area, and that it is unlikely that any such sites will be affected. The property is subject to the requirement for accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites as required by the CCME and LDC. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: That the CCPC forward petition PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10 to the BCC with a recommendation not to adopt and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and reviewing agencies that provided comments. IF the Planning Commission chose to recommend adoption, staff recommended revisions to portions of the Subdistrict text to remove an unnecessary intensity standard for the hotel use no longer contained in the LDC. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission, also acting in their capacity as the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), held its required Adoption public hearing on March 19, 2015. At that hearing, the petitioner proposed several changes for clarification, to which staff recommended minor edits. The CCPC recommended that the BCC adopt petition CP- 2013 -10, including the petitioner - proposed changes and staff - recommended revisions (vote: 510). The CCPC - recommended text is reflected in Exhibit A to the Adoption Ordinance, and is shown below. Words underlined are added - as approved for transmittal by BCC; Words double underlined are added, words are deleted — both as recommended for adoption by CCPC. 17. Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict This Subdistrict contains approximately 30.68 acres, is located on the south/west side of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and is depicted on the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map. The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow for neighborhood, community, and regional commercial development; residential development; and mixed use (commercial and residential ) development. The Subdistrict is intended to include commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. In order to comply with Policy 1.10 of the Housing Element of the Growth Management Plan, residential development shall be limited to market -rate units so as to avoid the concentration of affordable housing in one location in the County. The property may be developed entirely as commercial, entirely as residential, or as a mixture of residential and commercial uses. The development of this Subdistrict shall comply with the following restrictions, limitations and standards: a. Allowable uses: The maximum intensity of commercial uses shall be limited to those allowed in the C -3 zoning district, both by right and by conditional use, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict. Additionally, the following uses are allowed: 1. Department store (5311 2. Hotel (7011, hotel only), El 3. Dental laboratories (8072), and 4. Nursing and personal care facilities (8051). b. Additional use restrictions and intensity standards: 1. Commercial uses shall be limited to a maximum of 250,000 square feet of gross floor area (,GFA) one hotel (maximum �" I 0-6- of 150 rooms), and an tat =(. rqayjmum i AR 0 ham_ d- dltIonally, foy thereof of hotel or ALF the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10, 000 square feet or portion thereof for fractional amount under an acre. 2 Residential development shall be limited to a maximum density of 7.3 units per acre, calculated on the gross acreage of the property exclusive of any commercial portions, for a maximum of 224 multi - family dwelling units. 3 If the project is developed as mixed use (residential and commercial uses) the residential density allowance is as provided for in Number 2. above, and the commercial portion of the project shall not exceed 10 acres in size and a maximum of 128,000 square feet of GFA of commercial uses a 150 -room hotel pot t- a " F" ", and an Assisted Living Facility at a 0.6 FAR. Additionally, for every acre, or portion thereof, of hotel or ALF the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet, or portion thereof for fractional amount under an acre. 4 A stand -alone automobile service station (i.e. retail fuel sales in conjunction with a convenience store) is prohibited; however, accessory fuel pumps in association with a grocery stor 5411) or membership warehouse type facility (SIC 5311, 5331) rg eater than 15,000 square feet of GFA are allowed. 5 A recreational site for the use of the adjacent RV or mobile home parks may be developed on a maximum of 3 acres. The recreational site may include facilities such as a pool, clubhouse, and tennis courts. c. Site Development: 1 Rezoning of this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) The rezone ordinance shall contain development and design standards to ensure compatibility with internal uses as well as adjacent external uses, and shall include additional restrictions and standards necessary to ensure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses. 2 The subject site will be developed with a common architectural and landscaping theme, to be submitted with the first Site Development Plan. 3 The unified planned development submitted at time of the first Site Development Plan will reflect to the ma°j— N internal connectivity through shared parking and cross - access agreements. 4 Pedestrian connections are encouraged both with perimeter properties, where feasible, and between internal buildings. 5 At the time of Site Development Plan approval the required on -site vegetation retention may be satisfied off -site pursuant to Policy 6.1.1(13) of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the Growth Management Plan. At a minimum, 15 percent of the on -site native vegetation must be retained on -site. If the portion of native vegetation satisfied off -site is met by land donation to the County, the specific off -site property shall be taken to the Board of County Commissioners for acceptance However, a hearing before the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee will not be required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: .Same_ as to the. CCPC — .Not tc) adc pt , 9nd- .transmit n._ ti,�-p,1_ Pr 20130001 Z671CR -_20 3 -10; as __ submitted or as revised at the CCPC meeting, to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. Prepared by: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner, and David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section, Zoning Division, Growth Management Department Attachments: 1) CCPC Adoption Staff Report; 2) Adoption Ordinance with Exhibit "A" text and maps; 3) DEO and Reviewing Agency Comment Letters; 4) Transmittal Executive Summary; 5) CCPC Transmittal Staff Report; 6) Approved Transmittal Resolution; 7) CP- 2013 -10 Application Backup Information (petition only) — due to the size of the entire document, the complete back- up is accessible at: http: / /www.colliergov. net/ ftp/ AgendaApril2815 /GrowthM2mt/PL20130001767 CP -2013- 10 Application Petition.pdf. Executive Summary Adoption 2013 Cycle 3 Global Properties — Vincentian Subdistrict cs /dw \ \bcc.colliergov .net \data \GMD - LDS \CDES Planning Services \Comprehensive \COMP PLANNING GMP DATA \Comp Plan Amendments\2013 Cycles & Small Scale Petitions\2013 Cycle 3 - October\2013.3 BCC Adoption\2013.3 Cycle GMPA_Adptn Exec Summ_FNL.docx 2 �7; CU ELY' Ci�Ti17�1 �� STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: MARCH 19, 2015 SUBJECT: 2013 CYCLE THREE, SINGLE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (ADOPTION HEARING) ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE) AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES Transmittal hearings on the subject amendment were held on August 21 and September 4, 2014 Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), and on October 14 and 28, 2014 Board of County Commissioners (BCC). The respective Transmittal recommendations /actions are presented further below, following the petition number and title. Within CCPC materials provided you will find the Transmittal Executive Summary from the BCC hearings and certain attachments referenced therein, plus the Transmittal CCPC staff report for the petition, which provides staff's detailed analysis of the petition. REVIEW AGENCY COMMENT LETTERS After review of the Transmitted GMP amendment, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) rendered its Comment Letter indicating "no comment" within the agency's authorized scope of review, as did the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC)], Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) conducted a planning level analysis and rendered comments within their authorized scope of review. FDOT indicates that the proposed amendment is not anticipated to adversely impact important State transportation resources or facilities, and provided an additional comment regarding FDOT access standards; and, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) rendered comments within their authorized scope of review, indicating that the proposed amendment is not anticipated to adversely impact important State resources. The Florida Department of Education (DOE) rendered comments within their authorized scope of review, as follows: The Department recommends the changes associated with the proposed amendment CP- 2013-10 be reviewed as required by Section 8 of the Collier County Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency before adoption consideration. In response to the DOE Comment, staff notes the Transmittal package of materials was provided to School District representatives and subsequently reviewed in accordance with - I - STAFF REPORT ON 2013 CYCLE THREE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (ADOPTIONHEARIN6) Interlocal Agreement Section 8. Determinations from their Section 8 review are found in a letter dated January 22, 2015, as attached hereto and summarized below. In accordance with Interlocal Agreement subsection 8.2, Collier County notified the School District of the proposed GMP amendment that may increase school enrollment. In accordance with Interlocal Agreement subsection 14.2, the Collier County School District subsequently conducted the school planning level review per the Collier County Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency and responded. The School District response indicates at this time there is sufficient capacity for the proposed development for the elementary, middle and high school levels. This finding is for planning and informational purposes only and does not constitute either a determination of concurrency for the proposed project. At the time of site plan or plat the development would be reviewed for concurrency to ensure there is capacity either within the concurrency service area the development is located within or adjacent concurrency service areas such that the level of service standards are not exceeded. The Comments Letters received are located within materials provided to the CCPC. The remaining reviewing agency, Department of State, Bureau of Historic Preservation, did not provide a Comment Letter. Within CCPC materials provided is an Ordinance with Exhibit "A" text and maps for the petition; those exhibits reflect the FLUE text and maps as approved by BCC for Transmittal. PROPOSED AMENDMENT PETITION CP- 2013 -10 / PL2013- 0001767, requesting amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan, to re- designate the subject site from the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict. The subject property, consisting of ±30.68 acres, is located south and east of Southwest Boulevard, south and west of US 41 (Tamiami Trail East), and west of the Hitching Post Mobile Home Park, in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This petition seeks to establish the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict to allow for entirely commercial development, for entirely residential development, or for mixed use (commercial and residential) development. Commercial development is limited to 250,000 square feet of gross floor area, one hotel of up to 150 rooms and an assisted living facility. Commercial uses allowed are the permitted and conditional uses of the C -3 zoning district plus hotel, dental labs, skilled nursing facilities, and department stores. Residential development is limited to a maximum of 224 market rate multi - family units. Mixed Use development limits commercial intensity to 128,000 square feet of gross floor area, one hotel of up to 150 rooms and an assisted living facility on no more than 10 acres, and residential density based on 7.3 units per non - commercial acre. The Subdistrict also provides for conversions if the project is developed with a hotel or assisted living facility, for automobile fuel pumps accessory to a grocer or membership warehouse -type facility larger than 15,000 square feet of gross floor area and, for a recreational site for use by residents of the adjacent RV or mobile home parks. Note: A companion PUD rezone petition is scheduled for this same hearing. TRANSMITTAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Not to Transmit to DEO. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Transmit to DEO (vote: 4/2), with the density reduction [from 11.74 DU /ac. to 10.0 DU /ac.] and with further modification of the amendment to reduce the maximum number of dwelling units from 360 to 307 DU, remove maximum building heights from Subdistrict provisions, calculate residential density on non - commercial acreage only, prohibit affordable- workforce housing, reduce commercial intensity from the initially proposed C -5 -2- STAFF REPORT ON 2013 CYCLE THREE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (ADOPTION HEARING) commercial uses to C -3 and other additional specific uses, prohibit a stand -alone automobile fuel station and, introduce conversion factors for certain uses. BCC ACTION: Transmitted to DEO (vote: 4/1), with the density reduction [from 10.0 DU /ac. to 7.3 DU /ac. for a maximum 224 DU total] and with further modification of the amendment to reduce the number of additional specific commercial uses allowed. ADOPTION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the CCPC forward the single, 2013 Cycle 3 petition to the BCC with a recommendation not to adopt and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and reviewing agencies that provided comments. IF the Planning Commission chooses to recommend adoption, staff recommends the following revisions to portions of the Subdistrict text to remove an unnecessary intensity standard for the hotel use no longer contained in the LDC. [Words underlined are added — as Transmitted; Words double underlined are added, and words double are deleted — as recommended by staff] 17. Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict This Subdistrict contains approximately 30.68 acres, is located on the south /west side of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and is depicted on the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map. The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow for neighborhood, community, and regional commercial development; residential development; and mixed use (commercial and residential) development. The Subdistrict is intended to include commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. In order to comply with Policy 1.10 of the Housinq Element of the Growth Management Plan, residential development shall be limited to market -rate units so as to avoid the concentration of affordable housing in one location in the County. The property may be developed entirely as commercial, entirely as residential, or as a mixture of residential and commercial uses. b. Additional use restrictions and intensity standards: 1. Commercial uses shall be limited to a maximum of 250.000 square feet of gross floor area (GFA), and one hotel (maximum FAR 0.6 and a of 150 rooms) and an assisted living facility (maximum FAR 0.6). Additionally, for every acre of hotel or ALF, the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet. 2. Residential development shall be limited to a maximum density of 7.3 units per acre calculated on the gross acreage of the property exclusive of any commercial portions for a maximum of 224 multi - family dwelling units. 3. If the project is developed as mixed use (residential and commercial uses) the residential density allowance is as provided for in Number 2. above, and the commercial portion of the project shall not exceed 10 acres in size and a maximum of 128,000 square feet of GFA of commercial uses, and a 150 -room hotel not to and an Assisted Living Facility at a 0.6 FAR. Additionally, for every acre of hotel or ALF, the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS This staff report has been approved as to form and legality by the Office of the County Attorney. [HFAC] -3- STAFF REPORT ON 2013 CYCLE THREE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (ADOPTIONHEARIN6) PREPARED BY: pnko � DATE: ,;?4 61 1 c5 CORBY SCH IDT, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER COMPREHE SIVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT REVIEWED BY: DATE: 2-- DAVID WEEKS, AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT REVIEWED BY: DATE: 2- 2 S f MIKE BOSI, AICP, bIRECTOR, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT APP BY: 1' DATE: C ' CASALA Nf3fJ ID AD WNf —ST RATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION 2013 Cycle 3 GMPA— Adoption (petition CP- 2013- 10/PL2013- 0001767). Staff Report for the March 19, 2015, CCPC Meeting. NOTE: This single petition 2013.3 Cycle GMPA has been scheduled for the April 28, 2015, BCC Meeting. -4- STAFF REPORT ON 2013 CYCLE THREE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (ADOPTION HEARING) ORDINANCE NO. 15- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING_ THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ESTABLISHING THE VINCENTIAN MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT IN THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL ONLY, COMMERCIAL ONLY OR MIXED USE PROJECT AT THE FOLLOWING DENSITY/INTENSITY: UP TO 7.3 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR A MAXIMUM OF 224 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES, A 150 ROOM HOTEL, AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY AT A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 0.6. THE COMMERCIAL USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT ARE ALL PERMITTED USES AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE C -3 COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE ZONING DISTRICT, AND THREE PERMITTED USES AND ONE CONDITIONAL USE IN THE C -4 COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING DISTRICT IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WITH CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT; AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST) IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 30.68± ACRES, [PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Petitioner, Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP of Hole Montes, Inc. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, PA on behalf of Global Properties, LLC, have initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; and [14- CMP- 00931/1167684/1] 101 PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10 —rev. 4/6/15 Words underlined are additions; Words straek thfough are deletions * ** * ** * ** * ** are a break in text WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendments to the Department of Economic Opportunity for preliminary review on November 10, 2014, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Economic Opportunity reviewed the amendments to the Future Land Use Element to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the Department of Economic Opportunity to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of these amendments, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendments and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on March 19, 2015, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on April 28, 2015; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan [14- CMP- 00931!1167684/1] 101 2 PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10 —rev. 4/6/15 Words underlined are additions; Words stmeigh are deletions * ** * ** * ** * ** are a break in text amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status,_a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the state land planning agency. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of _,... 2015. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk TIM NANCE, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: Scott A. Stone Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A — Text and Maps �4A'/15 [ 14 -C M P -00931 / 1167684/ 1] 101 PL201300017671CP- 2013 -10 —rev. 4/6/15 Words underlined are additions; Words st%ie1� are deletions * ** * ** * ** * ** are a break in text PL20130001767 W-GINIIIN U. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT CP- 2013 -10 [Page 10] Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1 Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict 6, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict 11. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict 13. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 14. Livingston/Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 15. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 16. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict 17. Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict [Page 26] 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict, Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict; and, in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict; Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict, in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay; and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. Words underlined are added; words �eeg# are deleted Row of asterisks (' " "' "" " "') denotes break in text. Version Date: 3 -20 -2015 [Page 46] r s '� PL20130001767 CP- 2013 -10 17. Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict This Subdistrict contains approximately 30.68 acres is located on the south /west side of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and is depicted on the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow for neighborhood community, and regional commercial development residential deaciapment and mixed use (commercial and residential) developrrE -Int - The Subdistrict is intended to include commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. In order to comply with Policy 1.10 of the Housing Element of the Growth Management Plan, residential development shall be limited to market -rate units so as to avoid the concentration of affordable housing in one location in the County. The property may be developed entirely as commercial, entirely as residential or as a mixture of residential and commercial uses The development of this Subdistrict shall comply with the following restrictions limitations and standards: a. Allowable uses: The maximum intensity of commercial uses shall be limited to those allowed in the C -3 zoning district, both by right and by conditional use as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict. Additionally, the following uses are allowed: 1. Department store (5311), 2. Hotel (7011, hotel only), 3. Dental laboratories (8072), and 4. Nursing and personal care facilities (8051). b. Additional use restrictions and intensity standards, 1. Commercial uses shall be limited to a maximum of 250,000 square feet of gross floor area (GFA) one hotel (maximum of 150 rooms) and an assisted living facility (maximum FAR 0.6). Additionally, for every acre, or portion thereof, of hotel or ALF the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet or portion thereof for fractional amount under an acre. 2. Residential development shall be limited to a maximum density of 7.3 units ger acre, calculated on the gross acreage of the property exclusive of any commercial portions for a maximum of 224 multi - family dwelling units. 3. If the proiect is developed as mixed use (residential and commercial uses) the residential density allowance is as provided for in Number 2 above and the commercial portion of the proiect shall not exceed 10 acres in size and a maximum of 128,000 square feet of GFA of commercial uses, a 150 -room hotel. and an Assisted Living Facility at a 0.6 FAR Additionally, for every acre, or portion thereof, of hotel or ALF the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet or portion thereof for fractional amount under an acre 4.A_ stand -alone automobile service station (i.e. retail_ fuel sales in coniunction with a convenience store) is prohibited however, accessory fuel pumps in association with a grocery store (SIC 5411) or membership warehouse type facility (SIC 5311 5331) greater than 15,000 square feet of GFA are allowed. 5. A recreational site for the use of the adiacent RV or mobile home parks may be developed on a maximum of 3 acres. The recreational site may include facilities such as a pool clubhouse and tennis courts Words underlined are added: words stRwA- t#reu" are deleted Row of asterisks ( * * ** * * ** * * * *) denotes break in text. Version Date: 3 -20 -2015 0 PL20130001767 CP- 2013 -10 c. Site Development: 1 Rezoning of this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD ), The rezone ordinance shall contain develo meet and design standards to ensure compatibility with internal uses as well as adiacent external uses and shall include additional restrictions and standards neces:.z to ensure that uses and fours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses- 2, The subiect site will be developed with a common architectural and landscaping theme, to be submitted with the first Site Development Plan. 3. The unified planned development submitted at time of the first Site Development Plan will reflect internal connectivity through shared parking and cross - access agreements. 4. Pedestrian connections are encouraged bath with perimeter ,properties, where feasible, and between internal buildings- 5 At the time of Site Development Plait approval the required on -site vegetation retention may be satisfied off -site, pursuant to Policy 6.1.1 (13) of the Conservation and Coastal Management of County Commissioners for acceptance. However, a hearing before the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee Ml not be required. * ## ?Y-i6'ti♦ #' * #'k #t }. it *i- ** # *t* #' *4ai *K #ik #KY[# !'F #* /r%*# Urban Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Map Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Livingston RoadlEatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict Livingston Road/Veteran's Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict Map Coastal High Hazard Area Map Coastal High Hazard Area Comparison Map Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map 3 Words underlined are added; words r,!FUGk thFo ugh are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * * *' * * ** * * * *) denotes break in text. Version Date: 3 -20 -2015 [Page 141] C -PaC 3 EXHIBIT A VINCENTIAN MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PETITION PL20130001767 1 CP- 201310 PREPARED BY GIS /CAD MAPPMG SECi1CN GROWRi MMOXa$NT DlY[Sl0N / MJJ4?, C AJ�M REWLATKM DAZE: 7/2014 FXP; CP- 2013- 10A.DW LEGEND 1\1010101�114 Page 4 of p T 48 8 T 47 8 T 48 S T 49 8 T 50 S T 51 S T 52 S if U " r W J n E Z Q Y iE iy4 y }N y 9 CL Wk�rg [I gyp. 9 ilia ■a■ 01 ■❑■ ❑! ■ 1 mom i!- mc • T t #" # •3� p8g6y p¢R' � . �p $ {6 � �� F■ {yi � � 3�' ei T� ��y a i W i■f� 3 � 1 S �pgqta �i ��i p�� C A �f❑ la2 mom: a G.iw�� C i H 2 " X c W N O Q W w N C .lip _$ Wpy 4$ W C, Q > J • O N I Z O J; V ez. 2 ° c U W i W ` O b N C sat 1 � jpa r:. a.. t" S Lt 1 3 a Z a• #�G° 117 r titext CO 9 (, U f S 84 1 S at 1 I 8 09 1 �•y� it I C W Q W W r}� o � c I W O s et W N Q m N fi oil C) Lu Uj w 9e 3 t= p e 0 U s S 19 1 S Z9 1 S 99 1 Page S of �, Rick Scott:" Jesse Panuccio GOVERNOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FLORIDA DEPARTMENTo' ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY December 10, 2014 The Honorable Tom Henning, Chairman Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tam iami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, Florida 34112 -5746 Dear Chairman Henning: The Department of Economic Opportunity has completed its review of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for Collier County (Amendment No. 14- 5ESR), which was received on November 12, 2014. We have reviewed the proposed amendment pursuant to Sections 163.3184(2) and (3), Florida Statutes (F.S.), and identified no comments related to important state resources and facilities within the Department's authorized scope of review that will be adversely impacted by the amendment if adopted. The County is reminded that pursuant to Section 163.3184(3)(b), F.S., other reviewing agencies have the authority to provide comments directly to the County. If other reviewing agencies provide comments, we recommend the County consider appropriate changes to the amendment based on those comments., If unresolved, such reviewing agency comments could form the basis for a challenge to the amendment after adoption. The County should act by choosing to adopt, adopt with changes, or not adopt the proposed amendment. Also, please note that Section 163.3184(3)(c)1, F.S., provides that if the second public hearing is not held within 180 days of your receipt of agency comments, the amendment shall be deemed withdrawn unless extended' by agreement with notice to the Department and any affected party that provided comment on the amendment. For your assistance, we have enclosed the procedures for adoption and transmittal of the comprehensive plan amendment. Florida Department of Economic Opportunity= i Caldwell Building 1 10717L Madison Street ; Tallahassee, FL 32399 866.FL:�.23d5 1 850-245.7105 i 850.921.3223 Fax w1vzv.tloridaiobs.org i www.mjtter.com /FLDEO I unvw- facebook.com /FLDEO The Honorable Tom Henning, Chairman December 10, 2014 Page 2 of 2 If you have any questions concerning this review, please contact Scott Rogers, Planning Analyst, at (850) 717 -8510, or by email at scoff.rogers@d,eo.myflorida.com. Sincerely, Ana Richmond, Chief Bureau of Community Planning AR /sr Enclosure: Procedures for Adoption cc: Michael Bosi, Director, Collier County Planning & Zoning Department Margaret Wuerstle, Executive Director, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Y ' SUBMITTAL OF ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR EXPEDITED STATE REVIEW Section 163.3184(3), Florida Statutes NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED: Please submit three complete copies of all comprehensive plan materials, of which one complete paper copy and two complete electronic copies on CD ROM in Portable Document Format (PDF) to the Department of Economic Opportunity and one copy to each entity below that provided timely comments to the local government: the appropriate Regional Planning Council; Water Management District; Department of Transportation; Department of Environmental Protection; Department of State; the appropriate county (municipal amendments only); the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (county plan amendments only); and the Department of Education (amendments relating to public schools); and for certain local governments, the appropriate military installation and any other local government or governmental agency that has filed a written request. SUBMITTAL LETTER: Please include the following information in the cover letter transmitting the adopted amendment: Department of Economic Opportunity identification number for adopted amendment package; Summary description of the adoption package, including any amendments proposed but not adopted; Identify if concurrency has been rescinded and indicate for which public facilities. (Transportation, schools, recreation and open space). Ordinance number and adoption date; Certification that the adopted amendment(s) has been submitted to all parties that provided timely comments to the local government; Name, title, address, telephone, FAX number and e-mail address of local government contact; Letter signed by the chief elected official or the person designated by the local government. Effective: June 2, 2011 (Updated March 11, 2013) ADOPTION AMENDMENT PACKAGE: Please include the following information in the amendment package: In the case of text amendments, changes should be shown in strike - through /underline format. In the case of future land use map amendments, an adopted future land use map, in color format, clearly depicting the parcel, its future land use designation, and its adopted designation. � y A copy of any data and analyses the local government deems appropriate. Note: If the local government is relying on previously.submitted data and analysis, no additional data and analysis is required; Copy of the executed ordinance adopting the comprehensive plan amendment(s); Suggested effective date language for the adoption ordinance for expedited review: The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the Department of Economic Opportunity notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the Department of Economic Opportunity or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits,'°: or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the Department of Economic Opportunity. List of additional changes made in the adopted amendment that the Department of Economic Opportunity did not previously review; 1. List of findings of the local governing body, if any, that were not included in the ordinance and which provided the basis of the adoption or determination not to adopt the proposed amendment; Statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes not previously reviewed by the Department of Economic Opportunity in response to the comment letter from the Department of Economic Opportunity. 2 Effective: June 2, 2011 (Updated March 11, 2013) + 1926 Victoria Avenue .1 Fort Myers, FL 33901 SAES ` RcF15D,'`l December 18, 2014 Mr_ D. Ray Eubanks Administrator Plan Review and Processing Department of Economic Opportunity 107 East Madison Street — MSC 160 rallahassee, Florida 32399 -4120 Re Collier County f DEO 14 -5 ESki Dear Mr. Eubanks: P: 239.338.25501 F: 239.338.25601 the staff of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council has reviewed the requested amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). The review was performed according to the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, The Council will review the proposed amendments to the Collier Count -y GV2 at its 3anuary 15, 2 015 meeting. Council staff has recommended that Council find the changes described in CPT 2013- 10/PL20130001767 as not regionally significant, and consistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRPP). Council staff has recommended that the Council find that the requested changes do not produce adverse effects to significant regional resources and support the recommendation of the Collier County Emergency Management requiring that the developer provide a one -time developer contribution of a generator to mitigate impact for hurricane evacuation concerns, The generator as specified by the Collier County Emergency Management allows for additional evacuee capacities at various shelter(s) that can be used based on the storm factors associated with development in the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA). Council staff also. recommended that. Council find that the requested changes do not produce adverse effects to facilities found in the SRPP and that the proposed changes do not produce extra- jurisdictional impacts that are inconsistent with the comprehensive plans of any other local government A copy of the official staff report explaining the Council staff s recommendation is attached. if Council action differs from the staff recommendation, we will notify you. Sincerely, � Aouthwest Florida ta AICP lW /lam Attachment .Planning Council Cc: Nick Casalanguida, Administrator, GroNkgh Nfanagement Division, Collier County OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER THE CA.PSTOL (880) 617 -7700 400 SOUTH _MONROH STREET TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-0800 i FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES COMMIssioNBR ADf m H. PUTN.A M December 10, 2014 VIA EMAIL (davidweeks @colliergov.net) Collier County Growth Management Division Attn: David Weeks 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Re: DACS Docket # -- 20141117 -484 Collier County CP- 2013- 10/PL20130001767 Submission dated November 10, 2014 Dear Mr. Weeks: The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (the "Department") received the above - referenced proposed comprehensive plan amendment on November 17, 2014 and has reviewed it pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes to address any potential adverse impacts to important state resources or facilities related to agricultural, aquacultural, or forestry resources in Florida if the proposed amendment(s) are adopted. Based on our review of your county's submission, the Department has no comment on the proposal. If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at 850- 410 -2289. Sincerely, s /r Stormie Knight Sr. Management Analyst I Office of Policy and Budget cc: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (SLPA #: Collier County 14 -5 ESR) 1- 800- HELPFLA F[r>rada www.FreshFromFlorida.com �aP�kR 9c Z 'SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT December 4, 2014 Nick Casalanguida, Administrator Growth Management Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Subject: Collier County, DEO #14 -5ESR Comments on Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Package Dear Mr. Casalanguida: The South Florida Water Management District (District) has completed its review of the proposed amendment package from Collier County (County). The amendment creates the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict by adding policies and changing the land use designation on a 30.7 acre parcel. There appear to be no regionally significant water resource issues; therefore, the District forwards no comments on the proposed amendment package. The District offers its technical assistance to the County and the Department of Economic Opportunity in developing sound, sustainable solutions to meet the County's future water supply needs and to protect the region's water resources. Please forward a copy of adopted amendments to the District. For assistance or additional information, please contact Deborah Oblaczynski, Policy and Planning Analyst, at (561) 682 -2544 or doblaczyC&- sfwmd.qov. Sincerely, oc�-, Dean Powell Water Supply Bureau Chief DP /do c: Ray Eubanks, DEO Deborah Oblaczynski, SFWMD David Weeks, AICP, Collier County Brenda Winningham, DEO Margaret Wuerstle, SWFRPC 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 • (561) 686 -8800 • FL WATS 1- 800 - 432 -2045 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 24680, West Palm Beach, FL 33416 -4680 • www.sfwmd.gov State Board of Education 0 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF W'Mr r.org EDUCATION Gary Chartrand, Chair John R. Padget, Vice Chair Members Ada G. Armas, M.D. John A. Colon Marva Johnson Rebecca Fishman Lipsey _.. Andy Tuck December 4, 2014 Mr. David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Plan Manager Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Via E -mail: davidweeksgcollier ov.net Re: Collier County 14 -5 ESR Dear Mr. Weeks: Pam Stewart --" Commissioner of Education On November 14, 2014, the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) notified me of its receipt of the Collier County proposed 14 -5ESR comprehensive plan amendment. Because the county did not provide a copy to the Florida Department of Education, I accessed the proposed amendment package through the DEO's online plan amendment archive, Florida PAPERS. According to the department's responsibilities under section 163.3184(3)(b), Florida Statutes, I reviewed the amendment package considering the provisions of chapter 163, part 11, F.S., and to determine whether the proposal, if adopted, would have the potential to create adverse effects on public school facilities. The amendment relates to petition PL2013001767/CP- 2013 -10, which proposes an amendment of the future land use element text and map to establish the Vincentian Mixed -Use District. Although the application and staff report assert that there are no effects on public school facilities, the proposal's intent to permit up to an additional 307 residential dwellings appears to have the potential to increase demands for public school capacity, and thus must be analyzed for such effects. Given this, I contacted Amy Lockhart, AICP, with the Collier County Public Schools, to request an analysis. Because she had not received the proposed amendment, she was not able to provide one. Prior to considering adoption of the amendment, the county and the applicant should complete the school planning level review required by section 8 of the Collier County Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. If the planning level review indicates that a planning solution is necessary to address any estimated deficit, the county should revise the amendment to adopt an appropriate solution. Thomas H. Inserra Director, Office of Educational Facilities www.fldoe.org 325 W. Gaines Street, Suite 1014 1 Tallahassee, FL 32399 -0400 1 850 -245 -0494 © 2014, Florida Department of Education. All Rights Reserved. Mr. David Weeks, AICP December 4, 2014 Page Two Section 163.3184(1), F.S., defines the department as a reviewing agency to receive comprehensive plan amendments that relate to public schools. It has been my understanding that amendments that relate to public schools include those that propose an increase in residential density (whether by text or map amendment), propose a change in land use proximate to an existing or future public school site or to accommodate a future school, or propose policy revisions that would affect intergovernmental coordination with the school district regarding public educational facilities. Please direct such future amendments to my attention at the letterhead address. If you prefer to save the costs of copying and mailing amendments, I would welcome transmittal via e -mail to the address listed below. If you have questions about this letter, or if I may be of assistance, please contact me at 850 -245- 9312 or tracy.subergfldoe.org. Sin erely, Tracy . Suber Growth Management and Facilities Policy Liaison TDS/ cc: Ms. Amy Lockhart, AICP, Collier County Public Schools Ms. Brenda Winningham, DEO /State Land Planning Agency Mr. Scott Rogers, DEO /State Land Planning Agency e1i L c� LE 'C d C c O O N cu U a; S O C- Q) E +� v 3 c a 0 0 L o > -0 O U E 4-- 1 c O te cn v) a-+ O m > N N N L 1 > Y O L O J O L O LL 01 1.0 E ai N Y 1 O In w (> N H LA L` O m m 0 CL uO U- mF- N -0 —C: U U } C O Q m w L E O a) w Q -0 L C 1 c aJ Y O aJ > ... ..... .: ... � ai h O .O 41 Y m -0 a) m 3 Y v LA a) ±� t Ln m N Y CU 4- 3 3 O -a v a Ln 3 a o QLl •> m QYLi Ln CU 3 m -0 m N Q ++ C O aai L 4- 41 H C aL-+ w "O 0 O 3 a) m —C 41 p U C Y c O M O O O c (n . '^ }, O O v u O O > O m °- E 3 0 41 to +�+ M 0 cu a c Q •— r 0 O Q 0 E C Y V) r M E c v O m O O_ > f0 O � L H L v Y N C 4) 1 E w a) m O Y U o N tf O ca cN M.� Q N a a, m L + C: �— o m Lo ? m O a M v t di LL fa V, U O L" 1 IT w p M v- to L O Co (n 'L N L W M LO L O E O L Q cu O to w ([j Q c C3 2 4 — u Y U �- CL to 4) O E p i N O C E a) :3 cYi� N O— Q. O O Q c v a> Y O o � 4-- n a, v p a) O O U ❑ O C t*u 4) M (D _ Y O L H M H —C CO cu °" �� o� L�;,oN E� on > u U O � 2 a) i O (n U a n3 4) 0 0 N O M LL O � 1.4 U O LWr1 U cOa � I O c 4) L L ._ 3 of H ai O 4 ai > O u1 L EE U ¢c O o L > +�1 O On c O o o U (D -q m °� c p p L vi Y +1 c ai Y L u �' U 0 W - U >. > Qj '� a1 7 � C Q L v i +0., > :E 2 0 U O +' •- C O c, N > w c0 Ln a) m j i � L T U O O c C r+ d f° w [2 d U > O -0 O � 41 10 c u O ate+ -6 L 0 ++ �a=io�3 .�, p U rn �� °� 0OU= > o a; t E C c O O N cu U a; S O C- E +� v 3 0 E N a 0 0 L > -0 O U E 4-- 1 c O te cn a-+ O m > N N N 0 O 3 m E L O J O L O LL 01 1.0 E ai N p p v`ni 1 O In w (> N H N L` O m m 0 CL uO U- mF- C ,MW SIC A .O N U 0 O N L_ U 16 C O U c0 d N C C N N t_ O cc E U C O U N N C O N O C O a m C 6 9) N O U N _U a 7 Q f0 O N N C O O_ N N C 1 � �3 c m c O s CL [V FDOT Florida Department of Transportation RICK SCOTT 10041 Daniels Parkway ANANTH PRASAD, P.E. GOVERNOR Fort Myers, FL 33913 SECRETARY November 25, 2014 Mr. David Weeks, AICP Growth Management Plan Manager Collier County Growth Management Division/Planning & Regulation Planning & Zoning Department Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 RE: Collier County 14 -5ESR Proposed Comprehensive PIan Amendment (Expedited State Review Process) — FDOT Comments and Recommendations Dear Mr. Weeks: The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), District One, has reviewed the Collier County 14 -5ESR, Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, transmitted under the Expedited State Review process (transmitted by the Board of County Commissioners on October 28, 2014) in accordance with the requirements of Florida Statutes (F.S.) Chapter 163. The Department offers Collier County the following comments and recommendations for your consideration regarding the proposed amendment. CP- 2013 -10 (Text and Mai) Amendment): The subject site comprises 30.7 acres, lies within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), and is generally located south and east of Southwest Boulevard, south and west of US 4I (Tamiami Trail East), and west of the Hitching Post Mobile Home Park in Collier County, Florida. The comprehensive plan amendment proposes to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) to introduce a new Subdistrict and to re- designate the subject site from the Urban Mixed Use District (UMUD), Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict (UCFS) to the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict (VMUS). The subject property (Vincentian project) was initially approved as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) per Collier County Ordinance 99 -37. The approved Vincentian PUD includes 57,500 square feet of commercial uses, 57,500 square feet of general office and 40 single family residential dwelling units, which would result in 447 p.m. peak hour trips (after the reduction of the internal capture and pass -by trips). www.dot.stat.e.fl.us Mr. David Weeks Collier County 14 -5ESR — FDOT Comments and Recommendations November 25, 2014 Page 2 of 5 Based on the information provided in the traffic study and the staff report, the proposed Vincentian PUD Amendment will continue to develop as a mixed -use conunercial project. The proposed land -use includes 190,000 square feet of commercial uses, a hotel (100 rooms) and 57,500 square feet of general office which would result in 851 p.m. peak hour trips (after the reduction of the internal capture and pass -by trips). As indicated in the following tables, the proposed development could result in a net increase of 404 p.m. peak hour trips. TRIP GENERATION AS PROPOSED L Trip generation based on the rates and equations obtained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition). 2. A pass by rate was limited to a maximum of 25% of the trips generated by the shopping center, per Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures As seen in the following tables, a planning level analysis was prepared to establish whether state roadways in the vicinity of the project will operate at their adopted level of service (LOS) www.dot.state.fl.us ITE Size of Development Scenario Land Use Land PM Peak Designation Use Acres allowed Trips Code Development SF Residential 210 40 Ws 46 30.7 General Office 710 57,500 sf 143 Shopping Center 820 57,500 sf 413 Existing Internal Capture Trips 58 Pass -By Trips'- 97 Total (Existing Condition) 447 Hotel 310 100 Occ. 70 Rooms 30.7 General Office 710 57,500 sf 143 Shopping Center 820 190,000 sf 921 Proposed Internal Capture Trips 60 Pass -By Trips' 223 Total (Proposed Condition) 851 1chInge in Trips +404 L Trip generation based on the rates and equations obtained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition). 2. A pass by rate was limited to a maximum of 25% of the trips generated by the shopping center, per Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures As seen in the following tables, a planning level analysis was prepared to establish whether state roadways in the vicinity of the project will operate at their adopted level of service (LOS) www.dot.state.fl.us Mr. David Weeks Collier County 14 -5ESR— FDOT Comments and Recommendations November 25, 2014 Page 3 of 5 standards, as identified within the Collier County's comprehensive plan during the existing (2013), short-term (2019), and long term (2035) horizon year conditions. YEAR 2013 EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS 1. PM Peak Hour Two -Way Service Volume at the County Adopted LOS Standard YEAR 2019 SHORT -TERM HORIZON ROADWAY CONDITIONS 2019 Conditions Roadway 2013 Conditions To From To SIS? County LOS Projects Project Service' PM Peak Roadway Lanes Volume Std. Dist.% Traffic Traffic LOS Acceptable? No. of Lanes LOS Acceptable? Traffic Volume Hour Vol. CR 864; US 41 Rattlesnake Tree Tops US 41 Rattlesnake Tree Tops N E 6 5,660 3,105 C Yes Dr. Hammock Rd. Dr. CR CR US 41 Tree Tops Dr. 95]I*CollieT N E 6 5,660 2,520 C Yes Yes Blvd. Blvd North of North of SR 951 Championship US 41 N D 4 3,759 2,565 C Yes 40 Dr. C Yes Dr. L. 1. PM Peak Hour Two -Way Service Volume at the County Adopted LOS Standard YEAR 2019 SHORT -TERM HORIZON ROADWAY CONDITIONS t. PM Peak Hour Two-Way Service Volume at the County Adopted LOS Standard. 2. The short -term planning horizon year 2019 background volumes were obtained using trends analysis based growth rates. I The project traffic distribution percentages were obtained based on the information provided in the traffic study. www.dot.state.fl.us 2019 Conditions Roadway From To No. of Service ' 2019 Projects Project Total Lanes Volume Background Dist.% Traffic Traffic LOS Acceptable? Traffic CR 864i US 41 Rattlesnake Tree Tops 6 5,660 3,474 60% 242 3,716 C Yes Hammock Rd Dr. CR US 41 Tree Tops Dr. 951 /Collier 6 5,660 2,826 35% 141 2,967 C Yes Blvd North of SR 951 Championshi US 41 4 3,759 2,871 10% 40 2,911 C Yes Dr. L. t. PM Peak Hour Two-Way Service Volume at the County Adopted LOS Standard. 2. The short -term planning horizon year 2019 background volumes were obtained using trends analysis based growth rates. I The project traffic distribution percentages were obtained based on the information provided in the traffic study. www.dot.state.fl.us Mr. David Weeks Collier County 14 -SESR — FDOT Comments and Recommendations November 25, 2014 Page 4 of 5 YEAR 2035 LONGTERM HORIZON ROADWAY CONDITIONS J. rm reak Hour i wo -way Service Volume at the County Adopted LOS Standard. 2. The long -term planning horizon year 2035 background volumes were obtained using trends analysis based growl, rates. I The project traffic distribution percentages were obtained based on the information provided in the traffu study. FDOT Comment # 1: The Department has determined that the changes associated with the proposed amendment CP- 2013 -10 are not anticipated to adversely impact important state transportation resources or facilities FDOT Comment # 2• The subject property is located along the west side of US 41. Any access to US 41 will be subject to FDOT permitting process as described in Rule 14 -96 FAC. The FDOT may require that the applicant provide mitigation for any such impacts as a condition of a permit. The FDOT Access Management standard for US 41 is access class 3 from CR 864/Rattlesnake Hammock Road (M.P. 15.834) to Joseph Lane (M.P. 23.188). The FDOT standards for access class 3 require a minimum spacing of 2,640 feet (one half of a mile) for signals and full median openings, 1,320 feet (one quarter of a mile) for directional median openings, and 660 feet (one eighth of a mile) between access points for any single parcel, at posted speed limits greater than 45 MPH. www.dot.state.fl.us 2035 Conditions Roadway From To No. of Services Project3 Project Total Volume olume Background BackgroTraffic Dist.% Traffic Traffic LOS Acceptable? CR 864/ US 41 Rattlesnake Tree Tops Dr. 6 5,660 4,473 60% 242 4,715 C Yes Hammock Rd CR US 41 Tree Tops Dr. 951 /Collier 6 5,660 3,627 35% 141 3,768 C Yes Blvd North of SR 951 Championusbi US 41 4 3,759 3,690 10% 40 3,730 D Yes Dr. J. rm reak Hour i wo -way Service Volume at the County Adopted LOS Standard. 2. The long -term planning horizon year 2035 background volumes were obtained using trends analysis based growl, rates. I The project traffic distribution percentages were obtained based on the information provided in the traffu study. FDOT Comment # 1: The Department has determined that the changes associated with the proposed amendment CP- 2013 -10 are not anticipated to adversely impact important state transportation resources or facilities FDOT Comment # 2• The subject property is located along the west side of US 41. Any access to US 41 will be subject to FDOT permitting process as described in Rule 14 -96 FAC. The FDOT may require that the applicant provide mitigation for any such impacts as a condition of a permit. The FDOT Access Management standard for US 41 is access class 3 from CR 864/Rattlesnake Hammock Road (M.P. 15.834) to Joseph Lane (M.P. 23.188). The FDOT standards for access class 3 require a minimum spacing of 2,640 feet (one half of a mile) for signals and full median openings, 1,320 feet (one quarter of a mile) for directional median openings, and 660 feet (one eighth of a mile) between access points for any single parcel, at posted speed limits greater than 45 MPH. www.dot.state.fl.us Mr. David Weeks Collier County 14 -5ESR — FDOT Comments and Recommendations - November 25, 2014 Page 5 of 5 Thank you for providing FDOT with the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed amendment. If you have any questions please free to contact me at (239) 225 -1981 or sarah.catala@dot.state.fl.us. Sincerely, Sarah Catala SIS /Growth Management Coordinator FDOT District One CC: Mr. Ray Eubanlu, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity www.dot.state.fl.us KendallMarcia From: WeeksDavid gent: Monday, November 24, 2014 4:11 PM To: SchmidtCorby Cc: BosiMichael; KendallMarcia Subject: FW: Collier County 14 -5ESR (CP- 2013 -10) [Vincentian] FYI. (alreadysa)ied into proper folder) From: Hight, Jason [mailto:Jason.Hight0MyFWC.com] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 3:45 PM To: DCPexternalagencycomments; WeeksDavid Cc: Wallace, Traci; Chabre, Jane; Poole, MaryAnn Subject: Collier County 14 -5ESR (CP- 2013 -10) Mr. Weeks: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) staff has reviewed proposed comprehensive plan amendment in accordance with Chapter 163.3184(3), Florida Statutes. We have no comments, recommendations, or objections related to fish and wildlife or listed species and their habitat to offer on this amendment. If you need any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Jane Chabre either by phone at (8 50) 410- 5367 or at FWCConservationPlanningServices aMyFWC.com. If you have specific technical questions, please contact Mary Ann Poole at (850) 488 -8783 or by email at maryann. oole(a MyFWC.com. Sincerely, Jason Hight Biological Administrator II Office of Conservation Planning Services Division of Habitat and Species Conservation 620 S. Meridian Street, MS 5B5 Tallahassee, FL 32399 -1600 (850) 228 -2055 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. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to deny the single petition within the 2013 Cycle 3 Growth Management Plan Amendment for transmittal to the Florida Department'of Economic Opportunity for review and Comments response for the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Transmittal Bearing. OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners to review the 2013 Cycle 3 amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. CONSIDERATIONS: • Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government's adopted Growth Management Plan. • The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), sitting as the "local planning agency" under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held their Transmittal hearing for the 2013 Cycle 3 petition on August 21 and September 4, 2014. • This Transmittal hearing for the 2013 Cycle 3 considers an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map. Note: Because the support material (petition only) is voluminous, and some exhibits are oversized, some of the backup documents are not included in the printed agenda package. A link has been provided to the `I' drive on page 4 of this document in order to view the document. The entire Executive Summary package, including all support materials, is available for review in the Comprehensive Planning Section of the Planning & Zoning Department office, located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, including the Comprehensive Planning Section GMP Amendments web page, via http://www.colliergov.net/index.aspx?page=2460. The entire Executive Summary package is also available in the Clerk of Courts/Minutes and Records office at 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 4t' floor, Suite 401. Petition PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10 is a petition submitted by Christopher Shucart, requesting Future Land Use Element (FLUE) amendment to re- designate the subject site from the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict. The Vincentian Subdistrict site comprises 30.7 acres and is located south and east of Southwest Boulevard, south and west of US 41 ( Tamiami Trail East), and west of the Hitching Post Mobile Home Park, in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. Among the factors analyzed are Background and Considerations, Commercial Analysis, Apartment Analysis, Residential Density and Land Use Intensities, Appropriateness of the Site, Consistency with Coastal High Hazard Area Policies within the Growth Management Plan, Traffic Capacity /Traffic Circulation Impact Study Analysis, and Public Facilities Impact. The following findings and conclusions result from the reviews and analyses of this request: • The subject site was approved in 1999 for mixed use development only— not stand -alone commercial or residential development. • More than 12,000 approved, but un -built dwelling units are proximate to this site. • The proposed Subdistrict proposed limiting residential development to market rate rental apartments only, prior to the CCPC meeting, which correlated with the submitted apartment study. Now, the petition proposes market rate residential development of any ownership type, which means the type of residential development could be the same as the already approved +12,000 units proximate to this site. • The proposed Subdistrict would allow residential density of 10 [12 prior to CCPC meeting] dwelling units per acre in a Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) location where additional dwelling units (beyond 4 DU /A) can only be attained when qualifying for a density bonus, but no qualifiers for density bonuses are met. • Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Objective 3 and related Policies limit public expenditures in the CHHA for certain public facilities needed to support new development permitted by the Future Land Use Element. Approval of the proposed density does not limit, but potentially expands, public expenditures in the CHHA. Florida Statutes provide the basis for this CCME Objective and Policies, with specific provisions found in: Section 163.3178(1), providing that local governments limit public expenditures in areas subject to destruction by natural disasters, and Section 163.3177(6)6, requiring local governments to limit public expenditures that subsidize development in coastal high hazard areas. Based on data and analysis submitted for the supply of existing and potential commercial development and demand within the market area for the subject site, the additional need for the proposed commercial uses contemplated by this amendment to serve the surrounding residential areas cannot be ascertained/has not been demonstrated. Staff found the data and analysis for the subject Growth Management Plan amendment does not support the proposed changes to re- designate the subject site from the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict. The proposed Vincentian Subdistrict is not consistent with Coastal High Hazard Area policies or Future Land Use Element provisions within the Growth Management Plan. Additional staff analysis of this petition is included in the CCPC Staff Report. FISCAL IMPACT: There are no fiscal impacts to Collier County as a result of this amendment, as this is for the Transmittal of this proposed amendment. Petition fees account for staff review time and materials, and for the cost of associated legal advertising/public notice. Fiscal impacts to the County may result from this amendment if it is adopted. The Vincentian Subdistrict proposes residential density of ten (10) dwelling units per acre in a location where only three or four dwelling units per acre of market rate housing are allowed [within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict (UCF) and the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA)]. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality. A majority vote of the Board is needed for adoption of the Resolution. [HFACJ GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of the proposed amendment by the Board for Transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity will commence the Department's thirty (30) day review process and ultimately return the amendment to the CCPC and the Board for Adoption hearings to be held early in 2015. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The site of petition PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10 contains approximately 12.66 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Wetlands on -site are isolated with no hydrological connection to wetlands or waters off -site. As part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders (e.g. site development plan), the site will be subject to all applicable local, state and federal environmental protection regulations, including applicable portions of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan, and the Land Development Code. HISTORICAL /ARCHAEOLOGICAL LUPACT: No significant archaeological or historical sites are recorded for or likely to be present within the Vincentian Subdistrict subject area, and it is unlikely that any such sites will be affected. The site is subject to the requirement for accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites as required by Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 11.1.3. If found to be present or affected, as part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders (e.g. site development plans), the site will be subject to all applicable local, State and Federal protection regulations relevant to historical and archeological sites. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: That the CCPC forward Petition CP- 2013 -10 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to deny transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC was provided with the recommendation to deny transmittal of the GMP Future Land Use Element (FLUE) amendment as proposed by the petitioner. Staff also provided the CCPC with revisions to the applicant's proposed Subdistrict text (for proper code language, format, clarity, etc.) if they chose to recommend transmittal. The CCPC heard CP- 2013 -10 during two separate hearing dates. During its initial hearing, the applicant's agent presented a revised version of Subdistrict text. That version incorporated land uses, intensity, density and other key Subdistrict provisions summarized as: allowing an entirely residential development, an entirely commercial development, or mixed use (residential and commercial) development; increasing residential density to a maximum of nearly 12 dwelling units per acre (= 360 units); basing residential density upon total site acreage; removing the residential limitation to only allow rental apartments; increasing commercial intensity to a maximum of 250,000 sq. ft. of uses as allowed to the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts; allowing for an automobile service station and other commercial uses outside the C -3 District; and retaining a minimum of 15% native vegetation on site. During its continued hearing, a different version of Subdistrict text was presented by the applicant's agent. This substantially revised version incorporated changes to: (a) limit the increased residential density to a maximum of 10 dwelling units per acre (= 307 units); (b) base residential density only upon non - commercial acreage; (c) relax the residential limitation to allow any market -rate dwellings, not just rental apartments; (d) limit the increased commercial intensity to a maximum of 250,000 sq. ft. of uses as allowed to the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, with hotel and ALF conversions reducing this maximum; and, (e) allowing for automotive fuel pumps accessory to another, larger commercial facility, and other commercial Uses outside the C -3 District. There were a number of public speakers, expressing concerns about impact upon owners of businesses and residences in the area. In particular, speakers addressed the low residential density of existing neighboring developments, and contrasted it with the high residential density proposed in the Vincentian Subdistrict. Incompatibilities were identified and ways to minimize them were discussed. Interconnection was another issue discussed, as access to the commercial development to the southeast would be beneficial, without having to use US 41 for every trip. Emphasis was put on the growing traffic on both US 41 and Southwest Boulevard, and the accompanying traffic problems. Speakers located in the Hitching Post Mobile Home Park addressed the possible collaboration on land uses adjacent to, on and through their recreation /storage area. Speakers were apprehensive of such a wide -open proposal, where no specific plans for development of the site were known or proposed. The CCPC forwarded petition CP- 2013 -10, with the petitioner's changes, to the Board with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (vote: 4/2), subject to a few clean-up changes to the text. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: Deny transmittal of petition CP- 2013 -10, as revised at the CCPC meeting, to the Department of Economic Opportunity. Prepared by: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner, and David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section, Planning and Zoning Department, Growth Management Division Attachments: 1) CP- 2013 -10 CCPC Staff Report; 2) CP- 2013 -10 Resolution with Exhibit "A" text and map 3) Application Backup Information (petition only); due to the size of the entire document it is accessible at: http: / /www.colliergov. net /ftp /AgendaOctl4l4 /GrowthMgmt/op� PL20130001767_CP- 2013- 10_Petition Applica.pdf \ \bcc.colliergov .net \data \GMD- LDS\CDES Planning Services \Comprehensive \COMP PLANNING GMP DATA \Comp Plan Amendments \2013 Cycles & Small Scale Petitions \2013 Cycle 3 - October\2013.3 BCC Transmittal\13 -10 Tmsmttl BCC exec summ DRAFT.docx Global — Vince Ilan Mixed Use Subdistrict Coder CouVI.ty STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item 9.A FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: August 21, 2014 RE: PETITION CP- 2013 -10 / PL- 2013- 0001767, Growth Management Plan Amendment (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) APPLICANTS/OWNERS/AGENTS: Global Properties of Naples, LLC Christopher Shucart, Manager 2414 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 615 Naples, Florida 34103 Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Hole Mantes, Inc. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 950 Encore Way 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34110 Naples, Florida 34103 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The ±31 acre subject site is located south and east of Southwest Boulevard, south and west of US 41 (Tamiami Trail East), and west of the Hitching Post Mobile Home Park, in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. REQUESTED ACTION: Amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Mao and Man Series of the Growth Management Plan, to introduce a new Subdistrict. This petition seeks to redesignate the subject site from the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict. (CR2013 -10 Resolution Exhibit A reflects the petitioner's proposed text changes) SURROUNDING LAND USE ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Site The subject site comprises ±31 acres, and is designated Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map and lies within the Coastal High Hazard Area. The site is zoned Vincentian PUD and is undeveloped. The PUD provides for a maximum gross density of 4 dwelling units per acre (on the Residential tract); assisted living facilities; and up to 115,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses, including all permitted C -2, Convenience Commercial district uses, community theater amusement and recreation services, a miniature golf course, bike and moped rental amusement and recreation services, auto & home supply stores, business services, drinking places, hospitals, membership organizations, museums & art galleries, paint, glass & wallpaper stores, public -1- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9A administration, non - depository credit institutions, real estate services, retail nurseries, lawn & garden supply stores, social services, used merchandise stores, the USPS, and comparable C-2 commercial uses (on the Commercial Infill tract). A detailed list of uses allowed in the PUD is provided further below. Pedestrian sidewalks are on south side of US 41, along the entire frontage of subject site, and on east side of Southwest Boulevard, also along the entire frontage of subject site. Surroundina Lands North of Subject Site: Across US 41, land is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map, and zoned Whistlers Cove PUD. Whistlers Cove is developed with multi - family residential apartment buildings. The Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project facility is situated (north) east (within Eagle Lakes Park), across US 41. A pedestrian sidewalk is on north side of US 41, along entire frontage opposite the subject site. West of Subject Site: Land is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict. An area zoned C -5, Heavy Commercial District fronts US 41 and is developed with an automobile service station immediately across Southwest Boulevard; then with a self storage facility further (north) west. The area behind the commercial development, and across Southwest Boulevard, is zoned RSF-4 and developed as Trail Acres, a single family residential subdivision. A pedestrian sidewalk is on west side of Southwest Boulevard, along entire frontage opposite the subject site. South of Subject Site: Land is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict. This area is zoned RSF-4 and developed as Trail Acres, a single family residential subdivision. East of Subject Site: Land is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, and zoned C-3 and MH. An area zoned C -3, Commercial Intermediate District fronts US 41 and is developed with a Collier County government service facility; then with a multi - tenant strip mall further (south) east, with its parking lot fronting US 41. The area behind these government service and commercial uses is the Hitching Post Mobile Home Park, with a mobile home park service building and vehicle area located directly behind the government service facility. In summary, along with the commercial development on the south side of US 41, the existing land uses in the area immediately surrounding or directly opposite the subject site are predominately residential in nature. STAFF ANALYSIS: Backaround and Considerations The Vincentian PUD was originally approved in 1985 (Ord. 85 -27) and allowed °80 residential units for the elderly" on 10 acres for density of eight (8) dwelling units per acre; °a school, church, rectory and related uses" on 10 acres; and, "institutional care facilities such as, but not limited to children's home, residence for unwed mothers, family enrichment center, special educational center, etc." on 10.7 acres (31.7 acres total). The PUD was rezoned to a new Vincentian PUD in 1991 (Ord. 91 -88), via the County's implementation of the zoning reevaluation program, to lower the residential allowance to 30 dwelling units (3 DU /A on 10 acres) (31.7 acres total). In 1999, the PUD. was again rezoned to a new Vincentian PUD (Ord. 99 -37) to allow 115,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses on 8.5 acres, residential development at four (4) dwelling units per acre on 9.8 acres, and group housing /nursing home/ALF at 0.45 FAR (30 acres total). In this latter rezone, the allowance of commercial uses along US 41 was deemed consistent with the FLUE via the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict The commercial uses allowed are: all permitted uses in C -2, Convenience Commercial zoning district; amusement and recreation services - community theater, miniature golf course, bike and moped rental amusement and recreation. services; auto & home supply stores; business services, with exceptions; drinking -2- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.A places, with exclusions; hospitals; membership organizations; miscellaneous retail; museums & art galleries; paint, glass & wallpaper stores; public administration; non - depository credit institutions; real estate; retail nurseries, lawn & garden supply stores; social services; used merchandise stores, with exceptions; U.S. Postal Service, except major distribution center, and, any other commercial use comparable with the foregoing and consistent with the C -2 district. For all three rezones, the property was owned by the [Catholic] Diocese of Venice; was designated Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map (as it is designated today); and, was in the Coastal Management Area then Coastal High Hazard Area - as it is today. It is important to note that application materials suggest the uses generally described in the present Vincentian PUD are the basis from which new /additional uses are proposed, and are not confined to the permitted uses itemized above. This approach is reported further in the Comments Specffic to the Commercial Needs Analysis section, below. Justifications (Refer to Attachment "B ", Justification and Supplemental Information) The justifications asserted in the application's supplemental information for the proposed amendment are: (1) The shape and size of the subject site allows for a variety of commercial use options; (2) The area would benefit from additional commercial development; (3) The commercial needs study identifies a need for additional commercial uses and a deficiency in lands designated for commercial development; (4) Low density residential development is not feasible in the current market; (5) The site is well situated due to its access and exposure to an arterial roadway; (6) There is a strong demand for market rate apartments; (7) The minimum density necessary to attract a developer and quality design is considered to be around 12 dwelling units per acre; (8) The amount of commercial acreage and square footage is reduced in a mixed -use development scenario; An assessment finds only some of these justifications are supported by the petition's data and analysis. Detailed analyses are provided further below. Commercial Analysis (Refer to Attachment'E', Commercial Needs Analysis) Generally, commercial development within a community can be categorized as strip commercial development, neighborhood commercial, community commercial, regional commercial, and so forth. Based on specific studies and/or demographic data for an area, such as population, income, household size, percentage of income spent on retail goods, etc., an analyst is able to estimate supportable commercial square feet for various lines of goods and services for that geography by shopping center type. Relevant to the subject petition, a community commercial needs analysis was provided in support of the requested commercial development. The firm of Fishkind and Associates, Inc., conducted a Commercial NeedsAnalysfs dated January 31, 2014 with an amended date of July 31, 2014, identifying the market conditions within a 5- minute, 10- minute and 15- minute drive time from the subject site. This analysis provided an assessment of the community commercial needs for the existing and projected population within the site's market area. Analysis identifies that there is a demand for community serving commercial within the 10- minute and 15- minute drive -time market areas. The commercial square feet demand findings from the study are as follows: -3- CP- 2013 -10 / P L20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda item 9A The community commercial square feet demand that can be supported by the area's population projected in 2019 is 920,597 sq. ft. within the 10- minute drive time and 1,438,596 sq. ft. within the 15- minute drive time. To allow for flexibility within the market, the application of a 1.25 market factor yields supportable community square feet of 1,150,747 sq. ft. within the 10- minute drive time and 1,798,211 sq. ft. within the 15- minute drive time. Staff Assessment: Based on the data submitted with this petition it cannot be ascertained whether demand exists for additional community commercial square feet at this location. Irregularities in the data presented, such as the use of dwelling unit figures where commercial analyses typically use household figures contributes to these irregularities. Employing dwelling unit figures where households are being analyzed effectively over - estimates demand as household figures would not produce the same results. Derivative over - estimations directly impact the household income calculations for establishing demand. The application of the figures used produce an unrepresentative data set and conclusions based thereon are inaccurate. [Note: A "household" is, by U.S. Census Bureau definition, an occupied dwelling unit Given the occupancytvacancy rates in Collier County, there is a significant difference in the number of dwelling units and number of households in a given geography (countywide 67.5% occupancy /32.51% vacancy, but varies by Census Tract).] Another example of inaccuracies produced by irregularities in the data submitted is the use of population numbers - where the data sets based on Census geography may have been split by the market area boundary. These are the Census sub -areas (Blocks or TAZs) used to calculate the population and households within the market area. For those sub -areas only partially within the market area, using whole - not partial - population figures over - calculates demand. The application of the whole figures used produces an unrepresentative data set and conclusions based thereon are inaccurate. One more example of data irregularity is the all- inclusive commercial center types used in the demand calculations and reflected in the Allocation tables appearing in Commercial Needs Analysis. Household incomes available for spending on different goods and services (general merchandise, food, entertainment, etc.) are distributed among all shopping center types and not allocated further specifically to community commercial shopping centers - again, over - calculating demand. The application of the "all center types" figures produces an unrepresentative data set and conclusions based thereon are inaccurate. The Commercial Needs Analysis reports a community commercial square feet supply of 2,437,398 sq, ft described as existing or potential community commercial floor area in the market area. Staff Assessment: Many of the community shopping centers listed in the Commercial Needs Analysis contain developed outparcels which would seem to be integral components of the community shopping center, yet are excluded. Staff finds an additional 318,540 sq. ft. for an estimated total of 2,755,938 community commercial development (comprised of the outparcels, omitted square feet at existing centers - gardens centers at four different community centers, and differences in square foot allocations for some community centers). See attached staff worksheet The data and analysis submitted to support the request addresses community commercial uses only - but proposed Subdistrict provisions also allow neighborhood commercial development, regional commercial development [including several high intensity C -5, Heavy Commercial uses], all office development, and hoteVmotel uses. Staff Assessment: Application materials over - estimate demand for, and under - estimate supply of, community commercial development, and do not provide the supply /demand data & analysis for other -4- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vlncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.A commercial categories. Without such support, it cannot be ascertained that demand exists at this location for additional neighborhood commercial square feet beyond the square feet already approved in the PUD, or community and regional commercial square That newly proposed. Apartment Analysis (Refer to Attachment "D ", Rental Apartment Survey) The firm of Fishkind and Associates, Inc., conducted a Rental Apartment Survey dated March 11, 2014 with an amended date of July 31, 2014, identifying the supply and demand trends and associated pricing of the rental apartment market in the County. This analysis surveyed more than forty apartment complexes including 100 apartments or more and assessed the housing needs for [market rate] rental apartment, and found the following: • Increasing Average Sizes and Rental Rates • An Increasing Countywide Occupancy Rate: From 88% in 2010 to 97% in 2013 • A Countywide Average Size: z 20 acres • A Countywide Average Density. from z 11 units/acre to >- 13 unitstac re • A Countywide Average Unit Count: a 231 units The data and analysis submitted to support the request addresses a specific residential type - rental apartments - and proposed Subdistrict provisions allow only rental apartments. Application materials also review comparable rental condominiums, but do not provide the demand/supply data & analysis for fee simple condominiums, single - family residences or other residential types. Notwithstanding these absences, the demand for market rate apartments can be ascertained. It is important to note that virtually all of the apartment complexes surveyed are located outside the Coastal High Hazard Area, where such densities and unit numbers are appropriate and can be attained. The County's limitations on density are detailed in the Consistency with Coastal High Hazard Area Policies section below. Residential Density and Land Use Intensities The FLUE allows density in the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, which lies within the CHHA, to exceed 4 dwelling units per acre only for developments qualifying for density bonuses by providing affordable housing. The Subdistrict proposes residential density of nearly 12 dwelling units per acre in a location where 3 dwelling units per acre are allowed [4 dwelling units per acre using the conversion of commercial zoning density bonus, where applicable, or up to an additional 8 dwelling units per acre for affordable workforce housing density bonus] - while no qualifiers for density bonuses are being proposed or met. The Vincentian property presently allows for 4 dwelling units per acre based on the residential component acreage for a maximum of 39 dwelling units. Proposed Subdistrict provisions base density on the entire acreage for a maximum of 360 dwelling units. The amount of residential units is not reduced proportionally with any reduction of acreage devoted to commercial development. By way of comparison, the Whistler's Cove PUD meets affordable housing qualifiers for density bonuses and is approved for a density of 10 dwelling units per acre. Application materials present a basis/rationale for allowing residential density to be calculated based upon total property acreage as an opportunity to maximize the site's development potential - without the density bonus qualifiers met by comparable developments. -5- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global — Vincentian Mixed use subdistrict Appropriateness of the Site Agenda Item 9.A The Mixed Use Activity Center (MUAC) Subdistrict allows the full array of commercial uses (C-1 thru C -5 Districts) and residential density at a maximum of 16 dwelling units per acre, except within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict (max. of 4 DU /A) and Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (max. of 1.5 DU /A, or 2.5 dwelling units per acre utilizing the transfer of development rights). There are 19 MUACs; each is located at the intersection of two major roads, and they are spaced no closer than two (2) miles apart as measured at intersection midpoints. FLUE Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict provisions allow for establishment of new Activity Centers subject to the following criteria: • Site must be situated at the intersection of two arterial roads or one arterial and one collector road - as identified in the Transportation Element; Site must be located no closer than two (2) miles from another MUAC; and, Market justification must be demonstrated. This amendment allows the option of developing the site with commercial uses as allowed in the C -1 through C -5 zoning districts, with some exclusions, or residential development at 11.74 dwelling units per acre. Essentially, this Subdistrict allows the same commercial development use intensity as the MUAC, and residential development at a higher density than a MUAC within the Urban Coastal Fringe - albeit on 30.6 acres whereas MUAC quadrants were originally 40 acres each (now MUAC quadrants vary from less than 10 acres to roughly 250 acres). No other subdistrict besides MUAC allows the commercial use intensity proposed by this Subdistrict, and few others allow the residential density proposed or the density calculation based on total site acreage within a mixed use project. The subject site does not meet the first two criteria for establishing a new Activity Center and may not meet the third criterion. Community Desires (Refer to Attachment "C", Vision for the East Trail Corridor, and NIM comments toward the end of this Report.) Staff understands that this Vision document was not prepared at BCC direction nor presented to and accepted by the BCC. Nonetheless, staff offers the following observations: • General Urban areas in [East Trail Corridor] Segment 1 and Segment 2 are envisioned to be primarily low to medium density residential in nature but should provide opportunities for mixed use developments and live -work units, with quality landscaping and public parks, squares and greens. The present Vincentian PUD satisfies this vision (at a density of 4 dwelling units per acre), while the proposed Subdistrict would not (with a density of more than 11 dwelling units per acre). • The vision for [East Trail Corridor] Segment 2 does not seek more hotels or other non - community commercial uses, while the proposed Subdistrict allows hotels [and many of these other non - community commercial uses]. These inconsistencies between the proposed Subdistrict text and the Vision document do not lend support to the request. People attending the Neighborhood information Meeting raised questions and concerns related to site design and land uses. Find more information in the NIM Synopsis below. Consistency with Coastal High Hazard Area Policies within the Growth Management Plan As previously noted, the subject site lies within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict (UCF) and the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA). The CHHA encompasses all of the UCF, some lands north of US 41 East, and some lands north of the City of Naples (mostly west of US 41). The UCF Subdistrict reads as follows: 'The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Conservation designated area (primarily located to the south of the Subdistrict) and the remainder of the Urban designated area (primarily located to the north of the Subdistrict). The Subdistrict -6= CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincenban Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.A comprises those Urban areas south of US 41, generally east of the City of Naples, and generally west of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral Lands, but excludes Section 13, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, and comprises approximately 11,354 acres and 10% of the Urban Mixed Use District. The entire Subdistrict is located seaward of the Coastal High Hazard Area Boundary. In order to facilitate hurricane evacuation and to protect the adjacent environmentally sensitive Conservation designated area, residential densities within the Subdistrict shall not exceed a maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre, except as allowed in the Density Rating System to exceed 4 units per acre through provision of Affordable Housing and Transfers of Development Rights, and except as allowed by certain FLUE Policies under Objective 5, and except as provided in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. New rezones to permit mobile home development within this Subdistrict are prohibited. Rezones are recommended to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development." The CHHA reads as follows: "Policy 12.2.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) defines the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA). The CHHA boundary is generally depicted on the Future Land Use Map and is more precisely shown in the Future Land Use Map series; all lands lying seaward of that boundary are within the CHHA. New rezones to pemtiit mobile home development shall not be allowed within the CHHA. The Capital Improvement Element and Conservation and Coastal Management Element both contain policies pertaining to the expenditure of public funds for public facilities within the CHHA." Historically, the State has discouraged Increasing density within the CHHA (so as to direct population concentration away from known or predicted coastal high hazards and not to negatively affect hurricane evacuation times). For the most part, so has the County. Only two density bonuses are applicable in the CHHA - affordable - workforce housing, and conversion of commercial zoning [that has been deemed consistent by policy]; other density bonuses are not applicable within the CHHA. By way of example, the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (depicted on the FLUM and generally encompassing lands along Davis Blvd./US 41 East/Airport- Pulling Rd./Bayshore Dr.), now entirely within the CHHA, promotes redevelopment, especially of mixed use projects. When the County drafted the GMP amendment to create this Overlay in 2000, it included a traditional density bonus as an incentive (ask for density increase via rezoning process) which would have allowed an overall increase of density in the CHHA. The State objected. The County responded by revising the amendment to establish a density pool derived from previously entitled density from the Naples Botanical Gardens site (the density allowed by the zoning of that site prior to its rezoning to PUD); this was acceptable to the State. This density pool provides for increased density of projects within the Overlay via a reallocation of density, not a creation of new density, thus the overall density within the CHHA is not increased. For most rezones within the UCF, density is limited to a maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre, and typically just 3 dwelling units per acre due to the density reduction factor of minus 1 dwelling units per acre for lying within the CHHA. The primary exception to 3 or 4 dwelling units per acre is for provision of affordable- workforce housing, a density bonus of up to 8 dwelling units per acre. The conversion of commercial zoning bonus is applicable in the UCF only to the extent of increasing density back to the cap of 4 dwelling units per acre [4 DU /A (base density) minus 1 DU /A (CHHA reduction) = 3 DU /A; +1 DU /A (conversion of commercial zoning bonus) = 4 DU /A maximum eligible density for market rate housing]. Outside of the UCF but still within the CHHA, the density cap is 16 dwelling units per acre, not 4 dwelling units per acre [4 DU /A (base density) minus 1 DU /A (CHHA reduction) = 3 DU /A; +16 DU /A (conversion of commercial zoning bonus) = 16 DU /A maximum eligible density for market rate housing]. Under the FLUE's density rating system, density is based upon the total site acreage less commercial and industrial acreage, and less any acreage for uses with a residential density equivalency established in the LDC; and, eligible density is not an entitlement. For the subject site, the maximum eligible density is 3 dwelling units per acre for market rate housing or 11 dwelling units per acre for -7- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Yrncentlan Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda item 9.A affordable- workforce housing (30 acres total minus 8.5 acres commercial tract = 21.5 acres x 3 DU /A = 65 DUs, or, x 11 DU /A = 237 DUs). Note: the existing PUD allows 4 dwelling units per acre, but this density is based solely on the acreage of the residential tracts (9.8 acres x 4 DU /A = 39 DUs). Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 12.1.2 reads as follows: "Land use plan amendments in the Category 1 hurricane vulnerability zone shall only be considered if such increases in densities provide appropriate mitigation to reduce the impacts of hurricane evacuation times.' The applicant responds that consistency is met by agreeing to provide, as requested by the Bureau of Emergency Services Director, a portable generator for use at emergency shelters. Hurricane Mitiaation Requirements Collier County Emergency Management has reviewed the PUD and the associated hurricane mitigation needs to aid in evacuation refuge efforts for this site. Staff has determined that the best mitigation effort for this PUD would be for an off -site nearby public - shelter as is typically the shelter of last- resort These shelter(s) are determined and announced as the storm approaches Collier County based on storm's intensity, surge model, direction of travel, time of day and day of week impact among others factors. Collier County is therefore requiring the developer to provide a new towable, quiet running, extended run-time towable 45kW (minimum -kW) generator per Emergency Management's specifications. The towable generator will be a one -time developer contribution based on the number of units currently permitted to meet the hurricane mitigation impact for evacuation concerns. The - generator specifications must be pre- approved by the Department of Emergency Management as the County has certain interoperable standards and required safety options. The towable generator allows for additional evacuee capacities at various shelter(s) that can be used based on the storm factors referenced above. [Dan E. Summers, Director Department of Emergency Management] Environmental Imoacts Passarella and Associates submitted an environmental report, dated October 2013. Collier County Department of Natural Resources personnel reviewed this petition and provided the following analysis: The subject site is an undeveloped 30.68 acre parcel located on the south side of US 41 in the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict. Surrounding properties are developed with residential and commercial uses, with no preserves or undeveloped land containing native vegetation abutting the subject site. The majority of the subject site is forested with native vegetation, mainly slash pine and pine/cypress vegetative communities. Exotic vegetation occupies most of the site, with 50 to 100 percent coverage with exotic vegetation. Also on -site are approximately 12.66 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Wetlands on -site are isolated with no hydrological connection to wetlands or waters off -site. Listed species surveys were conducted on the subject site on March 6, 2012 and April 7, 1998 by the environmental consultant for the petitioner. No listed wildlife species or signs of listed wildlife species were observed on the property. A literature search by the environmental consultant found no documented occurrences of listed wildlife species on the property and the property not to be located in any state or federal agency designated habitat areas for listed wildlife species. A letter from the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources indicates no significant archaeological of historical sites recorded for or likely to be present within the subject area. The letter also states that because of the property location and/or nature it is unlikely that any such sites will be affected. The site Is subject to the requirement for accidental discovery of archaeological or historical -8- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.A sites as required by Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 11.1.3. The Provision is also included in Subsection 2.03.07 E of the Land Development Code (LDC). The subject site is not located within any County well field protection zones. The proposed GMP amendment allows for the off -site retention of all the native vegetation required to be retained on the subject property. Much of the subject site appears to already qualify for the off -site retention of native vegetation provision in the LDC, which allows for preserves with 75 . percent or more coverage with exotic vegetation to be satisfied off - site. To insure the entire preserve requirement can be satisfied off -site, an exemption to the restrictions in the LDC provision has been included in the GMP amendment. Requests for deviations to the native vegetation retention requirements in the GMP and LDC are allowed pursuant to Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policies 6. 1.1 (10 & 13). The CCME Policies are as follows. Policy 6.1.1 (10) CCME The County shall adopt land development regulations that allow for a process whereby a property owner may submit a petition requesting that all or a portion of the native vegetation preservation retention requirement to be satisfied by a monetary payment, land donation that contains native vegetative communities equal to or of a higher priority as described in Policy 6.1.1 (4) than the land being impacted, or other appropriate method of compensation to an acceptable land acquisition program, as required by the land development regulations. The monetary payment shall be used to purchase and manage native vegetative communities off -site. The land development regulations shall provide criteria to determine when this alternative will be considered. The criteria will be based upon the following provisions: a. The amount, type, rarity and quality of the native vegetation on site; b. The presence of conservation lands adjoining the site; c. The presence of listed species and consideration of Federal and State agency technical assistance; d. The type of land use proposed, such as, but not limited to, affordable housing; e. The size of the preserve required to remain on site is too small to ensure that the preserve can remain functional; and f. Right of Way acquisitions for all purposes necessary for roadway construction, including ancillary drainage facilities, and including utilities within the right of way acquisition area. The land development regulations shall include a methodology to establish the monetary value, land donation, or other appropriate method of compensation to ensure that native vegetative communities not preserved on -site will be preserved and appropriately managed off -site. Policy 6.1.1 (13) CCME The County may grant a deviation to the native vegetation retention requirements of sub - sections 2, 4, 5, 10, and 12 of this Policy, and shall adopt land development regulations to set forth the process for obtaining a deviation. The regulations shall allow for the granting at a deviation rt the appropriate review board after a public hearing, and for the granting of a deviation administratively. The County shall consider the amount and type of native vegetation and the presence of listed species in determining whether the granting of a deviation requires a public hearing, or may be granted administratively. The County may grant a deviation if. a. County, Federal or State agencies require that site improvements be located in areas which result in an inability to meet the provisions of this Policy, or -9- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Yncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9A b. On or off -site environmental conditions are such that the application of one or more provisions of this Policy is not possible or will result In a preserve area of lesser quality, or c. The strict adherence to these provisions will not allow for the implementation of other Plan policies that encourage beneficial land uses. Given the above, staff supports the request to allow for off -site retention of native vegetation. Pursuant to Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2 -1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances, the project requires review by the [CCPC acting in their capacity as the] Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). A deviation to the provisions in the LDC on when native vegetation can be satisfied off -site is being requested through the GMP amendment. The applicable provision from Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2 -1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances is provided below. (m) Scope of land development project reviews. The EAC shall review the following: (1) Any PUD that requests a deviation from environmental standards of the LDC or any identified development order that requests a deviation from the provisions in GMP CCME Policy 6.1.1 (13). [Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist Surface Water & Environmental Planning Section] Historical and Archaeological Impacts The historical and archaeological characteristics inherent to the subject site are addressed in application materials. In a letter dated May 18, 1998 the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources writes, °a review of the Florida Site File indicates no significant archaeological or historical sites are recorded for or likely to be present within the subject area, and that "it is unlikely that any such sites will be affected." Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Impact Study Analysis Including Transportation Element Consistency Determination Trebilcock Consulting Solutions submitted a Traffic Impact Study (TIS), dated October 18, 2013. The substantive review of this document was done by the Transportation Planning Section, and their review comments are provided below. The petition indicates that [the subject site] is intended to have a corporate headquarters based, mixed -use project. The new Subdistrict however, allows for all commercial, all residential, or mixed - use (commercial and residential) development. The TiS analyzes it as a shopping center within a single -use scenario and within a mixed -use scenario. Additional uses that exceed the trip generation limits of the shopping center use have been proposed (i.e. gas station). The land uses proposed are reconciled with the analysis in the TIS, reviewing the trip generation characteristics of each potential use. The most impactful combination of trip generators has been selected at the maximized square footage they could achieve, and a trip generation "cap" has been developed that will become a condition of approval [in the companion PUD]. The proposal may be considered consistent with the Transportation Element of the GMP by way of implementing this Trip Generation Cap at the zoning phase as a mitigation strategy to limit their impacts (which meets Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element). Implementing the Trip Generation Cap ensures the TIS will be consistent with the categorized land uses, and the PUD and FLUM will be consistent with one another. [John Podczerwinsky, Project Manager Transportation Planning Section] -10- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Yncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Public Facilities Impact Agenda ftem 9A Development within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) is addressed in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME). CCME Objective 3 and related Policies limit public expenditures in the CHHA for certain public facilities needed to support new development permitted by the Future Land Use Element. Application materials present the public facilities needed to support the Vncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict as follows: • Water: The subject site will be served by Collier County Water District potable water treatment and distribution system. Depending upon the development scenario (all commercial, all residential, or mixed -use development), the estimated demand for potable water for the project ranges from 28,000 to 42,000 gallons per day [Peak demand: from 78 to 117 gallons per minute]. • Wastewater: The subject site will be served by the Collier County Sewer District wastewater collection and treatment system. Depending upon the development scenario, the estimated demand for wastewater for the project ranges from 25,000 to 38,000 gallons per day [Peak demand: from 69 to 106 gallons per minute]. • Solid Waste Disposal: The service provider is Collier County Solid Waste Management. The Annual Update and Inventory on Public Facilities (AUIR) indicates the County has sufficient landfill capacity up to the year 2065 for the required lined cell capacity. • Stormwater Management: Future development is expected to comply with the SFWMD and/or Collier County rules and regulations that assure controlled accommodation of stormwater events by both on -site and off -site improvements. • Paris and Recreational Facilities: There are no anticipated adverse impacts to parts facilities from the proposed development. • Schools: There are no anticipated adverse impacts to public school facilities from the proposed development. • Emergency Medical and Fire Protection Services: The subject site is located within the Golden Gate Fire District. The proposed increases of commercial intensity and floor area and increases of residential density and dwelling units are anticipated to have minimal impacts on these safety services. [Kris Van Lengen, Principal Project Manager Public (Jt INes Planning & Project Management Dept.] NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by -LDC Section 10.03.05 F was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on Thursday, July 17, 201, 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County South Regional Library, Meeting Rm. "B ", located at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples. Approximately 16 people other than the application team and County staff attended - and heard the following information: The applicant's agent provided a full description of the proposed GMP amendment to the group, including that the amendment has a companion petition to amend the PUD. Together they will allow for flexibility in design, in terms of allowing a mixture of uses. The applicant desires any residential development to be higher density at market rate, and indicated a commitment to preclude affordable housing. People voiced their concerns regarding affordable housing and supported the applicant's commitment to develop only market rate housing. People voiced their concerns regarding storm events and water run -off, and the distances water management facilities, buffer plantings and berms would be to their properties. They also discussed -11- CP- 2013 -101 PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentlan Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.A interconnection with the Hitching Post Plaza, and suggested that these features [indicated above] be designed to not obstruct interconnection and afford the ability to create access. Land uses on both side of this property boundary would need to be configured or reconfigured to keep this option open - and both the applicant and the speakers were encouraged to pursue this further. People voiced their concerns about the height limitations on buildings for the variety of different uses allowed, such as the multi- family residential buildings, senior living facilities, hotels, and so forth. The applicant's agent described their design as one providing "good" separation and substantial landscape buffers. Aside from the concerns summarized above no one in attendance expressed opposition to the proposed GMP amendment. The meeting was completed by 6:30 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The following findings and conclusions result from the reviews and analyses of this request: • The subject site was approved in 1999 for mixed use development only - not stand -alone commercial or residential development. The approved density of 4 dwelling units per acre based only upon PUD residential tracts acreage yields less density than allowed by the FLUE (39 vs. 65 DUs). • More than 12,000 approved but un -built dwelling units are proximate to this site, with application materials explaining why this existing inventory cannot be used to meet the demand for more apartments. • The proposed Subdistrict limits residential development to market rate apartments only. •. Subdistrict allows residential density of nearly 12 dwelling units per acre in a Coastal High Hazard Area location where additional dwelling units (beyond 4 DU /A) can only be attained when qualifying for an affordable workforce housing density bonus, but no qualifiers for density bonuses are met. • The amount of residential units in mixed use developments are typically reduced proportionally with the amount of acreage devoted to commercial development, but this Subdistrict bases residential density on the entire acreage allowing for 360 dwelling units. • To represent shopping practices in typical market analyses, a declining household percentage is applied to the three drive times, the farther from the subject site the market area extends. • . Significant impacts to public facilities, as defined in the Capital Improvement Element, with respect to Transportation, Potable Water Supply, Wastewater Treatment, Stormwater Management and Solid Waste Disposal facilities will not result from this amendment. • Based on data and analysis submitted for the supply of existing and potential commercial development and demand within the market area for the subject site, the additional need for the proposed commercial uses contemplated by this amendment to serve the surrounding residential areas cannot be ascertained /has not been demonstrated. • Adverse environmental impacts will not result from this amendment. Staff finds that the data and analysis for the subject Growth Management Plan amendment does not support the proposed changes to introduce a new Subdistrict by redesignating the subject site from the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict. -12- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - I incentian Mixed Use Subdistrict LEGAL_ CONSIDERATIONS: Agenda Item 9.A This Staff Report has been reviewed by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP- 2013 -10, as submitted, to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. IF the Planning Commission chooses to recommend transmittal as proposed by petitioner, staff recommends the following revisions to the applicants proposed Subdistrict text (for proper code language, format, clarity, etc. only - not Intended to change allowable uses, intensities, development standards or other items of substance): Note: Words underlined are added - as proposed by petitioner; words double underiined are added, words are deleted - as proposed by staff. Insert on Page 46 of the Future Land Use Element: 17. Vncentian Mixed - Use Subdistrict The dMUmMent of thil Subdistrict sh 11 ITIDIM Mdh the f0110MA I a. b. 4;ks fakwAng4mer, ape [are, A�.e " Prohibit d �aP 1. Pawn shoos (5932} 2. Adult book stores adult video rental or sales or any other use that is defined as a -sexuallv oriented business" in the Collier County Code of Laws 26-151 at seg., 3. Animal specialty services except veterinary (0752)• except outside kenneling and dog -grooming are permitted 4. Automatic merchandisina machine operators (5962) 5. Correctional institutions (9223) 6. Crematories (7261 7. Farm product raw materials (5153 -5159) 8. Fishing, commercial (0912 -0919) -13- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincendan Mixed Use Subdistrict 9. Fuel dealers (5983- 5989). 10. Homeless shelters and soup kitchens. 11. Installation or erection of building equipment contractors (1796). 12. Local and suburban passenger transportation (4131 - 4173). 13. Marinas (4493 & 4499) . 14. Motor vehicle dealers, used only (5521). 15. Agenda Item 9.A 16. Power laundries, family and commercial (7211) and 17. Transfer stations (4212). c. Additional use restrictions and intensU standards: 1. Commercial usAS Shall Wilt hA limitAd to a mavimiar d. 2. 3. 4. 5. zoning gis>'ricts_ Under any of the development scenarios above the average weekday Pm Peak hour entering/exitina trip generation shall not exceed 1 107 total trios 6. A recreational site for the use of the adjacent RV or mobile home Parks may be developed on a maximum of 3 acres. The recreational site may include facilities such as a Pool clubhouse and tennis courts. Site Development: 1. Rezoning of this Subdistrict is encoumned to he in the fnrm of a PI In Piannnri i init 2. 3. The subiect site will be developed with a common architectural and IandscaPing theme to be submitted with 814ke4gm-9 the first Site Development Plan The unified planned development submitted at time of the first Site Development Plan will reflect, to the maximum extent feasible, intemal mrinecWtt r through shared parking and cross -access agreements. -14- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - vncentian M6ced Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.A 4 if the subm . ni0. - ..:.iw...ai_I ..1 10. ..i •tl — •.i F 60 88F88RI 99814 sigmas. --9F1 goose eke!! be-30.88poe" 5. 4. Pedestrian connections are encouraged both with perimeter Properties where feasible and between internal bulldinos. 6. 5, Building height shall be permitted to a maximum of 50 feet zoned and 57 feet actual 7. & The building setback from any of the Subdistrict boundaries shall be 50% of the building height, but not less than 25 feet. ` A. At the time as tscermErie t :_ she'! iiaf•a e sasiea@Aai w�i uselk a 10.8. Residential AAv FesodaMW development shall be limited to develseed=as a market -rate R. rental apartment Proied __- _ es0eni= 6 As a second alternative: IF the Planning Commission chooses to recommend transmittal - but without the residential component and limiting commercial uses to non - regional commercial development - staff recommends the following revisions to the applicant's proposed Subdistrict text (for proper code language, format, clarity, etc. AND to eliminate the residential component, attempt to limit commercial to non - regional uses, and limit building floor area): Note: Words underlined are added - as proposed by petitioner, words dQuble underiined are added, words double slmek threugh are deleted - as proposed by staff. Insert on Page 4011 of the Future Land Use. Element: Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infiil Commercial Subdistrict 6. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Residential Moved Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Moved -Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict -15- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties Creating the Vncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentien Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9A 11. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict 13. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 14. Livingston/Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 15. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 16. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict B. URBAN - COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 1. Mixed Use AdMty Center Subdistrict 2. Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** Text Break 11. Orange Blossom/Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict 12, Vncentian Commercial S gxftstri Insert on Page 26 of the Future Land Use Element: 12. Commercial . uses subject to criteria Identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston/Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict ViReeRfieR MW" Ise- SirHdla&Ook and, in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Livingston/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road/Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict; Orange Blossom/Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict, Vincentian Commercial Subdistrict, in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay; and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. Insert on Page 46 of the Future Land Use Element: 17. Vmcentian Commercial a Subdistrict st _ - - - - -- zo m " - - - - o •' i i••�ll: i • !i •• a ,1- _•11•l ,1111 I- • •lll• - 1 t 1 IIL -.1.1 -1• r..1•. • - - -- - -- .• iC- • o - _ - • �• • . - - _ . • • r - 7 z• 1 1 d I _- ��._Iti .1• x••11 _I •• _ -I.- jl y • •a • .••• ►1 1 •.•t -Uh -16- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Yncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Yncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict 1§6414 bv Fwki OW as kries, excent as prohibited listed. low. b. Prohibited uses: Agenda Item 9.A c. Additional use restrictions and intensity standards: 4. Z Under any of the development scenarios above the average weekday om peak hour entednglexiting trip generation shall not exceed 1.107 total trips. - 17 - CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentian Nfuced Use Subdistrict S. Agenda Item 9.A 6. 1 A recreational site for the use of the adjacent RV or mobile home parks may be developed on a maximum of 3 acres. The recreational site may include facilities such as a pool. clubhouse, and tennis courts. d. Site Development: 1. 2. The subiect site will be developed with a common architectural and landscaping theme, to be submitted WM et- ihe4W%�.W the first Site Development Plan. 3. The unified planned development submitted at time of the first Site Development Plan will reflect to the maximum extent feasible internal connectivity through shared parking and cross- access agreements. 5. 4. Pedestrian connections are encouraged, both with perimeter properties, where feasible, and between internal buildings. 6. 1 Building height shall be permitted to a maximum of 50 feet zoned and 57 feet actual. 7. C The building setback from any of the Subdistrict boundaries shall be 50% of the building height. but not less than 25 feet. 8 woof 9. Z At the time of Site Development, the required on -site vegetation retention may be satisfied off -site, pursuant to Policy 6.1.1 (13) of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element taken to the Board of County Commissioners for acceptance. However, a hearing before the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee will not be required Insert on Page 141 of the Future Land Use Element: Urban Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Map Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map -18- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties Creating the vncentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Global - Vincentlan Mixed Use Subdistrict Livingston/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Livingston Road/Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Orange Blossom/Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict Livingston Road/Veteran's Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict Map Coastal High Hazard Area Map Coastal High Hazard Area Comparison Map Vincentlan Commercial Ayes Subdistrict Mao -19- CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties. Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.A Global - Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict PREPARED BY: Agenda Item 9A l DATE: Am 14 Corby Schmidfj AICP, Principat Planner Comprehensiv Planning Section, Planning And Zoning Department REVIEWED B.1 t} WIVI..._.._ __' _ DATE: David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Plan Manager Comprehensive Planning Section, Planning And Zoning Department REVIEWED BY: �J DATE: Mike Bosi, AICP, Director, Planning And Zoning Department APPRO BY: DATE: salanguida, finis rat Growth Management Division PETITION NO.: CP- 2013 -10 / PL- 2013 - 0001767 Staff Report for the August 21, 2014, CCPC Meeting. c�,- — 12, — ) if NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the October 14, 2014, BCC Meeting. CP- 2013 -10 / PL20130001767 2013 -10, Global Properties: Creating the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict com9 s.f. comparison s.f. - staff s.f. - netitinnar f iffaranra Existing Community Commercial - Smile 859,358 807,449 51,909 Potential Community Commercial - 5 mile 1 497,4671 550,735 1 (53,268) bum S mne 1,356,BZ5 1,358,184 (1,359) Existing Community Commercial -10 mile 924,985 852,558 1 72,427 Potential Community Commercial -10 mile 1 347,500 327,0001 20,500 auiw iu mne 1,Z7Z,485 1,179,558 92,927 Existing Community Commercial - 15 mile 422,773 336,564 1 86,209 Potential Community Commercial -15 mile 1 2,333,165 2,100,8341 232,331 ,juiw >_S mue 2,755,938 2,437,398 318,540 SUM Marco 110,532 110,596 (64) SUM of Existing & Potential Community Commercial 1 5,495,7801 5,085,7361 410,044 conclusion: staff estimates a total of 410,044 s.f. more community commercial development than petitioner U. mu..,...... 1 ....IGMD•LDSICDESP.— ,S—a...1 — ...... — =MP PLANNING GMPDATA \C.. R..Am...m.,,..1 20130, a..& S—.i S.. ..P,.....12013C,..3- 0..... —ACP- 2013 -10, V--,.,. M.. U.. —',. -- 113 -10 S: Re......m.c... — /A,.,. 2014 RESOLUTION NO. 14- 2 31 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, BY ESTABLISHING THE VINCENTIAN MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT IN THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL ONLY, COMMERCIAL ONLY OR MIXED USE PROJECT AT THE FOLLOWING DENSITYANTENSITY: UP TO 10 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR A MAXIMUM OF 307 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES, A 150 ROOM HOTEL AT A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF .60 AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY AT A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF .60. THE COMMERCIAL USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT ARE ALL PERMITTED USES AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE C-1 GENERAL OFFICE THROUGH C -3 COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WITH CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT; AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS .LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND US 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST) IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 31 ± ACRES. [PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10) WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Petitioner, Robert J. Mulhere FAICP of Hole Montes, Inc. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, PA on behalf of Global Properties, LLC, has initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map Series; and jl4 -CMP -0093 1/1129173/1) 58 - Rev. 10/31/14 Words underlined are additions; Words stm4 6�reagh are deletions * ** * ** * ** * ** are a break in text . WHEREAS, on August 21, 2014 and September 4, 2014, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, on October 28, 2014, the Board of County Commissioners, at a public hearing, approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing, to Collier County its comments within said thirty (30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty (180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. -ra THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion., second and majority vote this a40 day of n c+a bp,(- , 2014. ATTEST: BOARD OF C UNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERIC. COLLIER C TY�JORIDA y ?' .A i •A t BY: , t r = TOM HENNING, Chairman Attest as an. signature. only, [14 -CMP- 00931/1129173/1] 58 —Rev. 10/31/14 Words underlined are additions; Words str-uele through are deletions * ** * ** * ** * ** are a break in text Approved I �s to Bonn And legality. kil— --k-- Scott A. Stone Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit "A" — text and maps CM14-CI MP- 0093l\2 [14 -CMP- 00931/1129173/]] 58 — Rev. 10/31/14 Words underlined are additions; Words ,.a...,aj are deletions * ** * ** * ** * ** are a break in text PL20130001767 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT CP-2013-10 (Page 101 Policy 1-1: The URBAN Future Land. Use Designation shelf include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban, Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict S. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict & IUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7 Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8 Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson. Creek Mixed-Use Subdistrict 11. Research and Technology. Park, Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed-Use Subdistrict 13- Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 14. Livingstop /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 15. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 16. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict 17- Viric(antian Mixed Use Subdistrict "** **** **** **** *+** **-* **.Ik + +•A• + 3 11 * A -16 -.-+* *.A ** [Page 26] 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban -- Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Stibdistrict, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict. Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Cornmerc.-Jal Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Henderson Creek Fixed Use Subdistrict, LivingstorilRadio Road Commercial Infil' Subdistrict. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Sub d istrict,_Vincen tip, n Mixed Use Subdistrict; and, in the Urban Comm.ercial District., Mixed Use A ,tivity Center Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict. Livingston/Pine, Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road!Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road Cornmercial Infill Subdistrict. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial infill 'Subdistrict, GoodleftelPirie Ridge Commercial 1pfill Subdistncl: Orange Blossorn./Airpoyt Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict in the BayshorelGat4way Triangle Redd-welopment Overlay, and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. *•r ** * +•* **** * * *k **** *+*+ -. Words underlined are added: words are deleted. Row of as�terisks t""" denotes brp.q-k it teyt -F! Outobe, ?014 C"C I ra!,srr.;ttaj\/ersjur. PL20130001767 17. Vincentian (Mixed Use Subdistrict CP- 2013 -10 (Page 46] This Subdistrict co0ains approximately 30.63 acres is located on the south west side of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and is depicted on the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow for neighborhood, community, and regional commercial development: residential development; and mixed use (commercial and residential) development. The Subdistrict is intended to include commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. In order to comply with Policy 1.10 of the Housing Element of the Growth Management Plan residential development shall be limited to market -rate units so as to avoid the concentration of affordable housing in one location in the County. The prooerty may bo developed entirely as commercial, entirely as residential or as a mixture of residential and commercial uses The development of this Subdistrict shall comply with the following restrictions, limitations and standards: a. Allowable uses: The maximum intensity of commercial uses shall be limited to those allowed in the C -3 zoning district, both by right and by conditional use as listed in `he Collier County Land Development Code in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict. Additionally, the follovring uses are. allowed: Department store 5311)" 2 Hotel 70( 1 I , hotel one 3. Dental laboratories (8072), and Nursing and personal care facilities (8051) b. Additional use restrictions and intensity standards: 1. Commercial uses shall be limited to a maximum of 250.000 square teet of gross floor area jGFA) grid one hotel (maximum FAR 0.6 and a maximum of_ 150 rooms), and an assisted living facility maximum FAR fl 6). Additionally, for eve rr,`arre of hoto Ur_ALF. the mammum allowable commercial GIZA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet_ 2. Residential development shall be limited to a maximum density of 7.3 unite per acre calculated on the gross acreage of the property exclusive of any commercial portions for a maximum cf L24 multi family {welling units, 3 If the proiect ig developed as mixed use residential and commercial uses) the residential density allowance is as provided for in Number 22. above, and the commercial portion of the pro ect shall not exceed 10 acres in size and a maximum of 128.000 square feet of GFA of commercial uses, and a 150 -room hotel not to exceed 0.6 FAR_ and an Assi�tp_ri 1 ivinry i= nr_ilifV at a 0.6 FAIR Additionally, for every acre of hotel or ALP, the maximum allo able commercial GFA shall be reduced by M000 square feet. A A stand -alone automobile service station (i.e. _retail tuel sales in coniunCtion with a convenience store) is prohibited' hnwever accessory fuel pumps in association with a rocery store Or membership warehflus _type facility greater than _i5�ire feet of GFA are allowed. 5. A recreational site for the use of the adiacent RV or mobile home parks developed on a maximum of 3 acres. The recreational site may include facilities such as a pool, ciubhouse, and tennis courts Words underlined are added; wards strrsi 4 arc de',,A.d. low of aster-sks (**** **** * +et) denote-, break {n text ,:8 OlOtPl 20 1= 3 ;C z ransmi+ +al Virs +o^ PL20130001767 c, Site Development: CP- 2013 -10 1. Rezoning of this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development restrictions and standards necessary to ensure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The subject site will be developed with a common architectural and landscaping theme to be submitted with the first Site Development Plan. 3. The unified planned development submitted at time of the first Site Development Plan will reflect, to the maximum extent feasible, internal connectivity through shared parking and cross- access agreements. 4. Pedestrian connections are encouraged, both with perimeter properties, where feasible, and between internal buildings. 5. At the time of Site Development Plan approval, the required on -site vegetation retention may .be _satisfiied off -site, pursuant to Policy 6.1.1(13) of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the Growth Management Plan. At a minimum 15 percent of the on -site native venetation must be retained on -site. If the portion of native vegetation satisfied off -site is met by land donation to the County, the specific off -site property shall be taken to the Board of County Commissioners for acceptance. However, a hearing before the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee will not be required. [Page 141 ] Urban Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Map Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Henderson Creek, Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Buckley. Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict Livingston RoadNeteran's Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict Map Coastal High Hazard Area Map Coastal High Hazard Area Comparison Map Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map 3 Words underlined are added; words stru9k thmugh. are deleted. Row of asterisks ( **** * * ** * * * *) denotes break in text. 28 October 2014 8CC Transmittal Version T 46 S T 47 S T 48 8 T 42 8 ZI ._o�: OE r bu 3 T 51 5 T 62 S T 63 S .19 9 i AINnoo 118VMM�s AANnO3 3CVQ 0 i R 2! a i 0 0 E3 0 o o., w � t ID¢ ��g 'i j� � f?�a�E iz� � a �E � 5 G �S { ( w F .7 ;p N1 oil o I loom LU ji Lu _dd W Ln T-1 F ; 94 bg I Cell, Lu _41 0 LLJ 'j LL. co N CL U) G u f 9t I Slit S84S st 1 8 09 1 s 19 1 SZ91 i 0 C9 I �t ei TO 4 41�1 M .19 9 i AINnoo 118VMM�s AANnO3 3CVQ 0 i R 2! a i 0 0 E3 0 o o., w � t ID¢ ��g 'i j� � f?�a�E iz� � a �E � 5 G �S { ( w F .7 ;p N1 oil o I loom LU ji Lu _dd W Ln T-1 F ; 94 bg I Cell, Lu _41 0 LLJ 'j LL. co N CL U) G u f 9t I Slit S84S st 1 8 09 1 s 19 1 SZ91 i 0 C9 I �t EXHtBiT A PETMOPl PL20130001767 I CP- 2013 -10 VINCENTIAN MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA I iH' �9 G .S r t Y! � A JJ� 5 I 1 I � 00 A 9� S �0 9Q LEGEND SCALE Sl1BDIS T ICT PREPARED BY. GIS /CAD MAPMNG SECTION 0 1000 FT. 2000 FT. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DId19ON / RMNING AND R €GUL MON DATE 7/2014 FLE. CP- 2013x- 10A.DWO APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER e120130ca17 1"V? RECEIVED 3."3. 1 9 PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE September 26, 2013 DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Comprehensive Planning Department, Suite 400, 2800 Norf h Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239 - 252 -2400 (Fax 239 -252- 2946). The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97 -431 as amended by Resolution 98 -18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239 - 252 -2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant: Christopher Shucarf, c/o Global Properties of Naples LLC Company Global Properties, LLC Address 2614 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 615 City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239 - 435 -0098 Fax Number 239 - 692 -8527 B. Name of Agents * Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP and Richard Yovanovich Esquire THESE ARE THE PEOPLE TP CONTACT FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company: Robert J. Mulhere /Hole Montes, Inc. Address 950 Encore Wav City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34110 Phone Number 239 - 254 -2000 Fax Number 239 - 254 -2099 Company: Richard Yovanovich, Esquire /Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester PA Address 4001 Tamiami -Trail North City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239 -435 -3535 Fax Number 239 - 435 -1218 C. Name of Owner (s) of Record Global Properties of Naples, LLC Address 2614 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 615 City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239 -435 -0098 Fax Number 239 - 692 -8527 D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. a Norm Trebilcock, AICP, P.E., Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, P.A. 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202, Naples, FL 34110 Bethany Brosious, Senior Ecologist I, Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200, Fort Myers, FL 33912 II. Disclosure of Interest Information: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, Tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Stock C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and /or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Global Prooerfies of Naples, LLC James Shucart, Manager Christopher Shucart, Manager 2614 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 615 Naples, FL 34103 2 100% 97% E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Date of Contract: Percentage of Ownership F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address G. Date subject property acquired (x) leased (): 11 -3 -2010 Term of lease yrsjmos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing: H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION See Attachment "A" B. GENERAL LOCATION Corner of Southwest Boulevard and Tamiami Trail East Section 32 Township 50S, Ranae 26E, Folio No. 00439880008 C. PLANNING COMMUNITY South Naples D. TAZ 311 E. SIZE IN ACRES 30± acres F. ZONING Vincentian PUD G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN See Attachment "B" H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION (S) Urban Designation, Mixed Use District Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict and Coastal High Hazard Area Overlay 3 IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Traffic Circulation Sub - Element Aviation Sub - Element Sanitary Sewer Sub - Element Solid Waste Sub - Element Capital Improvement Element X Future Land Use Element Immokalee Master Plan Recreation /Open Space Mass Transit Sub - Element Potable Water Sub - Element NGWAR Sub - Element Drainage Sub - Element CCME Element Golden Gate Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) OF THE ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Sfrik th„��rto identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: SpA Attn hmpnt "R" C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM Urban Designation, Mixed Uses District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, TO Urban Designation, Mixed Use District, Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN I" =400'. At least one copy reduced to 8 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and /or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit A -1 Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Exhibit A -2 Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exhibit A -3 Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION Exhibit B -1 Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designations) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibit C -1 Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT- FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. Exhibit C -1 Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and /or known to inhabit biological communities. similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.),Identify historic and /or archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J- 11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 1. INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)(5), F.A.C.). IF so, identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1) (c), F.S. ? (Reference 9J- 11.006(l)(a)7.b, F.A.C.) Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County -wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). if yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. Y Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and /or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J- 5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J- 11.007, F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Exhibit E -2 Potable Water (See attached Public Facilities Report) Exhibit E -2 Sanitary Sewer (See attached Public Facilities Report) Exhibit E -3 Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS (See attached Traffic Impact Statement) N/— Drainage N_ A Solid Waste N/A Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and /or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. Exhibit E -1 Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. 3. Attachment "B" Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: Exhibit F -1 Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N/A Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on i v Tier %v'v'tnty Zoning ro'cips) NSA Traffic_Congestaoan-Boundary f applicable Y Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable NIA High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Y $16,700.00 non - refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) N/A $9,000.00 non - refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) Y Proof of ownership (copy of deed) Y Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) Y 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1 " =400' or at a scale as determined during the pre - application meeting. LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN We hereby authorize Robert J Mulhere FAICP and Richard Yovanovich Esquire (Name of Agents) to serve as our Agents in equest to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting proper e tified in th' Ap is tion. Signed: Date:/0f lobal Properties of Naples, LLC J -e Shucart Ma ager Signed: Date, I � al Properties of Naples, LLC Christopher Shucart, Manager We hereby certify that we have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the bes i ur knowle e gnature of Applicant James Shucart Manager N arepe inted of App (cant Christopher Shucart Manager Name - Typed or Printed STATE OF . ( ) COUNTY OF ( Coil Sworn to and subscribed before me this '-,;-t day of bc-� , 2013 MY COM te x3 3 1-7 b y ` d Notary Public • % ANN R. jOMLiN50N • '`;��_ f��3i.�;}i �ifl� ° �t3f� of Flue , CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: ± MY G*m.�Es Apr 23, 20i p r Commission *FF11307 who is personally known to me, J K who has produced as identification and did take an Oath did not take and Oath Hawy Pok -twof wa>; NOTICE ° BE AWARE THAT: ftft- EVkft* IS. 207 �ti �l�•417 Florida Statute Section 837,06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of %500.00 and /or maximum of a sixty clay jail term." 7 INSTR 4492154 OR 4620 PG 1385 RECORDED 11/3/2010 2 :26 PM PAGES 3 DWIGHT E_ BROCK, COLLIER COUNTY CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT DOC @.70 $14,175.00 REC $27.00 CONS $2,025,000.00 This Document Prepared By and Return to: Mark S. Weinberg, Esq. GrayRobinson, P.A. 1221 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1600 Miami, FL 33131 Parcel ID Number: 004398800080 This Indenture, Made this ay Acquisitions Holdings, Inc., 'a corpolti6n' Global Properties of Naples, LL� lF.ri Trail North, Suite 615, Naples, Fla _ Witnesseth thatthe GRANTOR, for and in\ N�era�tion of the sum of _—_1 o-- DOLLARS, and other good an tJe ab consideration to G3 hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and it aid GRANTEE following described land, situate, lying and beinginthe `?ot - 1'#< Subjeetto: i i ' 10 A-D., Between, Special State of Florida, grantor, and 7)se address is: 2614 Tamiami I I )- t - L 711---- - wand paid by GRANTEE, the receipt whereof is TEE'S heirs, successors and assigns forever, the da to wit: SEE ATTACHED EXMIT "A!' 1. Deal estate taxes for the year 2010 and subsequent years; and 2. Covenants, restrictions, and public utility easements of record, without any intention to re- impose same; and existing zoning and governmental regulations. AND the Grantor hereby covenants with said Grantee that the Grantor is lawfully seized of said land in fee simple; that the Grantor has good right and lawful authority to 9011 and convey said land; and Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land against claims arising by, through or under the Grantor and will defend same against the claims of all persons claiming by, through or under Grantor, but none other. in Witness Whereof, the grantor has hereunto set its hand and seal the day and year first above written. os. 4620 PG 1386 Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: f �Printed Name: Yhti,F, W I v� G off. 5 Witness printed Name: Q - s Witness STATE OF Florida COT NTY OF Collier The foregoing instnment was by Alma Shuckhart, as Vice Pres behalf of the corporation. She is I identification. Special Acquisitions Holdings, Inc. By. (Seal) Aiwa Shuckhart Title: Vice President P.o. Address: 6435 Maples Boulevard Naples, FL 34109 `O�Y tUf4e t�oaite�.T'lRtU.��i Prime` -EI _ a Notay public • mm 6f Fwld Notary iv€y Gamin. Exgkcs .tu17, 2dt4 9 'S Gomtiti5f€Ofl ®D Q bi53 0 $ ondG�dtllia >�hFJ2tlQRiltlauyAgo. ,ic1 �4ay� mo i�gs, as prdc -uc (Corporate Seal) 2010 a Florida Corporation, on I his Florida driver's license as *** OR 4620 €'G 1387 ** A LEGAL DES C T2.1.d2`f A. PARCEL O-` LAND LOCATED ITS SECTION 37., TOMAMSMP 5o SOUTH, �ARTICULARL� DESCRIBED � FOLLOWS: BEING IIWORE AS COIN€ HENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 32, Ttl ii�S ; uODg�, ��v� , j FLORIDA AND RUN SOUTH 02 °481461' WEST ALONG THE FAST LII E OF SAID SECTION 32, A DISTi ANCE OF 1725.03 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WTH THE SO �AY LINE -DINT OF OF U.S. HIGHWAY N0.41(T Q SOUTH OZ° k? SST BEGINN 'qG; THENCE C(}I�� C F 4.0Z ALONG SAID EAST LINE OE SE � ADISTAPd / EC�R�R, _ SEC ITOl 32 FEET TO HE EAST QT7A� t C ` AND THE NORTH, LINE O Lt� 94� T IL UNIT AS RECORDED :I� � ATE PUBLIC RECORDS OF CO 784, BY INSTRUMNTRECCI -14 FI - ; PAGE 792 }; THEN RIB 57 °30'15" WE � A� H LiL�TE O ACREHE FO I2. I�TOR'I' I` SRECO FLAT NORTH LINE OF TRAIL ACRES 4 AS � OLL AT BOOK 7, PAGE 203 OF SAID P � � CER R COUNTY, FLORIDA, AD. T SAID NORTH DINE OF TRAM NORTH 39-04'37" WEST ALONG ACRES UNIT 4 AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRAIT, ACRES UNIT 3, A DIS'T'ANCE OF 1081.98 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF SOrt MWEST BOULEVARD; THENCE RUIN NORTH 50 056153` EAST ALONG - SAID EASTERL3' RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 10(17.8 ET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT - OF WA`s' LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY ESQ. 41 (TI AffAM TR�II�)9 THENCE RUN SMITH 39°03`26" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT- OF-WAy LINE, A DISTANCE OF 77.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURS BEING CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 3210.55 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14 °34144" AND A CHORD BEARING 4 `EAND DISTANCE OF SOUTH 46- 20149" �+ AS` , RESpECTWELY; THENCE RUIN SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CU-RVE AND THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 516.93 FEET TO THE SAID POINT OF BEG0NMG. p rg.ry p q'tyy-16E1s7T c6 X5 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMIVMNCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND RUN SOUTH 02 1148'46" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 32, A DISTANCE OF 1718.03 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE_ OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 41 (T f TRAIL) AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUE SOUTH 02 °48'46" WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SECTION 32, A DISTANCE OF 884.02 FEET TO THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32 AND THE NORTH LINE OF LOTS FORMERLY IN TRAIL ACRES UNIT 3 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 94 OF 'THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (VACATED BY INSTRUMENT RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 189, PAGE 792); THENCE RUN NORTH 87 °30' 18" WEST ALONG SAID FORMER NORTH LINE OF TRAIL ACRES UNIT 3 -AND THE NORTH LINE OF TRAIL ACRES UNIT 4 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 103 OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, A DISTANCE OF 695.96 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 39 004'37" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF TRAIL ACRES UNIT 4 AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRAIL ACRES UNIT 3, A DISTANCE OF 1081.98 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD; THENCE RUN NORTH 50 °56'59" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 1007.85 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 41 (TAMIANH TRAIL), THENCE RUN SOUTH 39 003'26" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 77.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE BEING CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 3210.55 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14 034'44" AND A CHORD BEARING AND DISTANCE OF SOUTH 46 020'49" EAST, 814.73 FEET, RESPECTIVELY; THENCE RUN SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 816.93 FEET TO THE SAID POINT OF BEGINNING. ATTACHMENT "B" JUSTIFICATION AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Existing Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The subject property is located at the "T" intersection of Southwest Boulevard and U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail East). See GMPA Attachment `'`A" for the legal description of the subject parcel. The subject parcel is 30.68 acres +/- in size. The land use designation is presently Urban, Mixed Use District Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, in the Coastal High Hazard Area Overlay. The property is zoned PUD, allowing for residential uses, ALF, and commercial (a variety of C -3 uses, all C -2 uses, and several C -4 uses). The PUD does not provide a specific breakdown of acreage dedicated to commercial use; however, the master plan depicts about +/ -8.0 acres in the commercial tract(s) leaving +/- 22.6 acres to be calculated for residential density (yielding +/ -90 dwelling units). The PUD has been sunsetted. The surrounding lands, on the south/west side of US 41 are all designated Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict. The lands across U.S. 41 (to the north/east) are designated Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. The zoning and actual lands use on surround lands is as follows: North: Vacant C -5 commercial, Trail Acres RSF 4 (developed) and across U.S. 41 Whistler's Cove PUD Multifamily Development East: Hitching Post Mobile Home Park, Zoned "MH "; and Hitching Post Commercial Plaza, Zoned "C-3"; across US 41, Eagle Lakes Community Park "P" and County owned lands for wastewater reclamation area, Zoned "A" Ag. South: Trail Acres RSF 4 (developed) West: Trail Acres RSF 4 (developed) J TREE T c11S C-3 a V HIISTLMSCOVE ' PUD M017E.RTY A ZONING � � L TRAIL ACRES �� Y R 3F4 \ Y EAGLE LAS L �.� CCAMU TiT? PARK V7NCENTi4& ... -tee„ � Ps ZC�NMd4 PUD 0 141TCFf;F.t3 POST TRAIL ACRE l P MtSBiLr li044E PAFW t#EN'TiORTti 4....5_J cx a urn iaw ESTATES Mq Min sett +• - erA: H:\ 2013\ 2013043\ WP \GMPM3rd +Resubmittal\Attachment B Justification 7- 31- 14.docx Requested Changes This proposed GMPA would change the designation from Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, to Urban Mixed Use District, Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict. This will require amending the FLUE and the FLUM. The new Subdistrict will allow for commercial, residential, or mixed -use (commercial and residential) development. Justification for Request The present PUD allows for approximately eight (8) acres of commercial development, with the remaining acreage for residential development at'a density not to exceed four (4) units /acre. The subject parcel is unique in that there are very few potential commercial parcels under unified control that have the shape and size that will allow for a variety of options for commercial uses that are desirable in East Naples along the U.S. 41 E ast Corridor. The East Naples Civic it t= s ago, prelim'" y� e w /! r et v rr CIo(�r nI n inrT e''[[nriir L A ASsoclaLion, several years ago, conducted aprelim111Q1� J.41. 4-i Ea-' 0 1 li t./ aL�r: lls JllA4A�' J part of that study, this piece of property was recommended to be a "commercial activity center." This nomenclature should not be confused with the defined Mixed Use Activity Centers located at major intersections in Collier County, buf rather a label used to indicate this property's values as a large commercial tract that could accommodate a mixture of commercial uses to serve the East Naples Community. The area would benefit from additional commercial development. This is true both from a market perspective and from a "good for the community" perspective. The change in land use designation will allow for the possibility of a variety of commercial uses and even a corporate headquarter type use such as a Hertz or Arthrex type corporation, or market -rate apartments with or without mixed -use (neighborhood commercial uses). While the FLUE does not explicitly require a commercial needs or market analysis with the submittal of a commercial rezone outside of a Mixed Use Activity Center, a market analysis is provided as additional supporting data and analysis. The study identifies a need for additional commercial uses and a deficiency in lands designated for commercial development to accommodate these uses. Given the size of developable area for residential and the relatively low density now permitted, we do not feel that such low- density residential is feasible in the current market.The site is competing with several large -scale PUDs (consisting of hundreds or thousands of acres) within reasonable proximity (3 miles) of the subject parcel, including Lely Resort, Treviso Bay, Sabal Bay, and Winding Cypress. These master planned communities can offer single - family homes with significant amenities, such as multiple swimming pools, tennis courts, and golf courses. The subject site does not have sufficient space to provide a similarly amenitized community. The table below lists approved PUDs within three miles of the subject site and a count of approved and developed units. These PUDs contain more than 10,000 approved, un -built dwelling units. HA\2013\2013043 \WP \GMPA \3rd + ResubmittaMttachment B Justification 7- 31- 14.docx Active PUDs with Un -built Residential Units Within 3 miles Total Units Approved Total Units Developed Total Units Un -built Acreage Artesa Point 280 204 76 81.00 Eagle Creek 470 456 14 298.00 Lands End Preserve 725 78 647 262.90 Lely Resort 10,150 3,805 6,345 2,892.50 Mandalay 84 71 13 28.06 Rockedge 400 - 400 76.42 Sabal Bay (Isles of Collier) 1,999 - 1,999 2,416.08 Shadowwood 574 104 470 168.10 Sierra Meadows 300 36 264 90.80 Wentworth Estates (Treviso Bay) 1,450 214 1,236 1,563.84 Winding Cypress 2,300 1,686 614 1,928.00 TOTAL 18,732 6,654 12,078 9,805.70 Source: Collier County PUD Master List Dated 12/20/13 Additionally, the strongest market attraction within the communities identified above is for a fee - simple development (i.e. condominiums) with a quick return on investment for the developer. As a result, there is a strong demand for market -rate rental apartments. This site is well- situated to provide such market -rate rental apartments, due to its access and exposure to an arterial or collector roadway. A Rental Apartment Survey is submitted as supporting data and analysis for this use. In order to address concerns raised by the neighborhood, the Subdistrict limits residential development to market -rate rental apartments, as there is a substantial amount of affordable housing already provided in the area. Whistler's Cove is an affordable housing rental community. In addition, Habitat for Humanity has several dwelling units already constructed or proposed to be constructed in the area. The GMP prohibits the concentration of affordable housing in one area of the County. The average density of market -rate rental apartments in Collier County is approximately 13 units /acre (see the Rental Apartment Survey), and we consider around 12 units /acre (calculated on gross acreage, inclusive of commercial portions) to be the minimum necessary to attract a developer and a high - quality design. As this project is within the Coastal High Hazard Area, discussions were held with Emergency Management regarding appropriate hurricane evacuation mitigation. Emergency Management requested that a portable generator be provided; -if more than 123 dwelling units are constructed, and this commitment will be included in the implementing PUD. H:12013\2013043 \WP \GMPA\3rd + Res ubm ittal\Attachment B Justification 7- 31- 14.docx The Subdistrict also permits the site to be developed as a mixture of residential and commercial uses. In order to provide flexibility for a mixed -use developer, but establish reasonable constraints on the total development allowed, the amount of commercial acreage and square footage is reduced in a mixed -use development scenario. The total number of trips that can be generated by that development is also capped, establishing an overriding limit on total development intensity. The proposed GMPA to create the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict is justified based upon the community's desires, the long range growth potential in this area, access to the arterial road system, and the fact that the site has been established, through the PUD process, as an appropriate location for commercial, residential, and mixed -use development. Environmental Overview See the Environmental Data Summary prepared by Passarella and Associates. Traffic/Transuortation Overview See the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Trebilcock Consulting Services. Conclusion The request to create the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict is justified and will better serve the needs of the community than the existing permissible land uses. HA2013\2013043\WPIGMPAl3rd + ResubmittaltAttachment B Justification 7- 31- 14.doex ATTACHMENT "C" I "Is/1071 V [lip; Ea f Trail Corridor T,lbte of Caaterrts lrr €tod�actior} ?. aster Plari Stadv Process context 3 History Circulation Population Characteristics Neighborhoods and Housing Canditi€ ns Economic Conditions and Trends Environmental Cbaraeteristit. s Past Plan -iffig Eftt)rEs East Trail Visioning Proo ss 10 Public Involvement. Appheable Planning Principles The East Trail `vision Statement 14 Goals & Strategies Attachment: Vision Concept Plan Appendix: Demographic Page f om Economic Development Council of CollieT County "s "Market Pacts 2008 -2009" Public Input Meeting documents I`ision Iror the .East Trail Cc; r idor The East Naples FoWndation is .t 50j (c:)(3) Don- pn.*ft. ors :,Ztni itio.n that is Continuing the Wttrttun €tXr project Mit€ated by the Fast Naples Civic Strategic PI.Mi g Co -mmift e. T iris pilt.jec;t is art endeuvar tc, creite a plan h-I proalote planned growth for f?te tinure, tir the "Eat Trail" l [ amiarti Trffl East I U.S. 41 l?ast) co dor in Colliet Comity, 'Jl=e I-AstNaples Foundation envisio %,; iafong €Ire Fast Trail over tirne 4,ccording tot a coma -unity Based master plan- This is vol : bolt the road. itself. This Sfort is Pot an evaIuat.ion of how utany lanes or how -much asphalt should be poured on STS 41. This t 'lion for the future for use< an the propel t��, the btuildin�s. and the feats }res along the East - Trail. -Mese features still ttltirnately be &welopcd and redeveloped in. a tA;a.v that elf aer contributes to or detracts from a souse of identity, character, place and f-unctionzglity or the people who live along and travel tae corxi€lot, The Study Area is a stretch of approximately 14 mites beginning art Airport Pulling Road adjaccnt to the Bayshoro Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Areal to County Road 92. The Study Area covers a long distance of r-oa€ way with vay ed characteristics and n altiple functiors serving both travelers and neighbors. The functions of the corridor span The spectrum, from the northernmost portions that can serve as a "main. street" for established coi unities in East Maples, to the southernmost portion that is a scenic route through the Collier- Seminole State Park and rural agricultural lands. The future cbaracter of the corridor will be dictated € ver the next twenty years as many currently developed sites reach the end of their structural and functional lives, and many undeveloped lands face development pressure. The East maples Foundation identifies the need to focus the activity, growth and opportunities of the corridor in a way that best and most efficiently serve the people living, working., m ning land, or doing business along the East Trail corridor. The Fast. Naples Foundation has undertaken this planning effort for the following purpose: To develop a Master Flan for the U.S. 41 Ta a Try corridor which will encourage planned growth, both commercial and residential, that is compatible with the unique natural resources of the area, resulting in an enhanced quality of life for all residents. The East Trail Corridor Study Area defined for this planning effort does encompass some property within the Rayshore Gafevray Triangle Community Redevelopment Area (CIA) boundary, however the recowmcndations of this Vision for the Ecru Trail Corridor are only for lands outside of the CRA boundary. Any reference to property wiNrt the CRA boundary is only conceptual in nature, and is not irftended to alter or vary from the CRR's Redevelopment Plan that guides and governs all future development within the CRA. Johnson Engineering., Inc. Altrjl 2010 p, i si n )i tire; East Trail Corr•rf.hn, if si- -ar Plan (' .=� u fit`FT )c s.s 1-he ol'jcc ui c of this m istei' plaT ninq 1101t 3.t to ant €cipa"' . p f-1111 mid idcrrfi� adjusinieuts tai iv=} tVhLtOYY iian1.Qx- %k1i-1,: o drat the Fast Trail coniklor gioovvs viably whilc protectuig ualih, of life,. C. tent e(km._titioos bave boom docuvneiiwd " -M-d a AY/,ed, Community interests have been deed r d prioritized, hi this Vision RYY the f uttue. This Visicm will ultimnately be trwanslated iiito a master plan document goals, policies. 4.0d onpl"entatioit }mac t:61FLF1FSia2s that ctisure adherence to pxiiic:iples of flit P1011. t-lxe 1s011catving oU11111: p 1mvides the do milcd steps of this in?stct- plarinin.g, effort. Ste-Ps 1 and l avc: M -"Z-, Wi Vision, for the East Trail Corridor _.fir .d - c tv, } "History of the Tarniami Trail," Authority of the Tamlami Trail Commissioners and the County Commissioners of Dade County, Florida, 1928. History Opened in 1928, the Tamiarni 'frail has Zang provided a critical connection for the State of Florida, from Tampa to Miami. The importance of this route as a state connector has been overtaken by newer highway improvements to Interstate 75 that is now the high capacity route connecting the Fart Lauderdale area to Tampa and points north. Much of the Tamiami Trail that runs along the west coast now functions as an arterial roadway running through urban and suburban areas. Cities along the west coast have made efforts to redefine the arterial roadway to better fit their communities. These _ wmmunities have found through traffic studies that the Tamiami Trail is often utilized more for local trips rather than long distance trips. This means the Trail. corridor should develop with local content and character similar to a "main street" rather than a throughway in an urbanized area. Other portions of the Trail are much more scenic, where the landscape stretches for miles over agricultural lands, the Everglades, and other protected parklands. Johnson Engineering, Inc. 3 April 2010 C 4 � 'SiKS Land Use Characteristics Vision for the East Trail Corridor 3 ei n _F -ad y A � ✓; `_�b"�. it 4. 9 F by aL tterseetion with C.R. 951 71 he development along Collier County's Bast Trail from wort Read to County Road 92 is a reflection of a wide range of land uses. The Study Area defined for this East 'Trail Master Plan Study begins to the northwest at the intersection of Airport Road and the East Trail, where the Collier County Government Complex is located. The southeastern terminus of the Study Area is the intersection of County Road 92 and the East Trail, where the Collier - Seminole State Park begins. Due to the geographic extent of the 14 -mile stretch of the Study Area, the area has been divided into four segments, depicted on the attached Vision Concept flan. All the segment lines do not correspond with major roadways because the segments were divided according to transitions in land use patterns. Segment 1 is approximately 2 miles between Airport Pulling Road and 'Malley Stream Drive. Segment 1 includes Lake Avalon and the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Boulevard. Johnson Engineering, Inc. 4 April 2010 Visio fior rhie East Frail Cort'idor e segWre€ t 2 is approxi a<tely 2.5 des. from Vatley Stream, Drive to Navajo llrail. Seg ment 2 cousins mostly devolol,Fed of planned residential 11601bot°lwods nel zdirtg Saba] Bay, k -ely Country Club, Naples Manor, Treviso Hay, J.Id � hi.-Ocr`s Cove. f Seg €neat 3 is a.lrlaroO:na.tely 3.5 miles, from Nav llo Tr «il to Naples Reserve Boidevard. Segment 3 includes Ley Resort, Eagle C. -reek, thE_ C.R. 951 inter'sc tion, and the new S.mper WalMart, g Scent l is the Longest scgcnta rcastte tug prckracly Er Mesa from IN-aples Reserve 104mlevard to County Road 92. This includes Reflection. Lakes, fiddlers CrE ek. Six Ls barn and Cci @her Seminole State Park. ThQ corridor is cliaractcrized by the established neighborhoods of East Naples, which gradually transition to the southeast to mores golf co-arse. communities and suburban and coral �tylc development. Lit Segments 1 and 2 the coromercial property along the East Trail was limited in size after the wridem- ag of US 41, so that much of the commercial, lard in these se~ eats is underutilized. 1`he corridor is bisected by the intersection at County load 951, This intersection is an importm.t crossroads because County Road. 95 t connects Naples to Marco Island going south. and connects to the 175 interchange going north. The intersection is developing with coramercial shopping centers and big box retailers. Moving to the southeast, the development along the corridor becomes more sparse, with sonic s€ bi ban neighborhoods and more rural and agricultural lands. Potential for a new self-sustaining neighboTho€md exists on the property o-& zed by 6Ls Farm at the southeastern end of the corridor, which is a large land area designated on the County Future Land Use Map as eligible for a rural village. For this planning effort, the Study Area has been limited to properties along the East Trail within a, half -mile: distance from the centerline of the Trail. This half -mile dimension allows, our study to encompass parrs and schools that are in close proximity and are important to the condor. The half -mile dimension also allows us to represent and evaluate walk-ability in the form of pedestrian sheds. Johnson Engineering, Inc. 5 April 2010 e. -.r:. .M [�YrY AVE (SW TrmnL, SWA) y' Vision for the Fast Trail Corridor BAV S 8L`. r .. Public CmunerciA Xe�iden!W TotalAcses 54.89 318.76 659.39 1063.03 5.I(>% 32_81% 61'.03 °. =v 100q TR - 4 .�r�.. °;�»:= �7 =�'"` South U.S 41 Transportation W.., —Q �.,.• `- ° „ 0. Ccncurrency Exception Area (TCEA) n Circulation The East Trail is a significant arterial roadway that serves the East Naples community. The predominant mode of travel is by automobile, although the East Trail corridor has opportunities for alternative modes as well. The Collier County Metropolitan Planlung Organization (MPO) labels the East Trail from Rattlesnake Hammock Road and north into the City of Naples as a "Congested Corridor." The Collier County Growth Management Plan delineates the U.S. 41 Transportation Coneurrency Exception? Area (TCEA) at the northwest portion of the East Trail from Rattlesnake Hammock Road and north to Davis Boulevard, This designation is established pursuant to Florida law in recognition of communities who adopt strategies for Urban Infill and Urban Redevelopment. This area of the East- Trail is granted exceptions from traffic coneurrency because a variety of uses are in close proxi -mitt', and provisions for alternatives to auto-only circulation are available. Such alternatives include: bike racks, bus stops, mixed use development, and sidewalks, which are considered appropriate solutions to congested. conditions. Alternative anodes exist and are planned for expansion along the corridor. The Collier Area Transit service has bus routes from the northwestern extent of the Study Area to Greerrway Road, and a Riture transit route is proposed to extend south to C.R. 92. Johnson 1 ngineering, Inc. 6 April 2010 Mision- or the East Trail Corridor- Sidewalks are primarily located within the Last. Frail right -of -way from the northwestern tip of the Study Area to Maples Manor subdivision. Pathways are proposed to extend from C.R. 951 south in the future. Bike lanes are primarily located within the corridor from the northwestern tip of the Study Area to the Rattlesnake Hammock intersection. Bike lanes are proposed extending south from C.R. 451 in the future. Population Characteristics Collier County's Comprehensive Planning Department delineates planning communities and generates population figures for each area. The planning communities that relate to the Last Trail corridor are the East Maples; South Naples and Royal Fakapalm planning communities. The County's statistics project population growth from 65,724 people in 2008 to 98,876 people in 2020, constituting an increase of 30,152 residents (an increase of 44 %). The figures show small growth of population in East Naples (northeastern portion of the corridor), an increase of 51% in South Naples (central portion of the corridor) and growth that nearly doubles the population in the outlying Royal Fakapalm area. POPULATION PROJECTIONS BY PLANNING COMMUNITY from Economic Development Council of Collier County's "Market.acts YUUa -ZVUV- -- Source. Collier Ccuniy Ccmprehenlve P:ann=ng Deparimenl, Pv -ri:ea d,98 The 2044 Census data for Census Tracts adjacent to the East Trail corridor indicates a median household income of $39,405 for this area, which slightly exceeded the State of Florida's median household income of $38,819. Neighborhood and Housing Conditions The East Trail is a community of many neighborhoods. Older established neighborhoods are located at the northwestern portion of the corridor, proximate to many community facilities. From Rattlesnake Hammock road and south, existing and planned large golf course communities are the predominant neighborhood type, with the exception of some established single family subdivisions including Naples Manor. Housing characteristics range from older single family structures in established neighborhoods, to newer single and multifamily structures in the gated and golf course communities. A cross section of the community is served, from entry level housing to luxury estates. Johnson Engineering, Inc. 7 April 2010 Vision for the East Trail Corridor South of C.R. 951, single family developments have been approved and developed along side established larger tract subdivisions that accommodate rural single family homes and some mobile homes. Fiddlers Creek is a large community permitted for residential development along an extensive section of this ;part of the corridor. potential for a new self - sustaining neighborhood exists on the property owned by 6Ls Farm at the southeastern end of the corridor, -which is a large land area designated on the County Future Land Use heap as eligible for a rural village. Economic Conditions and Trends After years of dramatic economic growth through the last decade, economic conditions have deteriorated for the country, the state, and particularly southwest Florida. Housing and construction were primary economic drivers for this area throughout the past decade, �. a +�,a �.�,•�:•�� ,-n?v4cet hay h ?n ,;b decline since reaching its teak in 2005. Development projects that were approved in recent years are facing financial diracu%ty as homebuying lags behind market supply. With the drop in homebuying and consumer spending, the commercial development supporting residential areas along the East Trail has also suffered. decline. Businesses have closed and some new commercial developments remain unoccupied. Economists indicate the outlook is a slow, steady recovery over the next several years. With the development of a new hospital on County Road 951 near Rattlesnake Hammock Road, along with the County Government Center that will endure as a major xrorkplace, the East Trail corridor is an area that can continue to attract new residents and support new business if properly planned. Environmental Characteristics Beyond the most urban portions of the corridor, areas surrounding the East Trail are rich in environmental quality. Sugden Park and Eagle Lakes bark provide a glimpse of the natural features for the residents to enjoy in the more developed areas of the corridor. The Collier - Seminole State Park at the southeastern terminus of the corridor is a large protected natural area. South and east of the Study area are Panther Zones designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Collier County's environmental policies and standards have governed the development of subdivisions built over the past 10 -15 years so that significant native vegetation is preserved and maintained in perpetuity. Such environmental regulations shall - continue to be observed and followed as the corridor develops, with a focus on avoiding impacts to wetlands and critical habitat for protected species. Johnson Engineering, Inc. 8 April 2010 Vision for the East Trail Corridor- Fast Planning efforts The Community Character Plan for Collier County ( "Character Plan ") was completed in 2001. The Character Plan set forth goals and implementation steps to redefine centers of activity and quality neighborhoods throughout the County. The Character Plan identified the need to focus on building human scale settings rather than auto - oriented, single use developments. The Plan illustrated photos that were ranked as the least appealing images of Collier County according to a public image survey. As shown below, all three of the lowest ranking photos were taken in East Naples. The Character Plan also included a conceptual design study of the Naples Town Center shopping center, showing how inffll development could revitalize the declining strip mall as a mixed use center of activity. The Character Plan put forth valuable planning strategies and implementation: steps to promote quality design of the built environment in Collier County. Only a few of the recommendations have resulted in new policies or techniques applied in the processing of development projects. 1, i Johnson. Engineering, Inc. 9 April 2010 Vision. for the East Trail Corridor Per Florida Statutes Section. 163.3177 (13), local governments are encouraged to develop a community vision that provides for sustainable growth, recognizes its fiscal constraints, and protects its natural resources. The stakeholders along the East Trail corridor realize that their future must he planned according to a vision that directs growth in an orderly manner in appropriate locations. This visioning process for the East Trail incorporates pudic involvement and applicable planning principles to arrive at a vision concept plan and a vision statement with supporting goals and strategies to direct future development along the corridor. Public Involvement 30, 2009 to survey the priority issues of property owners and residents along the East Trail corridor. Property owners adjacent to the East Trail and neighborhood associations adjacent to the Study Area were notif ed of the meeting by mail, and it was advertised in the Collier Mizenz newspaper. An bnage Preference Survey was conducted with approximately 40 meeting attendees. The Image Preference Survey consisted of 44 pictures taken both along the East Trail and in ether areas of Collier and Lee Counties. Pictures ranged from rural scenic views to urban hardscapes. The results of the Image Pre %ence Survey revealed that the most favored images were well landscaped semi urban and suburban scenes, as illustrated to the right and below_ , ='- fohnson Engineering, Inc. April 2010 10 Hsi€ n for the Past Trail Corridor The images that were ranked as least favorable during the l:mage Survey are depicted below. These images portray auto - oriented uses along roadways that are characteristic of sprawl -like development. Meeting attendees also answered individual questionnaires about their likes, dislikes and vision for the last Trail's future. The issues most commented on by meeting attendees - concerned: 1. Development types (preferences for types of businesses and communities) 2. Aesthetic issues (appearance of roadsides and buildings) - 3. Traffic (safety and convenience for cars and pedestrians) Other comments received related to recreation, natural resources, community services, and public safety. For the final phase of the Public Input Meeting, attendees divided into workgroups of four to eight participants. The workgroups focused on one of the four segments of the corridor. The participants identified positives, negatives, and future goals for each segment. The results of this exercise revealed that top priorities for all groups were related to development types and aesthetics. Less noted were the other issues of connectivity; natural resources, recreation and public safety. Johnson Engineering, lac. 11 April 2010 Vision for the East Trail Corridor Applicable Planning Principles Using the available data and priorities from the perspective of stakeholders along the corridor, it is evident that a continuation of the past development patterns for twenty more years into the fixture N,AII not bring about desirable results. Today's struggling commercial strip centers, disconnected neighborhoods, and automobile oriented buildings and uses are not the tools for successful community development in the fixture, The spread of suburban development sprawling into rural areas is a pattern the Florida Legislature has identified as a problem for communities throughout the state. As a result, Florida Statutes are designed to control growth management policy or land use changes that result in low density, single use development in the countryside that constitutes sprawl. The Transect ��R _'ye � {psi (.+. —�,_�, �,lj_�Jl.Sl .Je U1lfVyt•J}J itt VJJII yJft 4 ,2J .:::u wu. v a� S.ii :.:i:J rCL�:� .- -....� correspond to a planning model known as the Rural - Urban Transect. A transect, in its origins (Von Humboldt 1790), is a geographical cross - section of a region used to reveal a sequence of environments. Originally, it ivas used to analyze natural ecologies, showing varying characteristics through different zones such as shores, wetlands, plains, and uplands. For human environments, such a cross-section can be used to identi5) a set of habitats that vary by their level and intensity of urban character, u continuum that ranges from rural to urban. In Transect planning, this range of enidronments is the basis for organizing the components of - urbanism: building, lot, land rise, street, and all of the other physical elements of the human habitat. - Andres Buany, et al., SmaKCode & hfaneral (hfiami: 'New Urban Publiaatians, Ina 2005). The Rural- Urban Transect is a tool that helps us understand and govem the development of communities. The Rural -Urban Transect defines the segments of a community from its most intense "urban care" where the highest density and building heights exist, to the moderately dense "urban center," the less dense "general urban" transect, the more spacious "suburban" transect, the wooded and agricultural "rural" transect, and the "natural" transect consisting of unaltered landscape. In The Lexicon of the New Urbanists published by Duany Plater- Zyberk & Company, land use, building types, and design standards axe applied to each transect to establish human scale and sustainable development patterns appropriate for the context of each area. The East Trail currently incorporates a full range of urban to rural characteristics starting at the County Government Complex at the Airport Road intersection, extending to Collier- Seminole State Park at the County Road 92 intersection. Using the Rural -Urban Transect typology as a guide to manage future growth along the corridor, the design of a vision for the future of the East Trail takes shape. Johnson Engineering, Inc. 12 April. 2010 Vision for the East Trail Corridor IkI order to fulfill the orderly development pattern of the Rural -Urban Transect model, the ai ug the East `frail Corridor must be designated witty appropriate Transects of Urban C:.cnteT, General Urban, Suburban, Rural and Natturat. Urban Core is not recommended for the East Trail corridor, bmause Urban Clore would be typical of a city ccater which does jiot correspond tc� axty portion of the East Trail. Center", Atona with tho, Transect designations and related development standards that -would be s:pplic ti to am ?mplish appropriate scale and style of developnrent relative to location along the corridor, a system of centers or nodes can be designated as concentrations of activity. The Growth Management Plan already applies the principle L,-f centers in the form of Activity Centers located at major road. intersections. The Community Character Flan for Cother County sought to advance the concept of centers to be more than comwerOal nodes. The Character Plan suggests convenient centers should offer the following: quality experiences; diversity of uses, including retail, workplaces, housing, and coy unity facilities; and building types that are durable and flexible to be functional as markets change. The centers should be scaled consistent with the Transect model, so that intensity and design of the center relates to the intensity and design of the surrounding area. Centers put forth in the Character flan that would be appropriate along the East Trail corridor range in type and scale from town centers, neighborhood centers, village eaters, hamlets, and rural crossroads. Mob_ ility The third planning principle that relates to the corridor characteristics and public prialities is mobility Manning. The concept of mobility has eclipsed traditional transportation planning models that focused on the automobile as the only measure of successful connection between two points. A. mandate for new transportation planning methods in Florida became law in 2008 (Laws of Florida Chapter 2008-191 1 House Bill 697). Florida's local governments are now required to adopt policies that discourage urban sprawl, establish energy efficient land use patterns, and develop transportation strategies to address reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. In the Quali4aevel of Service Handbook the Florida Department of Transportation has created level of services measures so that transit services, bicycling, and walking may be counted in addition to the traditional measure of road capacity to serve community mobility needs. This emphasis on developing in ways that reduce vehicle miles traveled results in planning for node's that allow mobility alternatives. Rather than putting more automobile trips on the road, it is important to allow opportunities for walking, biking and riding the bus to access community facilities, workplaces, and shopping. Quarter -mile and half- - mile pedestrian sheds, pedestrian connectivity, and bus transit are important concepts to guide future development and redevelopment of property along the East Trail corridor. Johnson. Engineering, Inc. 13 April 2010 1,7,vion fiw the East Trad Conidar I c5,wA& iii wan, Sutunettt 04M To, }rooted and enhance the quality of life for East Naples residents and busine&s owners, pror,crty glom, the. East Trail shall be developed and m-developed. aoccriding to orderly and cudiu-4ig etevelopment pattCOIS, that concentTate community firwilitios and sen4m in locafjcvlls ttI-'.I-t;nj3XjjjjI7C rjCSjCI-CJItS' CODWIliClIt access so that Ml nweds can be met within flicii- own comminuty. while PTOtCCfIDg the scenic quality and nZY-rural resources of East ,\Tjl flkc S' The 'followmig goals and strategies are the wsalt of co-mmunity input and priorities for how Ow Fast Trail should development io the future. Goal 1. Establish a franiework- for orderly future development and redevelopment that emulates the Fiscal -Ueban Transect development pattern. o Create a Vision Concept Plan as a graphic tool to show the desired development patterns along the East Trail corridor. o Establish land use and development standards that observe the mange of Urban to Rural characteristics along the East Trail and promote building and site designs that provide quality environments. o The urban Center at the northeastern portion of the corridor should be a concentration of shops, various residential unit types, offices, 17"orkplace, civic buildings, and public space in the form or'plazas and parks. o General Urban areas in Segment I and Segment 2 should be primarily low to T-nedium density residential in nature but should provide opportunities for mixed use developments and live-work units, with quality landscaping and public parks, squares and greens. o The Suburban area in Segment 3 should primarily accommodate detached single family home communities that appear landscaped and green when viewed from the road Cviewshed developments"). Parks and greenways are also appropriate. o The Rural area in Segment 4 should primarily accommodate agiieulture and scattered buildings, in addition to viowshed developments and a self- sustaining planned rural village. o The Natural area is Collier Seminole State Park at the southeastern terminus of the corridor, which is to remain in its natural unaltered state with the exception of commercially designated land appropriate for a comer store at the intersection of C.R. 92. Goal 2. Establish centers that correspond to the Rural-Urban continuum to define locations where- the following components of a community converge: residential, commercial, workplace, bus service, pedestrian paths, hike paths, and community facilities. Strategies: o Establisb land use and development standards that encourage concentration and mix of uses at centers with varying intensity based on location and accessibility. Johnsoii Engineering, tnc. 14 April 2010 Vision for the East Trail Corridor o Town Centers are desi2pated. et the tbllowing locations: The Collier County Government Complex Town Cuter is a location where all the components of community converge. The complex- is a. bus transfer station and a. major work center, with rolmectivity to residential neighborhoods within a hilf mile radius. The aging; shopping centers of Walinart and Naples !own Center are. opportunities for redevelopment with more intense mixed use settings to incorporate new restaurants and shops within the half mile pedestrimr shed. The Rattlesnake Hammock Road Town Center is a location where residential, workplac€:. bus service, pedestrian paths, like paths and community facilities converge within. the half-mile pedestrian shed. The fi.iture development of Sabal Bay could result in a new school and more commercial uses, including addition of a significant workplace. The aging shopping center at the southeast comer of Rattlesnake Hammock and the past Trail is an opportunity for development with a. more intense mix of uses. The Navajo Trail Town Center is a location where residential, bus service, pedestrian paths, bike paths, schools, and a park exist, and mixed use development is proposed on existing undeveloped and underutilized sites. o Neighborhood Centers are: designated at the following locations: The Suvden Park Neighborhood Center is a location where the park., residential neighborhoods, commercial uses, bus route, and some pedestrian facilities converge to conveniently serve the Lakewood and Avalon area residents. Due to the short lot depth of existing commercial properties along the corridor, low scale mixed use and the introduction of live -ivork writs is proposed for the eventual redevelopment of the existing commercial properties. The Saint Andrews Boulevard Neighborhood Center is a location where a commercial center, residential areas, pedestrian facilities, the bus route, and the library converge to serve Lely residents and future residents of Treviso Bay. Mixed use redevelopment and infill development of the existing commercial center is proposed to fortify this location as a viable center of neighborhood scale services within walking and biking distance for the adjacent neighborhoods. The 951 Neighborhood. Center is a location where commercial centers, residential communities, and the bus route converge. This location did not achieve status as a Town Center due to its location in the Suburban Transect and the limited number of community service components that are viable for this location. Eventual redevelopment of the shopping centers is envisioned as low scale, walkable, mixed use development that creates an identity for the 951 intersection that relates to the large adjacent neighborhoods of Johnson Engineering, Inc. 15 April 2010 F i,Vion or° the Fact Trail Corridor Lely Resort, Eagle Creek, and the other smaller residential naeighborhoods in chase proximity. a Village Centers are desipiated in the Rollo -wing loc- ations: The 6L-, t' ''illij e Center is designated where- the: 6Ls Farnn) currently »:xists. The Collier County Future Land Use Map designates this iarge property as a n:cceivlug area eligible for development as a rural vilbag . `ph;yr €fore, a Village: Center is appropriate in this location. The Village: Center should serve the fixture rural village as well 3s nearbv residents with minimal commercial uses and services needed for couvkmience, a hamlets are des ig€xated in the following locanoii s: The Manatee School Hamlet is a location where community facilities are concentrated at the transition het%,een the Suburban and Rural tramwets. 'ibis hamlet is characterized by the existing Cki Z1 iiLi.ligiEt,,,. -xe S «LSE VJLl. f J.eCi FtJ (iLl VAF could be further developed as a focal point for community based activities, along with commercial uses to serve nearby residents. o Rural Crossroads are designated at the following location: The C.R. 92 Rural Crossroads is designated for small scale commercial uses such as a corner store due to its location in the natural, area of the Collier Serninole State Parr. Goal 3. Establish motility strategies that facilitate pedestrian, bicycle, and bus transit connections between€ established neighborhoods, new development and redevelopment. Strategies: o Limit vehicle mils traveled by concentrating development cohere bus, pedestrian, and bicycle infrastructure exists or is planned. o Allow mixed use development and live -work units along with reductions in parking -requirements as a mechanism to reduce vehicle miles traveled. o Require connections between. new and existing development, including residential uses, commercial uses, and community facilities. o Incorporate new bus facilities in new developments. o Promote complete street design for road improvement projects, so that landscape treatments promoting pedestrian comfort, as well as pathways, bikeways and bans services, are critical components of the road design. Coal 4. Promote economic development by planning for an appropriate ma of uses and housing types to support viable new conimerciA, retail, restaurant, bot-el, and other services. Strategies: o Analyze market characteristics and trends to identify opportunities and limitations that affect development and location of desired uses along the corridor. o Coordinate with the Economic Development Council to develop a strategy to attract new desired businesses. Johnson Engineering, Iilc. 16 Aprj12010 M's on.for the East Trail Corridor o Promote land use regulations that limit incompatible land uses and are re nsi -vie to -ti ti-ends in building anti design to accommodate novativ€ &—velopment types. a Identify a "brand" for the East Trail conidor, and use it to promote. the East frail through inarlteting initiatives to attract new residents, new husincsses and eco-tour sm. Johnson Engineering, Inc. 17 April 2010 E�sr it SEGMENT I SEGMENT It P Dl tA% Fr- L I-orll 9f T-A;.* LF .VN--tAZ EAQ-E ou, xmd T-A LEGEND I VtEW9iM Wa.OPMENI ACTMY',NM. U, RESOE14TIAL ExtSTIKi BLIS SLFVKt UA, WOW pAlpc6F.D ous Allvici MME) U�t INC WEWALK Tksvti - GFIFEWMS Immmu ctvic K%**OSEE) WWWALK I ,TRWS 'cKfWAYS J:COTajJM%m, itf,,ogr uw.,, r A4 D�Co�)An PAI�TjLHZMESAAJ MWMt' ALONE ')4kHO9TH5l?tV d! .W SMMH t1f jr4 C k4Sj at 1XV:Tk7W 9 .� J 0 G Of C 0 (mil r�i-- CO l-L j UJ ` c.. H w w z w E lt'.OTHE: DEMOGRA COLLIER COUNTY 2008 2015 2020 2008-2015 2008-2015 PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION NUMERIC CHANGE %CHANGE Corksorew '3106 9,227 13,815 6,121 197.07 i I g Cypress 205 213 219 8 3.90% entral Naples 20,496 20,1356 21,300 26,549 460 426 224% 1,66 % Maples 'Cast N�3 25,tol 2B,229 L - Diden Pate 45,101 46,295 47,189 1,194 2.65% t �)mmdkalee 25,946 38,461 47,-844 12,515 46.23% i Marco island - 1,494 - 1,599 1,677 105 7.03 9/. i North Naoles - 61,610 64,217 3,209 5.48% i i - , - T,oyal Fakapalm 15,533 24,314 30,698 8,781 56.53% , aura! Estates 7,27D 46,616 53,623 9,346 25.08% uth Naples 27,390 35,414 41,429 8,024 29.3D% 9 _ 39,125 _ _ 51,511 60,797 12,386 31.661/1a _ates COWER COUNTY 2008 2015 2020 2008-2015 2008-2015 PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION NUMERICCHANGE ')/oCHANGE of Naples and 23,7p4 25,635 17,338 26,700 18,332 1,931 1.-350 8. 15% 8.44% vzrglades City 64B _ 683 709 35 5.40% PLANNING' COMMUNITIES COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA 1- North Naples 7 -Royal Fak3palm 2- Central Naples 6 Rural Estates 3 - Golden Gate 9 • Corksrrm 4- East Naples 10-imnmkalee 5 -south Naples ..6 Morco Island 11 -Big Cypress 12 -Urbon Estates 11 it i� c . /About this Study Objective of this Study TM.' East Niapleg: Foundation, Inc., the The objective of this study is to anticipate, philanthropic arm of the East No -pies Civic plan, and identify adjustments to regulatory Association (ENCA), is seeping community framework so that the East Trail corridor involvement to fund and complete a corridor study grows viably while protecting quality of life. of Tamiami Trail East (the "East Trail ") from its This study will ultimately result in a plan that Airport Pulling Road intersection south to its documents the current conditions of the East C'nllMv Ainnrl 97 interenr± inn Tkh ctrvAvt;e el ieinnt-;Cac r-k= v:cirin ;nr+ka fivtevre ref r6� to define an identity for the East Trail corridor. corridor based on community input, and The ultimate result of the study is a Corridor Plan outlines the goals, objectives and policies that that indicates existing qualities to be protected, will guide future development. target areas for development and redevelopment, and an overall vision for the future. Public Imvolvernent The public involvement component of this study is important. Property owners along the corridor, nearby residents and business owners, and other stakeholders in the area, will have opportunities to participate in the study process. Through newsletters and two public meetings, the East Naples Foundation seeks to include and mfarm the community during the process. The first public workshop is scheduled for March 30, 2009 and the se_ eond will be determined based on availability of funds to continue the study effort. To support or get more information about the effort; please contact enaplesfnd(d_)aol.com Ewl Nap fee Jowuliation, Jrrzc. "14 #4dife6na& Aammazi Jar% X214 :IYitpEeo,413: FAST'r ML MASTIM PIA" "TUD A PUBLIC- WQMOHIP-P HMCH 30 X409: - AT &adt Ora f . East Trail Master Plan Stud SEGMENT WORKGROUPRESULTS 6fv�Pl FlTi SEGlIIEfC3'2 S�i3RR�i�'3 '�F_GM3 ENT 4 AESTHETICS .Rural Landscaping and Open Space Architectural Design Character Cleanliness CONNEC T IVrrY Existing Pathway SERVICES C3Quick a. Response Time Proximity to Points o`int=_rest DEVELOPMENT Quantityof Commercial Space New Homes New Development Density OTHER, Natural Resources AESTHETICS Seas of Parking Unsightly Utilities Unsightly Buildings Guardralls- Homeless 8 Day Laborers Litter CONNECTIVITY 0 Z O Limited Connection between Destinations Dangerous Raadways (TurnianeslAccess) Segmented Sidewalks DtV_ELOPMENT. Unsightly Development (Pawn, Tattoo) Redevelopment Obstacles Limited Commercial Lot Depth Strip Mails Vacant Business`` Loge Income Housing High Impact Fees + OTHER Perceived Crime F Safety - Increased Landscape Increased Open Space Increased Buffer Design Review Review Committee Update Unsightly Building Facades Convoi Licht Pciluticn ' " ImproveiProvide BlkefPedestrian Connections _. Increased Parks & Open Space Increased Access to Civic Uses 4 DE1tF1UPMENT ., - - Increased Density' Increased Retail (up scale) Increased Hotels Increased Bolique Shops Increased Resturants Lot A_csembly for Larger Retail Business Park +' + UMER Environmental Sensitivity Eeofour'esm Meeting PlacesiConvention Center /Amphitheater Johnson Engineering, Inc, Hd200800D012008T796 -000 -East Naples Foundation Inc. jamiaml Trait E Strategic Planning) \PUBLIC INPUT MEETING DQCUMENTS\East Naples Traii_Survey Analysis.ris 45".1• 0&j.& 91w. East Trail Master Plan Study Public Input Meetirg 3t 0109 Individual Questionnaire Responses What do you like along 'he Trail and went tc3 keg the sCme? 12 Lands -pbg1Parks/%1'alIA- 2 Entry Slq_qe 2 Li;jhft I old Mora-. If - __ :� _C0I6IFCTN=.fi 3 Sld—Jk1Bk.L...1fV.WrT.9 I Cn..c4^ to the Library I Trafr. RECREATM-.4 I Golfcourse 77, 3 Library ✓ Bea Gs E,m Restairrant Franck Bakery M.Connell'sliard—re Has M.Vis Theater Lely Resort Tmwiso Bay L.. Population ,'hat do you think the East Trail should develop I change over the next 20 years? t3 AGPe:,rance L Updat..ld tam nests Fronts Clean -up ausSisr..r, Archbacturat Cors5nui(V1TmrrsdiDnZane SeWean Segments L—d—ping All Utilities Underground whliria O'dina- I 4 L.P.\.T.fficPald- Irnprp- D-51 &41 t-erse§_,n. Traffic Uqht, Reduce Feeling of Traffic 2 More Sidewalk Oom,—Ifeq I I Mui#-tme frays I Fun.61 Infrastructure 2�EnNrunmentsl Eh—arneft • Artist Can- I Lii r -: MMLQPVEKr -'s . '3 22 Bush— D.-loprn- I&rk.ling - . D.finalb. Wre, Red umas E—urage. Up--ie Development Restaurants (local and aMrtvs) 6> -r10.WDi*g Retail Hotel Probbit Paw and Adult Entertainment Stores Nlkedwuse Development Commemial Nodes (mflw than strip =11s; & stDmqt unts) 3 Raductio—fStipWil. 3 Limit. Low inmme Hausini; I Parking at am R-w or Developments I A.dte r1_1 valq. D—japm—t Retail 2 Longer Operating Hours for S=bnS Crime ControllPrevention I Continue the Current Plan What is your biggest ooncem about the East Trail? 3 Appearance Loss of Character Lack .f Maintenance end R.k.,e51msn1 77-1 2: Traffic S.r.ty 1 LtS-Acas 0 Srqht and V.—I SL.,a Front. 3 L.. Income H.-hif 2 8.1im"d Growth I Un=,*.Ifed G,.,,t, I Abundance of Storage unts I Mobile Florrne,s 2 Crkne CORRIDOR PRIORITIES Responses from Individual Questionnaires 0 SERVICES 0 RECREATION 6% 2% 0 OTHER 0 CONNECTIVITY •DEVELOPMENT =AESTHETICS EICONNECTiATY ■SERVICES RECREATION Johnson Engineering, Inc. H'VDGWOCIOUDDST70-000 - rest N.*. F..ndb k- Crarnimi Trail S, Stwagi. P1 .. iq)1PUBLIC INPUT MEETING DOCUMENTS�Ft Naples T.il_SU" Anal•91--'A- - EAST TAM I M1 TRAIL MA' T PLAN March 30, 2009 Public Input Ma roc St Deter the Apostle postle Cathollo Cha c h Sign In Sheet 2 ADDRESS iC� 'rF Cif: Cat 1,1el EMAIL n r ,ASt9kL 0 5 leo f \ Lwow y t /0?-6 e, 4 t - r��, he (3+z z ,f s f? � � � X73 t (? oy- 9 - �' � ►/1 € � t,� cfr �t { r� r i; f (�_ f S S CfcflL ., to-7 10 V A l r.t } / i ✓-* YYC .� �S/ Gh�.. ^5 �I LQi'� i/{ f•�� S,Yla v s clt vim, S t }t rt. �'� i� eJSrc� S l(op fns 62D`YiCt� \ocr�'icfe1 12 fl lt�'f'J l far op f Cr • t f17?� l / t• - rCU'v EASTTAMIAMI TRAIL MASTER PLAN STUDY March 38k 2009 Public, Input Meeting NAME ADDRESS EMAIL ` � 1' - -; - -- , �'�� 1'f.�.�%�f `A�""A(�.u, �.t�,f�ll: �F'V � ` � ��,�q ,;gyp ------------ 14 IVXI 115 r6( 3 3 " T i -A 17 1 Tq Witwll / - ��f y 19 20 22 (2 CAI �J-1- C <-� s I Ce &Vv G �rLcr k-j V� t -e� =1 t 1-i L-P,-Q- ap <j4e 24 25 26 27 28 29 Page 2 1P Co EAST TAMIAMI TEL MASTER PLAN STUD' March 30, 2009 Public Input Meeting St. Peter the Apoatle Cothofir. 0haa;h Sign In Sheet NAIME ADDRESS EMAIL G�) VG CT-. Ai i& 4 Ski It e- k- t1j,6jZ? &ad 4C) 5 6 7 Cr%4--6 11 12 13 ess QfXOh like. -nlet �2 �Wl Rental Apartment Survey Collier %. March 11, 2014. Updated July 31, 2014 Prepared for Mr. Christopher Shucart Global Properties of Naples. ATTACHMENT A C1C7M1f NT 6G1f " TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 CONDITIONS OF THE REPORT ............................................................. ..............................3 1.1 INTENDED USE OF THIS REPORT .................................................................................. ............................... 3 1.2 INTENDED USER OF THIS REPORT ................................................................................ ............................... 3 2.0 SCOPE OF STUDY .................................................................................. ..............................3 2.1 TASK PLAN .................................................................................................................... ............................... 3 3.0 SOUTHWEST FLORIDA OVERVIEW AND FORECAST ...................... ..............................4 4.0 DEMOGRAPHIC AND MARKET PROFILE ........................................... ..............................5 4.1 OVERVIEW OF FLORIDA ................................................................................................. ............................... 5 4.2 OVERVIEW OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA ............................................................................ ............................... 5 5.0 COLLIER COUNTY RENTAL APARTMENT MARKET ......................... ..............................6 5.1 MARKET RATE APARTMENTS ...................................................................................... ............................... 16 6.0 MARKET PERFORMANCE SCORE ..................................................... .............................22 7.0 NEW RENTAL APARTMENT SUMMARY 8.0 FEE SIMPLE CONDOMINIUM RENTALS ............................................. .............................26 9.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMANDATIONS ........................................ .............................30 UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS............ ............ .............................31 RESTRICTION UPON DISCLOSURE AND USE .............................................. .............................33 COPYRIGHT, TRADEMARK AND LEGAL DISCLAIMER ................................ .............................34 TERMSAND CONDITIONS OF USE ................................................................. .............................35 © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 2/36 Introduction As we understand it, GLOBAL PROPERTIES OF NAPLES, LLC ( "Client ") would like ResortProperties.com, Inc. ( "Consultant ") to study the rental apartment market in Collier County, FL. This study is to research the supply and demand trends and associated pricing of the rental apartments in Collier County, FL. It will conclude with a report summarizing the market conditions. 1.0 Conditions of the Report; The Client is responsible for representations about its development plans, marketing expectations and for disclosure of any significant information that might affect the ultimate realization of the projected results. There will usually be differences between projected and actual results because events and circumstances frequently do not occur as expected, and the differences may be material. 1.1 Intended Use of This Report The intended use of the analysis is to provide GLOBAL PROPERTIES OF NAPLES, LLC ( "Client') with a current understanding of the supply and demand ratio and associated pricing of the rental apartment market in Collier County. 1.2 Intended User of This Report The intended user of this analysis is GLOBAL PROPERTIES OF NAPLES, LLC ( "Client ") only. No other users are authorized to use the report for any other purpose. 2.0 Scope of Study Based on our understanding of the current situation, the Consultant has developed a scope of work to analyze the Project as identified above. The scope is based on the Client's objectives, as described to the Consultant, which includes the following interrelated tasks. 2.1 Task Plan We will perform the following scope of professional services in order to meet the objectives of this assignment: Phase 1 Task 1 — Research and profile all the rental apartment complexes in Collier County and provide a conclusion of the supply and demand trends and associated pricing for the county as a whole. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 3/36 3.0 Southwest Florida Overview and Forecast As of the July 2012, census estimate, there are an estimated 1.14 million people living year -round in Southwest Florida. Since the 2000 Census, the area's population has increased by 38 %, the equivalent of 305,000 new residents. Looking ahead, Southwest Florida will continue to gain new residents at a faster rate on a percentage basis than the state of Florida. By the year 2015, the population of Southwest Florida is projected to total 1.21 million residents. This is an annual growth rate of 1.06% from 2012 to 2015 compared to Florida's annual growth rate of 0.83% during the same time period. The Consultant analyzed the major economic growth trends driving Collier County and generated a forecast for those indicators through 2015. The population of Collier County grew slightly between 2009 and 2010, then increased in 2012 and is expected to reach the peak population of 353,896 by 2015. The analysis is derived from the Consultant's annual economic forecast ",.,".JA nlnvm,on4 �nfl nnnc }rlir }iron f{)rpr�_ctc 7} the county level. The 2015 forecasted population represents a 6.4% increase over the 2012 population. Accompanying this population growth was a short term employment decline from 2009 and 2010; with growth occurring in 2011 and 2012. We expect increases in employment as the real estate market expands and as the baby boomers increase their purchases of second homes. The corporate relocation of Hertz Global in Estero will also help to spur employment growth in Collier. The majority of the decline in employment was in the construction industry and related support services such as mortgage and real estate services. The recent increases in employment have been in education, health care and retail trade, with the real estate related industries increasing steadily. Housing Market The housing market grew at an unsustainable pace from 2002 to 2006 creating an excess supply of housing units in relation to households formed in several areas of Collier County. The areas which saw the majority of this growth were generally more affordable areas of Naples Park, Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates. The abundance of easy money moved the market incentive for homes from one of personal preference to one of speculation. This speculative market inflated pricing beyond the historical property appreciation trends providing the market with false expectations of future home value stability. Home pricing began to fall in late 2006 and did not begin to stabilize until the third quarter of 2009. Since the beginning of 2011, home prices have. risen and have reached a growth rate of more than 15% per year over the past 2 years. This growth rate is not sustainable and is anticipated to level off as the inventory increases. There is currently pent up demand for new homes, however many existing homeowners who move up or down will explore new construction if the cost is commensurate with purchasing an existing home of similar utility. The new supply of housing will help alleviate the current shortage of product and provide a balance in the supply demand ratio. This limited supply of housing was also noted in the rental apartment market as no new projects were added due to the high cost of land. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 4/36 4.0 Demographic and Market Profile 4.1 Overview of Florida Florida is currently the nation's fourth most populous state, home to an estimated 19.3 million people. The U.S. Census Bureau projections indicate that the top three fastest- growing states between 2010 and 2030 will be- Florida (300,000 persons /year), Texas (400,000 persons /year), and California (400,000 persons /year). Florida is expected to have the largest net growth as well as the third highest percent increase (approximately 600 new residents are expected to move to Florida each day starting in 2014). By the year 2030, Florida's population is projected to total 28.7 million people and will edge past New York into third place in total population (California and Texas would continue to rank first and second respectively). Florida's population growth is depicted in the map below. This shows the latest projections of growth by county for the year 2030. As you can see, the most heavily populated counties in Florida are Broward, Miami -Dade and Palm Beach counties in Southeast Florida; Hillsborough and Pinellas counties in the Tampa metro market; Orange County in Central Florida, and Duval County in the Jacksonville metro area. Table 4.1.1 2030 Population Projections by County Florida Counties Population Projections 2030 O 100,000 or less - 100.001 - 250.000 - 250.001- 500,000 - 500.001 - 1.000.000 - 1,000,001 + —#I*' w�E as so ,eot�s Source: University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research 4.2 Overview of Southwest Florida Southwest Florida is defined by the three- county region that consists of Lee, Collier and Charlotte counties. The chart below shows the 2012 population estimate by county along with the 2015 © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 5/36 Population estimate. Charlotte County is the smallest of the three counties with 14% of the region's population while Lee County is the most populated with 57% of the total. Table 4.2.1 Southwest Florida Region Source: Bureau of Economic & Business Research, 2092 Population Estimates Currently, there are an estimated 1.14 million people living year -round in Southwest Florida. Since the 2000 Census, the area's population has increased by 38 %, the equivalent of 310,000 new residents. Looking ahead, Southwest Florida will continue to gain new residents at a faster rate on a percentage basis than the rest of the State of Florida. By the year 2015, the population of Southwest Florida is projected to total 1.21 million residents. This is an annual growth rate of 1.06 % from 2012 to 2015 compared to Florida's annual growth rate of 0.82% during the same time period. Strong population growth in the Southwest Florida market is due to both the in- migration of young professionals looking for a better quality of life as well as the ongoing arrival of baby boomer retirees. The number of baby boomers reaching retirement age is expected to peak in 2020, however the delay in this group's move to other markets has been pushed ahead, therefore the demand is expected to increase. The appeal of the Southwest Florida market indicates a steady demand for housing over the long term. In addition to the growth in permanent residents, the number of visitors to the area is on a continuous rise. Southwest Florida International Airport, located in Lee County, has undergone a $438 million expansion with future capacity to handle ten million passengers annually. In 2012, the annual traffic was 7.3 million passengers which is up from prior years. The expansion of the 1 -75 and a dedicated interchange (currently under construction) for RSW has significantly improved the capacity of vehicular transportation infrastructure. The annual economic impact of the Southwest Florida International Airport is estimated at $3.8 Billion annually. Overall, the infrastructure investments made in Southwest Florida over the past 5 years have significantly improved the future capacity for growth. This capacity will allow more residents to enjoy the quality of life currently afforded to the market. It will also positively impact the area's ability to attract new business, which would help to diversify the local economy, further enhancing the region's future growth potential. 5.0 COLLIER COUNTY RENTAL APARTMENT MARKET A review of 41 rental apartments in Collier was conducted to estimate the overall supply. The apartments utilized in this sample are those with 100 or more units and range in age from new to © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 6136 Annual Growth County 2012 Population %ofRegi <2015Population %of Region Hate Charlotte 162,449 14.2% 169,681 13.9% 1,446 Lee 645,293 56.6% 695,952 57.1% 10,132 Collier 332,427 29.2% 353,896 29.0% 4,294 Total 1,140,169 1,219,529 Source: Bureau of Economic & Business Research, 2092 Population Estimates Currently, there are an estimated 1.14 million people living year -round in Southwest Florida. Since the 2000 Census, the area's population has increased by 38 %, the equivalent of 310,000 new residents. Looking ahead, Southwest Florida will continue to gain new residents at a faster rate on a percentage basis than the rest of the State of Florida. By the year 2015, the population of Southwest Florida is projected to total 1.21 million residents. This is an annual growth rate of 1.06 % from 2012 to 2015 compared to Florida's annual growth rate of 0.82% during the same time period. Strong population growth in the Southwest Florida market is due to both the in- migration of young professionals looking for a better quality of life as well as the ongoing arrival of baby boomer retirees. The number of baby boomers reaching retirement age is expected to peak in 2020, however the delay in this group's move to other markets has been pushed ahead, therefore the demand is expected to increase. The appeal of the Southwest Florida market indicates a steady demand for housing over the long term. In addition to the growth in permanent residents, the number of visitors to the area is on a continuous rise. Southwest Florida International Airport, located in Lee County, has undergone a $438 million expansion with future capacity to handle ten million passengers annually. In 2012, the annual traffic was 7.3 million passengers which is up from prior years. The expansion of the 1 -75 and a dedicated interchange (currently under construction) for RSW has significantly improved the capacity of vehicular transportation infrastructure. The annual economic impact of the Southwest Florida International Airport is estimated at $3.8 Billion annually. Overall, the infrastructure investments made in Southwest Florida over the past 5 years have significantly improved the future capacity for growth. This capacity will allow more residents to enjoy the quality of life currently afforded to the market. It will also positively impact the area's ability to attract new business, which would help to diversify the local economy, further enhancing the region's future growth potential. 5.0 COLLIER COUNTY RENTAL APARTMENT MARKET A review of 41 rental apartments in Collier was conducted to estimate the overall supply. The apartments utilized in this sample are those with 100 or more units and range in age from new to © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 6136 40 years. The projects are located throughout the county with the newer communities located in southern Collier County due to historically lower land cost and availability of land in the urban area. Located below is a map showing the location of the apartments researched for this study followed by a map key. say `Map ID Cnunhy Club �'�f�rotr�i a" --------- Y••t101 ?iE•r 6�ntbr IA <d�trirra .a.fr :e cuntry Club •: dix}e � 7 Tlw i Club ardpud? At Tbs CluiiiGT—C 1.1vil:1 SuPWd [cuntrM Pied Rirfifj�7tl i-Jp celltclub L ?ub ' a rb,bld - 6a r-,.y i Glyn 4W�:oUi�.i Gcgr, lub ' Crrses ±p!t Clui : ! " w :ESA1:, U 3 1 SY3 — -- -' - F�t:e�n i_L:e:.td Ttburon:_ a rind =n �r'`` _ Uyll Club ' Coll 20 o� :bib I 7h. e]uaris 13-1a E`er- rhvl Club At 1-6J6�J? Tie a,s. +�kc du:a p .;.I C Wb • � l en1�. ibill Cou nlr_e 'Nub .:. -- q Vanderbilt B- wch'Rr1-+ =' =— Cdj` 7 Tlw i 115 ardpud? say, Ilea: � 33 ctt Pied Rirfifj�7tl i-Jp =- .._ -.._o i4� — t a � — O p p- s " w 4 j SY3 — -- -' .. a rind =n �r'`` ___'..Fk,R1it_•, " i'Grenda ' arl 20 o� rWh 27 tlaFles :' } S 12' - - -- Am pod Nsp)tl.` - �.. j,1 1+RIPtl 841 n ^ 8 N • SJyjtias a 18 Say sp . 29 40 ocF 41 �k Cg3lar j, Caunuy .. Tlx Traaa u P:, © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. OW - rbid8 f'-611 CM) Goldin G.I. IiWdW FC, RRCAN. EsOJapon, em,=3 7136 Cdj` •S`it:l7 ;cST: � say, S.W—: E-.L DsL -me, UAVTEG, IJS mEn, Ear?Chi- N m8 KoJeg). Esti (T © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. OW - rbid8 f'-611 CM) Goldin G.I. IiWdW FC, RRCAN. EsOJapon, em,=3 7136 I Bear Creek 21 Northgate Club 2 Belvedere 22 Oasis ofples (Arbor Walk) 3 Berkshire Reserve 23 Ospreys Landing 4 Bermuda Island 24 Meadow Brook Preserve (Turtle Creek) 5 Brittany Bay I & 11 25 River Reach 6 Bryn Mawr 26 Sabal Key 7 College Park 27 Saddlebrook Village 8 Coral Palms 28 San Marino (Aventine) 9 Goodlette Arms 29 Shadowood Park 10 Heritage (WrSoleil) 30 Somerset Palms (Arbor View) 11 Heron Park 31 Summer Lakes 1 12 Ibis Club 32 Summer Lakes 11 13 Jasmine Cay 33 Summer Wind 14 La Costa 34 Tuscan Isle 15 Lagu Bay 35 Villas of Capri 16 Malibu Lakes 36 Waverley Place 18 Naples 701 38 Whistler's Green 19 Naples Place 1 -III 39 Windsong Club 20 Noah's Landing 40 Aster Lely 41 Sierra Grande The apartments surveyed include both market and subsidized housing and are all included to provide a census of the rental apartment market. Located below is a profile of each apartment complex followed by a map showing the year built of each complex and the most recent market attributes for each. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 8/36 U � 3 f- a _ z -6 U2 EU2asO _ oc_ o E E E m E E E ¢mra mm m`muu °Q xxo�.� -992 zzzzoo�a;m 0 rmanmmol�.��",�' ,d.�"a �tO.y.^y°�°,m -� °ry NNr"lN "�iry ^ry NNmmMmmmm�^+I rtmlmc V N N N L Of Q U C E O U _LD If O CL 0 d O U d' r O N ^c d o 0 6 o 6 A A o p .. O o A 6 e~4 A .A O .04 o 6 �4 6 .�.� ----------------------------------------- —N- -- -------- ----- cryhNNN-- ---- --- ------ � 0 W r o b o o � 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0° 0 .y 0 G N p c C o 6' .y 0 O N p 0 c 0 0 G O o 6 O o n n m o m m n m O m m p m ^ Q n F2 N � n o o A O N O A O c 6 0 'i p a 0 0° 0 0 0 0 O O O O o o O O O o 0 o � H NtA o � y O 0 0 m 0 o N 0 o O W O O 1p o p 6 m 0 nO � o O p 6 o m m c V n p m O ° � O °m O ^ p y p m d o o n � .9- NN-NyHKN----N—N— N ----NN Nh—NN —to-----N- `� o o o 0 o p o 0 c 0 0 0 ----------------- ------ --- �j e-1 O� o eg.m.m.o, m�mmq�mo oa�mm� M` mo tig m� o m� m� m m m m m m m m >� c � � 'O o g m m 4 S oe rn n m m m m m m m m m m m m S rn m m o m m oro m O. o m tii ? `'mwmoYO,mmmmogO,mm�`O m�$mgJO m m&mm O. i rv� m� m Z N m N m a om m o v o m °o o umi m m O1 0 "� ry ry µ o. o nun m O � m z � m m o g m m m m ~ Q m a q m m y ? x m a a O U ° n r U � 3 f- a _ z -6 U2 EU2asO _ oc_ o E E E m E E E ¢mra mm m`muu °Q xxo�.� -992 zzzzoo�a;m 0 rmanmmol�.��",�' ,d.�"a �tO.y.^y°�°,m -� °ry NNr"lN "�iry ^ry NNmmMmmmm�^+I rtmlmc V N N N L Of Q U C E O U _LD If O CL 0 d O U d' r O N 'zpruigs RASEc % c`�itr�lentS Year Buil t Collier ; ; F.' a C W L'• At t r. FL. -,tom r Ida Ga _•tJC:,1Ie_tr ?III =.IUG =ppt., s Her e &ge ,,:1 Ctub Irnm4k31ea.h,cf .. .. ... . ® ~ Aus8 ph r l oat Go If who _ rt_Lu l +i;rai' Tifr�tou 'zrrjt•rt'It - - _r li Cluls r;nlf•;C.GUUUt+ C 6b _ lub :.,j Vandm Wit 8Okb-R'd— V The 4S trsey�rJ. _n'Jr fNe L= 7 T" n • tti 4 e - (`irteRiiiriK Ad Z - .3 I -i, L i V c � � } �C t::f'Ita i ...__ —_ GCICIEh tj} -zek Club! A t.tl_'n( ,_ r 'arl;� F- .... _ mQ. -7�T F. I- b e r, �+ r Legend Col lierApa rtments_2_14 YRBLT_AC T 1931 -199fl 1991 -2000 2001 -2005 2006 - 2014 C any 6=i ' 1 - -� '= �R3t•JEznak2 -H 3mn10a:Tr-Rd � E! - rr_.aClub t;l,,aer.n �4!-iFa, _tug �y tr T7Eoco _ p:v�s: FSri. Q -Lorme, h'AWTEL, USGS, Irt�m'sF.JPG. HRCM, E rl Japan. MET!, Esri Ch ina 4Hcng Kong). Esri (Thailand), Tc�,FO13 © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 10 136 © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 10 136 a7 3 H tY9 P! d CD A E a! U al co () a) N w +N+ .0 2) Q U CC C 0 U Ui a) If a) Q 0 L if 0 N Co N O C5 ti a m N � K r-1 ti ti m d � � d 01 oi K N N ti m V y! 4- 10 N m N e-1 N N d' 111 m O f� O1 1� D1 O N M N m m n O1 m I� m m of m 01 m O Ot m N N [C f` m O Il W eq W m Gt O O � m yl O a a a O a A C C 4 A O O O C C a C a a Cl a a a ti a4 C cc m M V1 V1 Vf V1 K V1 V1 V) U? VT V1 V} V} V} VT V) V) V> V} V? V} V1 V} Y/f V1 Vl V1 VT N Vn VT N Of� M oo O M N M n m O O M 110'1 O n M 1011 M n M poO d l�fl lMO u01 Y01 L l00 O1 O CY O1 T ci 01 m O m O m N al 01 - Cl O m Q1 O 01 01 m 111 1-{ ci cr N ti N ri ti N ei' N N N e-I N N ei N m M V1 V> ilT VT V1 111 u? V} V1 VT VT V1 VT V} V) V1 VT VT V1 V} VT VT V1 Vl V1 Vt V? V} N V1 d ei O m t N W N N O c00 two p p - 0 0 00 O- - 9 0 0cn chi 1011 M Ac�1 M N N N O N N a O N N M d' �'-� O H O N N M M e-I N N ei tm r-I c-1 ei e-1 C m M M � ON1 ON1 N O M O QO1 Owl 0^1 M N O O m 001 r n M ai M c�-1 W CO n OOO r~i O T N Onl O e-1 �"� O e4 O a o 14 A a-i O .N a 0 0 a '-I ti .--! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A o do o N z m N VT Vf VT t/} �/} 4/T N 4A a? ih VT V1 vT 1h vT t? in Lf V} t/} tl? V} iA V} iM1 ilT 4h VY VY a/} aM1 i/f to 4R t? VF VY i/? N v pN uV11f M O mMm M O N IOi1 N [10'1 M 1+01 O n W 0 0 10l1 N M N M 0 M I� N Y] O N O n u01 n oo 0 m "M F! 8 O m O N 1� m m Ol m m m m N Ln 0 Ol oo N ei m N m m m m O O1 N N N at m m Ol O m i-1 N N N ti � N ti N e-1 N N N N e-I m m N i!T V> Vf VT V1 u♦ V? of VY V1 V} V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 VY V} V1 V1 N V1• V1 V1 V1 V} VT V1 Vt V1 V1 Vf V1 V1 u> N V1 O N N HN O l0 t!1 O 0 1� 0 0N l0 Ol C O d' cNO O N N N MV lD M O n m [r01 m m °m u01 a O�n ��h{ tO W 0m1 O 01 Qt O Ol N Ot a--I N O m a1 01 0 0 Q7 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 al Ol I� m T 0 0 �'-i iy O h ti N N N N N N N N N N N N N ei N N N N ti N N ca m N N tD 1� 0 0 u1 Ot n M 111 O t0 tll t� O1 m R d' p } O m 01 m c l N Ol a O 0 N O 0O 001 OMI N �1-i O N 01 O 1.- m e4 O A A A O A C O O O C O e- a O Zpp M m N V} V! VY V1 v1 V? V1 V1 V1 V1 VT Vf VT V1 V} Vl a!? i/> Vf V} 1/? S/} � 1/} i/} yy yy V} lrt i/ t? VT N d {fN�� O w 001 1011 N I m 001 T m trail - oo N O O M N 001 f0n N O Ih r W O O T 10 01 oo n n N m m n n r n m Q1 t0 N M tm0 lM0 lM0 K m e-1 t? ut VT VT V1 VS VF V1 VY V1 V? V} V> N of VT N VT V} V) VT V} V? VT VT v} V> V1 V1 VT N V1 4l1 N O W p0pp� 111 u01 O 0m1 M P ti O a00 .Ni M V tm11 N IN+I O Vml t0A O W IN11 0~j VI (� n K m N v v U d C Y N � Z O O C x a1 3 w = c ¢ a E m v ._ °cmi o v u m u v u y N m d U y u Z c O m J T E C t6 T O C O �' N a0. 10 U IC O U T L C N i d Ip m 3 d J Y O. J y 3 N N N N C p N d O J C7 O N v Co O T O d Y a u m y e m m m t H` o m E E E m a`1 Y OOD E° c° m o_ o E U n n n m— o m a1 v m E E E E `I = m e r c y `o d '° w m m> z> d Q v a m d •�= Z' o o vn m o o m m m r o >> 3 a mco mmm`muu19xx z zzoo�� 0 m [r1 111 p1 ai N M V 1 D h m 0 N r{ 0 eri y O N N N N N N N N N N M M rnn M M M M M im+t m V R co () a) N w +N+ .0 2) Q U CC C 0 U Ui a) If a) Q 0 L if 0 N Co N O Located below is a summary of the historical occupancy and rental rate for each of the apartments comparing January 2011 to December 2013. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R, 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 37 38 39 40 41 © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 12/36 Overall Occupany Weighted Rent COMPLEXSUMMARY History perSQFT Apartment Year Built Total Units Avg sqft ' 11 2011 12/1/2013 1/1/2011 12/1/2013 Bear Creek 1995 120 969 93% 100% $ 0.72 $ 0.92 Belvedere 1986 162 612 100% 100% $ 0.62 $ 0.70 Berkshire Reserve 2000 146 1,300 81% 100% $ 0.77 $ 0.82 Bermuda Island 1999 360 1,051 88% 97% $ 1.06 $ 1.12 Brittany Bay I & II 2002 392 1,011 97% 93% $ 0.76 $ 0.85 Bryn Mawr 1998 240 938 86% 98% $ 1.02 $ 1.15 College Park 1999 210 954 98% 97% $ 0.76 $ 0.90 ( -nrp.! opjrv+., 1987 288 821 90% 100%1 $ 0.78 $ 0.98 Goodlette Arms " 1976 vU 486 " i00% 100% " Heritage (MerSoleil) 2001 320 1,012 92% 90% $ 0.70 $ 0.84 Heron Park 1997 248 947 1009/. 96% $ 0.77 $ 1.00 Ibis Club 2000 134 1,017 90% 95% $ 0.70 $ 0.79 Jasmine Cay 1995 72 1,100 99% 99% $ 0.73 $ 0.88 La Costa 1995 276 1,080 941% 92% $ 1.05 $ 1.26 Lagu Bay 1989 363 1,027 93% 98% $ 0.91 $ 1.06 Malibu Lakes 2002 356 1,057 97% 99% $ 0.99 $ 1.13 Meadow Lakes (Saxon Manor) 1997 252 996 929/6 98% $ 0.75 $ 0.94 Naples701 1975 188 750 8691. 98% $ 0.83 $ 0.97 Naples Place 1 -III 1985 160 800 97% 99% $ 0.95 $ 1.06 Noah's Landing 2002 264 971 92% 100% $ 0.68 $ 0.88 Northgate Club 1988 120 910 92% 90% $ 0.74 $ 0.98 Oasis ofples (Arbor Walk) 1991 216 969 100% 100% $ 0.89 $ 1.03 Ospreys Landing 1995 176 1,013 95% 96% $ 0.74 $ 0.86 Meadow Brook Preserve (Turtle Creek) 1997 268 952 62% 96% $ 0.80 $ 1.12 River Reach 1987 556 902 95% 100% $ 0.85 $ 1.07 Sabal Key 1987 200 976 91% 100% $ 0.82 $ 1.04 SaddlebrookVillage 1999 140 834 98% 99% $ 0.53 $ 0.65 San Marino (Aventine) 2001 350 1,092 72% 96% $ 0.84 $ 1.07 Shadowood Park 1989 96 1,185 100% 100% $ 0.63 $ 0.74 Somerset Palms (Arbor View) 1999 168 1,057 85% 95% $ 0.62 $ 0.72 Summer Lakes 1 2003 140 1,162 96% 95% $ 0.69 $ 0.84 Summer Lakes II 2007 276 1,032 97% 97% $ 0.73 $ 0.88 Summer Wind 1986 368 883 98% 97% $ 0.83 $ 1.01 Tuscan Isle 2003 298 920 89% 30% $ 0.74 $ 0.88 Villas of Capri 1997 235 928 76% 97% $ 0.78 $ 0.99 Waverley Place 1990 300 840 78% 97% $ 0.82 $ 0.87 Whistler's Cove 1999 240 1,042 96% 90% $ 0.75 $ 0.80 Whistler's Green 1999 168 1,051 96% 95% $ 0.74 $ 0.81 WindsongClub 1993 120 991 9891. 99% $ 0.78 $ 0.84 Aster Lely (New) 2014 308 1,153 $ 1.13 Sierra Grande (New) 2014 270 1,175 $ 1.09 Average Avg 1996 Total Units 9814 Percent of Total Average Size Average Occupancy 92% 95% Cng from prior period 2% -136 Average Weighted Rent persgft $ 0.81 $ 0.96 Cng from prior period 21% S% © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 12/36 The development of apartments in Collier County started in the mid 1970's with a surge of new development occurring in the mid 1980's which coincided with the first wave of new residential development. As we can see from the graph below, the majority of the apartments built consisted of 1 and 2 bedroom units. The first real influx of 3 bedroom units did not begin until the mid 1990's, following that decade's recession. Development of rental units from the mid 1990's through today consisting primarily of 2 and 3 bedroom units with a very limited supply of 4 bedroom units. Product size by bedroom count has stayed relatively consistent for the 1 bedroom and has increased slightly for 2 and 3 bedroom units. The few 4 bedroom units are the designs that have increased in size the most. Historical Development 1400 1200 1400 1000 1200 � 1000 s � 800 800 600 600 200 0 1990 1991 1993 1995 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2007 2014 400 MMMMIAverageofiBR Average of2BR MVM Average of3BR M Averageof41311 — Linear (Average of 11311) - —Linear (Average of 21311) —Linear (Average of 3611) —Linear (Average of 413R) 200 0 Ln LD Ln LO h 00 M 0 • i m Ln n 00 (n 0 ci N M r� n n 00 00 00 00 00 rn M 0) tT M M M O 0 0 0 O c-L tT M M M M M tit M m M M M M M O O O O O O ei ci H ei If N ei H ei rl H e-1 e-i 1-4 N N N N N N M$UmOf1BR MSumof2BR MSumof3BR ■Sumof48R Product size by bedroom count has stayed relatively consistent for the 1 bedroom and has increased slightly for 2 and 3 bedroom units. The few 4 bedroom units are the designs that have increased in size the most. 0 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 13/36 Unit Size by BR Count and YR Built 1800 1600 1400 1200 � 1000 s � 800 600 400 200 0 1990 1991 1993 1995 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2007 2014 MMMMIAverageofiBR Average of2BR MVM Average of3BR M Averageof41311 — Linear (Average of 11311) - —Linear (Average of 21311) —Linear (Average of 3611) —Linear (Average of 413R) 0 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 13/36 Located below we will analyze the projects based on their location, age and rental rate per sqft. The chart and graph below represent the weighted rate per sqft based on the unit mix of all the projects. As we can see the rate has increased significantly over the past four years. rei�xrj�i� wed R� "' ?t+ i $1.15 $1.05 $0.95 $0.85 $0.75 $0.65 $0.55 $0.45 $0.35 O O 1 1 1 'y iti 4'r ti try Pry �ry `Sti `ti�"� C3 C�i �°i `,`1 0 ;y ��y Qa.y e�;Y e 0 'L 1 O O F P %J' P O O Q P 1 P O O Q P � P O O -1Bed - -2 Bed -®3 Bed —4 Bed Occupancy has also risen significantly over the past 4 years to the current 95% which represents stabilized occupancy when you consider a 5% turnover rate. Located below is a chart and graph showing the historical occupancy from October 2010 to present. Oct -10 Jan -11 Oct -11 Mar -13 Dec -13 Avg Occupancy 903/0 92% 91% 96% 95% © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 14/36 Average Rate by Bedroom Count Bedroom Count Oct -10 Jan -11 Oct -11 Mar -13 Dec -13 1Bed $ 0.90 $ 0.94 $0.91 $1.00 $1.11 2 Bed $ 0.77 $ 0.79 $ 0.80 $ 0.89 $ 0.95 3Bed $ 0.71 $ 0.75 $0.73 $0.81 $0.91 4 Bed $ 0.76 $ 0.78 $ 0.81 $ 0.85 $ 0.91 rei�xrj�i� wed R� "' ?t+ i $1.15 $1.05 $0.95 $0.85 $0.75 $0.65 $0.55 $0.45 $0.35 O O 1 1 1 'y iti 4'r ti try Pry �ry `Sti `ti�"� C3 C�i �°i `,`1 0 ;y ��y Qa.y e�;Y e 0 'L 1 O O F P %J' P O O Q P 1 P O O Q P � P O O -1Bed - -2 Bed -®3 Bed —4 Bed Occupancy has also risen significantly over the past 4 years to the current 95% which represents stabilized occupancy when you consider a 5% turnover rate. Located below is a chart and graph showing the historical occupancy from October 2010 to present. Oct -10 Jan -11 Oct -11 Mar -13 Dec -13 Avg Occupancy 903/0 92% 91% 96% 95% © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 14/36 Historical Occupancy 97% 96% 95% 94% 93% 92% 91% 90% I 89% - 88% I 87% ti� 1� tit 'y,' titi titi tit tit titi ti� 11" 'Lti try titi 1� 1� ti� ti� 1� 13 Ooc O�c �yb PQc ,mac V0 doe Qyc �� PQC ��d P�Ci o�c OeC �yo Pit' '$c V0 op, OyC -Avg Occupancy z The chart and graph below show the rental rates and size by bedroom count for the current period. Bedroom Count Avg Size Dec 2013 Rate 1 Bed 776 $ 1.11 2 Bed 1,015 $ 0.95 3 Bed 1,209 $ 0.91 4 Bed 1,407 $ 0.91 © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 15/36 5.1 Market Rate Apartments Market rate apartments were the first developed in the county, with subsidized housing starting in the late 1980's to accommodate the increasing employment for hotels and other hospitality related industries. The mix of units by bedroom count is consistent with the overall supply and is primarily 1 and 2 bedroom units. The major influx of market rate 3 bedroom units did not begin until 2000 when the availability of affordable family accommodations was restricting due to rapidly rising home prices. The majority of rental apartment complexes within the Collier County and the general region, are located on major arterial roadways in order to provide easy access for their tenants, higher visibility for rental apartment marketing and provide reduced land cost in order to make the ensuing rental rate more affordable. Typically rental apartment complexes prefer to be located closer to employment centers and other support facilities within the area. A convenient location is generally considered more desirable as it reduces transportation cost and thus overall living expenses. There are a significant number of approved residential units within existing planned unit developments in Collier County. These units are generally planned for the development of fee simple condominiums and single- family homes catering to people who want to purchase versus Y rent. The communities that offer amenities such as lakes, golf courses or other open space utilize those amenities to cater to the larger percentage of the market that prefer to purchase real estate. Located below is a chart showing the market rate apartments based on their density. From this analysis, we can see the average for the existing market rate apartment is over 13 units per acre. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 16136 9 MapID Apartmentme County Acerage Density Year Built Total Units 2 Belvedere Collier 10.2 15.9 1986 162 3 Berkshire Reserve Collier 11.41 12.8 2000, 146 5 Brittany Bay I & 11 Collier 37.4 10.5 2002 392 6 Bryn Mawr Collier 20 12.0 1998 240 12 Ibis Club Collier 14.43 9.3 2000 134 13 Jasmine Cay Collier 2.5 28.8 1995 72 14 La Costa Collier 31 8.9 1995 276 15 Lagu Bay Collier 38.2 9.5 1989 363 16 Malibu Lakes Collier 24 14.8 2002 356 18 Naples 701 Collier 8.66 21.7 1975 188 19 Naples Place 1 -III Collier 10 16.0 1985 160 21 Northgate Club Collier 9.95 12.1 1988 120 22 Oasis ofples (Arbor Walk) Collier 18.4 11.7 1991 216 28 San Marino (Aventine) Collier 40 8.8 2001 350 29 Shadowood Park Collier 13.3 7.2 1989 96 33 Summer Wind Collier 29 12.7 1986 368 36 Waverley Place Collier 27.3 11.0 1990 300 Average 20.34 13.16 1992 231.71 Located below is a map showing the location of the market rate apartments followed by graphs and charts summarizing these projects. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 17/36 Cof lie r [Market Rate Apartments 13 Ry :tub 'i:ounlrr. o. "tubs vu.:,tl, ., :. ` . - - - • . _ Gauntry �_lub c.IvL:.I --.TR. �¢'m,t�3rylln {:, +�Slirr 7,;mM ry•7iuh n1{4 4lur ` 1t TN, 4uy1'.;fe'k Imt -fixt _nand C.uwry Goif+; luh Club 1 fe ti:WbAt {:uacfly R•: i_tJcollif Ou- 01clut rr.yw_.s Hera, +alf i-lub• Ba Pin? s •36A 12iub rohc.an W ch: T;Lwai� zmac•rhiN - - x3n11radb r -�.e .....•r..: ' Lb -- . VanJelbilt Weach i. it rr Ix CJ �22 ne 19 'maeacet: . r3oleJr:n f N. ple, m � 14 - -Pine Rrdly 2 1J� s a S � r � g t 4 i e. •-,tub,� 3 6 r 7 f.iaFt_a 13 ltumcrpal, .'R3rIioRrl D AtrFtr1 2 ;5 R N3plak' Daxl-. Blvd' 84' m 18 ctr _ 29 . - - .- fiatitlin akHamm oc ".t•P. 41 - -.Htbia u- 00va r _ h [�;gend t B3y fs1�;•e; � #' • YearEndiWarketScDre Irx k• Sarre-: Esri. CELar me, -NAMTEQ, USES: Intlorma C, NRCAN• Firl Japan. - 1 I -n. E-ri China IY.eng K ;?;j E >ri [Thar�ntl }, f. tcm 2013 © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 18/36 i Product size by bedroom count has stayed relatively consistent for the 1 bedroom and has increased slightly for 2 and 3 bedroom units. Historical Development Market 800 700 600 500 400 1200 .� Now .r 300 son 1000 am 200 100 0 1975 1985 1986 1988 1989 1990 1991 1995 1998 2000 2001 2002 2014 ■Sum of 1BRU ■Sum of 2BRU WSum of 3 BRU ■Sum of 4BRU Product size by bedroom count has stayed relatively consistent for the 1 bedroom and has increased slightly for 2 and 3 bedroom units. Located below we will analyze the projects based on their location, age and rental rate per sqft. The chart and graph below represent the weighted rate per sqft based on the unit mix of the market rate projects only. As we can see the rate has increased significantly over the past four years. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 19/36 Unit Size by BR Count and YR Built - Market 1600 1400 wr 1200 .� Now .r son 1000 am Now 800 600 400 200 MEN E 0 1975 1985 1986 1988 1989 1990 1991 1995 1998 2000 2001 2002 2014 �AverageoflBRS Average of26RS Average of3BRS Average of 4BRS —Linear (Average of iBRS) -Linear (Average of 2BRS) `+ —Linear (Average of 3BRS) Located below we will analyze the projects based on their location, age and rental rate per sqft. The chart and graph below represent the weighted rate per sqft based on the unit mix of the market rate projects only. As we can see the rate has increased significantly over the past four years. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 19/36 Occupancy has also risen significantly over the past 4 years to the current 97% which represents stabilized occupancy when you consider a 3% turnover rate. Located below is a chart and graph showing the historical occupancy from October 2010 to present. Market Rate Oct -10 Jan -11 Oct -11 Mar -13 Dec -13 Avg Occupancy 88% 92% 90% 97% 97% © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 20136 Average Rate by Bedroom Count - Market Bedroom $1.15 $1.05 Count $0.95 Oct -10 Jan -11 Oct -11 Mar -13 Dec -13 1 Bed $ 0.90 $ 0.93 $ 0.92 $ 1.02 $1.11 2 Bed $ 0.83 $ 0.85 $ 0.84 $ 0.92 $ 0.99 3 Bed $ 0.80 $ 0.81 $ 0.80 $ 0.85 $ 0.97 4 Bed $ 0.80 $ 0.86 $ 0.86 $ 0.92 $ 0.94 Occupancy has also risen significantly over the past 4 years to the current 97% which represents stabilized occupancy when you consider a 3% turnover rate. Located below is a chart and graph showing the historical occupancy from October 2010 to present. Market Rate Oct -10 Jan -11 Oct -11 Mar -13 Dec -13 Avg Occupancy 88% 92% 90% 97% 97% © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 20136 Historical Rate - Market $1.15 $1.05 $0.95 $0.75 $0.65 $0.55 - -u- $0.45 $035 `y1' O ``cy3 �y3 OIL pPo 4 � rev PQ� l`�c PJ4o O� Q� Ps 1J PJ O O� �� Q l� PJ O� —1 Bed —2 Bed —3 Bed —4 Bed Occupancy has also risen significantly over the past 4 years to the current 97% which represents stabilized occupancy when you consider a 3% turnover rate. Located below is a chart and graph showing the historical occupancy from October 2010 to present. Market Rate Oct -10 Jan -11 Oct -11 Mar -13 Dec -13 Avg Occupancy 88% 92% 90% 97% 97% © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 20136 Historical Occupancy- Market 98% 96% 94% 92% 90% 88% 86% 84% 82% pc, O° �e� �Qt hoc PJ4 O° pe Feo QQ� �JC Pp4i O° p° F� QQ �J QJ p Qe -Avg Occupancy The chart and graph below show the market rental rates and size by bedroom count for the current period. Market Rate Bedroom Relationship of Avg Size to Rate per sgft- Market Count Avg Size Dec 2013 Rate 1 Bed 826 $ 1.11 2 Bed 1,047 $ 0.99 3 Bed 1,277 $ 0.97 14 Bed 1,501 $ 0.94 0 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 21/36 Relationship of Avg Size to Rate per sgft- Market $1.20 1,600 1,400 $U0 1,200 $0.80 1,000 800 $0.60 600 $0.40 400 $0.20 200 lBed 2Bed 3Bed 4Bed Avg Size -Dec2013Rate 0 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 21/36 The market rate apartments are located primarily in the southern portion of the county and have easy access to the employment centers. The newest projects are located in this area due to the availability of land and the lower land cost. 6.0 MARKET PERFORMANCE SCORE The consultant developed a market performance score for each rental apartment complex using age, average occupancy and average rental rate per sgft as criteria. Other subjective criteria, such as condition, management quality, renter profile, etc can be added to the scoring system to enhance the comparison. After the score has been determined, each sites score is mapped to see the spatial distribution of the best performing complexes. For this study, we are only reporting on the market rate projects. After we have determined the criteria for the score, we developed a ranking system for each criterion. In this case a score of between 1 and 5 was selected for each criterion with assigned thresholds for each. The n-e 4 fi . t: yrh+rh n•••e.r�r Lu�srrvwS iGiiy... .i V:i ... .. , vii .,.. ...�... ..o_ .._ ..,., and a higher attribute. Located below are the criteria and the ranking for each criterion. Age r to hi score 0 5 5 6 10 4 11 15 3 16 20 2 20 1000 1 occunancvi%1 to hi score 95.00% 5 90.00% 94.90% 4 80.00% 89.90% 3 75.001/. 79.90% 2 75.00% 1 Rent /Soft W to hi score $0.90000 S $0.80000 $0.89990 4 $0.70000 $0.79999 3 $0.60000 $0.69999 2 $0.60000 1 A score was assigned to each attribute for each rental apartment complex. Once each attribute is assigned for each rental apartment complex, we weighted each to calculate a final score. Located below is the weighting we assigned to each attributes score. Weights Age 15% occupancy 50% Rent /Sgft 35% 100% Below are the individual scores for age, occupancy and rental rate per sqft for each of the market rate complexes and the final weighted average score. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 22/136 Belvedere Berkshire Reserve Brittany Bay I a II Bryn Mawr Ibis Club Jasmine Cay La Costa Lagu Bay Malibu Lakes Naples 701 Naples Place 1 -III Northgate Club oasis ofples (Arbor Walk) San Marino (Aventine) Shadowood Park Summer Wind Waverley Place Aster Lely Sierra Grande ID Age ®ccupancV Rate 2 1 5 3 3 5 5 3 4 6 2 5 12 3 5 13 2 5 14 2 4 15 1 5 16 3 5 18 1 5 19 1 5 21 1 4 22 1 5 28 3 5 29 1 5 33 1 5 36 1 5 40 5 1 41 5 1 3 4 4 1 1 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 5 4 5 5 Market 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 score 4.7 5.4 4.9 4.2 4.3 5.2 5.1 5.4 5.7 5.4 5.4 4.9 5. 4. 5. 5. 4. 4. The final weighted scores range from a low of 4.0 for Aster Lely and Sierra Grande because they are in the lease up stage of their development to a high of 5.7 for Aventine and Malibu Lakes due to their newer age. In order to identify the spatial distribution of the best performing sites, we mapped each complex and delineated the score range by color code. Located below is a map of the market rate apartment complexes by final weighted score. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 23/36 Collier Market Rate Apartments luh. rlub C(u III( VChib tihclrl TOT �5 WestG'Af t:, iliCT KIP d ;I -IT.• Rer�r:e 'nuntgrIiA, :; dl .x. C Win I Tltie i;ual•�ra =< Irnrarral 4.tr�rtJ -eu irn) iuiEGluh Club The tuGAt afrp Legend Dec_13_sco • Less than 3.5 • 3 -51 to 4 0 4 -1 to 4.5 4.51 to 5 Over 5 o life d I.• F) :,a d HF-IItm4- C:IdC_.Ifrar '�eliC19G F_h��n L1�i:h; rrhurc•n Ircl> V 22 U 15 'o rPlna Ride Z li , z m G 4 tY i S � C et d Q C a 0 •3u� Ctub; Legend Dec_13_sco • Less than 3.5 • 3 -51 to 4 0 4 -1 to 4.5 4.51 to 5 Over 5 o life d d HF-IItm4- h" Ccldr n attic _ W rl -e al t 16 Rte~ ' U'a[r<F_� ti cS -n 13 "- �Radirl r'+cl Q . n r .AirF!�r1 — , V N5y(es`- CtJviillau' i 1: O_18' F4faf%IE$ 1 . L s7 Y { H+ti:ic u �oH >;iuh Gila; Sjy .N Selrces: ESrf. Cdsrme. NAV -T£C, USGS ), T1ETI; Esri China {Hcng Ka 4Y. Fsif (Thaft P. Cf:: s;i•.. Caunk) ,- lu h N R^„N, FM Japan. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 24/36 P. Cf:: s;i•.. Caunk) ,- lu h N R^„N, FM Japan. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 24/36 The highest scoring apartment complexes are Avertine, located in Collier Blvd, 1/2 south of Interstate 75 and Malibu Lakes, located south of Immokalee Road adjacent to 1 -75. These two communities have similar designs as they offer limited garages and extensive amenities. The other North Naples apartment complexes are located along Pine Ridge Road and have easy access to 1 -75, however they are older and reflect dated amenities and unit designs. The existing supply of market rate apartment complexes are enjoying high occupancies and increasing rental rates due to the lack of apartment complexes in the market and more importantly an increase fee simple housing cost which is directing the consumer to the few rental market options available. 7.0 NEW RENTAL APARTMENT SUMMARY The stabilized occupancy of the existing market rate apartments has prompted the development of two new apartment communities. These are located within'/ mile of each other on Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Blvd in South Naples. Located below is a map showing the location of each complex followed by a brief summary. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 25/36 Seirra Grande Sierra Grande is located on Rattlesnake Hammock Road, just west of the intersection of Collier Blvd. This community was originally developed as for sale condominiums which failed during the great recession. Two buildings were completed and 27 units were sold to individual owners and the remaining units owned by the rental developer and rented as the new units. The site was purchased in June of 2011 for $5,150,00 (OR 4689 PG 3233) for 282 of which 273 are vacant land and 9 area foreclosed units from the prior project. The average of all units was $18,262. The site infrastructure was in place at the time of the sale. This site is 17.9 acres representing a gross density of 10.11 units per acre. The 273 units are divided into 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments ranging in size from 902 sgft to 1,313 sgft. There are 32, three bedroom units, 161, two bedroom units and 80, one bedroom units. The community began leasing the existing units in March of 2013 with the release of newly developing units in January of 2014. Of the seven total buildings, 2 are completed and leased or OccUl01ed by I11Cl1VIdUdI (;UilUVIIIIIIIUfII VV1111CIJ GIIU Ullcc UUiidiiyS are iariCici C.viisi.ii,ii;iiiil I uc sic visit revealed significant interest as there were people waiting to see a leasing agent. The newly developing buildings are expected to be ready for occupancy by May. Aster of Lely Aster of Lely is located on southwest corner of Lely Cultural Blvd and Collier Blvd, '/Z mile south of the intersection with Rattlesnake Hammock Road. This site was vacant at the time of sale and was sold in April of 2007 for $8,635,000 (OR 4210 PG 1766) for 308 units for a price per unit of $28,035. No site infrastructure was included in this sale. This site is 17.79 acres and has a gross density of 17.4 units per acre. As of the updated report, current pricing and availability buildings have been released. This community will consist of 11 buildings and an amenity center, of which five building are complete and available for lease as of this report date. Located below is a summary of the current pricing for each floorplan and the number of unit available of 210 being offered at this time. Floorplan Rental Rat BR Bath SQFT Rent /sgft Available Al 1050 1 1 820 $ 1.28 36 A2 1075 1 1 890 $ 1.21 53 131 1300 2 2 1100 $ 1.18 4 B2 1325 2 2 1195 $ 1.11 82 C1 1600 3 2 1435 $ 1.11 11 Total 186 The product mix, unit size and rental rate are consistent with the other market rate rental apartments used in this study. ®.0 FEE SIMPLE CONDOMINIUM RENTALS The consultant also reviewed fee simple condominiums that are rented on an annual basis. The source for this information was the Naples (Multiple Listing Service) MLS. There are several condominium developments that offer comparable amenities and pricing, but were designed to cater to the second home buyer and not designed for rental. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 26/36 The main difference between the fee simple condominium rentals and the apartment rentals is the building design. Rental Apartments are designed for lower construction cost and generally have less exterior windows and have adjacent units on three sides. The market rental rate does not distinguish a difference for design or amenities, but does distinguish a difference for interior finishes. Located below is a summary of the current listings of condominium units available for annual rentals in Collier County based on the March 1, 2014 Naples MLS system, followed by a map showing the location of the NABOR MLS areas. Location Avg Size Avg $ /sgfE NA05 - Crayton Rd Area 1209 $2.07 NA06 - Olde Naples Area 1851 $1.95 NA02 - Vanderbilt Beach Area 1107 $1.81 NA04 - Pelican Bay Area 1669 $1.66 NA15 - E/O 41 W/O Goodlette 1200 $1.50 NA12 - N/O Vanderbilt Bch Rd W/O 75 1626 $1.40 NA01 - N/O 111th Ave 1547 $1.30 NA21 - N/O Immokalee Rd E/O 75 1419 $1.23 NA16 - S/O Pine Ridge Rd 1358 $1.21 NA14 - N/O Pine Ridge Rd and Vineyards 1634 $1.21 NA08- Royal Harbor-Windstar Area 1210 $1.19 NA24 - Golden Gate City 757 $1.13 NA17 - N/O Davis Blvd 1230 $1.12 NA13 - Pine Ridge Area 1042 $1.12 NA11 - N/O Immokalee Rd W/O 75 1642 $1.12 NA18 - N/O Rattlesnake Hammock 1393 $1.05 NA09 - South Naples Area 1579 $1.04 NA38 - South of US41 East of 951 1538 $0.98 NA19 - Lely Area 1279 $0.91 NA37 - East Collier S/O 75 E/O 951 1351 $0.87 NA22 - S/O Immokalee Rd W/O 951 1996 $0.85 Grand Total 1461 $1.28 © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 27136 NABOR MLS Ares Cnri.0, © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 28/36 The list above shows the average living area size and price per sqft for the condominiums available for rent by area of the county. The top 5 areas offer waterfront or high end product for rent which is superior in quality and location to the rental apartments in the market. The rental rate for the condominiums in areas where the majority of the rental apartments are located are consistent in price, however are older in age. Located below is a list of condominium rentals that are considered most comparable to the rental apartment markets. Location /Condo Name Avg Size Avg $ /sgft LocationlCondo Name Avg Size Avg $ /sgft NA15- E1041W /OGoodlette 1200 $1.50 NA17- N/O Davis Blvd 1230 $1.12 HIGH POINT COUNTRY CLUB 1200 $1.50 BLUE HERON 1000 $1.18 NA01 - N10111th Ave 1547 $1.30 COUNTRYSIDE CONDOS 1150 $1.39 BARBADOS 1515 $1.15 ENCLAVE OF NAPLES 874 $125 FALLING WATERS NORTH PRESERVE 1586 $0.82 GLENMOOR GREENS 1300 $0.96 MARTINIQUE 1225 $1.18 JASPER 1484 $0.98 SEAGROVE 2061 $1.36 NEW WATERFORD 1212 $1.24 SWEETWATER BAY 1381 $2.17 NEWCASTLE 1450 $1.02 NA12 -N /O Vanderbilt Bch Rd W10 75 1534 $1.24 OPAL 1406 $0.92 CARRINGTON 1250 $1.20 PRESERVE AT THE SHORES 1406 $1.07 CRESCENT GARDENS 1563 $0.96 SHERWOOD 1630 $0.86 EGRETS WALK 1681 $1.34 SPRINGWOOD 1000 $1.15 FIELDSTONE VILLAGE 1456 $1.17 TIMBER LAKE 1340 $1.34 RAVENNA 2015 $1.24 NA13 -Pine Ridge Area 1042 $1.12 VICTORIA LAKES 1089 $1.15 MISTY PINES 1242 $1.05 WILSHIRE PINES 1391 $1.44 TURTLE LAKE GOLF COLONY 842 $1.19 NA21- N10 [mmokalee Rd 00 75 1419 $1.23 NA11 - N/0 Immokalee Rd W/O 75 1642 $1.12 CYPRESS TRACE 1538 $1.48 EAGLE COVE 1621 $0.86 CYPRESS WOODS GOLF + COUNTRY CLUB 1373 $0.95 FEATHER SOUND 1449 $1.04 GRAND CYPRESS II 1763 $0.85 RIVER ROYALE 1400 $129 HUNTINGTON LAKES 1107 $1.63 SPOONBILL COVE 1926 $0.88 .TERRACE 1194 $0.96 SWEETWATER BAY 1167 $1.19 NA16 -SIO Pine Ridge Rd 1358 $1.21 TOSCANA 2822 $1.59 COLONYATHAWKSRIDGE 1650 $1.15 VERONAPOINTE 1560 $0.89 FAIRWAYS AT EMERALD GREEN 1167 $1.03 NA18 - N/O Rattlesnake Hammock 1393 $1.05 KENSINGTON 2686 $1.12 AMBERLYVILLAGE 1216 $123 MARBELLALAKES 2143 $0.89 CROWN POINTE SHORES 1585 $0.88 MARIPOSA 1558 $1.16 GLADES COUNTRY CLUB 1270 $1.26 NAPLES BATH AND TENNIS CLUB 1319 $1.27 JASMINE COURT 1249 $1.12 POS]TANO PLACE 1067 $1.35 LAKE ARROWHEAD 1928 $0.90 RESERVE AT NAPLES 1107 $1.04 LELY PINES 1032 $0.94 TURTLE LAKE GOLF COLONY 842 $1.46 NAPOU 1033 $1.09 NA14 -N 10 Pine Ridge Rd and Vineyards 1634 $1.21 RIVIERA COLONY GOLF ESTATES 1200 $1.13 AVELLJNO ISLES 3141 $1.07 VERANDA AT SOUTHERN LINKS 1661 $1.20 AV ANO 2184 $0.87 NA09 - South Naples Area 1579 $1.04 BARRINGTON 1216 $1.15 ABACO BAY 886 $1.02 BELLERIVE 1708 $1.00 BOTANICAL PLACE 1968 $0.79 CALUSA BAY NORTH 1282 $1.40 DI NAPOLI 1883 $1.33 CALUSA BAY SOUTH 1982 $1.06 NA38 - South of US41 East of 951 1538 $0.98 EMERALD LAKES 1111 $1.33 SONOMA 2110 $0.92 LAKESIDE 1348 $2.23 TROPIC SCHOONER APTS 966 $1.04 LALIQUE 2050 $1.27 NA19- LelyArea 1279 $0.91 OASIS 861 $1.20 EAGLEWOOD 1250 $0.80 ORCHARDS 1607 $1.12 STMORITZCLUB 1294 $1.00 RUM BAY 1315 $1.14 ST REGIS CLUB 1294 $0.93 SILVER OAKS 1595 $1.12 NA37 - East Collier SID 75 E/O 951 1351 $0.87. NA24- Golden Gate City 757 $1.13 FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT 1351 $0.87 FAIRWAYS AT PAR ONE 735 $1.16 NA22 -S /O Immokalee Rd W/O 951 1996 $0.85 FAIRWAYS AT PAR TWO 768 $1.11 BIMINI BAY 2170 $0.88 FALLS OF PORTOFINO 1622 $0.82 Grand Total 1436 $1.15 As we can see from the above list, the apartments range in size from a low of 735 sqft to a high of over 3,000 sqft and average approximately 1,436 sqft. Many. of these communities cater to second home buyers or seasonal renters who are generally older than the typical rental apartment tenant. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 29/36 9.0 CONCLUSIONS AND REC®MAN®ATI ®NS The review of the rental apartment market and rental condominiums reveals a current shortage of units available for occupancy. The additional of 581 rental units within Sierra Grande and Aster at Naples will alleviate some of this shortage and may move tenants from older complexes in other parts of the county to these new projects. Location is still a. very important factor when renting a unit, however pricing for that location is a differentiator between renting an apartment complex of a fee simple condominium. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 30/36 UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS In conducting this market analysis, the consultant has assumed, where applicable, that: 1. Title to the land is good and marketable. 2. The information supplied by others is correct, and the revenue stamps placed on the deeds used to indicate the sale prices are in correct relation to the actual dollar amounts of the individual transactions. 3. There are no hidden or undisclosed sub -soil conditions. No consideration has been given to oil or mineral rights, if outstanding. 4. All general codes, ordinances, regulations or statutes affecting the property have been and will be enforced. and the property is not subject to floodplain or utility restrictions or moratoriums except as reported to your consultant and contained in this report. 5. The party for whom this report is prepared has reported to the consultant no original existing conditions or development plans that would subject this property to the regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission or similar agencies on the state or local level. 6. No responsibility is assumed by the consultant for legal matters, nor is any opinion on title rendered herewith. 7. The consultant herein, by reason of this report, is not to be required to give testimony in court with reference to the property analyzed, unless arrangements have been previously made. 8. The consultant has made no survey of the property and assumes no responsibility in connection with such matters. Any sketch or identified survey of the property included in this report is only for the purpose of assisting the reader to visualize the property. 9. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this study, and the consultant hereby reserves the right to alter, amend, revise, or rescind any of the opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies, research or investigation. 10. Unless stated otherwise, no percolation tests have been performed on this property. In making the study, it has been assumed that the property is capable of passing such tests so as to be developable to its highest and best use, as discussed in this report. 11. Certain data used in compiling this report was furnished by the client, his counsel, employees, and /or agent, or from other sources believed reliable. Data has been checked for accuracy as possible, but no liability or responsibility may be assumed for complete accuracy. 12. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in nature, nor is any opinion rendered herein as to title, which is assumed to be good and merchantable. The property is assumed to be free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, unless specifically enumerated herein, and under responsible ownership and management as of the date of this study. 13. The forecasts or projections included in this report are used to assist in the process and are based on current market conditions, anticipated short-term supply and demand factors, and a stable economy. These forecasts are therefore subject to changes in future conditions. 14. The consultant has relied upon the demographic data provided by local, state and national sources in order to project population trends, housing trends, gross sales trends, and economic trends for the subject area. The information relied upon is referenced within the applicable section of this report. The consultant does not warrant its accuracy. 15. The consultant has obtained data regarding building permits for single family and multi family products from several sources. It is the consultant's understanding that multi family permits are those for condominiums and for rental apartment complexes. The rental apartment complexes which are known to the consultant have been omitted from this analysis. This, therefore, would reflect condominium unit development as reflected and would correlate with condominium sales based upon the local, state and national sources. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 31/36 16. The consultant has obtained data regarding building sales for single family and multi family products from local, state and national sources. This data includes Developer sales to end users and does not include on your lot sales or construction end loan sales. The consultant cannot warrant the accuracy of the data from this source. The consultant has segmented and amended the data based on market knowledge of the general market; however, no individual sales have been verified. The sales used from these sources reflect statistical trends, with larger samples of data providing a heavier weighting and smaller sample size results in less weighted percentage of the total market. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 32 136 RESTRICTION UPON DISCLOSURE AND USE The by -laws and Regulations of the Appraisal Institute govern disclosure of the contents of this report. Michael J. Timmerman, SRA is a Member of the Appraisal Institute. The by -laws and Regulations of the Institute require each Member and Candidate to control the use and distribution of each report signed by such Member. This market study report and the contents and data contained herein are confidential and are proprietary property of Fishkind & Associates, Inc. No reproductions of any sort or release of any proprietary information contained within may be released without prior written consent of Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Furthermore, neither all nor any part of this report shall be disseminated to the general public by use of advertising media, public relations media, news media, sales media, or other media for public communication without prior written consent of the signatories of this report. This report is for internal use of GLOBAL PROPERTIES OF NAPLES, INC. exclusively. The undersigned agrees to the confidentiality agreement. This is copy number of © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 33/36 COPYRIGHT, TRADEMARK AND LEGAL DISCLAIMER Copyright This report published by RESORTPRO PERT[ ES. COM, INC. hereby referred to as THE REPORT "', including, but not limited to, text, graphics, photographs, graphs, illustrations, data, images, are protected by copyright law. Copyright © 2014 RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. All rights reserved. All materials provided by RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. shall be used by the subscriber (the "User") only for the User's own authorized purposes, and may not be modified, published, reproduced in any manner, sold, distributed or in any way transferred to any person, corporation, organization, subsidiary or branch, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. Possession of these materials does not carry with it the right of publication thereof or to use the name of in any manner without first obtaining the prior written consent of RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. No abstracting, excerpting, or summarization of these materials may be made without first obtaining the prior written consent of RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. These materials are not to be used in conjunction with any public or private offering of securities or other similar purpose where they may be relied upon to any degree by any person without first obtaining the prior written consent of RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. These materials may not be used for purposes other than that for which they are prepared or for which prior written consent first has been obtained from RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. Disclaimer THE INFORMATION IN "THE REPORT" IS PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS" BASIS WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF - _� E.D. R9v iQ ei��. �� i=i i �!i~K = kt+!sr�t dJK ii;�p%�_ir� I he rmatei181S ami! !rt or;,�ation prDyiCiCii in " i iii r<c.rl.i RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. constitute raw data, factual materials and the opinions of RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. Neither RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. nor any of its affiliates, employees or agents will have any liability of any kind to the user, subscriber or any employee, agent, or contractor of the subscriber or to any other person using the information and materials herein or for any error or omissions herein or for any opinions or conclusions expressed. Other than as set forth expressly herein, RESORTPROPERTIES.COM, INC. makes no warranties, expressed or implied concerning the accuracy of the materials or information provided herein. © 2014 ResortProperties.com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 34/36 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF USE Your use of THE REPORT constitutes your agreement to be bound by these terms and conditions. THE REPORT is a service made available by RESORTPROPERTIES.cOM, INC. (the "COMPANY ") and all content, information and definitions provided in and through the Housing Demand Report ( "Information ") may be used solely by you (the "User ") under the following terms and conditions ( "Terms of Use "): 1.) Subscription. As an authorized user of THE REPORT, User is granted a nonexclusive, nontransferable, revocable, limited license to access and use THE REPORT and Information in accordance with these Terms of Use. Company may terminate this subscription at any time for any reason. 2.) Limitations on Use. The Information in THE REPORT is for authorized use only and not for commercial exploitation. User may not decompile, disassemble, rent, lease, loan, sell, sublicense, copy or create derivative works from THE REPORT or the Information. User may not copy, modify, reproduce, republish, distribute, display, or transmit for commercial, nonprofit or public purposes all or any portion of THE REPORT, except to the extent authorized by the Company. Any unauthorized use of THE REPORT or its Information is prohibited. 3.) No Solicitation. In no event may any person or entity solicit any Users with data retrieved from this THE REPORT. 4.) Intellectual Property Rights. Except as expressly provided in these Terms of Use, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right, by implication, estoppel or otherwise, under copyright or other intellectual property rights. User agrees that the Information and THE REPORT are protected by copyrights, trademarks, service marks, patents or other proprietary rights and laws. For additional information see Copyright. 5.) Unlawful Activity. Company reserves the right to investigate complaints or reported violations of the Terms of Use and to take any action deemed appropriate including, but not limited to, reporting any suspected unlawful activity to law enforcement officials, regulators, or other third parties and disclosing any information necessary or appropriate to such persons or entities relating to user profiles, e-mail address, usage history, posted materials, IP addresses and traffic information. 6.) Remedies for Violations. Company reserves the right to seek all remedies available at law and in equity for violations of these Terms of Use including, but not limited to, the right to cancel THE REPORT. 7.) Modifications to Terms of Use. Company reserves the right to change these Terms of Use at any time. Updated versions of the Terms of Use will appear in THE REPORT and are effective immediately. User is responsible for regularly reviewing the Terms of Use. Continued use of THE REPORT after any such changes constitutes User's consent to such changes. © 2014 Res ortP rope rties. com, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 35136 Proposed Community Retail Center Growth C Plan Amendment Needs Commercial -. Vincentian Mixed Use Sub District January 31, 2014 Updated July 31, 2014 Prepared for: Global Properties of Naples, LLC Prepared by: Michael J Timmerman, CRE, FRICS, SRA MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. 1415 Panther Lane Suite 429 Naples, Florida 34109 239 -269 -0769 ATTACHMENT "E" Contents 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................... ............................... 2 1.1 Purpose ........................................................................ ..............................2 1.2 Overview of Needs Analysis ........................................ ............................... 2 1.3 Definition of the Market Area and Target Population ... ............................... 3 1.4 Analysis Process .......................................................... ............................... 8 2.0 The Supply of Commercial Space .................................. ............................... 8 2.1 Project Primary Market ................................................ ............................... 8 3.0 Proposed Amendment Impact on the Supply ................ ............................... 14 4.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendment to the Market .............. 14 4.1 ............... ............................... Overview ................. .... ............................... 14 A n. '4.4 C'1 m.m .a. a.a le— r--.�m i L.- .— .e-.s, ° — j�....:�_ 'mac Rol �3 r-1 i �-�� !'!!Y i!'1!� D'em nd IVI l�Vlllillei dx1 Space in iiie i IV;ciL0 ��71 ai tai. t �1 U.— AllocationRatio .................................................................... ............................... 15 5.0 Conclusions .................................................................... .............................19 APPENDIXA 1 ........................................................................ ............................... 20 Retail Demand Methodology ................................................... ............................... 20 1.0 Methodology ................................................................. .............................20 2.0 Aggregate Market - Retail Demand ............................ ............................... 20 APPENDIXA 2 ........................................................................ ............................... 26 APPENDIXA 3 ........................................................................ ............................... 27 1 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose As we understand it, GLOBAL PROPERTIES OF NAPLES, LLC ( "Client ") would like MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. ( "Consultant ") to prepare commercial needs analysis on the 31 +/- acre site located on the south site of US 41 south in Collier County, FL. MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. ( "Consultant ") has been engaged to prepare this report. 1.2 Overview of Needs Analysis The process for determining the need for additional commercial square footage takes the form of a comparison of: The supply of existing and vacant land currently planned for various commercial uses; The demand for commercial square footage based on projected population /households in the market Historically, these comparisons have focused their studies County -wide. This analysis studies the market for commercial retail demand within a defined market area surrounding the site. There are two related reasons for this type of analysis. First, consumers are assumed to maximize benefit over all goods and services consumed subject to their income. This type of analysis requires that travel costs are either explicitly or implicitly accounted for during the consideration of the consumers' income constraint. This analysis requires the Consultant to narrow the scope of the -analysis from the county level down to a local market level. Second, the Consultant considers whether the choice of location is a Pareto improvement for consumers. (Pareto improvement means that no consumers are made worse off, and at least one is made better off.) That is, the Consultant asks the question whether additional retail space makes at least one local market better off, without reducing the welfare of all others. An analysis of commercial retail space over the whole of a County may lead to the wrong conclusion of where to develop new space. That is, the county as a whole may appear to need more retail space to support the aggregate level of demand generated by its residents. This is precisely the outcome the County wants to avoid. Therefore: ® By narrowing the focus of this study to the local market, the Consultant determines if this market has a need for additional retail space. ® The Consultant can replicate a competitive outcome, and ensure that the welfare of all other local markets is improved or unchanged. 0 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 2 1.3 Definition of the Market Area and Target Population The site is a 31 +/- acre parcel located at 11480 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34113. The site is east of the City of Naples and across US 41 from Eagle Lakes County Park. The site is current classified as Vacant Residential and is located in the Urban Coast Fringe Future Land Use district. Located below is the information on the site from the Collier County Property Appraiser. PIN 00439880008 502632 ALTKEY 002.0005832 ACRES_GIS 31.09 GLOBAL PROPERTIES OF O_NAME1 NAPLES 2614 TAMIAMI TRL O_NAME2 N STE 615 O_CITY NAPLES O_STATE FL O_ZIPCODE ! 34103 w a A4f`. TAO A!A!!A! TrJ! S_ADDRESS ! I 1lvYW Y ♦ TVV E S_CITY NA S 7JPCODE 34113 SALE1_AMT $ 2,025,000 SALE1_YEAR 2010 SALE1_DATE 2010 -11 -02 SALE1_BK 4620 SALE1_PG 1385 SALE2_AMT $ 5,590,000 SALE2_YEAR 2010 SALE2_DATE 2010 -01 -21 SALE2_BK 4532 SALE2_PG 3068 SALE3_AMT $ 2,100,000 SALE3_YEAR 2004 SALE3_DATE 2004 -05 -20 SALE3_BK 3568 SALE3_PG 27$9 LUSEDOR 00 LUSEDOR D Vacant Residential Located below is a map showing the regional location of the site and an aerial showing the surrounding uses. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 3 .95:1 Td rPOP AY Legend `' SubjectSite SLISCFi: Sari, S r RCA d, rlJaV- S,,,lrmr ;r. Cnr!Fef B_1EM, i ri China fl-c U N•.ongj, Ea i (Traland), TcmT m, 2013 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 4 �ccation within the region l Y naiq ke ugr . Lka - . —._.ice _' _ -. __.. ' B o-•'.u,,� T3.`I �NiCYUD He' :ck rit ul: vyvlfE J'DS y _ ,1 Gi:Yn:: CIQ:, -cYnvi rluL e.Y - `N` c r .rfl.rr, •. - `may ?n:IrrJ -_• :. L 1. .. i Ws I ..:..nbT ilul. =. r7elaf.:F i TI, aJj 1 pr,+i li\ x.53 G E> is i J11, I . u =�• a sui:.r. .95:1 Td rPOP AY Legend `' SubjectSite SLISCFi: Sari, S r RCA d, rlJaV- S,,,lrmr ;r. Cnr!Fef B_1EM, i ri China fl-c U N•.ongj, Ea i (Traland), TcmT m, 2013 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 4 3" r�•��,iy}-r'.i'f j)p�� i ,r y, y i�. 14 0 r p • ,� s r y • - rLt,L,� �, t ��t. � i." }rr "'` �• 'L L,\ z. t s� - iAmr`�ir'>iai�lb�: �j � r vaalaoiJJa`oJ � m� 4`4 Jri7aa�Af11 is c i A -.. saiia. Legend SUbjectSlle ♦ r zz ]� ��J rfi11 "T 1 f � " �� _d,;l n• � ].�•., ��t��jlyy.`. -.. J:Tl�jd�, 12�;r'1�, ,Rr . 3n- � _, °3.`n`y'�'I�f • - ��. analysis was developed utilizing guidelines from the Urban Land Use Institutel based on the proposed volume of retail space. The primary market area is community serving in nature which is generally identified as a 15 minute drive time surrounding the site. Due to the sites larger size and it being one of the remaining sites of adequate functional utility to accommodate a wide array of commercial uses, we also included the City of Marco Island. The City of Marco has no sites large enough to accommodate a big box retailer or larger community center; therefore this market would be potential demand. In studies of this nature, we estimate the market capture for each drive time increment based on the premise that consumers will travel to sites more convenient than drive further to get to the same type of retail use. For this site, we prepared four net need calculations, based on the incremental need for a 5 minute drive time, the need between 5 and 10 minutes, the need between 10 and 15 minutes and a separate net need for Marco Island. Once the incremental net need calculation is complete, we apply a market capture rate for each increment to estimate the overall net need for the site community retail uses based on the tiered demand and supply. Located below is a map showing each drive time increment and the Marco Island area. 9 Beyard, Michael D., W. Paul O'Mara, et al. Shopping Center Development Handbook. Third Edition. Washington, D.C.: ULI -the Urban Land Institute, 1999. p.11 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 6 Day = Primary Trade Area I c_: Y. I G Ga 117 rK. Legend 5ha1 inD rive&ne NewlQMlnDrive - Newl5MinDrive = ,.ter NewMarco SubfectS -Ite /0"r �. .y Lcdr su LL-c.aJn- c a iJ _ _ Sazcas: F—ri, ri EP.E C= icrm <_, USCS. F Ccrp., HIRCPh, ,' E3HJapaa, WE'" . Fr China !Pcng Kme), hrM— hailand)• Tcm7cm, F. =pmjindia,®Ur _rS it;�ap cntl:.utvs, and the CIS Use Ccmmunitj Estimates of existing and projected households and population for each drive time are provided for years 2014, 2019, 2025 and 2030 in Table 2. The population figures for the market area were obtained by ESRI Business Analyst and were used to derive households. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. % 1.4 Analysis Process Determining the need for additional retail land is a four -step process, as outlined below. ® Inventory current existing and vacant supply of commercial space in the market area; ® Inventory parcels identified as potential commercial by the Collier County Future Land Use Map (FLUM); Project future population /households to determine future commercial land needs and compare against commercial land allocation ratios; © Determine impact of amendment on land allocation ratio within the primary market area 2.0 The Supply of Commercial Space 2.1 Project Primary Market The analysis begins with the existing supply of commercial space in the primary market area. The primary market is community serving in nature as defined by the Urban Land Use Institute. For the purpose of this analysis we selected sites with more than 10 acres that had more than 100,000 sgft of leasable space. Each existing site included out parcels that had primary access from the larger parcel. Table 1 provides the current inventory of community - serving commercial space based on the distance from the site with attribute data obtained from the Collier County Property Appraiser's ('PA') data. 0 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 8 ` nhla I r- iirrpnt f.nrYBrO' iinifv-St -wive lnventory Grand Total Source: Collier County Property Appraiser 6'IV1,IV! —:•o tee€' s-�rnnFa! -iiac 3ilrv' w �,ave are lftnt iin pi e' 1 .111 i p ..F.endes - - 1 and are consider competing supply to the potential uses on the site. These sites include the assembled large parcels that are improved with community serving retail uses, as well as the out parcels that are directly access from the larger improvement. Vacant sites with the potential for commercial development The next step in this analysis is to identify parcels within the market area that have similar functional utility to the subject site in order to estimate the potential commercial square footage that could be built on those sites. Located below we identified twelve sites that fall with the following parameters that could provide competing commercial space; • 10 Acres or more, and • Have frontage and access on a major roadway, and • Are currently classified as Vacant Commercial Land Use per the Collier County Property Appraiser, and / or • Are located within a FLU category that allows commercial development. Located below is a list of potential sites that have adequate functional utility and could be developed with commercial uses. These sites are also segregated by their location from the subject site. This is followed by a map showing the existing competing center and the potential development sites with a map reference. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 9 YEAR Dist Map ID PIN Center Name SITE ADDRESS SQFT HTD BUILT 5.00 1 '81076000040 WAL -MART STORES EAST LP 6650 COLLIER BLVD 201,783 2007 5.00 3 34520001005 FREEDOM SQUARE 12713 TAMIAMI TRL E 233,255 1994 5.00 4 {00732840004 CORAL ISLE FACTORY SHOPS LTD 6060 COLLIER BLVD 148,656 1991 5.00 6 25368002589 LOWE'S HOME CENTERS INC 12730 TAMIAMI TRL E 223,755 2010 5.00 Total 807,449 10.00 7 61834840006 GULF GATE PLAZA 2900 TAMIAMI TRL E 208,208 1969 10.00 8 00390080002 WAL -MART STORES EAST LP 3451 TAMIAMI TRL E 126,837 1993 10.00 9 28750000028 COURTHOUSE SHADOWS 3390 TAMIAMI TRL E 117,040 1987 10.00 11 00391600009 TOWN CENTER 3903 TAMIAMI TRL E 289,673 1987 10.00 13 '00390680004 HOME DEPOT USA INC 1663 AIRPORT RD S 110,800 2000 10.00 Total 852,558 15.00 2 `59712000488 WAL -MART STORES EAST LP 9885 COLLIER BLVD 203,652 2004 15.00 10 '23945007103 BERKSHIRE COMMONS 7301 RADIO RD 132,912 1991 15.00 Total 336,564 Marco Island 12 56930960002 MARCO CENTER 1089 COLLIER BLVD N 110,596 1998 Grand Total Source: Collier County Property Appraiser 6'IV1,IV! —:•o tee€' s-�rnnFa! -iiac 3ilrv' w �,ave are lftnt iin pi e' 1 .111 i p ..F.endes - - 1 and are consider competing supply to the potential uses on the site. These sites include the assembled large parcels that are improved with community serving retail uses, as well as the out parcels that are directly access from the larger improvement. Vacant sites with the potential for commercial development The next step in this analysis is to identify parcels within the market area that have similar functional utility to the subject site in order to estimate the potential commercial square footage that could be built on those sites. Located below we identified twelve sites that fall with the following parameters that could provide competing commercial space; • 10 Acres or more, and • Have frontage and access on a major roadway, and • Are currently classified as Vacant Commercial Land Use per the Collier County Property Appraiser, and / or • Are located within a FLU category that allows commercial development. Located below is a list of potential sites that have adequate functional utility and could be developed with commercial uses. These sites are also segregated by their location from the subject site. This is followed by a map showing the existing competing center and the potential development sites with a map reference. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 9 Table 2, Potential Community -SeMce lnvenforry The sites above are PUD's that include commercially approved square footage that would compete with the subject site. New Communities that are currently selling developer product are also included on this list. Fiddler's Creel: and Hacienda Lakes have sites designated for commercial development in front of their communities. Lely Resort's square footage reflects the remaining approved for public use. Additional commercial square footage in Lely is approved, however it is reserved for community owner's only and is not available for public access. These sites would include the Players Club and the Ole' Town center within the Lely Resort DRI. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 10 Remaining Dist Map ID OWNER NAME PUD Name LAND USE CODE Appr SQFT 5 1 KRG 951 & 41 Ilc Tamiami Crossings Vacant Commercial 245,000 5 11 COLLIER LAND DEVELOPMENT INC Sable Bay Acreage Not Zoned Agricultural 146,876 5 14 NEW COMMUNITIES Lely Resort PUD 158,859 Total 5 Minute 550,735 10 15 NEW COMMUNITIES Hacienda Lakes PUD 327,000 Total 10 Minute 327,000 15 2 BC NAPLES INVESTMENTS LLP East Gateway Vacant Commercial 200,000 15 3 NEW HOPE MINSTRIES New Hope Minit6es Acreage Not Zoned Agricultural 76,373 15 4 BENDERSON TR, RONALD 1 -75 Alligator Alley PUD Vacant Commercial 258,249 15 5 VICTORIA ESTATES LTD ET AL Golden Gate Commerce Park Vacant Commercial 270,000 15 6 1 -75 ASSOCIATES LLC Collier Blvd Mixed Use Vacant Commercial 270,000 15 7 DAMS CROSSINGS VIII LLC ET AL 1 -75 Collier Blvd Commerical Vacant Commercial 83,000 15 8 HIGHLAND PROP OF LEE & COLLIER Taormina Reserve Acreage Not Zoned Agricultural 262,000 15 9 STROHL FAMILY LLC Shopps at Santa Barbara Vacant Commercial 146,785 15 10 FFT SANTA BARBARA II LLC Freestate Vacant Commercial 134,427 15 12 ABERCIARALPH Forest Glen Vacant Commercial 100,000 15 13 NEW COMMUNITIES Fiddlers Creek PUD 300,000 Tota115 Minute 2,100,834 2,978,569 Total The sites above are PUD's that include commercially approved square footage that would compete with the subject site. New Communities that are currently selling developer product are also included on this list. Fiddler's Creel: and Hacienda Lakes have sites designated for commercial development in front of their communities. Lely Resort's square footage reflects the remaining approved for public use. Additional commercial square footage in Lely is approved, however it is reserved for community owner's only and is not available for public access. These sites would include the Players Club and the Ole' Town center within the Lely Resort DRI. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 10 The twelve existing centers have a combined total of 2,107,167 square feet of leasable space with 807,449 sqft located within 5 minutes, 852,558 sqft located between the 5 and 10 minute area, 336,564 sqft between the 10 and 15 minute area and 110,596 sgft on Marco Island. The fifteen vacant sites located in PUD's that have approved commercial square footage have a combined total of 2,978,569 sqft within the trade area. Within the 5 minute area there is a total of 550,735 sqft, between 5 and 10 minutes there are 327,000 sqft and between 10 and 15 minutes there are a total of 2,100,834 sqft. The large percentage of potential commercial square footage in the area between 10 and 15 minutes be due to the concentration of vacant commercial land surrounding the 1 -75 and Collier Blvd interchange. The sum of the existing commercial square footage from Table 1 and the approved commercial square footage in the PUD's in Table 2 reflect the total square feet supply potential in the trade area. Located below is a summary of these retail supply categories. Table 3e Total Exiistina and Vacant Zoned Commercial segregated by give T Ime Market Area SQFT Pct of Total 5 Minute Existing 807,449 59% 5 Minute Potential 550,735 41% 5 Minute Total 1,358,184 10 Minute Existing 852,558 72% 10 Minute Potential 327,000 28% 10 Minute Total 1,179,558 15 Minute Existing 336,564 14% 15 Minute Potential 2,100,834 86% 15 Minute Total 2,437,398 Marco Island Existing 110,596 100% Marco Island Potential - Marco Island Total 110,596 This subtotal reflects the existing square footage of commercial space and the potential for new commercial space based the approved square footage in the active PUD. Located below is the summary of both the existing and potential for each market area in the study. Table 4. Market Area totals Status SQFT HTD Existing 2,107,167 Vacant Zoned Comm 2,978,569 Sub Total 5,085,736 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 13 3.0 Proposed Amendment tmpalct on the Supply If the proposed Project is approved, it could add 250,000 square feet to the inventory of commercial - retail land to the market area community - serving retail market. 4.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendment to the Market 4.1 Overview As noted above, the need for amending the adopted Plan revolves around whether or not the market contains enough commercial land to provide a sufficient degree of flexibility to accommodate the future projected level of demand for commercial retail space. It must be demonstrated that the amount of land allocated in the market to community retail uses does not provide this level of flexibility in satisfying future demand. For this study, the supply of land with existing commercial retail development, the supply of vacant commercial designated land, and the supply of suitable lands designated by the Collier County FLU as having the potential to be commercial were compared to the demand for community serving commercial retail land as generated by projected population /household growth in the market area. For this study we are using a market capture method to estimate the overall net need for the subject market area. In order to do this, we prepared market area population forecast and demand for commercial square footage forecast for each of the four drive time markets. Each drive time market area was analyzed independently in order to derive a net need for the primary market area in total. Located below are the results of each drive time analysis. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 14 4.2 Demand for Commercial Space in the Project's Market Area and the Allocation Ratio In order to estimate the demand for commercial service, we need to estimate the population for the market area. This population estimate is based on data obtained from ESRI and is supplemented by the housing unit count from the Collier County Property Appraiser's data for July 2014. The Consultant also used an allocation factor in determining the demand for commercial retail space in the market area. The appropriate factor depends on a number of issues including the nature and speed of development in the market area, as well as the degree to which population forecasts are subject to error. The former Florida Department of Community Affairs ( "DCA ") endorsed a factor of 1.25 for these kinds of analyses. While the appropriate level for the allocation ratio was still subject to debate at time DCA was dismantled, the Consultant has applied a factor of 1.25 in this study in order to remain conservative. The allocation ratio measures `ilc d(IIUUIIt Of additional acreage or deiiiand 1Z;4 i rcd in relation to the directly utilized acreage or demand to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The additional acreage or demand is required in order to maintain market level pricing and to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. 5 Minute Drive time Table 5. Market Area P®Dulation Forecast 5 Minute TA Source: ESRI Tahla P_ Dprnanell for Cnmmunitv Commercial So. Ft. for 5 Minute TA 5 Minute Drive 2014 . 2019 2025 2030 2010 2014 2019 2025 2030 Trade Area Population 14,169 14,896 20,495 23,151 24,571 TA HH Size 2.84 2.84 2.84 2.84 2.84 TA HHs 4,988 5,288 7,215 8,150 8,650 TA Avg HH Income $59,610 $67,092 $88,237 $107,354 $130,613 Source: ESRI Tahla P_ Dprnanell for Cnmmunitv Commercial So. Ft. for 5 Minute TA 5 Minute Drive 2014 . 2019 2025 2030 Community Retail Demand (sqft) Market Factor - Allocation Ratio Retail Demand w/ Allocation Ratio (sgft) Vacant Supply (sgft) EAsting Supply (sgft) 239,989 430,646 591,845 764,246 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 299,986 538,307 739,806 955,307 0 100000 200000 550,735 807449 807449 807449 807449 Net Need (sgft) 507,463 369,142 267,643) (402,877) © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 15 Between 5 and 10 Minute trade area Table 7. Market Area Population Forecast 10 Minute TA Source: ESRI Table 0. Demand for Community Commercial Sq. Ft. for 10 Minute TA Between 5 and 10 Min Drive 2014 2019 2025 2030 2010 2014 2019 2025 2030 Trade Area Population 29,611 30,830 36,205 39,418 42,233 TA HH Size 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 TA HHs 13,188 13,772 16,125 18,250 20,254 TA Avg HH Income $62,801 $70,683 $84,399 $97,842 $113,426 Source: ESRI Table 0. Demand for Community Commercial Sq. Ft. for 10 Minute TA Between 5 and 10 Min Drive 2014 2019 2025 2030 Community Retail Demand (sqft) Market Factor - Allocation Ratio Retail Demand w/ Allocation Ratio (sqft) Vacant Supply (sqft) E)dsfing Supply (sqft) 658,482 920,597 1,207,866 1,554,007 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 823,102 1,150,747 1,509,833 1,942,509 0 100000 200000 327,000 852558 852558 852558 852558 Net Need (sqft) 29,456 198,189 457,275 762,951 Between 10 and 15 Minute Trade area Table 9. Market Area Population Forecast 15 Minute TA Source: ESRI Table 10. Demand for Community Commercial Sq. Ft. for 15 Minute TA Between 10 and 15 Min Drive 2014 2019 2025 2030 2010 2014 2019 2025 2030 Trade Area Population 49,418 50,634 60,701 66,087 70,808 TA HH Size 2.47 2.47 2.47 2.47 2.47 TA HHs 20,002 212,544 24,569 26,457 28,450 TA Avg HH Income $64,408 $72,492 $86,559 $100,346 $116,328 Source: ESRI Table 10. Demand for Community Commercial Sq. Ft. for 15 Minute TA Between 10 and 15 Min Drive 2014 2019 2025 2030 Community Retail Demand (sqft) Market Factor - Allocation Ratio Retail Demand w/ Allocation Ratio (sqft) Vacant Supply (sqft) EAsting Supply (sqft) 1,105,480 1,438,569 1,795,849 2,238,709 1.25 1.25 1.25 125 1,381,850 1,798,211 2,244,812 2,798,387 - 250,000 500,000 2,100,834 336,564 336,564 336,564 336,564 Net Need (sqft) 1,045,286 1,211,647 1,408,248 360,989 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 16 Marco Island Drive time Table 11. Market Area Population Forecast Marco TA Source: ESRI Fable 12. Demand for Community Commercial Sq. Ft. for Marco TA Marco Island 2014 2019 2025 2030 2010 2014 2019 2025 2030 Trade Area population 18,599 18,930 22,330 24,986 27,757 TA HH Size 1.98 1.98 1.98 1.98 1.98 TA HHs 9,371 9,578 11,251 12,589 13,985 TA Avg HH Income $102,222 $115,052 $137,378 $159,259 $184,624 Source: ESRI Fable 12. Demand for Community Commercial Sq. Ft. for Marco TA Marco Island 2014 2019 2025 2030 Community Retail Demand (sgft) Market Factor - Allocation Ratio Retail Demand wl Allocation Ratio (sqft) Vacant Supply (sgft) -a lsaftx 745,417 1,045,536 1,356,204 1,746,556 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 931,771 1,306,920 1,695,255 2,183,195 - - - - I if) 59S 11 Q 596 1110:596 110 59-6 Net Need (sgft) 821,175 1,196,324 1,584,659 2,072,599 The information above is the basis for estimating the market demand for community retail uses within the 5 minute drive time area and between 5 and 10 minutes, 10 and 15 minutes and Marco Island. This forecast information indicates that the market's demand for commercial space will increase in relation the population within each drive time area. The data from ESRI does not accurately forecast the number of housing units in an area of rapid growth life the trade area. In these cases we supplemented the ESRI households with an estimate of finished units in the newly developing communities. The 5 minute trade area household count was increased by 1,500 units in 2020 to account for the addition of 500 households in Treviso Bay and 1,000 households in Isles of Collier Preserve. By 2025, it is anticipated that Treviso Bay will be built out, however the Isles. at Collier Preserve, will still be marketing. Using the same absorption rate, we increased the 2025 households by 600, which would account for the remaining units in Isles of Collier Preserve. The 10 minute trade area household count was increased by 1,000 units in 2020, 760 in 2025 to account for the addition of new units within Hacienda Lakes. This community has approval for the development of 1,760 homes of which we are accounting for the build out within our forecast window. Naples Reserve also falls into the 10 minute drive time. This community is approve for 1,157 units and marketing is expected to commence in 2015. In order to account for these units, we increased the 2020 household count by 750 and the 2025 household count by the remaining 407 u its. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 17 The Consultant has developed a retail demand model to project the demand for retail space based on the number of households and their income and demographic characteristics within each of the drive time areas. The documentation for the model is rather voluminous. This methodology is reproduced here in Appendix A2. Growth management practices suggest that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the commercial allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market. Table 13 summaries the market capture from each of the trade area commercial net need calculations presented above. The market capture percentages are reflective of the portion of the market that this sites retail uses could reasonable expect to capture. Depending of the type of use of tenant at the site, these capture rates will vary. Located below is our estimate of market capture for each drive time trade area. Table 13. Net Need Market Capture for Community Commercial Sq. Ft. Distance Market Capture 2014 2019 2025 2030 5 Minute Drive 50% (253,732) (184,571) (133,821) (201,438) .10 Minute Drive 20% (5,891) 39,638 91,455 152,590 15 Minute Drive 10% 104,529 121,165 140,825 36,099 Marco Island 20% 164,235 239,265 316,932 414,520 Total 9,141 215,496 415,390 401,771 We assume that 50% of the 5 minute trade area will visit the sites retail uses. This is based on the fact the most convenient retail uses will capture the largest share of the market. The site is estimated to capture 20% of the 10 minute trade area due to easy access and visibility on US 41. The low market capture rate for the 15 minute trade is reflective of the abundance of vacant commercial land surrounding the 1 -75 interchange and the amount of alternative centers in the trade area. As noted in the 15 minute net need analysis, over 2,100,000 square feet of vacant commercial land is potential competition to the subject site, however, over 1,100,000 square feet is located at the 1 -75 interchange and is significantly influenced by interstate drive by traffic. Because of these factors, we limited to the market capture for this area to 10 percent. Marco Island is outside the normal 15 minute drive time, however due to its limited land for new commercial development and its access near the subject site, it is included in our analysis. I estimated the market capture of Marco Island to be 20 %, which accounts for the current net need estimated from our analysis. The growth of the .island and its lack of available sites for community serving retail uses currently - pushes the demand off the island and into our general trade area. The future growth of the island will result in the more visits to the 5 minute trade area surrounding the subject site. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 18 As shown by Table 13, using the market capture estimated for each drive time and Marco Island, the net need in the horizon year of 2030 is estimated at 401,771 sqft of community based retail. Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with community- serving commercial use to this market. The demand for additional square footage in this market exceeds the potential for the subjects 31 +1- acre site. 0.0 Conclusions Taking into account all developed, vacant and potential commercial land in the market; there are currently insufficient lands designated for commercial uses to provide a reasonable degree of market flexibility in accommodating community serving retail uses within the primary market area. Demand from households east of the market area in Goodland, Port of the Isles and Everglades City, further add to this need. --a is the only site of adequate functional utility to allow for flexible development. The location provides the access and visibility that is required for this type of development. The under - allocation of suitable commercial property supports the need for this additional commercial acreage. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 19 L i Retail Demand Methodology 1.0 Methodology The methodology employed in the analysis of the demand for retail space at this site is based on a consumer expenditures model. This model can estimate the aggregate market demand for retail space, the demand for retail space at a specific location, and the effective supply of competing retailers in the area. The net demand for retail space at the location being studied is determined as the difference between the site demand and the effective supply of competition. 2.0 Aggregate Market o Retail Demand MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. utilized a model to determine retail demand. This model estimates retail demand by square footage, shopping center type and store type. These sources are census based (ESRI) local area households and household income data, consumer expenditure profiles from the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Expenditure Survey, Department of Revenue Gross Sales data, and Urban Land Institute shopping center tenant profiles, square footage requirements and average sales per square foot by store type from the publication Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers. The model operates by first determining retail household expenditures for market area households. Expenditures are determined through application of the results of the Consumer Expenditure Survey, conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor. This survey of over 30,000 households nationwide provides detailed information on average dollar expenditure amounts and the expenditure percent of household income, for all household expenditures. The income expenditure percentages are applied to the average local area household income and multiplied by the number of households to determine market area spending potential for retail store goods. Next, the historic Department of Revenue (DOR) Sales data (for the county in question) is indexed by tenant classification 2, from the Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers. The expected expenditures on retail goods are then applied to this county specific (DOR) index to determine an estimate of spending by major store type (tenant classification). The determination of sales by retail center (neighborhood, community, regional, super- regional) is determined through the construction of an index of surveyed sales by center type (also located in the Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers). 2 Tenant Classification are: general merchandise, food, food service, clothing and accessories, shoes, home furnishings, home appliances /music, building materials and hardware, automotive, hobby /special interest, gifts /specialty, jewelry, liquor, drugs, other retail, personal services, entertain ment/commun ity. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 20 Supportable square feet of a retail center is determined by applying the average sales per square foot of GLA, found in Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, to the expected sales by store type (tenant classification). In addition to determining the supportable square feet of retail space, MJT Realty Economic Advisors has determined the expected sales by DOR retail classification, which is a subset of the individual store types (tenant classifications). Provided below are income and expenditure data used in the analysis for each of the four trade areas in this report. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 21 5 Minute Drive Time Source: NUT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; U.S Census; Collier Comprensive Planning Dept.; Bureau of Labor Statistics Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; U.S. Census Bureau; Bureau of Labor Statistics Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE (ALL CENTER TYPES) in Allocation 2014 Expenditures 1$1 GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $18,743,999 Total Market Income Exp. Income Avail. for Year HHs AVG HH Income Income L Retail 2014 5,288 $67,092 $354,780,276 36.50% $129,480,164 Source: NUT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; U.S Census; Collier Comprensive Planning Dept.; Bureau of Labor Statistics Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; U.S. Census Bureau; Bureau of Labor Statistics Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE (ALL CENTER TYPES) in Allocation 2014 Expenditures 1$1 GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $18,743,999 FOOD 15.27% $19,765,409 FOOD SERVICE 10.73% $13,892,760 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 4.48% $5,797,860 SHOES 0.37% $484,276 HOME FURNISHINGS 7.10% $9,194,939 HOME APPLIANCES/MUSIC 3.67% $4,756,492 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARD 11.73% $15,188,530 AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% $30,233,996 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH HOBBY /SPECIAL WITH HOBBY /SPECIAL GIFT /SPECIALTY 1.86% $2,413,209 JEWLERY 0.56% $730,220 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 0.87% $1,123,621 OTHER RETAIL 1.44% $1,860,016 .PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% $895,891 ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% $4,398,948 TOTAL $176.87 $129,480,164 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. MEDIAN SALES PER SQFT - COMMUNITY CENTER Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 22 COMMUNITY 2014 COMMUNITY MFG SF SQFT SUPPORTABILITY GENERAL MERCHANDISE $149.50 7,999 FOOD $350.38 34,825 FOOD SERVICE $298.41 20,865 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES $232.68 2,546 SHOES $192.73 294 HOME FURNISHINGS $20928 18,567 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC $302.20 3,561 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE $388.65 36,959 AUTOMOTIVE $237.92 88,423 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST $208.86 GIFT /SPECIALTY $170.42 3,931 JEWLERY $288.20 81 LIQUOR $376.46 DRUGS $429.07 1,289 OTHER RETAIL $247.53 1,820 PERSONAL SERVICERS $176.87 2,181 ENTERTAINMENT $76.61 16,679 TOTAL 239,989 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 22 Between 5 and 10 Minute Drive Time Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; US Census, Collier Comprehensive Planning, Bureau of Labor. DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE (ALL CENTER TYPES) (/1 Allocation 2014 Expenditures($i GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $51,429,849 Total Market Income Exp. Income Avail. for Year HHs AVG HH Income Income L Retail 2014 13,772 $70,683 $973,447,361 36.50% $355,268,127 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; US Census, Collier Comprehensive Planning, Bureau of Labor. DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE (ALL CENTER TYPES) (/1 Allocation 2014 Expenditures($i GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $51,429,849 FOOD 15.27% $54,232,398 FOOD SERVICE 10.73% $38,119,002 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 4.48% $15,908,189 SHOES 0.37% $1,328,757 HOME FURNISHINGS 7.10% $25,229,107 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 3.67% $13,050,879 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWA 11.73% $41,674,342 AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% $82,956,143 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH HOBBY /SPECIAL WITH HOBBY /SPECIAL GIFT /SPECIALTY 1.86 % $6,621,372 JEWLERY 0.56% $2,003,580 Lll{V Vll I N11T -, i.t I wl-r ? r-.0()rl (u -PVft F I DRUGS 0.87% $3,082,995 OTHER RETAIL 1.44% $5,103,518 PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% $2,458,148 ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% $12,069,848 TOTAL $176.87 $355,268,127 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. MEDIAN SALES PER S @FT — COMMUNITY CENTER Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 23 COMMUNITY 2014 COMMUNITY MODS /SF SOFT SUPPORTABILITY GENERAL MERCHANDISE $149.50 21,948 FOOD $35036 95,553 FOOD SERVICE $298.41 57,249 CLOTHING 8 ACCESSORIES $232.68 6,903 SHOES $192.73 807 HOME FURNISHINGS $209.28 50,944 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC $302.20 9,770 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE $388.65 101,409 AUTOMOTIVE $237.92 242,616 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST $208.86 GIFT /SPECIALTY $170.42 1 0,785 JEWLERY $266.20 221 LIQUOR $376.46 DRUGS $429.07 3,536 OTHER RETAIL $247.53 4,993 PERSONAL SERVICERS $176.87 5,983 ENTERTAINMENT $76.61 45,764 TOTAL 658,482 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 23 Between 10 and15 Minute Drive Time Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; US Census, Collier Comprehensive Planning, Bureau of Labor. DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE (ALL CENTER TYPES) (%) Allocation 2014 Expenditures ($1 GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $86,342,072 Total Market Income Exp. Income Avail. for Year HHs AVG HH Income Income °S Retail 2014 22,544 $72,492 $1,634,254,495 36.50% $596,435,469 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; US Census, Collier Comprehensive Planning, Bureau of Labor. DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE (ALL CENTER TYPES) (%) Allocation 2014 Expenditures ($1 GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $86,342,072 FOOD 15.27% $91,047,081 FOOD SERVICE 10.73% $63,995,398 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 4.48% $26,707,175 SHOES 0.37 % $2,230,760 HOME FURNISHINGS 7.10% $42,355,429 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 3.67% $21,910,232 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 11.73% $69,964,215 AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% $139,269,420 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH HOBBY /SPECIAL WITH HOBBYISPECIAL GIFT /SPECIALTY 1.86% $11,116,171 JEWLERY 0.56% $3,363,674 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 0.87% $5,175,831 OTHER RETAIL 1.44% $8,567,948 PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% $4,126,818 ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% $20,263,245 TOTAL $176.87 1 $596,435,469 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. MEDIAN SALES PER SOFT - COMMUNITY CENTER Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 24 COMMUNITY 2014 COMMUNITY MED $ISF S.QFT SUPPORTABILITY GENERAL MERCHANDISE $149.50 36,848 FOOD $350.38 160,417 FOOD SERVICE $298.41 96,112 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES $232.68 11,589 SHOES $193.73 1,355 HOME FURNISHINGS $209.28 85,526 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC $302.20 16,401 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE .. $388.65 170,249 AUTOMOTIVE $237.92 407,311 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST $208.86 GIFT /SPECIALTY $170.42 18,107 JEWLERY $288.20 372 LIQUOR $376.46 DRUGS $429.07 5,936 OTHER RETAIL $247.53 13,383 PERSONAL SERVICERS $176.87 10,044 ENTERTAINMENT $76.61 76,831 TOTAL 1,105,480 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 24 Marco Island Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; US Census, Collier Comprehensive Planning, Bureau of Labor. DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE (ALL CENTER TYPES) ly. Allocation 2014 Expenditures($) GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $58,219,823 Total Market Income Exp. Income Avail. for Year HHs AVG HH Income Income % Retail 2014 9,578 $115,052 $1,101,965,772 36.50% $402,172,045 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; US Census, Collier Comprehensive Planning, Bureau of Labor. DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE (ALL CENTER TYPES) ly. Allocation 2014 Expenditures($) GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $58,219,823 FOOD 15.27% $61,392,376 FOOD SERVICE 10.73% $43,151,626 CLOT HING & ACCESSORIES 4.48% $18,008,451 SHOES 0.37% $1,504,185 HOME FURNISHINGS 7.10% $28,559,954 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 3.67% $14,773,908 BUILDING MATERIALS/HARDWARE 11.73 % $47,176,355 AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% $93,908,344 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH HOBBY /SPECIAL WITH HOBBY /SPECIAL rzier7Cor(.141 T( 1 96q�- <7.495.552 JEWLERY 0.56% $2,268,101 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE r WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 0.87% $3,490,025 OTHER RETAIL 1.44% $5,777,304 PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% $2,782,683 ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% $13,663,357 TOTAL $176.87 $402,172,045 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. MEDIAN SALES PER SQFT — COMMUNITY CENTER Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 25 COMMUNITY 2014 COMMUNITY MED$ /SF SQFTSUPPORTABILITY GENERAL MERCHANDISE $149.50 24,846 FOOD $350.38 108,168 FOOD SERVICE $298.41 64,807 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES $232.68 7,814 SHOES $192.73 914 HOME FURNISHINGS $209.28 57,670 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC $302.20 11,059 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE $388.65 114,798: AUTOMOTNE $237.92 274,647 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST $208.86 GIFT /SPECIALTY $170.42 12,209 JEWLERY $288.20 251 LIQUOR $376.46 DRUGS $429.07 4,003 OTHER RETAIL $247.53 5,653 PERSONAL SERVICERS $176.87 6,773 ENTERTAINMENT $76.61 51,806 TOTAL 745,417 Source: MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc.; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 - Urban Land Institute. © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 25 APPENDIX A 2 Collier County Future Land Use Map R 25 E B 2R E - R 27 E I R 2R E R 22 E R 30 E 1 R 31 E { R-32 E R 33 E R 34 E _ 2012 — 2025 :. =.... ■ u �.� # t~.�� . FUTURE LAND USE MAP J,�, „g ,m r• ,•�, p..,wn. =o. rn Collier County Florida °"awry I Y. ... a<TMeuswonxnannrw,uasxwm - ! r�'•• -• VB°"•` ®� � ?s:it:s.•s�.!Es " e�caumrmermurcuwauwlmaa - -- - -- - D {)...4........ '- coum•uwruewcmwvau ..so"" — .... wxuwsaeurxr`n rwRasworaurw _., ♦ — , �.....a ,w..:, � qY: �K.�e�zca '— �.:��ee �. ..{ '- .- .�..._ - -�•h1 � )R e.v srw rui . wa+sru ir..,+. � _ . °mss Y 4h. e — y�- cy7lj.tf� �: La '�_�'�� mrsr.[ •"`�'.t°`,e.'s,',"� pR 25E '1 R 2 E R27 E I R 2RE I R25 E i R 30 E R31E a,(•� R32E R 33 E i R 34E i © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 26 APPENDIX A 3 ESRI D "emographic Summary ioesr*i- i Demographic and Income Profile vincentian 248 Benson St, Naples, Ronda, 34113 .., • 1111 11 11 , .:.'::, Drive Time; 5 minute radius Summary Census 2610 2014 _ 2019 Population 14,169 14,896 16,021 Households 4,983 5,283 51746 Families 3,569 3,758 4,055 Average Household Size 2.82 2.80 2.77 Owner Occupied Housing Units 3,723 3,738 4,035 Renter Occupied Housing Units 1,26S 1,549 1,711 Median Age 39.6 41.7 44.2 Trends: 2014 - 2019 Annual Rate Area State - National Population 1.47 170 1.46 °! 0.734•-. Households 1.68 %'0 1.061,'° 0.75 %. Families 1.5390 0.9550 0.66 %'0 Owner HHs 1.54% 0.95 °.0 0.69 °fa Median Household Income 3.H69b 3 -16% 2.7441° 2014 2019 Househalds by Income Number Percent Number Percent e$1S,000 685 13.0 °71 680 .- �,nren_e�t a ^c ann few- 522 ;n.goc. $25,000 - $34,999 aig .s.s% 740 12.25 $35,000 - $49,999 875 16.5°.!, 983 i7.1 °70 $50,000 - $74,999 846 Y6.4°!0 1,083 18.8 %0 $75,000 - $99,999 526 9.9 °70 703 122-11. $100,000 - $149,999 404 7.6170 497 8.6% $150,000 - $199,999 152 2.91/ 232 4.0% $200,000+ 171 3.2°!0 246 4.3 °f Median Household Income $39.486 $47,725 Average Household Income $59,610 569,555 Per Capita Income $21,285 525,123 Census 2010 - 2014 2019 -. Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0,4 992 7.0% 990 6.6°.0 1,032 6.4% 5- 9 1,028 7.3% 1,015 6.8% 1,033 6.4 1l0 10-14 926 6.51!0 941 6131!0 963 6.01.6 SS - 14 989 7.0°! 868 5.8% 883 5.5% 20-24 745 53% 855 5.7% 734 4.61.. 25-34 1,650 11.61/4 1,694 11 -49'° 1,805 11.30.. 35-44 1,690 11.9% 1,616 14.9°1° 1,690 10.5% 45-54 1,619 11.4% 1,663 11.2°.0 1,655 10.34-. 5S-64 1,644 10.9% 1,817 12.2% 2,121 13.21/4 65-74 1,708 1211% 1,983 23.3% 2,405 15.01% 75-84 1,001 7.1% 1,121 7.50110 1,316 8.21.'0 $$t 276 1.9% 328 2.2% 382 2.41.6 Census 2010 2014 2019 Race and Ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent White Alone 9,885 69.8% 10,207 68.5% 10,729 67.0% Black Alone 2,215 15.6°'0 2,470 16.6 % 2,855 17.914 American Indian Alone 76 0.5% 80 4.5% 39 0.6% Asian Alone 89 0.69. 111 0.7% 145 0.9%'0 Pacific Islander Alone 5 0.0% 6 0.0% 7 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 1,559 21.0% 2,660 11.111'0 1,797 11.2110 Two or More Races 339 2.441, 362 2.4% 390 2.41% Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 6,023 42.5% 6,307 42.3070 6,665 42.4°.. Dot. Note: iricwrn, is exptessed Nt current ddlars. source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 20 t0 Summary file 1. Esd forecasts for 2014 and 2019. July 30, 2014 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 27 Oesri' Demographic and Profile Vincentlan 248 Benson St Naples, Florida, 34113 Drive Time: 5 minute radius Trends 2014 -2019 3.5 Y C CD 3 L M 2.5 C 2- 1 � 1.5 13 Area State 0.5 ; USA 0 Population Median HH Income Households Families Owner HHs Population by Age 14 1 12 10 e a 4 u a- 4 g `} F ., a i 2014 � 2019 0 0 -4 5 -9 10 -14 15 -19 20-24 25 -34 35-44 45 -54 55 -64 65 -74 75 -84 85+ 2014 Household Income 2014 Population by Race 615K SZK -$34iC 15.5% 15.5% � . 15.3% % 60 -�- i, 55 $35K - 5a9K 16.6% $50K - f7C 16.0% .915K 13.0% 5200K+ 3.2% 5150K - 5199K 2.9% OOK - S149K 7.6% 575K -*99K 9.9% C N U d White 5lacK Am. ina. Asian raanc vcner iw0-r 2014 Percent Hispanic Origin: 42.3% Sources U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary Fie 1. Esri fo asts Poi, 2014 and 2019. July 30, 2014 �G2u. i csr: Fzt:a 2 of 6 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 28 Brim Demographic an• income Profile virxertciart 243 Benson St, Naples, Florida,. 34113 '•'r` '• -� Drive Time: 1D minute radius 'Q!". Summary Census 2010 2014 2019 Population 43,780 45,726 48,797 Households 18,176 19,060 20,488 Familes 11,596 12,095 12,942 Average Household 5i2;e 2.32 2.32 2.31 Owner Occupied Housing Units 12,935 12,852 13,730 RenterOc-upied Housing Wilts 5,241 6,208 6,757 Median Age 47.7 Solo 52.3 Trends 2014- 2019 Annual Bate Area State National Population 1.31% 1.06% 0.73% Households 1469. 1.06 °.'0 077 Families 1.565. 0.95 °:0 0.66% Owner Hills 1.33% 0.9311. 0.69010 Median iiousehoid Income 3.90% 3.16.1. 234:0 2014 2019 Households by Income plumber Percent Number Percent t�y,r D00 2,286 12.0% 2,223 10.9% 7.237 1(041011, $25,000 - $34,994 2,29S U-2,6 $35,000 - $49,999 3,160 16.6% 3,403 16.6% $50,000 - $74,999 3, 12S 16,4,. 3,816 1$.6% $75,000 - $94,994 0,023 - 10.6% 2,702 13.29% $100,000 - $149,999 1,606 8.4% 1,999 9.8% $150,000 - $199,999 527 2.8% 785 3.8% $200,000-e 749 3.9% 1,027 5.0% Median Household Income $41,593 5501367 Average Household Income $62,801 $73,730 Per Capita Income $26,477 531,121 - Census 2010 2014 2019 Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number - Percent 0 - 4 2,383 S,4% 2,343 5.140 2,423 5.0% 5 - 9 2,266 5.2% 2,337 5.1% 2,369 4.9% 10-14 2,023 4.6% 2,077 4.5% 2,234 4.6% 15-19 2,192 5.0% 2,020 4.4% 2,104 4.3% 20 -24 2,212 5.1% 2,324 5.1% 2,111 4.3:u 25-34 4,778 10-9% 4,$51 10.6% 4,927 101°, 35-44 4,651 10.6% 4,543 9.9% 4,696 9,6% 45-54 5,039 11.5% 5,011 11.00110 4,SS3 10.0% 55-64 5,792 13.2% 6,235 13.6-k 7,083 14-5% 65-74 6,608 15.1% 7,537 16.5%. 8,755 17.9% 75-84 4,377 10.0 1/4 4,673 10.21/0 5,260 10 -8910 £5t 1,461 3.34'. 1,774 3.9% 1;954 4.01% census 2010 2014 2019 Race and Ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent Number. Percent lh'hi:eAlone 34,654 79.21k 35,484 77.6% 36,882 75.6% Suck Alone 4,626 10.6% 5,261 11.5% 6,264 12.8:0 American Indian Alone 191 0.4% 203 0.4% 225 0.5% Asian Alone 342 0.870 427 0A% 559 1.1% Pacific Islander Alone 15 0.0% 17 0 -0% 19 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 3,06$ 7-09% 3,369 7.49$ $,775 7.7% Two or More Races 874 2.01'0 965 2,19/6 1,074 2.2% Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 12,517 28,6% 13,495 29.50! 15,193 31.1% Oates Note: Income is exple•.Aed in torrent "brS. Souris: U.S. Census Bureau, Corms 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2614and 2019. • July 30, 2014 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 29 Demographic and Income Profile Oesn- Vincentian 248 Benson St, Naples, Florida, 34113 Drive Time: 10 minute radius -8t.? 146 Trends 2014-2019 3.5- '3 - el 2.5- 2- 1.5 1- - Population Population by Age r a. Area State USA Households Families Owner HHs Median HH Income 2014 Household Income S25K -$34K 15.3% I $-35K - s49K 16-15% $50 16.4% < S15K 12-0% s2'0K. 3.9% $150K - $199K 2.8% OK - S149K 6.4% $75K -$99K 10.6% 2014 Population by Race E2014 ER 2019 White 131acK Am. Ina. Asian vaciric vzner two, 2014 Percent Hispanic Origin; 29.5% Source: U.S.Census Bureau, Census 2010Summary File 1. Ewi forecasts for 2014 and 2019. July 30, 2014 12014 Z-'ri ge 1, Of 6 @ 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 30 Am vircentian 248 Benson St, Naples, Florida, 34113 Drive Time; 15 mimte radius Summary Census 2010 2014 Population 93,198 96,360 Households 40,178 41,604 Families 25,514 26,209 Average Household Size 2-27 2.27 Owner Occupied Housing Units 27,931 27,289 Renter Occupied Housing Units 12,247 14,315 Median Age 48,4 50.3 Trends: 2014 - 2019 Annual Rate Area State Population Households 1.26% 1.0690 Families 1,1314 0.9511. Owner HHs 1,17% 0,93% Median Household income 3.61% 3.16% Households by Income <$15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 490,000-$74,999 $300,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $200,000+ Median Household Income Average Household Income Per Capita Income Population by Age 0.4 5 -9 10 -14 15 -19 20-24 25-34 35 -44 45 -54 55 -64 65-74 75-84 S5+ Rate and Ethnicity - White Alone Black Alone American Indian Atone Asian Alone Pacific Islander Alone Soma Other Race Alone Two or More Races Census 2010 Number Percent 5,011 SAM. 4,685 5.0 °!. 4,258 4.6 %. 4,398 4.7% 4,412 4.7% 10,008 10.7 -. 10,001 10.7% 1.1,096 11.9 %. 12,625 13.5% 14,326 15.4% 9,443 10.1 -. 2,937 3.21. Census 2010 Number Percent 76,432 82.0% 8,525 9.1% 357 0.4 %. 973 1,0% 34 0.0% 5,100 5.5% 1,778 1,19Y. Hispanic Origin {Any Race} 23,935 2S.7% Data Note: Incatnc 6 expressed in euucnt dolars. Seuraoz U.S, Census &rraau, Census 2010 Summary n3e L Esd forecasts for 20i4 and '2019. 2014 Number Percent 4,552 10.9% 5,886 14.1 5,618 13.5% 7,012 16.9% 7 -,256 17.4% a,55Y lt.rny. 3,914 9.4°,° 1,214 2.9% I,S88 3,81! $43,982 $64,408 $26,010 2014 Number Percent 4,892 5.1% 4,970 S.2% 4,370 4.5% 4,113 4.3% 4,506 4.71,. 10,144 10.5% 9,765 10.1 °1c 10,949 11.41% 13,319 13.5 % 15,678 16.311. 10,009 I0.4% 3,643 3.8% 2014 Number Percent 77,457 00.4% 9,669 10.0% 384 0.4 °,0 1,201 1.211. 42 0.00/4 5,622 5.8% 1,985 2.151. 26,070 27.1°/ 2019 102,213 44,296 27,718 2.26 28,927 15,369 52.0 National 0.73% 0.75% 0.66 0.699'. 2.74% 2019 Number Percent 4,350 9.8% 4,417 10.0°'0 4,732 10.7 %. 7,380 16.7% 8,613 19.4% 6;089 13.7v' 4,a78 11.0 % 1,736 3.9% 2,101 4.7% $52,525 $7S,121 $'32,690 . 2019 Number Percent 5,069 5.0% 5,053 4.9% 4,,&61 4.8% 4,344 4.2% 4,166 4.1 10,202 10.0% 10,087 9.91% 10,577 10,3% 14,875 14.6% 17,719 17.31.0 11,148 10.9% 4,113 4. % 2019 , Number Percent 80,125 78.41.9 11,486 112% 433 0.4% 1,554 1.5 °l. 49 0.0% 6,334 62 1."0 2,229 22°6 29,708 29.1% July 30, 2014 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 31 esri- Demographic and Income Profile Vncentian 248 Benson St, Naples, Florida, 34113 !.- ait %.vds�: 'F :}7533% Drive Time: 15 minute radius •£•1.12146 Trends 2014 -2019 3.5 3 u t[i 2.5 GL 2 6 1 Area - / State a 015 _ USA 0 Population Households Families Owner HHs Median HH Income Population by Age 16 14 12 10 w` 8 a fi 2 0 -4 5 -9 10 -14 15 -19 20 -24 25 -34 35 -44 45 -54 55 -64 65 -74 75 -84 2014 Household Income 2014 Population by Race $25K -534K SISK - 524K l3 49f. 1 L 1 N. $35K - $49K 16.9% $50K 17.4, <st5K 10.9% ;200x+ 3.$% $isoK - SIM 2.9% 3K - $149K 9.4% $75K- $99K 11.0% G N V N N 2014 .''1 2019 White Black Am. Ind. Asian Pacific Other Two+ 2014 Percent Hispanic Origin: 27.1% Source: U.S, Genus Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Es 1 forecasts for 2014 and 2019. July 30, 2014 aud•`t Eer! Fx;a 6o"' 6 © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 32 Oesn- • Demographic and income Profile Polygon Marco Isfamt Area: 49.84 square miles •`t` Summary Census 2010 2014 2019 Population 18,599 18,930 $102,222 19,864 Households 9,371 per Capita Income 9,578 10,077 Families 6,336 6,413 Census 2010 6,690 Average Household Size 1.98 1.98 Population by Age 1.97 Owner Occupied Housing Units 7,958 Percent 7,879 Percent 8,277 Renter Occupied Housing Uaits 1,413 354 1,699 374 1,800 Median Age 63.0 2.7% 64.8 2.S% 65.5 Trends- 2014 - 2019 Annual Kate Area 546 State 518 National Population 0.97% 15-19 1.06% 2.8-4 0.73% Households 1.02 %. 2.4% I.D60 /. 419 0.75 °'0 Families 0.85% 369 0.950:0 25 -34 0.66% Owner HHs 0.99% 4.8% 0.93!0 4.5% 0.69% Median Hcjusehold Income 3.32% 1,080 3.16% 1,205 2,749'. 45-54 2,176 11.714 2014 10.0% 2019 Households by Income 55-64 Number Percent Number Percent <515,000 1&5% 703 7.3% 609 6.0% $15,000. $24,999 5,359 776 8.1010 524 5.25'0 $25,000 - $34,999 17.701. 882 9.2% 667 6.6 °l. $35,000 - $49,999 968 1,134 11.8% 1,074 10.7% r511.91-1 _ Q7A 9aq 1.576 165°/. 1,701 16.9:0 $751000 - $991999 Number -1'1a3 12 4of. 1,470 14.6% $100,000 - $149,999 White Alone 1,605 16.80% 1,872 18.6% $150,000 - $199,999 93.61/o 644 6.7% 825 8.2% 1;200,000+ 271 1,074 11.21/. 1,333 13.2% Median Household Income $69,081 $81,349 Average Household income $102,222 $121,958 per Capita Income $51,371 $61,455 Census 2010 2014 2019 Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0 . 4 393 2.1% 354 1.9% 374 1.9% 5 -9 504 2.7% 478 2.S% 476 2.4% 10-14 546 2.91/. 518 2.7% 528 2.7% 15-19 523 2.8-4 472 2.5 °10 473 2.4% 2D - 24 419 2.314 402 - 2.1 -1. 369 1.911. 25 -34 880 4.7% 917 4.8% 888 4.5% 35-44 1,165 6.3% 1,080 5.7% 1,205 6.11% 45-54 2,176 11.714 1,893 10.0% 1,648 8.3% 55-64 3,S21 183% 3,423 18.1% 3,680 1&5% 65-74 4,819 25.91!. 5,081 26.8% 5,359 27.0 1.0 75-84 2,908 15.60/. 3,341 17.701. 3,715 187% 85+ 747 4.0% 968 5.1% 1,146 5.8% Census 2010 2014 2019 Race and Ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent White Alone 17,733 9513% 17,894 94.6% 181S83 93.61/o 81ac'k Alone 184 1.0% 217 1.101. 271 1.40 /. American Indian Alone 24 0.10/. 25 0.1 `0 30 0.2% Asian Alone 198 1.117. 250 336 1.7% Pacific l$iander Alooe 6 0.0% 8 0.0% 11 0.1% Some Other Race Alone 325 1.71Y. 377 2_D °l. 452 2.3% Two or More Races 130 0.7% 154 0.80:0 181 0.9% Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 1,375 7.4°% 1,572 8.3/. 1,917 9.7% pata Not- Inm,* is expre.sed In (.net d.11ars. Source. U.S. Census Ourean, Census 20t0 Summary file 1, Es�i forecasts fcr 201.1 and 2619. )uly 30, 2014 Face i •;i © 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 33 qpesri Polygon Area: 49.84 square miles Trends. 2014-2019 3- 2.5- iu 2- < r- 0.5 0 Population Population by Age 25- 20- iu 15 Households Families 0-4 5-9 10-14 1S-19 20-24 2014 Household Income 435K • 549K $25K - $34K 2.2% 524K 4K 1% 550K - $74K 16.5% <515K 7.3% 47SK - SS! 12.4% $lQGK -4149K 16.8% S20OK- 11.2% S199K 5.7% Are State USA Owner HHs Median HH Income 15-44 45 -54 SS-64 65-74 75- 85+ 2014 Population by Race 2 0 CL � E 2014 2019 - White Black Am. Ind. Asian Pacific Other Two+ 2014 Percent Hf.pani. Origin. 8.3% Soun= U.S. Census Bureau, CensM2010Summary File 1. rsdfM-asts for Z0T4 and 2019. July 30, 2014 @ 2014 MJT Realty Economic Advisors, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 34 PL20130001767 EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT CP- 2013 -10 [Page 10] Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict 6. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict 11. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict 13. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 15. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 16. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict 17. Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict [Page 26] 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict, Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict; and, in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict; Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict, in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay; and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. [Page 46] 1 Words underlined are added; words stF Gk thmugh are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * * ** * * ** * * * *) denotes break in text. Version Date: 10/21/2014 PL20130001767 17. Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict CP- 2013 -10 This Subdistrict contains approximately 30.68 acres, is located on the south /west side of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and is depicted on the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map. The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow for neighborhood, community, and regional commercial development; residential development; and mixed use (commercial and residential) development. The Subdistrict is intended to include commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. In order to comply with Policy 1.10 of the Housing Element of the Growth Management Plan, residential development shall be limited to market -rate units so as to avoid the concentration of affordable housing in one location in the County. The property may be developed entirely as commercial, entirely as residential, or as a mixture of residential and commercial uses. The development of this Subdistrict shall comply with the followinq restrictions, limitations and standards: a. Allowable uses: The maximum intensity of commercial uses shall be limited to those allowed in the C -3 zoning district, both by right and by conditional use, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict. Additionally, the following uses are allowed: 1. Department store (5311), 2. Hotel (7011, hotel only), 3. Dental laboratories (8072), and 4. Nursing and personal care facilities (8051). b. Additional use restrictions and intensity standards: 1. Commercial uses shall be limited to a maximum of 250,000 square feet of gross floor area (GFA), and one hotel (maximum FAR 0.6 and a maximum of 150 rooms), and an assisted living facility (maximum FAR 0.6). Additionally, for every acre of hotel or ALF, the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet. 2. Residential development shall be limited to a maximum density of 7.3 units per acre, calculated on the gross acreage of the property exclusive of any commercial portions, for a maximum of 224 multi - family dwelling units. 3. If the proiect is developed as mixed use (residential and commercial uses) the residential density allowance is as provided for in Number 2. above, and the commercial portion of the proiect shall not exceed 10 acres in size and a maximum of 128,000 square feet of GFA of commercial uses, and a 150 -room hotel not to exceed 0.6 FAR, and an Assisted Living Facility at a 0.6 FAR. Additionally, for every acre of hotel or ALF, the maximum allowable commercial GFA shall be reduced by 10,000 square feet. 4. A stand -alone automobile service station (i.e. retail fuel sales in coniunction with a convenience store) is prohibited; however, accessory fuel pumps in association with a grocery store or membership warehouse type facility greater than 15,000 square feet of GFA are allowed. 5. A recreational site for the use of the adiacent RV or mobile home parks may be developed on a maximum of 3 acres. The recreational site may include facilities such as a pool, clubhouse, and tennis courts. Words underlined are added; words StF Gk thFGugl4 are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * * ** * * ** * * * *) denotes break in text. Version Date: 10121/2014 PL20130001767 c. Site Development: CP- 2013 -10 1. Rezoning of this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The rezone ordinance shall contain development and design standards to ensure compatibility with internal uses as well as adiacent external uses and shall include additional restrictions and standards necessary to ensure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The subiect site will be developed with a common architectural and landscaping theme, to be submitted with the first Site Development Plan. 3. The unified planned development submitted at time of the first Site Development Plan will reflect to the maximum extent feasible internal connectivity through shared parking and cross - access agreements. 4. Pedestrian connections are encouraged both with perimeter properties, where feasible, and between internal buildings. 5. At the time of Site Development Plan approval the required on -site vegetation retention may be satisfied off -site, pursuant to Policy 6.1.1(13) of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the Growth Management Plan. At a minimum, 15 percent of the on -site !!01L!uG YGIAGIGlLillll !IIl.1JL fJc rc aiiicu t rl -Siic. ii iiic div1iiv1-1 v1 i`1 LIV �cia i iii Soi fc�a vii -S c is met by land donation to the County, the specific off -site property shall be taken to the Board_ of County Commissioners for acceptance. However, a hearing before the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee will not be required. [Page 141] Urban Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Map Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict Livingston Road/Veteran's Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict Map Coastal High Hazard Area Map Coastal High Hazard Area Comparison Map Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map 3 Words underlined are added; words stF Gk threugI4 are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * * ** * * ** * * * *) denotes break in text. Version Date: 10/21/2014 pp- -4 �, • .. L.. ,,,. 1 , J 1� � 1 Y �. (1•Y"1 11r� —! � � i'r�YJr l � • "'''- i atitt �Y5 �� a '!�^ .�d� .�R�y� a'v k1.�*,r„il�i c ., ern a,'Li taL—`2 1 G W-tti N_ + , r � ' f Y / �Y � t r 1LY7 U 1t�n o/�54,�! L �Mi� d�i ,17 i -.. ��, '� ■ vw�+ tl,� (� „�T t 4r1 i5 , � ", �i 4 I ri ➢ r� A� •� � �� Wb V, ,}, " °' I of ( i;i -` f I + r2 � I� 7 v� �� Lk I� ti hh i ;' k 1 "l �I 1 ''1.; uT,y�' �`�� ti;: GrC`+ir ' ,•,'' ,. l e I b �1 e f 1'' s 4 y Vt i I "e.4" , Zls I tl ; I E ' •',J�� p '�`y� � �''�'H�'qr�, t ( �,, "�`'� ;��1�,...,�.` Y�,, I � +1 ,. tP ��jjr'�g��1 �, ,,�1�t�o- `'' 1� iACF '�► 6J 'i7u �'`,� ,a,!ti� -- ! ( r Y +i �'I -euT,� ;r/ !¢ ul If[ I , ,�,r h �� ; ✓ bf ,I��'TfT�� Yj iF �''" yj1` d�� I ^ n, I ( �$ ' ' �'*slt,�•.'�j,„, ok F• � 1 4r' AV - ,ywl 11 1 l ;,�jl• .�'�, .`� ` ` ,. /`j�j�' T,,� • • ,� 119./R' �< ` �'�,, An, 1j� ,A•.T y, ��• � ro F�� ,'1► :e l„�1� ��q ��ti t I_�'' � 1,. �: ��t'�i °r� ,.� r �r�S. G+�I� `antiµ,, 1 Irr.r 1 ��' v, *ti.' a 1� 9Ct+tu� f it 1 ;, �i 4' +r 1 1l' 7 , WWI i 11A Xp rl y ! � ��IG'' il'• q 1 t � I r �' ' ' i y� ,N�aa '� 4�ik 11 �a .� ,r' �I �,i • idK�i I��1�� d� i ! I�JrMI • 1,, 1F�S! �,!!"s 1q... ,r! 1•'.+P v,4 �� , (a1 ,'i �f pF�w �i I ' ;� "' / � � r�."� • �9 f t ➢ +dal - e.�i' a�'�' �^:^, --- -- - Z'rr�.. ✓I7 �..��{ �1� dal± i�'Ji IMNI� r t� , • '.. rl: is r IL `t��. / ! I ��/ , I ��%�. f /'I � �'w� t'✓ !� , {ice P`� ti jY� +��., r '+fir {r1. k`^� ' � l�``t +� /i�,,� Ir♦I -r1 �, .� i iE�,?�, 1 � yvMt p /� f�l, � ��(r, �y�y �� , ��j�', - �I�a�.•r1�;� �etilT,'IF!' ale.. t y'� 'f' �� - . ,.v..•i,��'o ��t`�'.1�44r�AQARE�f1h. !Aa•;f!�I�"Ic= 71w'- �.dA941Y t;.1P��4'- �.�t��9i L_� ...�- i�..\,�Y � tl AIL fo I i �V r.��T,z_�iG1L��af�' [ s r!�; � � jp r� .•,1��\ '�bc '9"�;,•b� - IA KA F.AI0!'P�k � e+ i .nrtrl M1rb,�� ap�z f �0� �O cn C") w / C i[7 0 X I� S T w 70- — ia -- < a o T C C7 \ A 0� c m 0� c 0 0 °mho Cl) \ C < a o o m i � m rq C o Mm a m " 06 ea -0 m C S b O rrn ma m a< �a rz 'z0M < m -. o o m i � m rq C Z < n �rr Mm a C-d J 6 06 ea -0 m C C m en cn b mm ou rrn ma m a< �a rz 'z0M 20 08 � � u m d D zzg c f_9 t77 CIJ z_ 3> C m G)M G) < T °�, >MM am °mr 0 0 M -0mA n v' �a rz 'z0M � v- � 0 zzg r zZ m M z_ m G)M G) M z �r m 0 C) C) rn a o Fn y Z O O Oo O O EXHIBIT C -1 VE'q CENTIAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Octobers 2013 Prepared For: Global Properties of Naples, LLC: 2614 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 615 Naples, Florida 34103 (239) 692 -8397 Prepared By: Passarrella & Associates, Inc 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 274 -0067 Project No. 12JCS2108 TABLE OF CONTENTS Rage Introduction...................................................................................................... ..............................1 Vegetation Associations and Land Uses .......................................................... ..............................1 Soils................................................................................................................. ..............................5 JurisdictionalWetlands .......... ..................... ........... ,............ --- ....... ........... ...., .,....,..,.,,,................7 ListedSpecies .................................................................................................. ..............................7 Archaeological and Historical Resources ........................................................ ..............................7 References.......................................................................................................... ..............................8 1 LIST OF FIGURES ' S Page Figure 1. Project Location Map ............................................................... ..............................2 Figure 2. FLUCFCS and Wetlands Map ................................................. ..............................3 FigureI Soils Map ................................................................................. ..............................6 ii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Existing Land Use and Cover Summary ......... ............................... .................4 Table 2. Soils Listed by the NRCS ........................................................ ..............................5 Table 3. SFWMl3 and C ®E Wetland Acreages by FLUCFCS Code .... ..............................7 iii LIST OF EX ITS Page Exhibit A. Aerial with FLUCFCS and Wetlands Map .......................... ............................... A -1 Exhibit B. Listed Plant and Wildlife Species Survey ................................ ............................B -1 Exhibit C. Correspondence from the Florida Department of State Division of Historical Resources ............................................. ............................0 -1 iv INTRODUCTION The following information regarding site conditions and environmental considerations has been prepared for the proposed Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment for Vincentian (Project). The 30.68L acre Project site is located in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Figure 1). More specifically, it is found at the south comer of the intersection of US 41 South (Tamiami Trail East) and Southwest Boulevard. The property is bound to the northeast by US 41 and the Whistler's Cove apartment complex; to the east by the Hitching Post commercial plaza and Hitching Post mobile home park; to the south, southwest, and northwest by Trail Acres residential subdivision; and to the northwest by Southwest Boulevard and a Circle K gas station. The Project site itself is comprised mainly of forested uplands and wetlands that have been disturbed by the invasion of varying levels of exotic vegetation and an altered hydrologic regime. VF.GF,TAT 11-N ASSOC:A T J ONO AND LAND SUS) The Project's existing land uses include a combination of undeveloped, disturbed land and forested uplands and wetlands with varying degrees of exotic infestation. The vegetation associations for the property were delineated using December 2010 rectified color aerials (Scale: 1" = 200'); groundtruthing was conducted on February 19, 2012. These delineations were classified based on the nomenclature of the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) Levels III and IV (Florida Department of Transportation 1999). Level IV FLUCFCS was utilized to denote disturbance and "E" codes were used to identify levels of exotic species invasion (i.e., melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), downy rose myrtle (Rhodomyrtus tomentosa), and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius)). AutoCAD Map 3D 2011 software was used to determine the acreage of each mapped polygon, produce summaries, and generate the final FLUCFCS map (Figure 2 and Exhibit A). A total of seven vegetative associations and land uses (i.e., FLUCFCS codes) were identified on the property. The dominant habitat type on the property is Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (50 -75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4119 E3), accounting for 37.2 percent of the property (11.40± acres). Exotic vegetation documented on -site includes, but is not limited to, Brazilian pepper, melaleuca, java plum (Syzygium spp.), earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), and wedelia (Sphagneticola trilobata) (formerly known as Wedelia trilobata). The degree of exotic infestation ranges from 50 to 100 percent cover. Table 1 summarizes the FLUCFCS acreages; a brief description of each of the FLUCFCS classifications follows the table. tii W. W. vs, M ZPT AV 6 8 E C 6W'W.P �m 75 E UAp MIVA-9 'Wn 1IRW L rAll- Z Lsb J, FmorVIASS HAM 'R -7 3A w. 6- re Ali ff? 0 rc P. f PROJECTLOCATION SEC 32, T"T 50 S, RNG 26 E MRICE S 54 Gulf Inplaw- LIT -w L "a .M of 9 oft—L rl LEGEND: SFWMD AND COE WETLANDS (12.66 Ac.t) SURVEYED WETLAND LINE NOTES: FLUCFCS LINES ESTIMATED FROM 1' =200' AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS AND LOCATIONS APPROXIMATED. FLUCFCS PER FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCFCS) (FDOT 1999). UPLAND /WETLAND LINES WERE APPROVED BY SFWMD ON MAY 17, 2012 AND BY THE COE ON JULY 18, 2012. WETLAND LINES PER MARCO SURVEYING AND MAPPING DRAWING No. E -005 12 -075 ENV LOC VINC.Dws DATED JULY 18, 2012 PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER MARCO SURVEYING & MAPPING LLC. DRAWING No. P092- VINCENTIAN- PUD_V4. Dwc DATED MARCH 19, 2012. FIGURE 2. FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAP VINCENTIAN FLUCFCS PAS ARE LI A � U Ecdo0a ASSOCATES z B.B. MEWEDBY DATE /19 /12 % OF CODES DESCRIPTIONS ACREAGE TOTAL 4119 E2 - PINE FLATWOODS, DISTURBED (25-49% EXOTICS) 0.17Ac.± 0.6% 4119 E3 PINE FLATWOODS, DISTURBED (50 -75% EXOTICS) 11.40Ac.± 37.2% 4159 E3 PINE, DISTURBED (50 -75% EXOTICS) 0.86Ac.-t 2.8% 4159 E4 PINE, DISTURBED (76 -100% EXOTICS) 5.40 Ac.± 17.6% 6249 E3 CYPRESS /PINE/CABBAGE PALM, DISTURBED (50 -75% EXOTICS) 6.94Ac.± 22.6% 6249 E4 CYPRESS /PINE /CABBAGE PALM, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 5.72Ac.± 18.6% 740 DISTURBED LAND 0.19Ac+ 0. b% TOTAL 30.68 Ac.± 100.0% H.H. 7/19/12 PAS ARE LI A � U Ecdo0a ASSOCATES z B.B. MEWEDBY DATE /19 /12 EVISED DATE 3 2 J F O a a z i Table 1. Existing Land Use and Cover Summary FLUCFCS Code Descrilmti ®n Acreage Percent of Total 4119 E2 Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (25 -49% Exotics) 0.17 0.6 4119 E3 Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (50 -75% Exotics) 11.40 37.2 4159 E3 Pine, Disturbed (50 -75% Exotics) 0.86 2.8 4159 E4 Pine, Disturbed (76 -100% Exotics) 5.40 17.6 6249 E3 Cypress /Pine /Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (50 -75% Exotics) 6.94 22.6 6249 E4 Cypress /Pine /Cabbage Palm., Disturbed (76 -100% Exotics) 5.72 180.6 740 Disturbed Land 0.19 0.6 Totals 30.68 ]l00.0 .Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (25 -49% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4119 E2) This upland habitat occupies 0.171- acre or 0.6 percent of the Project site. The canopy is dominated by slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and also contains melaleuca, earleaf acacia, and widely scattered java plum. The sub - canopy contains scattered slash pine, Brazilian pepper, cabbage pahn (Sabal palmetto), melaleuca, earleaf acacia, and wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera). The ground cover is dominated by saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) and also contains wedelia, broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), muscadine grape (Vitis rotund folia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), St. Augustine grass (Stenotaphrum secundatum), and earleaf acacia. Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (50 -75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4119 E3) This upland habitat occupies 11.40± acres or 37.2 percent of the Project site. This community is similar to FLUCFCS Code 4119 E2; however, the canopy and sub - canopy consist of 50 to 75 percent Brazilian pepper, melaleuca, and earleaf acacia. Pine, Disturbed (50 -75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4159 E3) This upland habitat occupies 0.86± acre or 2.8 percent of the Project site. The canopy is dominated by slash pine and also contains melaleuca, earleaf acacia, and widely scattered java plum. The sub - canopy contains scattered slash pine, Brazilian pepper, cabbage palm, melaleuca, earleaf acacia, myrsine (Rapanea punctata), and wax myrtle. The ground cover is mostly open with widely scattered saw palmetto, cabbage palm, muscadine grape, poison ivy, bracken fern, wedelia, St. Augustine grass, and earleaf acacia. Pine, Disturbed (76 -100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4159 E4) This upland habitat occupies 5.40± acres or 17.6 percent of the Project site. This community is similar to FLUCFCS Code 4159 E3; however, the canopy and sub - canopy consist of 50 to 75 percent Brazilian pepper, melaleuca, and earleaf acacia. M Cypress /Pine /Cabbage Palm Disturbed (50 -75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6249 E3) This wetland habitat occupies 6.94± acres or 22.6 percent of the Project site. The canopy in this wetland community is dominated by equal amounts of slash pine and bald cypress (Taxodiuin distichum), and also contains melaleuca and earleaf acacia. The sub - canopy consists of slash pine, bald cypress, melaleuca, earleaf acacia, wax myrtle, Brazilian pepper, and cabbage palm. The ground cover includes swamp fern (Blechnum serrulaturn), climbing hempvine (Mikania scandens), rush fuirena (Fuirena scirpoidea), wiregrass (Aristida stricta), sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), yellow - eyed grass (Xyris sp.), gulfdune paspalum (Paspalum monostachyum), Asiatic pennywort (Centella asiatica), and horned beaksedge (Rhynchospora inundata). Cypress /Pine /Cabbage Palm Disturbed (76 -100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6249 E4) This wetland habitat occupies 5.72± acres or 18.6 percent of the Project site. This community is similar to FLUCFCS Code 6249 E3; however, the canopy and sub -canopy consist of 50 to 75 percent Brazilian pepper, melaleuca, and earleaf acacia. Disturbed Land (FLUCFCS Code 740) This upland land use runs along the southeastern boundary property. It occupies 0.19 acre or 0.6 percent of the Project site. The canopy and sub - canopy are open. The ground cover is a mixture of species common to disturbed areas including wedelia, Mexican clover (Richardia sp.), muscadine grape, and lovevine (Cassytha filiformis). SOILS The soils for the property, per the Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) (formerly the Soil Conservation Service), are shown on Figure 3 and listed in Table 2. The " Hydric Soils of Florida Handbook" (Florida Association of Environmental Soil Scientists 1995) lists Holopaw Fine Sand (No. 27) as a hydric soil. Immokalee Fine Sand (No. 7); Urban Land (No. 32) and Urban Land — Immokalee- Oldsmar, Limestone Substratum, Complex (No. 34) are listed as non - hydric soils. Table 2. Soils Listed by the NRCS Ma ins heart Description Hydric/Non- Hydrie` 7 Immokalee Fine Sand No 27 Holopaw Fine Sand Yes 32 Urban Land No 34 Urban Land — Immokalee- Oldsmar, Limestone Substratum, Complex No 'Per. the " Hydric Soils of Florida Handbook" (Florida Association of Environmental Soil Scientists 1995). 5 Ad eJq� -'- = 1 7 P PROJECT s j t7 L •F a st �` 1 rj ? _ LOCAT[ON ,. �. • kf 4 La`s ,'r' _�. �k '.f� "z '�° a S �= •cY�� .'-' � +S !'ci.f.T s`� ,! 4-c -.ddt 4 �. ' 'ch� �.-r` J. . wry�v 'r. _ t �� .+ -ac•� �''.' � � t '3a �� r �F: �r ?�.: ti�t!}`{�+-, a t� . •'._> '\ '.� .,#C' -® 't._ y } !! _ t �-_ , � " R� ��k�t s '�. �.�#' k7�� 5 -T �'`z� F-i, t�� -t�� '1��y� T'•�,ag�r`¢• } � � � '�:�ls. - =. to-'. A �li `'• - t =n _ Y -yea T ,r' -�`g�' its '.�.�Y =_ -. A.- ""lCygj�..p. �h�3•', i•' +� AjY' =;� ,3 <.,L� ['X�L owe ' r ♦ - a,1r.L y 7 &t - ty�rL_�+ 1 A>'`)Yf„Ne{-y'i.+ s,�� z. H� 1 i�R•'.•L ..A • rimer 'iGityyt'� �S E �2 Pfy�j, � y} 9irJJ�.��•' ,�s{ ` '_ �[4 i= 4" f 4 ZZ a s v Y 'kr•�' r e ti 1. iF �,, ".,�•Z r- „. ,, .s. �. 1� � 1c. +c,+b- f 3- F � a�}ttT�,�� ' fr ,•. r ti!r r7 - y T Ll ?a.. a• l _ ..R+t#" 3� �! 4,`y, _r, 7. i2,i Aw Nit XT XA )+s 1r �.cS��'@� W� "o '� Z �v�L � : Y � ]�� t }�3- �•fr� ,�. �S2• _ 1 '�('` - -'� ii� 'i _ _ _ .4i �rj ^��-l' � -i T_Ii�@�+��y�e.;yy� t �- • h'�lztc t �' ! - ; .- � � �_• `* _`F S� �P� + y ? � +�c.�'�� Jg, - `�y,�,Y'�•',rots'� �� ,�.�f�Ys -.ytp� � .i � I, - �g Vii. � _ i ti .` x*'ti i>� �4:�u1,!['1.. '�3•y� -'1 _.�1� F�+�` � "' _' _ f � JJ �.� _ • i ��s '.'•�'_; l�'k'O` =r- to .� cr-1 _tiv rie714'� yrsa�� 1 - �' tom:. "r � �•�' �' + of — 1 �` NOTES: r AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGH Soil Unit Description Hydric THE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S z 7 IMMOKALEE FINE SAND NO OFFICE WITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2010. s LEGEND 27 HOLOPAW FINE SAND YES a 32 URBAN LAND NO PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER MARCO SURVEYING VINCENTIAN 34 URBAN LAND-IMMOKALEE- OLDSMAR, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM, COMPLEX NO & MAPPING LLC. DRAWING No. P092-VINCENTIAN- PUD_V4.DWG DATED MARCH 19. 2012. t HYDRIC ROADWAY NETWORKS WERE ACQUIRED FROM THE _ FLORIDA GEOGRAPHIC DATA LIBRARY WEBSITE. a 0 5 250 00 SOILS MAPPING WAS ACQUIRED FROM THE FLORIDA Feet GEOGRAPHIC DATA LIBRARY WEBSITE OCTOBER 2007 AND CREATED BY THE NATURAL RESOURCES - CONSERVATION SERVICE 1990. DRA!{'N By DATE H H.H. ' 3/20/12 IN V. FIGURE 3. SOILS MAP PAS SARE* LLA B.B. 3/20/12 g &7-AS SOCIATES z - i{El75ED D.ATE DATE VINCENTIAN Eco!< +�'� O RMSDICTIONAL WETLANDS The subject property was reviewed for both state and federal wetland jurisdiction using the "Delineation of the Landward Extent of Wetlands and Surface Waters" (Chapter 62 -340, Florida Administrative Code) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Wetland Delineation Manual (COE 1987). The Project site contains 12.66zL acres of South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and COE jurisdictional wetlands (Figure 2 and Exhibit A). The jurisdictional wetlands identified by FLUCFCS code include approximately 6.94 acres of Cypress/Pine /Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (50- 75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6249 E3) and 5.72 acres of Cypress/Pine /Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (76 -100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6249 E4). The estimated SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands for the property are shown in Figure 2 and Exhibit A. The jurisdictional wetlands by FLUCFCS code are summarized in Table 3. SFW1gD Permit No. 11- 03454 -P was issued for the property on June 3, 2013 and COE Permit No. SAJ- 2013 -01268 was issued on June 24, 2013. Table 3. STWMMD and COE Wetland Acreages by FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Code Description Acreage 6249 E3 Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (50 -75% Exotics) 6.94 6249 E4 Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (76 -100% Exotics) 5.72 Total 12.66 LISTED SPECIES A listed plant and wildlife species survey was conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. on the Project site on April 7, 1998 and March 6, 2012. Additional observations were made on February 19 and 24, 2012 during vegetation mapping and other fieldwork. No listed wildlife species were observed during the listed species surveys or other work conducted on the Project site. The survey methodology and results are provided as Exhibit B. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES Correspondence was received from the Florida Department of State Division of Historical Resources on May 18, 199 8 which stated that no significant archaeological or historical sites were known to be present within or near the Project area. A copy of this correspondence is included as Exhibit C. 7 REFERENCES Florida Association of Environmental Soil Scientists. 1995. Hydric Soils of Florida Handbook, Second Edition. Victor W. Carlisle, Ed. Florida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. procedure No. 550 - 010 - 001 -a. Third Edition. U.S. Aimy Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1. E:3 ''; 7 A TO, R i A L W I T i i F L U C F U- S A N -Jo N VE T I, A' P I!Vlt' A Pr 003' �.� r y J 1 :w > _ any• 4�59E1i v w �v : ', { •y ,A,55 55 Ac +j, a E4S y. yt e ti 4119E3 z "'' w y ? (0' 14 AC (4.69 Ac,i y a' t ,'y: w w r \• . :� a ; 4159E3,: w w a w w w w w r �. `' .,., -(0.93 AG;�)' a' >. �' w y w" w, •�. ��; 4 . • y W '' ' �L' 4149E2 ,y _q:. yr` c,y' ti `y 0 �., >• v,�w :rti (0:03 At-*) x 6249E3 4 f ` (0.03 AC t) w . w w • w.•i w w w r z 'k -, _ 4249E3 • / 7 _ .v _ i,w � � .v ,o-• v� w w w _ .740 • (0 1$ AC t • AND COE WETLANDS v w SURVEYED WETLAND LINE 4- w w . NOTES: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGH THE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE WITH A FLIGHT DATE OF JANUARY 2012. L CFCS LINES ESTIMATED FROM 1'=200' AERIAL a „ CCC ., _ ... . . LISTED PLANT AND WILDIFE SPECIFES SURWEY VHNC 'i NTLA-N LISTED SPECIES SURVEY April 24, 2012 INTRODUCTION This report documents the results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. (PAI) on March 6, 2012 for Vincentian (Project). The Project includes a proposed commercial development with associated infrastructure and stormwater management system. The purpose of the survey was to review the Project area for plant and wildlife species listed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC), the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as endangered, threatened, species of special concern, or commercially exploited. The survey is also intended to be consistent with the environmental data submittal and protected plant requirements as outlined in Sections 10.02.02.A.3.b and 3.04.03, respectively, of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). Vincentian is 30.68± acres and is located in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Figure 1). More specifically, it is located in a densely urban area at the southeast corner of the intersection of Southwest Boulevard and US 41 (a.k.a. Tamiami Trail East). The Project is bound to the northeast by US 41 and the Whistler's Cove apartment complex, to the east by the Hitching Post plaza and Hitching Post mobile home park, to the south by residential development, and to the west and northwest by residential development and a BP gas station, respectively. The Project site is comprised of disturbed, forested uplands and wetlands with varying levels of exotic vegetation. The results of the March 6, 2012 survey found no listed wildlife species on -site. This result is also consistent with a prior wildlife survey conducted by PAI on April 7, 1998, as part of the initial review process for the property. Two Collier County listed "Less Rare Plants," inflated wild -pine (Tillandsia balbisiana) and stiff - leaved wild -pine (T. fasiculata) were observed scattered throughout the site during the 2012 survey. Further details regarding the more recent survey's methodology and results are as follows: METHODOLOGY AND DISCUSSION The listed plant and wildlife species survey included an on -site review, conducted on March 6, 2012, and subsequent literature search for local, state, and federal listed species. The results of the on -site review found no listed wildlife species or their signs (i.e., tracks, burrows, scat, calls, etc.). The literature search also found no documented occurrences for listed wildlife species on the property and the Project is not located within designated habitat areas for any listed wildlife species. Further details regarding the literature search results and survey methodology -are as follows: The literature search involved an examination of available information on protected species in the Project's geographical region. The literature sources reviewed included the FWCC Florida's Endangered and Threatened Species (2011); Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies (Runde et al. 1991); USFWS Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in the Southeast Region (19 87); the Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan (Logan et al. 1993); the Landscape Conservation Strategy Map (Kautz et al. 2006); and the USFWS and/or the FWCC databases for telemetry locations of the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), bald eagle, red- cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (RCW), Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus), Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), and wading bird rookeries, such as the wood stork (Mycteria americana), in Collier County. The results of the literature search found no documented occurrences of listed wildlife species on -site (Figure 2). The wildlife agencies' database information is updated on a periodic basis and it is current through different dates, depending on the species. The FWCC information is current through the �-eA .a., +o� - +7, iii.- -,.,,, �,'i�,_;,7� i.,___ +.•i„v,.,.. a [ti i. i.. t.a i_ 11V LliU LL0.Ll..J lol L11�G' 111 U1 1o11V Wlllg specleJ. 1'1V11U.0. pQr1LIlGl LG1G111G L1y — JL.111e ZV 11, Uald eagle 11esL locations — October 2011; black bear telemetry — December 2007; and RCW locations — August 2011. The USFWS information for the Florida scrub jay is current to September 2006. As previously noted, the results of the literature search found no documented occurrences of listed wildlife species on -site (Figure 2). The closest documented bald eagle nest is CO -010 which is located approximately 1.7 miles to the northwest of the site. The nest distance is beyond the USFWS and the FWCC recommended 660 -foot buffer protection zone for active and alternate bald eagle nests. The bald eagle is not a listed species, but is protected under the Golden and Bald Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. No RCW colonies or cavity trees have been documented within the Project area, per the FWCC's database (Figure 2). The closest noted RCW colony is located approximately 1.9 miles northeast of the Project site. This location, along with the others documented west of County Road (CR) 951 (a.k.a. Collier Boulevard), are considered relic or historic locations, as there are no currently known active cavity trees west of Collier Boulevard, based on PAI's survey experience in this region over the last 16 years. The USFWS considers suitable habitat for RCW to include any forested community with pines in the canopy that encompasses more than 10.01 acres (i.e., includes both on- and off - site). Although the Project area does have canopy pine trees, no cavities were noted during the survey and no sightings were documented in the area. The RCW is a state and federally listed endangered species. The FWCC database contains no documented Florida black bear radio - telemetry locations on- site or within a 1.5 mile radius of the Project area (Figure 2). The site's relatively small size and densely urban surroundings do not lend it support as suitable habitat for this species. The Florida black bear is a state listed threatened species, but is currently under study for delisting by the FWCC (Barco 2011). No Florida panther telemetry is located on -site (Figure 2). One historical telemetry point was recorded within one -half mile of the Project area. The historical telemetry was from Texas Cougar 101 and was recorded in May 1995. Since that date, no panther telemetry points have ME been recorded within one -half mile of the Project site. The property does not occur within the Florida Panther Zones (Kautz et al. 2006) and/or Focus Area (FA) (Figure 3). The Florida panther is a state and federally listed endangered species. The literature search confirmed that the Project is not located within the 30 kilometer (18.6 miles) Core Foraging Area (CFA) of any documented wood stork rookeries (Figure 4). The site's mixed slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) community would provide some suitable foraging habitat forthe wood stork; however, the heavy invasion by exotic species, such as melaleuca ( Melaleuca quinquinervia), earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), and java plum (Syzygium cumini) in the canopy and sub -canopy strata make it difficult for the birds to access and utilize. As a result, the property's foraging -potential is rather poor. The wood stork is a state and federally listed endangered species. Per Collier County LDC Section 3.04.03 (Requirements for Protected Plants), two listed "Less Rare Plants" were observed scattered throughout the property. They included the inflated and stiff - leaved wild pines. Two other listed "Less Rare Plants" which are likely to occur on -site, but were not observed include the giant wild -pine (T. utriculata) and butterfly orchid (Encyclia tampensis). Although these plants are protected at the state and local levels of government, they are rather ubiquitous to Southwest Florida. If these plant species are not already located within the future designated, retained, native vegetation preserve, then they will be relocated to the preserve, per the requirements of the LDC. The March 6, 2012 field survey methodology consisted of qualified ecologists walking parallel belt transects across the property (Figure 5). The transects were generally walked approximately 100 feet apart depending on habitat type and visibility. The weather during the survey was sunny, with clear skies, light wind, and temperatures ranging from the low to mid 80's. The survey began around 9:30 a.m. and ended approximately at 12:00 p.m. RESULTS The results of the March 6, 2012 survey found no listed wildlife species on -site. With the exception of one historical panther telemetry point, the literature search of the wildlife agencies' databases found no documented occurrences for listed species within the Project area or immediate vicinity. The Project site is not located within the designated zones or FA for the Florida panther. It is not located within the CFA of any wood stork colonies and is not located in the vicinity of any active RCW colonies or bald eagle nests. Two of Collier County's listed "Less Rare Plants" were observed on -site. These and any others, if encountered, will be relocated to the future designated retained native vegetation area, per the requirements of the LDC. IM REFERENCES Barco, K. 2011. FWCC Chairman's column: Florida black bear .... a conservation success story. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. FWCC. 2011. Florida's Endangered and Threatened Species. Official Lists, Bureau of Non - Game Wildlife, Division of Wildlife. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commmission. Tallahassee, Florida. Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, J. Comiskey, D. Jansen, D. Jennings, J. Kasbolun, F. Mazzotti, R. McBride, L. Richardson, K. Root. 2006. How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation, Volume, 130, Issue 1, 1 0.YVVJ 11U -1JJ Logan, Todd, Andrew C. Eller, Jr., Ross Morrell, Donna Ruffner, and Jim Sewell. 1993. Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan South Florida Population. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Gainesville, Florida. Runde, D.E., J.A. Gore, J.A. Hovis, M.S. Robson, and P.D. Southall. 1991. Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies, Update 1986 - 1989. Nongame Wildlife Program Technical Report No. 10. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. USFWS. 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. N: it i e{ ♦ �� ji4'A- r r ii a It ��" Gulf Of xico LF��k1 Xf RRRA�Dy��1y0��LN BECK BLVD VAH y4a fK.g [�` ly p� � � is•p t `�• • c r,� � i. ..r R .TL `Y �iLESN KE AMMODKL •� '-� RD �� Z�#+' x � D -�te-rT; t+ r 3 Y M,ANAATTE RO� Z Q 00 1— Litt 1 S�Wr,g c— ss J a cam. - - - - - - - - - - yam: SHELL ISM '`-iti 4 <J "� �•- �'`tr.'�"'��! � - i� � • pis'_ , �,,pOv 3 _ '4A$H pR1 � �Coosolci. &ologi T y' 6, ALM RD '• •, _, C9 � N O i r S O O P r OF- a wN ws Qo wi Wy �� tC- rW �W � � V y m y N N H W Z 3 y y K �` l wQ �r V �p I-'U F-O WJZ pW O� �Z � rn QO QQr W a7 pC F-y OQ \-7 J l //i//••/�� Ou JUH -RF WW ol�i KU //''�� VJ lam'. K O W l�- F- V) z ZF mF=-Z wF� o¢ ELF c�FI W J o F- aW �0 <0 U iQ- OFe� O W �J j 0 0 Z p 0 Ho i � LL G of L Ir f« •• — 4v •b X {. r « {. X. o a` f r f r , r °r, - i +� {�, r fir, v r x. a {. • a • {. �Y *v • i � • O i! try y s •�•i� • { f • •t, f.. a r •.f Y • • i ��`' Z� N N _OD p W❑ r (1 � � aJai�;r• ' • a • a, • � f � •f • • t i �, c i � c*\i r\i r a N.Sr . • 4•. r •mow {ik v •+ A. �{ w f• a `•.•• i • f v • •a s y •- • • r �• .a •'r .. r4f i< of :: • • {. �:• � a •.:' •� "w �` `i N < � �o Z•• •� ;. �• r < S, ..: •;, i < < �< � 1, W « . •. O tee c < < L U 4 [� � z � � • < cn \ i 0 w ``'L f i ® onia 1aVOHVS V1NVS f = L cl • m • � 0 Q ❑ 0 Lu � a r— w F- m— w r r • �"�• f 11 f ao wivd .•• �'a�3210HSAV9 •' r� , �ty V . . } tom• i CO r y r-+ wv 70 :02:01 a £IOZ191101 - aYU'd,w Hou—j -3i js a--;w pop Z aan ai�VSaanaijVS511210ZV519 \9012s�rZl \ZI OZ\ y N Z Z O w o o y 0 r < Z W W U m Q a w u �. W Q [7 CL Q F_; w < z W p U U U U. U U m p z LL L L v 1 o° m t.l_ ti IL LL w C9 � N O i r S O O P r OF- a wN ws Qo wi Wy �� tC- rW �W � � V y m y N N H W Z 3 y y K �` l wQ �r V �p I-'U F-O WJZ pW O� �Z � rn QO QQr W a7 pC F-y OQ \-7 J l //i//••/�� Ou JUH -RF WW ol�i KU //''�� VJ lam'. K O W l�- F- V) z ZF mF=-Z wF� o¢ ELF c�FI W J o F- aW �0 <0 U iQ- OFe� O W �J j 0 0 Z p 0 Ho i � LL G of L Ir f« •• — 4v •b X {. r « {. X. o a` f r f r , r °r, - i +� {�, r fir, v r x. a {. • a • {. �Y *v • i � • O i! try y s •�•i� • { f • •t, f.. a r •.f Y • • i ��`' Z� N N _OD p W❑ r (1 � � aJai�;r• ' • a • a, • � f � •f • • t i �, c i � c*\i r\i r a N.Sr . • 4•. r •mow {ik v •+ A. �{ w f• a `•.•• i • f v • •a s y •- • • r �• .a •'r .. r4f i< of :: • • {. �:• � a •.:' •� "w �` `i N < � �o Z•• •� ;. �• r < S, ..: •;, i < < �< � 1, W « . •. O tee c < < L U 4 [� � z � � • < cn \ i 0 w ``'L f i ® onia 1aVOHVS V1NVS f = L cl • m • � 0 Q ❑ 0 Lu � a r— w F- m— w r r • �"�• f 11 f ao wivd .•• �'a�3210HSAV9 •' r� , �ty V . . } tom• i CO r y r-+ wv 70 :02:01 a £IOZ191101 - aYU'd,w Hou—j -3i js a--;w pop Z aan ai�VSaanaijVS511210ZV519 \9012s�rZl \ZI OZ\ Cw w r� W W w o Q Z N O LLI C3 U N N F Y /) Z I VY� Cl) x _ CL 5 w a � °z �a KJ UW� O Q N N \ H \ C!J ' 07 M M z > P co y w .y 1 Y \ 1 0 F Z \ Ul CL � LU CIA-39V 9NH9 H1NHS LE t t� 1 p as NaH9 AIN(100 In fill _ .. r o > w Y;sf.' as w7e f fl ,�,; ✓�' W Ft CO 3Fi0HSAV9 F r N N ~ F C/) Z � p ON f LL N ° � £ P °o�LLy � � 05 Cf) oa3N t- °z �3�3 j gtr ( N I N M M Wd s9 :C Z c7 710Z 12211 - OYN-W 9-21014V S3183NDDLI YNO15 ODOM 7 3N091A\59NIMV80 Ol0 \53a0D1� \SSl \ZIOZ \519 \B OIZSJfZI \ZIDZ\ ( N W_ Z O Z N W N Q Q Z Q Z ' W F z LLI W 0 a J o0 0 tL W OK O O Z W Z � O w— U (7` U O` J sc� _ I. —I F r N N ~ F C/) Z � p ON f LL N ° � £ P °o�LLy � � 05 Cf) oa3N t- °z �3�3 j gtr ( N I N M M Wd s9 :C Z c7 710Z 12211 - OYN-W 9-21014V S3183NDDLI YNO15 ODOM 7 3N091A\59NIMV80 Ol0 \53a0D1� \SSl \ZIOZ \519 \B OIZSJfZI \ZIDZ\ ( N ,S �9 �!r Z- o t• z � LEGEND: - ". ,A APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF WALKED TRANSECTS e a NOTES: -- — AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGH THE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE WITH 1 A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2010. PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER MARCO SURVEYING MAPPING LLC. DRAWING No. P092- VINCENTIAN- PUD— V4.DwG `ATED MARCH 19, 2012. ' T DIUVM BY DATE -- H.H. 3/20/12 vI FTC�1 TRR S. ARRTAT, WITH ST TRVF.YTRANSFC TS REVIEWED HY DATE TEA Q C d R -P T T A CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES DIVISIONS OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ST?--tj T -STf Office of the Secretary r•, Office of International Relations Division of Administra five Services Division of Corporations tty: -`f_ -• T; Division of Cultural Affairs Division of Elections Division of Historical Resources Division of Library and Information Services Divisionof -Licensing FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE Sandra $.- Mortham Secr4ary of State DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES May 18, 1998 Mr. Andrew Woodruff Passarella and Associates, Inc. 4575 Via Royale, Suite 104 Fort Myers, Florida 33919 R.E. Cultural Resource Assessment Request USACOE Nationwide Permit Vincentian Planned Unit !Development Project No. 98RWA241 Collier, County, Florida. Dear Mr. Woodruff 92Rtu'l zqI MEMBER OF THE FLORIDA CABINET Historic Florida Keys Preservation Board Historic Palm Beach County Preservation Board Historic Pensacola Preservation Board Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board Historic Tallahassee Preservation Board Hista-icTampa /I- lillsborough County Preservation Boatd Ringli ng Museum of Art r , MAY 2 5' 133990 In Reply Refer To: Robin D. Jackson Historic Site Specialist Project File No. 982363 In accordance with the procedures contained in 36 C.F.R., Part 800 ( "Protection of Historic Properties" % we have reviewed the referenced 1) Ject(s) for possible impact to historic properties listed, or eligible for listing„ in the National Rfvjster of Historic Platoes. The audmrity fur this procedure is the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Uw 89 -665), as amended. A review of the Florida Site File indicates that no significant archaeology cal or historical sites are recorded for or likely to be present within the pro jeci area. Furthermore,, because of the project location and/or nature it is unlikely that any such sites will be affected. Therefore, it is the opinion of this office that the proposed project wilt have no effect on historic properties listed, or eligible f6r listing, in the National Register of Historic Places. If you have any questions concerning our comments, please do not hesitate to contact us. Your interest in protecting Florida's historic properties is appreciated. Sincerely, a. ld"t•y1.-� George W. Percy, Director Division of Historical Resources and, GWP /Sri State Historic Preservation Officer V DIRECTOR'S OFFICE R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0250 (904) 488 -1480 FAX: (904) 488 -3353 • WWW Address http: / /www.dos. state.fl.us 0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH i HISTORIC PRESERVATION 0 HISTORICAL MUSEUMS (904) 487 -2299 • FAX: 414 -2207 (904) 487 -2333 • FAX: 922 -0496 (904) 488 -1484 • FAX: 921 -2503 EX MBIT E -2 VINCENTIAN PUBLIC FACILITIES DEPORT Collier County Public Utilities will provide water service for potable and fire protection needs as well as wastewater service. The County has major water and wastewater transmission mains located along U.S. 41 and on Southwest Boulevard that are accessible to this property by means of connections and extensions of mains into the property. The County has sufficient capacity to provide Vincentian water and sewer service. The estimated potable water and wastewater requirements for Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict are as follows: Scenario 1 (190,000 SF retail, 57,500 office, and 100 -room hotel) Potable Water 42,000 GPD (Peak 117 GPM) Wastewater 38,000 GPD (Peak 106 GPM) Scenario 2 (250,000 SF shopping center) Potable Water 28,000 GPD (Peak 78 GPM) Wastewater 25,000 GPD (Peak 69 GPM) Scenario 3 (122 dwelling units) Potable Water 36,600 GPD (Peak 100 GPM) Wastewater 30,500 GPD (Peak 83 GPM) According to the Collier County AUIR, currently there is a an existing landfill capacity of 18,359,127 tons, and a ten -year landfill capacity requirement of 2,305,407 tons, representing a surplus of 16,053,720 tons of landfill capacity. This is more than adequate to accommodate additional tons per capita disposal generated by the Vincentian Subdistrict. Stormwater retention and detention will comply with SFWMD requirements, and State and County standards for off -site discharges will be met, resulting in no adverse impacts to stormwater management (drainage) level of service. H:\ 2013\ 2013043 \WP \GMPA\Resubmittal\Public Facilities Report 1- 24- 2014.docx EXHIBIT E-3 Tpflccu inn-efloinflor, Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) Vincentian PUDA Prepared for: Global Properties of Naples 2614 Tamiami Trail N, Suite 615 Naples, FL 34103 Phone: (239).189-3143 Collier County, FL 10/18/2013 Prepared bv- Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 Phone: (239) 566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock!2trebilcock.biz 'Micentian PUDA IS - October 2013 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Analysis has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. 2 I Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2375 Tamiarni Trail N, Suite 207 Naples, FL 34103 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 U Vincentuan PU®A T[S - Oc�®C -erg 2001-73 TabEe of Contents Page Project Description 4- 6 Trip Generation 6- Trip Distribution and Assignment 9 -11 Background Traffic 12 -13 Existing and Future Roadway Network 14 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network -- Roadway Link Analysis 15 -16 Intersection/ Project Accesses - Turn Lanes Analysis 17 -19 Improvement Analysis 19 Mitigation of Impact 19 Appendix Ao Project Methodology Meeting dotes (5 Sheets) Appendix Ba Project Master Site Plan (1 Sheet) Appendix Ca Trip Generation Calculations (3 Sheets) Appendix 0: Internal — Pass-By Capture Exhibits (3 Sheets) Appendix Eo Turning Movements Exhibits (2 Sheets) Vincentlan PUDA TIS - OCcober 2013 Project Description The Vincentian project is an existing approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) - Collier County Ord. 99-37 - and has a total site area of approximately 30.0 acres. The project site is located in east -Naples, at the southwest corner of the intersection of Southwest Blvd. and Tamiami Trail East (US 41), and lies in Section 32, Township 50S, Range 26E, Collier County, Florida. Refer to Fig. 1- Project Location Map, which follows and Appendix B - Project Master Site Plan. Fig. 1 —Project Location Map The existing approved Vincentian PUD consists of three (3) uses: Retail – Shopping Center 57,500 sf; Office – General Office - 57,500 sf; Residential – Single Family Detached Housing – 40 dwelling units. 12 Vinceneoan EU©A T§S - October 2013 The proposed Vincentian PUD amendment (PUDA) will continue to be developed as a mixed use commercial project as follows: Scenaft I1 - Retail — Shopping Center 190,000sf, Office — General Office — 57,500sfo Lodging — Hotel — 100 rooms; and Scenaft 2 - to consist of a single use of Retail — Shopping Center 250,000sf. Vincentian PUDA TIS provides a highest and best use scenario with ,respect to the project's trio generation. The development programs are illustrated in the Table 2. Table 1 ° Existing Approved Development Program Development Land Use Total Size BYE Land Use Code Build -Out Year Program �_' - -- s.,- General Office 710 57,500sf N/A n. 15C Wits r Shopping Center 820 190,000 sf 2018 Proposed PU ®A - . �eiier� �Of�ce` � ,':.• - :�_�, - `s�1�;•.�'. •�A. _ = 5�0�3Q's� °� _..25 <;�_,�;,. Scenario I Hotel 310 100 rooms 2018 n ,; "�t "` - 4L'q:- w=4.: fir.: z - :%:?' .cF ?.�: • ^�'n'` r�. �Ssenario Z �_ i'_3`.�< �•'.:- :3"o- •- �� %. :44.. - - af:_... ,t�2019._�.:� _ `�.'' - - - i`� -.• : /.:. "a':.� ti='- � - }s. - _1S.:>a .S'�,�. Y. _ The internal site circulation system proposes to connect to Southwest Blvd. and Tarniami Trail East. Refer to Appendix B - Project Master Site plan. 5 i! lincentean PUDA TIS - October 2013 The project's site trip generation is based on the institute of T ransportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9Y" Edition. The software program Gtiss — Online Traffic Impact Study Software (Version 3.0.0.137) is used to create the raw unadjusted trip generation for the project. The ITE rates (land use: hotel) and equations (land uses: shopping center; general office and single family residential) were used to generate the project trips. Trip reductions have been applied per ITE and Collier County guidance: internal capture trips — I,ip to GU /o, aiv€a ass -U trips s ° up to 12578 10o sil lopph-Bg center use. The proposed total project trip generation is illustrated in Table 2A — Scenario 1 (mixed -use) and gable 2B a Scenario 2 (single -use). The mixed -use scenario (Scenario 1) reveals more intensive PM peal. hour 2 -way values (PM Total to adjacent streets — 851 trips). `able 2C shows the trip generation for the existing approved mixed -use project. Fable 2® illustrates the net new proposed trips, and is determined as the difference between most intense proposed scenario (Table 2A — Scenario t) and approved existing project (Table 2C). More details of the trip generation calculations can be found in Appendix C -Trip Generation Calculations. The interrnM capture accounts for a reduction in external traffic because of the interaction between the multiple land uses in a site. Per Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture trips should be reasonable and should not exceed 20% of the total project trips. For this project, the software program ®tiss was used to generate the internal capture trips. The ®tics process follows the trip balancing approach as recommended in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9'h Edition — Volume 1: laser's Guide and Handbook, Chapter 7 - procedure for estimating multi -use trip generation internal capture aka "triangle method ". The resulting internal capture rates are below the county limits. The detailed results of the internal capture and pass -by calculations can be found in Appendix 04nternal/ Pass -by Capture Exhibits. VincenTlan PUDA TIS - October 2013 The pass-by trips account for traffic that is already on the external roadway network and stops at the project on the way to a primary trip destination. Per Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the pass-by capture for shopping centers (LUC 10120) should not exceed 25% for the peak hour. The daily capture rate is assumed to be 10% lower than the peak hour rate. Table 2A—Proposed Scenario I Trip Generation — Average Weekday Notes: * - Internal Capture — up to 20% max; ** - Pass-By Trips — up to 25% for shopping center. Table 2B—Proposed Scenario 2 Trip Generation — Average Weekday 24 Hour Two- AM Pk Hour PM Pk Hour Way Volume X Shopping Center 190,000sf 10,307 143 88 442 479 Hotel 100 occ. rooms 892 39 28 34 36 ME V Internal Capture* -30 -30 Pass-By Trips** -106 -117 - d-gu m ft ' HE Notes: * - Internal Capture — up to 20% max; ** - Pass-By Trips — up to 25% for shopping center. Table 2B—Proposed Scenario 2 Trip Generation — Average Weekday Notes: * - Pass-By Trips — up to 25%. 7 24 Hour Two- AM Pk Hour PM Pk, Hour Way Volume X Shopping Center 250,000sf 12,320 169 104 531 576 ®taB to adjacent streets 398 432 Notes: * - Pass-By Trips — up to 25%. 7 Vincentlan PUDA TIS - Oacher 2013 Table M—Existing Approved Projed Trip Generation — Average Weekday Notes: * - Internal Capture — up to 20% max, ** - Pass-By Trips —up to 25% for shopping center. Table 2D—Met New Proposed Project Trip Generation — Average Weekday PM Pk Hour Two- Proposed Scenario I Development 364 487 851 AM Pk Hour PM Pk Hour wady Met New Difference 187 216 Volume Shopping Center 57,500 sf 47391 69 42 199 215 5" SF Residential 40 units 452 10 281 29 17 Internal Capture* -29 -29 Pass-By Trips** -46 -51 T Notes: * - Internal Capture — up to 20% max, ** - Pass-By Trips —up to 25% for shopping center. Table 2D—Met New Proposed Project Trip Generation — Average Weekday The net new proposed trip generation shown in Table ZD reveals a net increase in the PM peak hour volumes., proposed conditions versus existing approved conditions. The Table 2D values are what will be used for the trip distribution and assignment in the roadway link analysis. The Table 2A— Scenario I —Total external values (PM — Enter — 500 and PM — Exit — 634) are to be used for the operational — intersection/ site access turn lanes analysis. M PM Pk Hour Proposed Scenario I Development 364 487 851 Met New Difference 187 216 403 The net new proposed trip generation shown in Table ZD reveals a net increase in the PM peak hour volumes., proposed conditions versus existing approved conditions. The Table 2D values are what will be used for the trip distribution and assignment in the roadway link analysis. The Table 2A— Scenario I —Total external values (PM — Enter — 500 and PM — Exit — 634) are to be used for the operational — intersection/ site access turn lanes analysis. M Vincention PUDA TAS e O cton her 2013 Tflp ©esWbut an and } SSIgnMeint T he traffic generated by the developlflent was assigned to the adjacent r oadiways using the knowledge of the area, previously submitted study data and as coordinated with Collier County Transportation Planning Staff.. The net new proposed site - generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3— Project Traffic Distribution for PM, Peak Hour, Peals Direction and is graphically depicted on the next page - Fig. 2— Project Distribution By Percentage and Fig. 3— Project Distribution By Pik Peak Hour. . Refer to Appendix B - Project Master Site Plan. Table 3— Project Traffic Distribution for Pik Peals Hour, Peak Direction Notes: * - Not a CC AUIR monitored roadway facility. 0 CC PM PM Peak der Project Distribution AtEUG� Volume Roadway Link Roadway Link Location of Project - }; .+, _ .. _ __q �I"L' ... EanE� Traffic 0® _ '{ x•� Airport Rd. to Rattlesnake 66 76 US 41 92.0 35% Hammock Rd. :;'.'•.:. �: _ °d.y.__:: ' -: -r - _ _ �Ratt�€sp��atee:�Harn7T•,�. -VC �I.1�'Y: — ':.` -� °iii ` •.' nd•i�.' ::s:': - � -��..r �{ = rcr.-�;4- � : :x :9: .' ;:aC. � ::[i ' jL ". '�•�.�,�r:_"- �%�`p Q l•:� - :i„n 7•_r.a . `. ... :: s:? "iTF1�M: ?.i*,•.1' ,y ; '!`H�`L'.;.. : ' <.',> + r i':L:1 : - .(�?�,.r.�y St. Andrews Blvd. to US 41 93.0 00/ 122 130 Project Triangle Blvd. to Collier 47 US 41 94.0 25% 54 Blvd. '7 ntii �� o�l t f �- V''7=^L: ::-`'�: - �ti ^' +. z= kVD4i/" .:��„- -!. _ ?= p.016i•' ^..�'T r4. -.�' Rattlesnake US 41 to Charlemagne 72.0 o 5/ 9 10 Hammock Rd. Blvd. ��u��i�ies�.Bf��:- _ ;,�j,,Q. °:- � Co. r.::to� P�o'[ect: �•'p� /_� -. •�' -;� -: - �,. Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. Collier BEesd. 35,0 15/ 26 32 to US 41 .,.iC.:: .,vi -•; mw t.' - �rti ;•F-�:•_•: : i:u. Z. ,.s- ^ i%,. '� .i {r = +.�1:'_'.lt;,..xJ: n "li,:am? i.r +=- : ' ` 01 - �IJJ :T'e�Ll:1= :.Y- tl'Of.4Ylil1'� ,i�: vkn 3:•.. . -... . .' �Dr - - Notes: * - Not a CC AUIR monitored roadway facility. 0 V ncentlan PUDA TIS a October 2013 Fig. 2— Project Distribution By Percentage 596 y ABS 5%< ` n X596 r 1596 PROJECT JABS.5% LOGATIO N. NOTE Y i � y 10 .v34i - d 3t�< 25% PROJECT TRIP-.. ABS. 596 3596.: 0 . DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAG t �. _F ear�.J! 0% ABS: 5% .. r pp% ABS. 596 1 J - 596 y ABS 5%< ` n X596 r 1596 PROJECT JABS.5% LOGATIO N. NOTE Y i � y 10 Vincentian PUDA i!S a October 2013 Fig. 3— Project Distribution By PM Peak Hour PRt3JECT TRIP NB =76 B= 66 DlSTRIB.Uj1QN. 212- E) IPM., F K HR, VVE37-9;" .EB =10 4 V . NB 130, SB ' 11.2 F . = NB=66 ' SB= 76 VkW NS- 47; SB✓ 54 °NHS 32. . # ` SB= 28. i. PRC?Ji =CT 3 L�GgTION S.4= 22. 11 . VincenTlan PUDA TIS - October 2013 Average background traffic growth rates were estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Transportation Planning Staff Guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical rate derived from Collier County annual traffic counts (estimated from 20080 thru 2012), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2013 AUIP volume plus the trip hank volume. For this project, the controlling (highest) volume is the AUIR volume plus the trip hank volume. Fable 4 e Background Traffic without Project, illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the year 2018 — see next page. 17 Vincentla0PUDATiS~October 201-3 Table 4—Background 'a rafful-c imflthout Project Q2013-ZE0318) Table Note: Growth Rate = from ZOO8tm2Ol3CC traffic count data, ur2%, whichever is greater. Growth Factor =(I+Annme| Growth Rate) A5' 2O18 Projected Volume =%Q13AU|R Volume x Growth Factor, mr 2013 AU|0+ Trip Bank, whichever is greater. N/A = not applicable, not available. Note* - Not aOCAU|R monitored roadway facility. 13 2013 AUIR Projected 2028 Projected cc Peak Hr, Traffic Peak Hr, Peak Dir AUIR Roadway Link Peak Dir Annual Trip &-owth Background Roadway Link Link Location Background Growth Bank Factor Traffic Volume (trips/hr) (511yr) (trips/1111 Rattlesnake Hammock Project to Triangle Thomasson Bayshore Dr. to US 41 Southwest Corso Bello Dr. to N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Blvd.* Project ;na em alib US 41 to Wal-Mart Collier Blvd. 3G.1 1,820 (NB) 2.0% 723 1.1041 2,543 Driveway Table Note: Growth Rate = from ZOO8tm2Ol3CC traffic count data, ur2%, whichever is greater. Growth Factor =(I+Annme| Growth Rate) A5' 2O18 Projected Volume =%Q13AU|R Volume x Growth Factor, mr 2013 AU|0+ Trip Bank, whichever is greater. N/A = not applicable, not available. Note* - Not aOCAU|R monitored roadway facility. 13 Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing r oadway conditions are extracted If-orn the 2012 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the 20108 roadway conditions are based on the current FDOT and Collier County 5 Year Work Program. The roadways evaluated are anticipated to remain the same thru 20100. The eacisting and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5 o Existing and Future Roadways Conditions. Table S ®Existinff and Future Roadwav Conditions Table Notes: 2U = 2 -lane undivided roadway; 4D, 61) =4 -lane, 6 -lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service. N/A = not applicable, not available. Note* - Not a CC AUIR monitored roadway facility. Southwest Blvd. road service volume is assumed similar to Shadowlawn Dr. —CC AUIR ID #144. 14 Cc Exist Peak Exist Future AUIR Exist Dir, Peak 1=1P Roadway Link Roadway Link Location Mi5tLC4S Link Roadway Capacity Roadway y [D# Volume _- •~' - I�i�port:t�d tQ t�attlesnaEce_ - I�S �� D , _ - Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. US 41 93.0 6D E 3,000 6D to St. Andrews Blvd. U5 Str Andrews I31vd to 6-D 41 4� Q 6DV- _ : Pro,e US 41 93.0 Project to Triangle Blvd. 6D E 3,000 6D - y Tnartgle Blvd J4, o Collier _ - LlS41 o 6d. E 31000 - 6D Blyd _ Thomasson Dr. 100.0 Bayshore Dr. to US 41 2U D 100 2U Ratttsnake X15 41io Charlemagne .. 72 4FiamMq _Rd VW Blvd = Southwest Corso Bello Dr. to Project N/A 2U N/A 0000 2U Blvd.* Rattfes�ake Hammock Rd ., Golh�r �Ivd. 35 0 6Q E 3,2QQ 6D to U 41 - _ F US 41, to Wal-Mart Collier Blvd. 36.1 6D E 2,500 6D Driveway Table Notes: 2U = 2 -lane undivided roadway; 4D, 61) =4 -lane, 6 -lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service. N/A = not applicable, not available. Note* - Not a CC AUIR monitored roadway facility. Southwest Blvd. road service volume is assumed similar to Shadowlawn Dr. —CC AUIR ID #144. 14 Vincentlan PUDA TBS e October 2013 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network— Roadway Link AnaQysus The Coiner County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project were evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future (2015). The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link adjacent to the project; 3% for other links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. The project PM peak hour volumes are added to the network volumes to coincide with the network peak time and peak direction. Table 6 ® Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the roadway network closest to the project. None of the adjacent links are projected to be operating below the adopted level of service with, or without the project. Although the percentage volume capacity exceeds County thresholds for some of the roadway links, the roadway facilities are projected to operate within the adopted LOS and therefore in an effective and efficient manner. Based on these criteria, this project creates significant, but not adverse impacts to the area roadway network. 15 Table 6—Roadway Lind® Level of Service (LOS) —With project ow the Year 2018 Table Notes: N/A = not applicable, not available. Note* - Not a CC AUIR monitored roadway facility. Southwest Blvd. road capacity is assumed similar to Shadowlawn Dr. — CC AUIR ID ##144. 16 Vincenfrian PU®A M - October 2093 Untersection/ Project Accesses — Turn Lane Analysis The Vincentian PUDA project proposes 3 accesses as follows: two access points off of Southwest Blvd. — Entrances #1 & #2 —full movement accesses, and one access point off of US41— Tamiami Trail East — Entrance #3 - right in / right out access. Refer to Appendix B - Project Master Site Plan. Tarniam! Trail East (US 41) is under Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and Collier County jurisdiction and it is currently a north -south six -lane two -way urban arterial roadway and has a posted legal speed limit of 55 mph in the vicinity of project. Based on FDOT Index 301 (design speed of 55mph), the minimum turn lane length is 350ft (which includes a 50 ft taper) plus required queue. Southwest Boulevard is a two lane west -east undivided local roadway under . Collier County jurisdiction and has a posted legal speed of 25mph in the vicinity of project. Based on FDOT Index 301 (design speed of 35 mph), the minimum turn lane length is 145ft (which includes a 50ft taper) plus required queue. Project accesses were evaluated for turn lane warrants based on Collier County Right -Of -Way Ordinance #2003 -37: a) two -lane roadways - 40vph for right turn lane /20vph for left turn lane; b) multi -lane divided roadways - turn lanes shall always be provided. US 41- St. Southwest Blvd. — Unsignalized Intersection The intersection of Southwest Blvd. and US41 is located in the proximity of the project. There is no operating traffic control signal at the intersection at this time, but it is under design by others. EB Southwest Blvd. approach provides one left -turn lane and one through /right- turn lane (+ /- 320ft). Eastbound exiting volume may warrant a double left turn lane, if combined with future background traffic. 17 VMcentldn PUDA TIS - October 2013 SB US41 approach provides one right -turn lane (+ /- 475ft) and one left -turn lane ( +/- 350ft). NB US41 approach has one right -turn lane ( +/- 550ft) and one left -turn lane. The existing turn lanes on US 41 serving the intersection will accommodate the operational needs of the project for both deceleration and stacking. Refer to Appendix E — Turning Movements Exhibits. This intersection may require modifications, which will be determined at the time of final development order review. Prgject Accesses —Turn Lanes Minimum turn lane lengths required at project build out conditions were analyzed based on number of turning vehicles in an average of 1- minute period (for right turns) and 2- minute period (for left turn), within the peak hour traffic. The minimum queue /vehicle considered is 25fi. A more detailed evaluation of the turn lanes for project access points would be implemented at the time of proposed development plan design and permitting, as applicable. Entrance #1 a EB Southwest Blvd. EB Right Turn Lane — The project is expected to generate 25 right turns during the PM peak hour. Therefore, an exclusive right turn is not warranted. WB Left Turn Lane — The project is expected to generate 25 left turns during the PM peak hour. Therefore, an exclusive left turn is warranted and it is recommended to be 170ft in length, at the minimum. Entrance 42 — ER Southwest Blvd. WB Left Turn Lane — The project is expected to generate 200 left turns during the PM peak hour. Therefore, an exclusive left turn is warranted and it is recommended to be 320ft in length, at the minimum. IM Vincention PUDA TFS e October 2013 Entwance #3 ° SB US 41 SB Right TO.�irn Lane — The pooled is enpected to generaate 15V r igi it tur ns during the PM peak hour. Therefore, an exclusive right turn is warranted and it is recommended to be 475ft in length, at the minimum. The project impacts to the Collier County roadway network are significant but are not adverse. Based on the link analysis and trip distribution, the proposed project is a significant traffic generator to this location. Empirically, the project is estimated to create a significant delay at Southwest Blvd. and US41 intersection that may warrant modifying the turn lane configuration geometry (additional turn lane) and /or installation of operating control signals that would improve service level. The recommended offsite improvements will be permitted and approved through the development order process. Mitigation of Impact The developer will provide appropriate mitigation and commitments as listed in the revised Planned Unit Development (PUD) document, in order to aid transportation improvements, as applicable. 19 Vincen an PU ®Q TiS e October 2013 -a o 20 V Vince dap PUDA TIS o October 2013 INITIAL idIELTING tCHECH l''ST Sang; sdou: Use thisAppeadix as a WOOL -shftt fi0 ensu. ue tlewt no huportaut elm, ents are overlooked. Cross Out the items that -do not apply. Date: October 11. 2013 Time: NMA Location: Collier County Development Services People Attendkg: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1) Reed Jarvi. CC Growth Vi ont Div 2) John.Podzenvinsky CC Growth Mgmt. Div 3) Robert Mulhere. Mulhere & Associates- 4) Nonnan Trebilcoclt.. TCS Eq dy Preparer• Preparer's Name and Title- Norman Trabilcock Organization. Trebilcock Consuiiing Solutions !address & Telephone Number: 1205 Ewer Boulevard. Suite 202. Naples: F134110-- ph 239 - 566 -9551 Reviewer( s)- Reviewer% Name & Titler- John.Podezerwinsky. Proiect Manager Collier County Transportation Planning Department Organization & Telephone Number: CC Growth li mA Division- 239 -252 -5890 An�Ideant- Appiicant's Name: Global Properties efMples (Christopher Shuent) Address: 2614 Tamiami. Trail Wofth. Suite 615. Nayles_ FL 34105 Telephone Number: (239)-289-3143 Prop2sed Dev2j2 meut_ Name: Virieentian PUDA Location:.Southwest comer of US 41 and Southwest Blvd- -East Naples. FI. Land Use Type: General Office, Hotel- and Shopping Center rIE Code f: 710 (General Office): 310 (Lode – Hotel): 820 (Retail – Shopping Center Proposed -Ilim er of development_ units: General Office 57.5 ksf: Hotel 100 rooms: Retail - Shopoina Center — 1901ysf. Rusting approved coadiiions: General Office 57.51:sf Shopping Center — 57.5ksf: Single Family Residential -40 dtvellin�•units. Page I of 5 21 Vincentd®n PU®A TIS e October 2013 Description: Eliminating Sint a Family Residential Creating mixed use commercial project_ General office: the same (Osf additional) Hotel is added (lot) rooms)_ and Retail is expanded (Shopping Center - 132.5ksf additionalk_ Zoning Existing: PUD residential office and retail are allowed uses. Comprehensive plan recommendation: N11A Requested: PUD amendment. other uses to be added and expanded_ as applicable_ Sia iificaneeTest- 2°%s/2 °�0/3% The project generates more than 100 net new total 2 -way ANN or PM Oak hour trips and siznifi"cautiy impacts one or more roadwav facilities. Study Roadwav Link Concurrence — based on net now trips. operational intersection! site access turn-lane analyses — based on total external project trips. �t�ds�'ilvra�•. • Small Scale TIS ❑ Minor TIS ❑ Major TIS St adv Area: Boundaiies: Southwest Blvd. US 4 L Collier Blvd.- Rattlesnake hammock Rd_ Additional inters.ections. to be analyzed: US 41 and Southwest Blvd. Build Out/ Planning Horizon Year(s): 2018 Use 2013 CC AUIR Analysis Time. Period(s): PNI Pk Hr Future C2 Site Developments: NIA Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE LUC Data — ITE 9h Edition Reductions in Trip Genemflon Rates: None: NfA Pass -by trips: Per ITE CC Guidance 0 to 25% for shopping center. Internal trips (PLTD): Per ITE CC Guidance: up to 2025 wwjdmu m. Transit use: MA Other: xisting approved (57.3 ksf general ofe. 57.5 retail. and 40 single family). Horizon Year Road av Network Fl�tar ®vevtnents: 2018 Page 2 of 5 22 lAincentian PUDA HS - October 2013 Nbu-sits traiMe athdatm 2013- CC BATAR Site-inp 'up-neradon. Otiss Sof Lwara - . - IT E. Tiip distAbutiun methad: Eri-ainder's Traffic assiam"ne'ritme-iliod: project qip!z nmffia gro-�wi rate- sommaij ca Ad(ritional -,motm I. fdQq�a of Lrofect. ,,n.tjvses - (as.- applicable?_ mJ y net censistqmcv flink dist3jbiAion). Fig. I -Projegi: Trip Distribution by Percettage I PRO;JEGT, TRIP BY VERCENTACJE JE Wit PRC?.iEGT LQCATIOH :Flo% NGT .IE? ABS.=ABSORP Pap 3 ©f5 23 Vincentian PUDA TIS - October 2013 Sntgial Featums- (from prelim�n ary slud3, or. . prior experieace) il-ccia-ants, locaioim NYA Sight dislamm. MIA Queuill_CF. A=6ssz location- & configuratioo: US41- SorgIrwest Blyd coordinate with MOT Oil US41 Thiffio conttol: Signal systojii location progression neads: N/A on-site parkffig Reds: per CC, LDC Data, Sources: M Trip Gem: 201:3 CC AU, IR: CC Traffic Comets &Ua maps: NIA Prior study reports: NIA Review process: PUDA Requirements: NNIA Miscellaneous: l Small Scald Study — \a Fea Minor Study - 5-150-00 Major Study - $1500.00 x Includes 2 intersections Additional Intersections - 9500.00 each bL agreed tit dwing dia Afethodology meafhtga; rdmust &-ptid to rmnspartadan pi.iar fa am-Agn-affan die ayTileadom SIGNATURES - %mmm.— Study Frepawr Revizwers. Applicant Page 4 of 5 24 Vincentlan PU®A T6S e Octobers ZO13 Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Ivfethodology Review, zAnalysis Review, and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional mectings or other optional services are also provided below. l6getfaodol2av RQylew - S500 Fee xrethodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement including review of submitted trip generation estiinate(s), distribution, assignment; and review of a "Small Scale Stidy' determinatiop, written approvalteomments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confirmation of a re- submitted amended methodology statement and one meeting in Collier County, if needed. "Small Scale Study" Review -Na Additional Fee (Includes one sufficiency review) Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review includes: a concnrnt ncy determination; site access inspection aitd confirmation of the study compliance with: trip generation, distribution and nim imam threshold-compliance. "Arinor.Study Review" - $750 Fee (Includes one sufrsciencv reviewb Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: optional field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, distribution, and assignment; concurremy- determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of off -site improvements within the right- of-way, review of site access and circulation, and preparation and review of "sufftcioner conrnentsrquestions. "LtNor Study Review" - 91.500 Fee (Ijaclu&s two intersection analysis and two sefiieiencv reviews Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: field visit to site, confirmation of flip generation, special, trip generation andfor trip- length study, distribution and assignment; concurrency determinatiort, confirmation of committed improvements, review of draffic volume data coliectedi�assertmbled, review of traffic growth, analysis; review of off -site roadway operations and capacity analysis, review of silo access and circulation, neighborhood traffic-introsion issues, any necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates, and preparation and review of up to two rounds of "sufficiency" commentsfquestions and:or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional iatersection Review" - $500 pee -11w review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the "A%or Study Reviety' and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the "Major Study Review" "Additional SuMdencv:RevxI —W - 85-60 Feet Additional sufficiency rwicws Beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review.. Page 5of5 25 Vincentlen PUDA, TIS e OcWher 2013 26 Vincentian PUDA TIS - October 2013 r -Clf� A • Zf.4'I.i'S �� ``� ~ ---- _..--- �°`"`�� mss`• t � .; � " ". 'ElilR,ttiGE i3 �- �� • "�i � i @ t�ii!1NG'e t3 i 1 3 PARK i 1 Mi ZONING UN IK 'M*T A' i I � TRWJLiaGRES caw ZtiT' NIG 27 Mincentlan PUDA T§S - October 2013 ll = �mi 23 Vincentlan PUDA TiS - October 2013 ProjectMame: Vincenrlan PUP -Appmv-,.?JCond.- No: I Date: 1019:2 -013 clty. stateiprp'llnCe" C'oun r t,.y- Crtont Edition. b Land Use Size Eatrjt t Exit Exit j Eftfry Exit 820 - Shopping Center F 57.5 Cl) 2379 2169 69 42 199 2115 Redaction 0 lata-mal # lall 140 T i 4 13 1-5 $23 jjl 335 TU 9 tFj 46 51 1851 1894 i 46 29 14.0 149 710 -doneral Off-ice 57.50 I 4141 439 Io 45 24 f 119 Buildlifig RedLct!Qn i 0 0 0 65 Yon pass 3y { 366 I9 1 997 14 1 18. 114 210 -Sinale-Family t 40 225 22a 10 2& 29 17 Efetacfi ad Ho-us!n,9. R.4 wfcrilin 0 0 0 0 0, IIII (ptsmal i 62 86 3 6 f to 9 gg Q M4 1 140 7 22 15 a I.Total t —30211 3026 187 eiu 252 3551 Tbtat geductfon 0 0 0 T-otd lnteuml i 32$ i 321 11 11 29 29 Tqtw FaRsby 32& 3:3 If; 9 40 51 a L 161" mom-P sd4`y zm 16.0 6.5 1 1-77 171 29 Vincen dan PUDA TiS - October 2013 30 Pra�ecf Flame: Vino est FUR -Prop,. Cond. - Date: Cibl" 6,atw?rovince: Zip/PosG-A Code- Couritry, Client Nave; Analyst's Name: Edition: sti, Daily AM Peak Hour FIrl Peak t opr Land Use Size Eptry Exit # Ehfi-V i Exit Entry Exit 1 820 - Shopping Center 6154 i 5153 143 as 442 A179 Reduction f Q if 0 Non-pass-by. -228 42P,4. 100 60 318 .3 5a 710 - General Office 4$I 43 106 15 24 119 BuiWinn Reduction f 0 0 E 0 1 0 0 t7 J 65 3 T 9 Pass--by j U i r7 # GL j 0 l 0 0 366 i 3-118 105 12 17 310 -Hotel 100 (37 446 446 i 39 j 23 1 36 Reduction 0 11 0 0 0 0 folem-W 71 85 5 S i 5 _q Nop-Vass-by 37$ 36.1 i $4 22 f 29 T "a' 6031 Son 290 lal 500 ToW Reductron, 0 0 0 01 i ot2l.finternal j 316 316 i 17, T7 so j ao Total Pass-bV j i 746' # 753 f 34 20 106 117 Total Mon-pass-by 4909 4961 f 232 3 94 If 364 i 487 (f) fGWSq- Fee, Gross-Lessa-We Area (2) f0a) &T Fearc-rossRoorArea 0--cupisdPooma 30 Vincendan PU®A TAS o October 2013 31 { 1 j Proleci.Nam.e: Vino�ntienPUD- Prop:Cond.- Ito: 1 ScAmmo 2 Date- 1 10/912013 City: � StafelProvince; ZipiPostai Cade: Country: Ghent Name: Analyst's Name: Edition: 9th s j Daily Alai Pear Hour j P?4 Peak [lour I Land Use i size Ereicy ExFt End Exit Entry Exit i 820 Center } 250 if 6160 0 169 104 i 531 i 370 -Shopping 4 -160 ; i Reduction ' ( 0 -0 D 0 0- 0 intemai 0 0 0 0- f 0 0 PHSS- bj/ ! 924 324 42 j 26 133 '144 i rlort pass -b ! 523.6 5236 127 ?8 398 I 432 Total 6160 5160 169 104 531 I 570 Total Reduction c i 0 0 D ' 0 1 0 { 0 TotalInte'mal- i D j a or a ! 7- E D Tatai Pass by ( 924 924 42 26. 133. m Total Non - pass -by i x236 5?30 127 78 398 s 432 ' � {1) 1[700 &q. €aat Gmsx F_aa�6la area i 31 Vdncent®wn PUDA TIS e October 2013 f 1 �. ' d D.- Internal Pass- ap f s s Exhibits 32 Vincentlan PUDA 1 I - October 2013 cat i 1;9;1 cf'-.—� T-1 Tip'-- Eff 33 YUY6rx ➢a3C .y TIA4 aqus*a EA Im 5F.S tz 77. 0 • G m CAGT,. k-,;t i[-Mq 2a cat i 1;9;1 cf'-.—� T-1 Tip'-- Eff 33 YUY6rx ➢a3C .y TIA4 aqus*a EA cat i 1;9;1 cf'-.—� T-1 Tip'-- Eff 33 YUY6rx ➢a3C .y TIA4 tz 77. 0 • G m CAGT,. k-,;t i[-Mq cat i 1;9;1 cf'-.—� T-1 Tip'-- Eff 33 YUY6rx ➢a3C .y TIA4 cat i 1;9;1 cf'-.—� T-1 Tip'-- Eff 33 Vincentlan PUDA TIS - October 2013 i n.:9 74F, sm D Z�Itsj-- �A 0-a- 2T,4 rn, qits �W- I L U at, i 21.9-ITCtul 141 _j, n.:9 74F, sm D Z�Itsj-- �A 0-a- 2T,4 rn, qits S,.t :Z4 at, 21.9-ITCtul 141 _j, n.:9 74F, sm 21.9-ITCtul 141 _j, n.:9 74F, 34 R� q7 V ncenti ®n PUDA TI.S a October 2013 F?roject Name: vbesntian PUD-- Prdp, Con&- Sceha -rio 2 nc.aiy5i5 i (ai�ici: rry reaK HOUT �J t hd.00- Wd40derrft(an'0W- Size Tirrie PeriocF i A-thdd Entry Exit Totat 020 - _ r ... Sjiotiping t,'70.0. $q. Feet'Gra$ -. V :250 V�leekda Reek Hour. .l E Bed stFif(LOG). Center - Ln(T}= 9.67Lri('<)+3.3'1 537 576 -1107 TrAC Re" rims Specify a perceniagat�ywhieh the Entry-Trip-ano tDxit Tnp WR be rPducerd For each trartd.Us� Th'fs reduction isapp[iEd i. th. Entry Tri :and E:xitTdp- ft-6m -0-1e previous section. To record any notes, click add Notes abova- Land tlsa Eritfy Redueiion A4Usteal-E6ifry Exit Reducffbn Adjusted Exit 320.- Shopping Center `EO A/o 5310 576 gxtemal Tdps Spee €flr tli erceiitage of Pass- byTnps for each Ldnd We,. The percentage v7ili be:n duced trcm the total nurriber o Xtamai t. g- fr-em-ttte prevtou sectiorT. -to record. any Mtes, dick, �' add i`lotes above. The 10 icon precad'iag'the 17259 -btgt, valve in�icatas dzta'provtded:by (CE. CGrfatig.the icon a custorrr Pas s�Y3!a value:-to data provided by ITE. Ncn- passliy Land Use Exiemal-Trfps rPass-by% Fria'- by:Trips. Tdp§ K. - Shopping Center 7.10'i X25 10% 277 8.30 35 i 36 Vincentian PUDA TIS - October 2013 Vincentian PUDA TIS e October 2013 S ius � T r_—i flr C.4 ju! Q Z - W _ N IN (— N 7 IZ N , ad CL uJ W k ai y� _ s` {. EW.., y` W C3 W UJ of _ c � 38 YC t . J! u] r . . Z ILI LU O W '. Z C2 ` Z � ut 1" t 38 YC t . J! . . Z ILI LU Z Z � ut 1" t 38 co ca --ioo TMMT cn > -U M 0 n OX 0 M ---I X --1 °r/<o m cf) m 10 Cf) c m m o < CD c z Z 0�� m0 0 m z m > <% m > z iz M C-) > m 0 ;o cn C) i 0 cD CA) r` cf) ,= ro im -n of lz CO. 00 0 0 > -n r- C 03 z m GO M z 0 0 00 z 0 m 0 0 0 * 0 a > --Cl) I N 0 > m Z > Z m m ;o m C/) 0 7Z-7� o m N 0 Z M. 11 cn m r, 00 0 > -n r- C 03 z m GO z m 0 0 C- m z 0 0 1 0 0 * 0 N 0 > m Z > Z m m ;o m 0 Cl) 0 M > m r 00 C 0 cr) 0 — z z CA) Z m "M HOLE MONTES ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SURVEYORS July 1, 2014 950 Encore Way • Naples, Florida 34110 • Phone 239.254.2000 • Fax: 239.254.2099 Re: Vincentian GMPA (PL- 20130001767, CP- 2013 -10) PUD Amendment (PL -2013- 0001726) HM File No.: 2013.043 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, of Hole Montes, Inc. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. on behalf of the property owner, have made two concurrent applications to Collier County. These applications include (1) a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) to change the future land use of the subject site from Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, to Urban, Mixed Use District, Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict; and (2) to amend the Vincentian PUD to change the zoning classification from a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district, to allow construction of a maximum of 360 residential dwelling units, or up to 250,000 gross square feet of commercial land uses, or a combination thereof, which may include a hotel limited to 150 rooms, and/or an assisted living facility. These lands total 30.68± acres and are located in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, approximately 1.5 miles west of the intersection of County Road 951 (Collier Boulevard) and U.S. 41 East, in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of U.S. 41 East and Southwest Boulevard. In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to hear a presentation about this amendment and ask questions. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Thursday, July 17, 2014 at 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County South Regional Library, Meeting Room "A ", 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida 34113. Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please feel free to contact me at 239 - 254 -2000. Very truly yours, HOLE MONTES, INC. Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Director of Planning R.JM /sek *Please note that the Collier County Public Library does not sponsor or endorse this program. klanloc . Fnrt Mx arc AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that pursuant to Ordinance 2004 -41, of the Collier County Land Development Code, I did cause the attached newspaper advertisement to appear and I did give notice by mail to the following property owners and/or condominium and civic associations whose members may be affected by the proposed land use changes of an application request for a rezoning, PUD amendment, or conditional use, at least 15 days prior to the scheduled Neighborhood Information Meeting. For the purposes of this requirement, the names and addresses of property owners shall be deemed those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the county to be notified. The said notice contained the laymen's description of the site property of proposed change and the date, time, and place of a Neighborhood Information Meeting. Per the attached letters, property owner's list, and copy of newspaper advertisement which are hereby made a part of this Affidavit of Compliance ( Signature of Applicant) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing Affidavit of compliance was acknowledged before me this lst day of July, 2014 by Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP who is personally known to me or who has produced VM4 (Signature of Notary Public) Stephanie Karol Printed Name of Notary as identification. (Notary Seal) ? {qt�Y Py STEP%MYCMMIE K AH QL N k EE 16 0 EXPIRES. 9, 2016 Thru Win Public underwriters NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily . Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publicath State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as t: appeared Daniel McDermott, who on Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Da newspaper published at Naples, in Col distributed in Collier and Lee counties attached copy of the advertising; being PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 tim on July 1, 2014. Affiant further says that the said Nat published at Naples, in said Collier Cc newspaper has heretofore been contim County, Florida; distributed in Collier each day and has been entered as secoi office in Naples, in said Collier Count year next preceding the first publicatil advertisement; and affiant further says promised any person, firm or corporati commission or refund for the purpose publication in the said newspaper. (Signature of affiant) M to and uliscrib'cd before me 3rd da, o July, f014 . d 2014' (Signature of notary public) 3 No 237130888 F CAROL POLIOOFLA k = MY COOSSION # EE 851758 ,-o EXPIRES: November 28,2014 .;F' o;•' Bonded Thm mcii4d lnsuiance Agency of fl -, Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 51600 j 300 PORTER STEEET REALTY TRUST 32 NICHOLS ST SWAMPSCOTT, MA 01907- -1034 ADAM JR, GLORIA A =& FREDERICK 2926 REEDY RD SINKING SPRING, PA 19608 -9621 AFFORDABLE WHISTLERS COVE LTD 1275 LAKE HEATHROW LN STE 115 HEATHROW, FL 32746 --4398 AT -GER, JOYCE 2 ARAPAHO T RL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7977 ALMEIDA, ANTONIO =& MARIA 14 1/2 WHITSBOURGH ST TAUNTON, MA 02780 -1916 ANDREWS, PIERRE CHRISTINE M ROBBINS 13 BUTTERFIELD TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7901 ARNDT, FRANKT CINDE LOU KAVAN 20 OSAGE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7971 B S & M L POWERS JT R/L TRUST 7922 KINGS RIDGE CIR FAIRBORN, OH 45324-1874 BANK OF AMERICA 101 E KENNEDY BLVD TAMPA, FL 33602 -5179 BEKESY, ILONA H HERSFELDER STRASSE 37 D -36088 HUENFELD GERMANY, D36083 -0000 tiquettes faeiles,A pe er A Rend along fine t® 11 Feed Paper expose Pop -Up EdgeTM j AVERY0 5160 ) 331 BENSON ST LADN TRUST 331 BENSON STREET LAND TRUST C/O PIKUS PROPERTY MANAGMENT C/O PIKUS PROPERTY MANAGMENT 5290 GOLDEN GATE PKWY 5290 GOLDEN GATE PKWY NAPLES, FL 34116-0000 NAPLES, FL 34116 - -0000 ADAMSKI, RICHARD D ADEE, JAMES A JANE D ADAMSKI SHARON ADEE 14700 S M 43 HWY 12228 HARBOR OAKS DR HICKORY CORNERS, MI 49060- -9709 MACHESNEY PARK, IL 61115--1046 AGUAYO, ESTEBAN =& TERESA AGUILERA, LILIAN 289 BENSON ST 339 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8541 NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 ALLEN EST, JAMES R ALLEN, PAUL E =& SARAH P CAROLE FALLEN 1 NATCr EZ TRL 3 NAVAJO TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7969 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7990 BERGER TR, MITCHELL M ANDERSON, NORMAN E =& BEVERLY J ANDERSON, TERRANCE N PAUL E =& HEATHER LANDERSON 285 BENSON ST 11227 OAKLEIGH DR NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8541 MIDDLEVILLE, MI 49333 -8792 ANTHONY, WILLIAM E APARICIO, ANTONIO A =& NIVIA M DEANNA B ANTHONY 294 PORTER ST 1 ABILENE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7945 ARROYO, JAMIE ALBIN, MICHELLE 2415 HARPER STREET SERGE PAQUETTE TAMPA, FL 33605 -0000 19 OSAGE TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 BADILLO, RICARDO F BALLMAN JR, WILLIAM JAMES ADRIANA LABRA BADILLO ROSALIE MARIE BALLMAN 135 3RD ST 27 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -8551 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7943 BARNHART, ROY J =& CARMEN A BARRY, WALLACE J =& LAURI A 205 BENSON ST 7137 S COUNTY ROAD A NAPLES, FL 34113 -8541 SUPERIOR, WI 54880 - -0000 BELCHER, LARRY M =& SANDY L BERGER TR, MITCHELL M JEFFREY MICHAEL BELCHER JOSEPH M BERGER LIVING TRUST NANCY ELIZABETH TUTTLE JEAN CLAUDE BERGER 107 STONEWALL DR 109 BAREFOOT WILLIAMS RD SAVANNAH, GA 31419 - -3272 NAPLES, FL 34113-7960 j - Replies A la hachure afin de 1 www.avery.com avery.com Sens de - ,-- r,_ -.- _ -�_ -� A__ .,_r.. � . ann .-p. wternwe -Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 516:00 BERGERON,FERNAND "NINE DESMEULES DES BOULEAUX NTREAL,QC CANADA, H113 5L2 - -0000 BOGGS, LESLIE 1394 RIDGECREST CT FAIRBORN, OH 45324-5912 BOND, SANDRA G B CHISHOLMTRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7973 BOUCHARD, DIANE ANDREWS JEAN -YVES BOUCHARD 6 ARAPAHO TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 BOUTIN, ROLLANDE ROBERTBOUCHER CHANTAL DOUVILLE °ECOS TRL tPLES, FL 34113 -7952 BRAFFORD, WARD FREEDA BRAFFORD 2810 E CREEKS EDGE DR BLOOMINGTON, IN 47401 -8381 BREAU, EVELYN 225 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8541 BRISSON, DIANE J 11 ABILENETRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7945 BULFRANO, LORA 120 3RD ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8535 i ♦ ® Send along line to Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edger' j BERIAULT ET AL, DENIS 27 ARAPAHO TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7951 BOLAND FAMILY TRUST 224 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8540 BOND, DARLENE M HOWARD J BOND 23 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7943 BOUR, PATRICIAJ BRUCE E PAGE 12409 FOX RUN CT HUNTLEY, IL 60142 -7418 BOWDEN, BEVERLY E RUTH R EISELE 12 CIMMARON TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 BRANDON, TIMOTHY R =& SHELBY J 15 MULESHOETRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7947 BREAD, EVELYN 225 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113- -8541 BROUSSEAU, CHARLES EDOUARD MARIELLE PELLETIER 48 RUE VERLAINE RICHELIEU, QC CANADA, J2W 1R7 -0000 BULMER, MALCOLM 4 CHEROKEE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7916 AVERYO 51600 .l BLAIS, GERALD MICHELINE SCOTT BLAIS 1905STJACQUES DRUMMONDVILLE, QC CANADA, J213 7S7 -0000 BOLDUC, RICHARD MARY E BOLDUC 69 HIGH ST ASSONET, MA 02702 -1706 BOUCHARD, DIANE ANDREWS JEAN -YVES BOUCHARD STEVE BOUCHARD 3 PECOS TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7952 BOURGET, LUCIEN C =& THERESA J 31 CIMMARON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7933 BOYLE, ELIZABETH 103TAHITI CIR NAPLES, FL 34113 --4010 BREAU, EVELYN 225 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8541 BRIONES, ELADIO 272 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8540 BROWN, EDWARD H DAVID BROWN 1 PECOS TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7952 BUNCH SR, DAVID G =& GWENDOLYN 319 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8556 CADER, DOROTHY E CAIN EST, ANN M CAMPANELLO, ANGELO B =& DIANE M 36 ABILENE TRL RICHARD W CAIN 141 1 ST ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -7900 14 SPANISH TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -8533 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7948 Easy PeelO Labels i ♦ Send along line to A E$V ®5160® Use Avery@ Template 51600 , i Feed Paper � expose Pop -Up EdgeTm j 1 CAPPS, JAMES A =& CONSTANCE A CAREY, RALPH W CARLS, DAVID W 347 BENSON ST #A CHARLOTTA B CAREY GENE RAE CARLS NAPLES, FL 34113 -- 8556 30020 DEER HARBOUR DR 30 ABiLENE TRAIL SALISBURY, MD 21804 -2509 NAPLES, FL 34113 -- -9654 CARMIGNANI, WILLIAM B CARTWRIGHT, MARGARET CATERINI, WILLIAM =& VERONICA HONG THITHU NGUYEN 315 BENSON ST PO BOX 108 208 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8556 ROSCOE, PA 15477 - -0108 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -0000 CAVANAGH, LAWRENCE J =& MARYANN CHACE, ANITA I CHANCELLOR, MARIANNA 109 2ND ST 20 CHEYENNE TRL 126 BRADFORD PL NAPLES, FL 34113 -8550 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7922 MT WASHINGTON, KY 40047 -8117 i n �;1E t, NV RCEL C. RC! r ON1 !E CIOCCO, SAMUEL R 24ABILENETRL DEBORAH B PASINI PATRICIA ANN CIOCCO NAPLES, FL 34113 -7970 88 AMBASSADOR DR 16 MEADE DR UNITA LATROBE, PA 15650 -1061 MANCHESTER, CT 06042 -0000 CLARKE, JEFF CLEMONS, LINDA COLLIER CNTY JANET DIPASQUALE 302 BENSON ST BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2348 HUCKLEBERRY RD NAPLES, FL 34113 -8505 WATER SEWER MANCHESTER, NJ 08759 -6124 3301 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34112 -4961 COLLIER CNTY COLLISS, ROY =& SHIRLEY COOK, CLINTON E BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THOMAS K =& KAREN COLLISS PATSY M COOK UTILITIES DIVISION 12 APACHE TRL LOT 303 69487 BANNOCK RD 3301 TAMIAMI TRL E # H -3 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7965 SAINT CLAIRSVILL, OH 43950 -9776 NAPLES, FL 34112 -4961 COOK, NORMAN CORNMAN, JAMES E =& NANCY A CRISCILLO, GERALDINE TERRY =& ROSALIE PHILLIPS 13 CIMMARON TRL 1 CIMMARON TRL 815 W MAHONEY RD NAPLES, FL 34113 -7914 NAPLES, FL 34113-79B6 BRASHER FALLS, NY 13613 -4258 CRISP, BARBARA CUBESMART L P CUMMINS, DAVANI 6881 WOOD LAKE CIR PTA- CS #451 .4260 JACK FROST CT APT 5 YOUNG HARRIS, •GA. 30582 - -1615 � YOUNG PO BOX 320099 I �APEPS.• FL.:34112 - -5242 Ya�hg Flcrr�s� ��SS� —��ets ALEXANDRIA,VA 22320 -0000 CURLEY, RICHARD L =& THERESSA M CURTON, JAMES E CWALT ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 3 BILL ST F BERNICE CURTON %ALDRIDGE CONNORS LLP DERRY, NH 03038 -5260 10106 PORTAGE RD 1615 S CONGRESS AVE # 200 PORTAGE, MI 49002 -7281 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33445- -0000 DAVIS TR, KENNETH L DAVIS, CHARLES N DAVIS, HORTENSE L K LYLE DAVIS REVOCABLE TRUST 322 PORTER ST 23 ABILENE TRL 2977 PALMETTO CT NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8542 NAPLES, FL 34113 -- -7945 DUNEDIN, FL 34698 - -9663. ttiquettes faciles A ; Repiiez la hachure afro de ; WWW avery com peter ga ae .5 Easy Peel® labels 11 A ® Bend along line to © AIMRY(D suo@ Use Avery® Template 51600 Use Paper ® expose Pop-up Edgem" j 1 DAVIS, LARRY E DAVISON, ERNEST DE LATORRES, ROBERTO PINERO " QUELINE J DAVIS MARK DAVISON ET AL XIOMARA CRUZ ACHE TRL 22526 BEECH ST 475 SOUTHWEST BLVD 'LES, FL 34113 -0000 DEARBORN, MI 48124 -2735 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8528 DE LEON, JAIME J DE VILLERS, JOHN DE VRIES, ROGER =& DONNA J 1471ST ST VANDA DE VILLERS 2521 REVELATION LN NAPLES, FL 34113--8533 DIANE DEVILLERS ROCKFORD, IL 61109 -3777 16 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7922 DEMPSEY, HUGH J DEONAMNE, KELVIN DESFORGES, GILLES 3764 KENT DR LUCILLE BONNEAU DESFORGES JANET MCGIRL NAPLES, FL 34112 -3740 SYLVAIN DAIGNEAULT 241 HILLSIDE AVE 6 OREGON TRAIL CRANFORD, NJ 07016- -3409 NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 DICE, JOHN N DIIOIA, DAVID MICHAEL =& ADELE DITTRICH, WILLIAM 8 APACHE TRAIL 808 GOLDEN MEADOW RD ETHEL DITfRICH NAPLES, FL 34113 -- -0000 EAGAN, MN 55123 -1964 26 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7922 DOMINGO - MIGUEL, MIGUEL PASCUAL DROZD, RONALD J =& JOAN S DUMAS, MAURICE R SANDRA MARTINEZ 2 AHL AVE TRLR 21 JEANNE 0 DUMAS 224 PORTER ST ALBANY, NY 12205 -2863 290 BILLINGS ST QUINCY, MA 02171-1804 ALES, FL 34113 -8542 E JEAN NIGRO EAST, BRIAN C =& MELISSA A EBANKS, DALE GARY J NIGRO 483 EVERGREEN DR 5218 GILCHRIST ST 51 PHILLIPS DR TALLMADGE, OH 44278 -1356 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7728 OLD BRIDGE, NJ 08857 -2428 EBANKS, DALE EBANKS, MARLON ECKL, SARA S 5218 GILCHRIST ST 5218 GILCHRIST ST DIANNA SHUST NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7728 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7728 6 OSAGE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7971 ELGART EST, CHRISTINE EMELANDER, SYDNEY B ENDERS, JERRY L % DAVID A ELGART PR`' JANICE F EMELANDER 12 ARAPAHO TRL LOT 315 LOIS L MORROW `/ 1204-I'M T / p S" PO kr7�c 156 -� :7 - GAYLORD, MI 49734- -0145 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7977 NAPLES, FL 34113 -8536 FALATO, DAVID =& ZENAIDA FEENEY, MICHEL FELLER TR, CYNTHIA H 130 2ND ST GAETANE NADEAU EARL F FELLER TR NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8534 1575 LOUIS CARIER #606 UTD 5/31100 MONTREAL, QC 1710 TREMONT ST CANADA, H4N 2Z7 - -0000 DOVER, OH 44622 -1075 FINCH, MARION FISHER, ROBERT D =& ETHEL M FEREZA, ANDRA 6057 N OLD 41 3 ARAPAHO TRL 1673 MANDARIN RD NAPLES, FL 34102-6139 VINCENNES, IN 47591 -7556 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7981 Easy Peel® Labels i ♦ Bend along line to I AXERY ® 5160 ® I Use Avery® Template 51600 i Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTm j 1 FLOOD, DONNA J FLORIDANN LLC FLORIDIMMO LLC 27 CIMMARON TRL 2633 LONGBOAT DR 2633 LONGBOAT DR NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7914 NAPLES, FL 34104 -0000 NAPLES, FL 34104 -3329 FONTES, DIOSDADO FOURNIER, PAUL FOWLER, DON A =& LA VERNE DALIA FONTES USE DARCY 332 BENSON ST SANDRA FONTES B OSAGE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8505 16 CHISHOLM TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7971 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7973 FOX, RAYMOND A FRESHOUR, CLAYTON GAINES, DONALD P 3 CHEYENNE TRL 204 PORTER ST CAROLYN D GAINES NAPLES, FL 34113 -7943 NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 4070 NEW COLUMBIA RD CAMPBELLSVILLE, KY 42718--0000 LAG "-' ? T ^, '% !Its GALLEGOS. MARINA GIRARD ET AL, ROBERT MARGARET M GALLAGHER TR 217 BENSON ST 12 A.B ILEN E TRAIL KEVIN & MARG GALLAGHER TRUST NAPLES, FL 34113--8541 NAPLES, FL 34113 -- -7961 UTD 12/28/0517 SPANISH TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7984 GLEN, MARVIN GLOBAL PROPERTIES OF NAPLES GOBER TR, ROBERT E SHIRLEY MARIE HEISTAND 2614 TAMIAMI TRL N STE 615 KATHLEEN T GOBER TR 2985 HARRIS RD SE NAPLES, FL 34103 -4409 GOBER FAMILY REV TRUST PORT ORCHARD, WA 98366 -2344 UTD 10121 /109 AL ST DERRY, NH 03038 -5270 GONZALEZ, EDUARDO GORANSON, PHYLLIS M GORGES, DIETER--& PHYLLIS 320 BENSON ST 39 CIMMARON TRL STACY A VELD NAPLES, FL 34113 -8505 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7933 DIETER H GORGES JR 41 CIMMARON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7933 GRAHAM, JAMES J =& BETTY L GRANDAL, MERCEDES L GREINER, CYNTHIA S 35 ARAPAHO TRL CESAR A HERNANDEZ -CRUZ 22 APACHE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7951 28 CHISHOLM TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7965 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7973 GRETHER, GARY W =& BELINDA K GRETHER, MARY RUTH GRIMES, JOE A =& MARJORIE E 6084 HUNTINGTOM WOODS DR RANDAL P GRETHER 1550 CHESAPEAKE AVE NAPLES, FL '34712"29'83% 1 NAVAJO TRL NAPLES, FL 34102 = =_0514 NAPLES, FL 34113--7990 GUERRA, AURORA D GUERRA, MANUEL GUY, PAULA L 2290 SW 132 AVE 2290 SW 132 AVE 12 OSAGE TRL MIAMI, FL 33175 - -1121 MIAMI, FL 33175 -1121 NAPLES, FL 34113-7971 H VERN AASEBY REV LIV TRUST HAERING, AUBREY L HAGERMAN, G KENNETH =& UNA R KYME S AASEBY REV LIV TRUST JOSHUA L HEARING KENNETH EDWARD HAGERMAN 18 NAVAJO TRL 240 PORTER ST PETER JOHN HAGERMAN NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7939 NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 31 NAVAJO TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7976 hiquettes faciles A peter , �epllez l8 t18ehUre aflfl de WiNW.aYerS/.CQnt 1 Cane r1a :Easy Peel® Labels Use AveryO Template 51600 HAMILTON, ANNA F -' MES W HAMILTON II HAMILTON RD 'HRANVILLE, PA 19330-1310 HARPER, ELLA MAE 16 ABILENE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7970 HAYS, NAOMI CATHERINE DONALD WAYNE KIESLER 236 PORTER ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 HEATH JR, HERBERT B =& TINA 27 SILVER CIR BARRE, VT 05641 -9046 HENDERSON, SAMUEL C =& CAROL M 5167 ROMAINE SPRING DR FENTON, MO 63026 -0000 HENSLEY, BONNIE M RICHARD O ESKRIDGE 2 PECOS TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7966 HITCHING POST CO -OP ATTN RICHARD ESKRIDGE 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL < NAPLES,'FL : 34113-79-6;5,:.. ' HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 Bend along tine to Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edge' j HANDEL, RICHARD 59 CROMWELL RD WIMBLEDON UK, SW 19 8LF -0000 HARTE, EDWARD VALERIA P HARTE 26 NAVAJO TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7924 HEAD, WILLIAM T ROSE A HEAD 107 BAREFOOT WILLIAMS RD NAPLES, FL 34113 -7960 HELL, KLARA ILONA VIOLA HEINMULLER 580 12TH AVE S NAPLES, FL 34102 -8007 HENDRICKS, WILLIAM E TERRY L HENDRICKS 9 PECOS TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 HERNANDEZ, EVARISTO NELDA HERNANDEZ 18 CHISHOLM TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7973 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL r NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32CHEYENNETRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNETRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 AVERVO 51600 1 HAROLD R DEVRIES JRTRUST 3 SPANISH TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 HARTMAN, ROBERT D KATHLEEN M HARTMAN 1 CHEROKEETRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7953 HEATH JR, HERBERT B TINA M HEATH 27 SILVER CIRCLE BARRE, VT 05641 - -0000 HENAULT, GILLES 161 RUE RONDEAU STE EMELIE DE UENERGIE, QC CANADA, 34113 -0000 HENRIQUEZ, IRMA IVETTE 5470 16TH PL SW APT 106 NAPLES, FL 34116 -4963 HITCHING POST 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 =7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 n ;Easy Peel® Labels i ♦ Bend along line to Use Avery® Template 51600 1 Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTIA HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 AVERY0 516oD 1 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHInI HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -- -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 n iGilI NO- PuST 1"CM,E . :V�-iS AS --.4 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 -PO-ST HOMFC»NNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113- -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL" 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 tiquettes faciles a paler ; V— A- Repiiez A la hachure afin de ; v"vw.avery eam €asy Peel® Labels i A ® Bend along line to I AVERY® 5160® i Use Avery® Template 5160® Feed Paper ® expose Pop-Up Edges"' A 1 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN - CHEYENNETRL LES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 62 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113--7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNETRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 -Easy Peel® labels i ♦ Bend along line to It Use Avee Template 51600 j Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edger j HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113--7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 7- -C �I` C- POST H , 0Vv'NER° ASS HITr.HIN!? POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113--7935 NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES. FL 34113 -7935 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HOEFT, RAY =& MYRNA HOPKINS, EDWARD W 7409 CIRCLE TRL MARILYN R HOPKINS WONDER LAKE, IL 60097 -8458 37- %14VAJ0 TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7976 HORNYAK, JOHN =& SUSAN HOSKINS, NANCY A 1919 MANCHESTER CIR DALE L HOSKINS NAPLES, FL 34109 - -7221 3325 WEBER DR NORTON, OH 44203 -5756 HOULAHAN, EDWARD J =& T MARIE HUBBARD, JON K =& EVA G 1271 WEBSTER DRIVE 6604 NW MELODY LN E SARNIA, ON PARKVILLE, MO 64152- -2757 CANADA, N7S 2J9 -0000 ttiquettes faciles A peler i A Repliez IN la hachure afin de AVERYID 5160® ; I HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -- -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7935 HITCHING POST HOMEOWNERS ASSN 32 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7935 HOCKSTRA, JOHN R= &TRACI L 3340 PINEY RIDGE RD LUDINGTON, MI 49431 - -0000 HORNER TR, RODNEY E VERNAJ HORNER TR RODNEY & VERNA HORNER RE TRUST UTD 101181011196 YORKSHIRE DR MARION, OH 43302- -6862 HOUGHTLING TR, ELLSWORTH CLARE MARGARET ANN HOUGHTLING TR UTD 10/27104 17 NAVAJO TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7976 HUNT, JERRY D CHERYL HUNT 8 OREGON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7972 www.avery.com -Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 5160® d HUNYADY, ELMER J 'AN M HUNYADY -iEROKEE TRL 2LES, FL 34113-7953 ZONE, JOYCE RALPH WOODSON BROWN 27 ABILENE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7945 JCS REALTY GROUP LLC 2614 TAMIAMI TRL N NAPLES, FL 34103 -4409 JOHNSTONE, MARIE E =& ROSS H 17 E LAKE BERNARD DR SUNDRIDGE, ON CANADA, POA IZO -0000 JUSTE, JACQUES BRICE CAROSE T JUSTE 269 BENSON ST PLES, FL 34113 -8541 KELLY, JAMES T=& MARQUERITE 9 MULESHOE TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 KIVETT, SANDRA D 232 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113- -8540 KOWALEWSKI, STANLEY F ANTOINETTE KOWALEWSKI 314 PLUM RUN RD CANONSBURG, PA 15317 -9727 KUTIL, ALICE J 3652 STOER RD SHAKER HEIGHTS, OH 44122 -5116 LACOUNT, RITA 4 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7922 Bend along line to 11 Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTm i AAMRYO 5160 0 .1 IACONELLI CO -TRS, ROBIN L IACONELLI TR, ROBIN IACONELLI CO -TRS, PETER PETER IACONELLI TR ROBIN L IACONELLI REV/TRUST ROBIN L IACONELLI REV TRUST UTD 2/26198117 3RD ST UTD 2/26/98188 PRICE ST NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8551 NAPLES, FL 34113 -8435 JACOBSEN, GARY LEE JARDINE, LLOYD E =& JOYCE DENISE DIANE JACOBSEN 18 SPANISH TRL 3541 HIGHLAND BLVD NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7948 HIGHLAND, MI 48356-1827 NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 JOHNSON, HELEN JOHNSON, HELEN KELLEY 9 OSAGE TRL 9 OSAGE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7938 NAPLES, FL 34113-7938 JUDD TR, GILES G JUNG, MICHEL LONESOME DOVE TRUST CAROLE TURCOTTE UTD 01/03/97 16625 RUE DE LA MOUSSON 9 NAVAJO TRL MARIBEL, QC NAPLES, FL 34113 -7976 CANADA, J7J 2P1 -0000 KASABOSKI, DAN KAVERMAN, MICHELLE C BETTY KASABOSKI 236 BENSON ST. 1808 KINGSDALE AVE NAPLES, FL 34113 -8540 OTTAWA, ON CANADA, KIT 148 -0000 KELLY, ROSEMARY A KING, CHESTER J =& GENEVIEVE N 22 PECOS TRL 12 SPANISH TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7966 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7948 KLEIN, FRANCIS JOSEPH KOLLMEIER TR, KENNETH X INEZ M KLEIN 4829 GARY RD 15 BUTTERFIELD TRL BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34134 -3928 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7901 KRACKERTR, HELEN L KUMITZ, MARSHA HELEN L KRACKER REV TRUST 11 CIMMARON TRAIL UTD.5 /6:0a NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 7 SPANISH TRL NAPLES; FL 34113 -7980 LABONTE, NOEL LABRA, ANTOLIN 12NATCHEZTRL RANGELARACELI NAPLES, FL 34113- -7982 338 PORTER ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 LAKE, D ELIZABETH LAMBORELLE, RAYMOND 112 2ND ST 14 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -8534 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7922 -Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 51600 LAMOTHE, ANDRE' DANIELLE SCOTT 5980 DESLANDES ST HYACINTH E, QC CANADA, J2R IC2- -0000 LAVERDURE,ANDRE ANNTA LEGAULT LAVERDURE MICHEL FEENEY 7 SANTA FE TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113RO- -0000 LECHLIDER III, THOMAS L 16 APACHETRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7965 LC`tV {5, 11`i1iL�i v DALE T LEWIS SUSANNE C ELSASS CYNTHIA G FUHRMAN9 NATCHEZ TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7969 LONG, MARTHA 102 3RD ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8535 LORA, JOSE A CIRINATREJO 350 PORTER ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 LUCAS, SANDRA 155 SOUTHWEST BLVD NAPLES, FL 34113 -8558 MAC INTYRE,GORDON JUDIMACINTYRE 2307 RANDALL ST SUMMERLAND, CANADA, V0H129- -0000 MACDONALD, JOSEPH JUSTINA WILLIAMS 132 4TH ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8536 MALANDE, JEAN LUCIENNE E DIEUDONNE 220 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8540 i ♦ fiend along line to jFeed Papers expose Pop-Up Edger j LANGE, STEPHEN SANDRA LLANGE 7 OSAGE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7938 LAVOIE ETAL, ERIC 30 NAVAJO TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 LEESON, WILLIAM R PHYLLIS E LEESON 6756 W BEAVER RD GRAYLING, MI 49738 -8587 ! M- KNER TR. GEORGE P MARLENE E LOCKNER TR 8876 E MAIN ST GALESBURG, MI 49053 - -9746 LONGTIN, IRENE D AMANDA R CHARPENTIER TINA M WILSON 9 QUEENSWAY QUEENSBURY, NY 12804 -1601 LOREDO, FLAVIO 306 PORTER ST NAPLES, FL 34113 --8542 LUDERS, FORTIL CONSULTA LUDERS 117 1ST ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8533 MACALISTER, STEPHEN W JENNIFER MACALISTER 252 BENSON ST ' NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8340 MACINTYRE, GORDON =& JUDI 2307 RANDALL ST SUMMERLAND,BC CANADA, VOH 1ZO -0000 MALDONADO, JOSE L 101 2ND ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8550 AVERY(R) 5160(D LANGMAID, JUDITH W DONALD LANGMAID 16 CHEROKEE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 7967 LAZZARI, MARGARET M 1207 MARTINIQUE CT MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145 -2321 LENTZ, A ALLEN 168 BIG PIECE RD FAIRFIELD,NJ 07004 - -1210 LOGSDON, OLLIE TIM D =& APRIL BRiMER 9 ABILENE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7945 LORA, EDEL =& YARA TREJO 351 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8556 LOVETT, VERNON BRUCE LOIS ARLENE LOVETT 3 CIMMARON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7986 LUNDBERG,MARK CAROLYN LUNDBERG 19 ROSE ST BROOKVILLE, PA 15825 -2503 MACCHIA, DONICKJ JOANN MACCHIA 27 OREGON TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 MADERS, DONALD W TR DONALD W MADERS TRUST UTD 9121/04 6 SANTA FE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7979 MALERBA, LOUIS M =& THERESA M LOUIS M MALERBA JR 19 PECOS TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 ttiquettes faeiles a peler a _ _._ liepliez h to hachure afro de ; www.every.com Casy Peel' Labels i A, �� Send along line to I AAMR (D 51600D i Use Avery® Template 51600 Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTm j j AANSFIELD EST, DONNA J )/ A CLARK 3 E H CLARK 17 , -,;OS TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7952 MARTENS, HERMANN= &JOAN 8 BUTTERFIELD TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7968 MARTINEZ, VERONICA SERGIO ALFARO 237 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113- -8541 MC LEOD, JOHN G JUNE MC LEOD 7 NAVAJO TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7976 MCGUIRE, MELFORD D =& ELLEN E 14 PECOS TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7966 MEEK, RICHARD =& SANDRA 135 WOODLAND FRST WINFIELD, WV 25213 -9606 MILLER TR, EARL P SONIA A MILLER TR UTD 5/17/96 7807 RIVER DR SPRING GROVE, IL 60081 -9303 MOORE, ANN 19 OREGON TRL NAPLES,FL 34113- -7988 MORIN, HELENE ANDREWS DIANE ANDREWS BOUCHARD 1266 RUE DU VISON 12ANCIENNE- LORET, QC -ANADA, 62E 1V9 --0000 MUNGER, JOANNE S 2 OREGON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7972 MARC, PASCAL =& MIAGALIE 288 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8540 MARTIN, DENNIS MARJORIE G MARTIN 20 FURLONG COURT TORONTO,ON CANADA, M1J1Y8 -0000 MALIK, CHRISTINE JOY =& BUELL 281 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8541 MCCUTCHEON, GORDON R 350 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8505 MCKEEFRY, JIMMY L LORI A MCKEEFRY 6234 QUARRY DR PULASKI, WI 54162-0000 MICHAUD, YANICK 276 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8540 MILLER, ERNEST P =& DARLA A JEFFREY W MILLER 21 CHEROKEE TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 MOORE, VICTORIA L 4 OSAGE TRL ' NAPLES, FL 341 1 3 -79 7 1' MORRONE, ANTHONY J JOAN M MC GEE 15 PECOS TRAIL LOT 328 NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 MURCH,GLENN JANET MURCH 17 NATCHEZ TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 MARPLE, NATHAN 10 CHEYENNE TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 MARTINEZ, JOSE DE JESUS MARTINEZ, ANA MARIA 5539 SHOLTZ ST NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8766 MC CORKLE, JOHN J 625 NEPONSET ST NORWOOD, MA 02062 -5201 MCGEE REVOCABLE TRUST 20 ARAPAHO TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7977 MCKEEFRY, JIMMY L =& LORI A 6234 QUARRY DR PULASKI, WI 54162 -0000 MICHELSEN, WILLIAM PAUL W MICHELSEN 103 OREGON TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 MILSTED SR EST, ALVIN L 19 EUCLID AVE PITMAN, NJ 08071 -2422 MORIN TR, ISABELLE FAY MORIN REVOCABLE TRUST UTD D3113108 15CHEROKEETRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7926 MULLINS, ERNEST C =& TERRY L 13 CHEROKEE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7926 MURCH, KEITH D CATHERINEA MURCH 799 RIVERSIDE DR CAMBRIDGE, ON CANADA, N3H 2V1 -0000 asy Peel® Labels i ♦ Rend along line to i A1ERY® 516x® i se Avery® Template 51600 i Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Ed geTm i 1 [WELL, FRANK DENNIS NICHOLS, JAMES C NINO JR, MIGUEL ARLETH LABRA 'ETER T NEWELL NELDA G NICHOLS 228 BENSON ST 01 BENSON ST 11 NAVAJO TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 NAPLES, FL 34113- -8540 IAPLES, FL 34113- -8556 )DON, OTIS L OLIVER, MICHAEL ORLOFSKY, FRANK JOSEPHINE WOMELSDORF 11 SANTA FE TRL 336 BENSON ST 33 NAVAJO TRL MAPLES, FL 34113--7919 NAPLES, FL 34113 -8505 NAPLES, FL 34113--7976 ORLOFSKY, FRANK ORLOFSKY, FRANK PAPINEAU, RUTH V JOSEPHINE WOMELSDORF JOSEPHINE WOMELSDORF 217010TH AVE NE 4 OREGON TRAIL 33 NAVAJO TRL NAPLES, FL 34120 --4967 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7972 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7976 c n_ct outs PARROT, KENNETH J PATRICK, LORETTAA ESTHER TREMBLAY 335 BENSON ST 28 CIMMARON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -8556 MENTOR, OH 44060- -0000 NAPLES, FL 34113--7940 PAUL, MARIE L PEEVER, J CARL --& ELLEN PELLETIER, GILLES 216 BENSON ST BRYAN J PEEVER DIONNE HUGUETTE NAPLES, FL 34113 -8540 5 NAVAJO TRL 210 PORTER ST NAPLES, FL 34113--7990 NAPLES, FL 34113- -8542 PEREZ, ANTONIO PERSHING, E LEE PETKOV, BORISLAV H TEODORA P KYUMURDZHIEVA JUANA PONCE 1207 MARTINIQUE CT 277 BENSON ST 149 4TH ST MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145 -2321 NAPLES, FL 34113- -8541 TRAILERACRES NAPLES, FL 34113 -8552 PICHE, JACQUES PICK, DENNIS PITTMAN, INA POWELL LYNE MORIN 21899 S 600 W DONALD J HENDRICK III MARCEL =& MARIE JEANNE PICHE LACROSSE, IN 46348 -9760 43 CIMMARON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7933 31 ABILENE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113R1 -0000 PIUZE, LAURETTE DESCHENES PIUZE, LAURETTE DESCHENES PLEAU ETAL, DANIEL MICHELE PIUZE MICHELE PIUZE 7 CHEYENNE TRL JEAN TREMBLAY 14 ABILENE TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113--7943 1292 JULIEN GREENQUEBEC, QC NAPLES, FL 34113 - =1970 CANADA, GIW 3M3 -0000 PLEAU ETAL, DANIEL PLEAU, DANIEL PONCE, CRISTINA P 12 CHEYENNE TRL MICHELYNE PLEAD 1231ST STREET NAPLES, FL 34113 -- -7922 9 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 —OODO NAPLES, FL 34113- -7943 POOLE, KAREN POWERS, DENNIS A POYNTER, ROBERT 3518 WILLYS PKWY MAUREEN ANN POWERS 4680 PARKSTONE LN TOLEDO, OH 43612 -1013 14 NATCHEZ TRAIL AVON, IN 46123 - -7095 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -0000 tie uettes faules A paler ; RepGez h !a hachure afin de www.avery.com Easy Peel® Labels Use Avery® Template 51600 POZAN, EDWARD G =& JUDITH A 4RAPAHO TRAIL LES, FL 34113 -7964 RAMBO, HENRY L WANDA F RAMBO 41 CHEROKEETRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7928 REGAN, JOSEPH M MYRA STAMMEL 10 ARAPAHO TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7977 RICHARD, LYN SYLVAIN BRUNEAU 281 ST -LUC # 1 QUEBEC,QC CANADA, GIN 2S4 -0000 ROBBINS, JOHN R DANIEL J ROBBINS 2 CHEROKEE TRL PLES, FL 34113 -7916 RODRIGUEZ- MENDOZA, MARTHA 134 2ND ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8534 RUSSELL, JOHN =& LORRAINE 200 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8540 S & L SOHLMIAN FAMILY REV TRUST 3 NATCHEZ TRAIL NAPLES, FL. 34113 -0000 SANDERS, GARY =& SANDRA MELISSA SANDERS MARK SANDERS 152 DES BOULEAUXLES COTEAUX, QC CANADA, J7X 1A2 -0000 SCHUH, ALLAN J PATRICIA A SCHUH 18 APACHE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7965 i A mend along line to 0® AVERV0 516 i Feed Paper expose Pop -Up EdgeTm I � 1 PREVATT, DAVID L= &ANNALEAH B QUINN III, JAMES 260 PORTER ST PO BOX 325 NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 CLARKDALE, AZ 86324 -0325 RAMBS, ELVIA BENIGNO SAUCEDA 256 PORTER ST NAPLES, FL 34113- -8542 REINHARD, MICHAELT 138 3RD ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8535 RIVES, OMAIDA CARMEN RIVES 18 SANTA FE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7979 ROBERTSTAD, KARK E BETTY ROBERTSTAD 29 CHEYENNETRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7943 ROLF, ESTHER T MICHAEL WALSH 15 NATCHEZ TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7969 RUTH A WINKER REVOCABLE TRUST UTD 08/04/08 8083 PALOMINO DR NAPLES, FL 34113-2634 SALVATORE, CHRISTINE MELISSA INSKIP TERESA SALVATORE 546 CAVERLY DR BRIGANTINE, NJ 08203 -2820 SCHLAGETER, STANLEY B 39 NAVAJO TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113- -0000 SCHULZ ET AL, SANDRA L 4252 SHOREWOOD DR ROCKFORD, IL 61101 -9369 A REFERENCE ONLY HITCHING POST MOBILE HOME CO -OP , -0000 REMY, KEITH D =& KATHLEEN 544 RISING HILL DR FAIRBORN, OH 45324 - -5917 RIX, GALENA M 287 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8541 RODRIGUEZ, IRIS 343 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8556 ROWLEY, KELLY J =& BRENDA J 264 PORTER ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 RUTH A WINKLER REV LIV TRUST 6 BUTTERFIELD TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 SAMSON, JEAN GUY JEANNINE MARCOTTE YVES SAMSON 25 CIMMARON TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 SCHLAGETER, STANLEY B 8417 OLD BOUNDARY RD LOUISVILLE, KY 40291 -0000 SCOTT EST, THEODORE 4 CHISHOLM TRL NAPLES, FL 34113--7973 R Easy Peel® Labels i ♦ Bend along line to AVERY0 5160 i Use Avery® Template 59b0 ® Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Pop—Up Ed eTM j }( ` ►►�� _� SCOTT, LOUISE HELEN SEYMOUR JR, HOMER SHIFLET, RONALD E =& SANDRA L 268 BENSON ST RONALD SEYMOUR 8019 WATTERSON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -8540 33 CIMMARON TRL LOUISVILLE, KY 40291 - -1760 NAPLES, FL 34113--7933 SLOSS, ELIZABETH D SLOSS SMEATHERS, DONALD A SMITH, DONALD CONNIE L RAMSEY PATRICIA K SMEATHERS 4 ABILENE TRL 105 BAREFOOT WILLIAMS RD 113 BAREFOOT WILLIAMS RD NAPLES, FL 34113- -7970 NAPLES, FL 34113--7960 NAPLES, FL 34113- -7960 SMITH, DONALD JAMES SMITH, DONALD JAMES SOHLMAN JR TR, EVERT F MARJORIE LOUISE SMITH MARJORIE LOUISE SMITH CLAIRE JO SOHLMAN TR 14 ARAPAHO TRAIL 21 ABILENE TRL E & C JO SOHLAMN LIV TRUST NAPLES, FL 34113- -0000 NAPLES, FL 34113--7945 UTD 12/13/949 CIMMARON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113-7986 SOMMERS, RONALD E =& JUDY K SOUTHWEST BLVD HOLDINGS LLC WILLIAM H SOLOMAN 1 OSAGE TRL 19275 W CAPITOL DR 5-1 E 1DO 24 CHEROKEE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7938 BROOKFIELD, Wl 53045- -2744 NAPLES, FL 34113 - -0000 SOUTHWEST BLVD HOLDINGS LLC SOUTHWEST BLVD HOLDINGS LLC SPRAKER, JOHN =& KIMBERLY MARIE 19275 W CAPITOL DR STE 100 19275 W CAPITOL DR STE 1 D 30 CHEYENNE TRL BROOKFIELD, WI 53045 -2744 BROOKFIELD, WI 53045 -2744 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7923 ST GERMAIN, ROBERT G STEPHENSON, ANN E STECLER, JOHN MARYLOU ST GERMAIN 1 TWINKLING CT 11 MULESHOETRL 14 APACHE TRL BLUFFTON, SC 29909 -6203 NAPLES, FL 34113- -7947 NAPLES, FL 34113-7965 STEWART, BILLY E STINFIL, MARIE STONE ETAL, KENNETH P DIXIE L STEWART 314 PORTER ST BOX 438 SHERRY L BELL NAPLES, FL 34113- -8542 COOPER CLIFF, ON CANADA, POM 1NO -0000 9 CHEROKEETRL NAPLES, FL 34113--7926 STOYANOVA, HRISTINA STRINGER, GRACE V STUCKEY, CAROL J ZDRAVKO STOYANOV 32 ABILENE TRL 0 145 2ND ST ' 34.113- -8550 23.3 BENSON ST 233 NAPLES, FL 34113 - 790 //PP,__FL.' Na� wJ/ tL 3�,i/3 NAPLES, FL 34113- -8541 SULLIVAN, PATRICIA J SULLIVAN, RICHARD J SUTPHIN, EDWARD B 126 3RD ST 9 SANTA FE TRL NANCY A SUTPHIN NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8535 NAPLES, FL 34113 -7919 56 SUNNY ACRES SETH, WV 25181- -9564 SWAN, MAX O TATE, MICHAEL J TATTOLI, PAULA RUTH A SWAN NICOLE N TATE LINDA L SILVA 825 N HINTZ RD 1 SPANISH TRAIL DIANE M LOESNER OWOSSO, MI 48867 -8406 NAPLES, FL 341113---0000 TIMOTHY A FLETCHERI CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7943 f tit faeiles 91 Repliez A is hachure afin de ; www.avery.com uettes peter ; C— a- -Easy Peel® Labels i A ® Rend along line to I Use Aveeye Template 51600 Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edge'' 11 TAYLOR, DONALD M TECRONEY, PAUL D =& SHEILA R "'kNNE A TAYLOR 286 PORTER ST 4 EASTGATE VILLAGE DR NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 !SVILLE,KY 40223 --4786 THOMPSON, JAMES L =& MEREDITH A TIMBURY, PATRICIA S F 33 ABILENE TRL DAVID S FLAD NAPLES, FL 34113-7904 ROBERTA F VIGNEAULT LAURA F NELSONPO BOX 28 WOODSTOCK, NH 03293 - -0028 TREJO LORA, CARLA M TREMBLAY, MAURICE 220 PORTER ST GAETANE GAGNE NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 1295 GUERARD ALMA, QC CANADA, G86 6K7 -0000 TURCOTTE, GILLES TUTTLE SR, JAMES L =& VONCILE LOUISE HEBERT 1291 ROGANA RD 1860 RUE DAUMIER BETHPAGE, TN 37022 -8611 JONQUIERE, QC CANADA, G7Z IP9 -0000 TVETEN, CHRISTIAN UMPENHOUR, KRISTOPHER E 290 PORTER ST SHEILA UMPENHOUR NAPLES, FL 34113 -8542 112 4TH ST NAPLES, FL 34113-8536 VELOSO, HECTOR VERMETTE, MIREILLE ZOA ELIDA PALLAIS ROMAIN CARON 16 ARAPAHO TRL ROBERT BONIN NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7977 ERIC CARON2 APACHE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7965 VILLASENOR, MANUEL=& ISABEL VILLASENOR, MANUEL =& ISABEL 251 BENSON ST 251 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8541 NAPLES, FL 34113 -8541 VOULIGNY, GEORGE WAGNER, MELANIEA HUGUETTE LEMOINE /_ L� (J �� 24 NAVAJO TRL 111:BA F_FOG S RD ��i t��vjr /a7 E'ft NAPLES, FL 34113 —79 39 NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 WALSH, KATHLEEN L TAMMY A BURNS 18 CHEYENNE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7922 i WELSH, NEIL C SONJA L WELSH 29 OREGON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7905 WARNE, WM E DOROTHY M WARNE MARJORIE LTUNNEY 29 NAVAJO TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7976 WELSH, NEIL C SONJA L WELSH 22 CHEROKEE TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 - -0000 AVERY@ s1600 TELFORT, ENISE 291 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -8541 TODHUNTER, DESNEIGES M CHARLES C TODHUNTER 2003 OVERBROOK CRES SUDBURY, ON CANADA, P3A 5J5 -0000 TRUHLSEN, WILLIAM C JOAN R TRUHLSEN 28 ABILENE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113--7970 TUYA, FRANK 133 2ND ST NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8550 VELLEFF, ELIZABETH B 4451 GARDNER DR PORT CHARLOTTE, FL 33952 -9728 VEZINA, MICHEL USE COTE MARC VEZINA 13 ABILENE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7945 VISICALE, JOSEPHINE 20 CIMMARON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7940 WALKER, ROBERT R =& NANCY A. 4699 Nk1V COUNTY ROAD 141 '` � � JEtiRlk�:: =S, F:�2053 -3130 �e�h►�s,�32�3 -3�3c� WELLS, BRIAN 316 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 WESLEY, SCOTT J 15155 BOICHOT RD LANSING, MI 48906 -1005 'asy Peel® labels Use Avery® Template 51600 WILSON, PAMELA E 259 BENSON ST NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8541 WOLFENSON, LOUIS B 16 OREGON TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 7 972 WOODLEY, FRANKLIN DONNA WOODLEY 10 MULESHOE TRL NAPLES, FL 34113 -7978 7cP7 THOMAS J =& SUSAN L 285 PRICE ST NAPLES, FL 34113 - -8438 ZICK, VERL DALE SANDRA M ZICK 12 BUTTERFIELD TRIAL NAPLES, FL 34113 -0000 ♦ Bend along line to i Feed Paper �� expose Pop-Up Edge"' d WISEMAN, CARL M =& SHIRLEY A 2 SPANISH TRL NAPLES, FL 34113- -7994 AVERY(R) 5160 1 WISEMAN, VICKI LYNN 4194 MINERS CANDLE PL CASTLE ROCK, CO 80109 - -0000 WOLFENSON, LOUIS B WOODLEY, FRANKLIN 8 PECOS TRL DONNA WOODLEY NAPLES, FL 34113 - -7966 8 CHEROKEETRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113-0000 WOODWORTH, RICHARD L YENTES, VIVIAN KATHRYN J WOODWORTH REBECCA GOLEMBISKI 7873 S SUGAR ISLAND RD 22 OSAGE TRL CHEBANSE, IL 60922 -0000 NAPLES, FL 34113 --- 7 971 ZENZ, THOMAS J =& SUSAN LYNN ZENZ. THOMAS J L8b rRli c ST CI -SAIM I 7�PI7 NAPLES, FL 34113 -8438 285 PRICE ST NAPLES, FL 34113- -8438 Whistler's Cove Apartments East Naples Civic Association 11400 Whistler's Cove Blvd. 3823 Tamiami Trail East, PMB #274 Naples, FL 34113 Naples, FL 34112 t tiqueiies faeites A paler Repliez & is hachure afin de v'ww averycom Sens de _z_.L�__ .9._...a 1I-TM t 1I-Qnn-r n_ev�Ra NIM Summary Vincentian GMPA — MPUD (GMPA -PL -2013 0001767/CP -2013 -10) (P UD Z-P L -2 013 0 0 01726) July 17, 2014 South County Regional Library Note: This is a summary of the NIM. A verbatim recorded is also provided. The verbatim record denotes all questions raised by attendees and responses to those questions. Attendees: On behalf of Applicant: Robert Mulhere, Rich Yovanovich, Christopher Shucart County Staff- Kay Deselem, Corby Schmitt Approximately 18 members of the public attended. At 5:35 PM, Mr. Mulhere started the presentation by introducing himself, the other consultants, the applicant, and County staff. Mr. Mulhere explained the NIM process, provided an overview of project, including what is being requested and the existing PUD permitted uses. Mr. Mulhere also went over the proposed PUD master plan, include location for development, stormwater lake, preserve, and project access. Mr. Mulhere also explained the process for review and approval of the GMPA and the PUD Amendment. The members of the public who identified themselves were either from the adjacent Hitching Post RV Park or from Trail Acres, an adjacent platted single family development. There were numerous questions related to site design and uses. The most significant issue of concern was related to affordable housing. There was significant opposition expressed to any additional affordable or subsidized housing in this area. Mr. Mulhere indicated that the applicant had no intention of building affordable housing and was willing to put a condition or limitation in the PUD that would restrict the housing to market rate. The meeting concluded at 6:30 PM. Page 1 HA2013 \2013043 \WP\NIM\NIM Summary 7 -23 -2014 Pev.docx W W 0 F1 Q Mml d.J h�1 Ff V f� ^C)^' V O N O P-I Z rTry ^^N W W W W AW �! rW F-1 A �I El O �7 CA U'AA 6 cs N �( cs a W �T7 N c M aJ s U C Q O .0 o 0 N y i s a, >a L !Z Q O �O r 41 N N dl aJ O b > O a O u O O CU Q a a O fa Ln ? {n L aJ L O aj Ln in N ..Q ror CD L CU O L O Y N >• O f= E � � C L � to O = _ O s Y � Q U � U N � a U o "° N .6 C C Oy _ 'u •fi5 S?. �E� CDL L y m p cca O S' °A a ayi L a' • aJ L (/J Q a U O 41 s0 LEI! L) y L N D �? O � L L a O m a O U a O V i Q >+ o U ca i O N Ln (a L dpi Ln En =o N a U C L Q N i $ GJ t-+ O cars IM 0 a L Q CD O C � � (Ij L QJ s U U 0 b 0 N m R 0 M O w, v yL Lh g t' \V V ^ pper. � '�, fv JJ ,(� � (� 1 � \. • � � �. i ise vi tii i Ai �%•i i ii CD C� m v � v V d V l P-A NZ U 0 b 0 N m R 0 M O w, L) z W �0 H O O O V W �I F-i W 7V F� f r-1 O O O M r1 O N L ' W w fF^� f� O F� N u O O C�..q) `'J r-i O N H w A W 7� a �i W V �7 �5 H P4 O to � a N (, r� \ W A� N of 9 o� N N n� t-+- N amen C U C O o C s g a L C ++ C O o s° Lm a E Q. m O o E v C v s - N C ++ m m °' o co moo$ o � 't4 vi >- N L L 4i Vo- s � N N •� N CU r- .2 = A O L O N u. s c c a >°. ° o E o 41 an 40, c S c s Y v o 41 -0 N -C o �N U >, f4 C. ;. d U N 3 E t+ 1 'F N r O "t3 C C L C G] 't6 Q U 47 d �Uo CL to; ra O +, l7A O H Q C 4J 3 a > o Ud +' d ` H U T y T p U C U N L f7 u O C o 3 O U 7 O U 0) CL >` O U m i 0 N •Q N 444-• 41 :3 > m N w y u n L s -C N C O i• N 7 U C L O y C N Y O f6 t Y i+ aJ 4_ E o L QJ 4'.. -is fa � L L s b W L W V ppQ 'tl V L N L 7 J 4 % J� W VINCENTIAN PUDA/GMPA NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Date and Time: July 17, 2014 at 5:30pm ]Location: Collier County South Regional Library, Meeting Room "A" 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida 34113 Existing Approved Uses: The site presently zoned PUD and allows for approximately 8 acres of commercial uses including hotel, retail office and personal services uses. The PUD also allows for residential development at 4 units per acre, and Adult Living Facilities (ALFs). Summary of Proposed Changes: GMPA: The applicant is requesting to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map to create the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict. This Subdistrict contains approximately 30.68± acres, and is located on the south/west side of U.S. 41 /Tamiami Trail East, as shown below. cPUD �, PUD EETOPS PUD WENTWC ESTATE PUD \TRAVEL TRAILER PARK/X G3 I M \ /IOTORIA EALLS Page 1 of 4 HA2013\2013043 \WP \N1MWincentian NIM Handout 7- 17- 2014.docx The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow for a mixture of neighborhood or community commercial development; residential development; and other employment generating uses such as corporate headquarters. The Subdistrict is intended to include commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and potentially allow for office uses that would provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. In addition, the Subdistrict provides the alternative of residential or mixed use development. The property may be developed entirely as commercial, entirely as residential, or as a mixture of residential and commercial uses. The Subdistrict allows all those commercial uses allowed in the C -1 through C -5 zoning districts, both by right and as conditional uses, with the exception of the following prohibited uses: 1. Pawn shops (5932), 2. Adult book stores, adult video rental or sales, or any other use that is defined as a "sexually oriented business" in the Collier County Code of Laws, 26 -151 et seq., 3. Animal specialty services except veterinary (0752); except outside kenneling and dog grooming are permitted, 4. Automatic merchandising machine operators (5962), 5. Correctional institutions (9223), 6. Crematories (7261), 7. Farm product raw materials (5153 - 5159), 8. Fishing, commercial (0912- 0919), 9. Fuel dealers (5983 - 5989), 10. Homeless shelters and soup kitchens, 11. Installation or erection of building equipment contractors (1796), 12. Local and suburban passenger transportation (4131- 4173), 13. Marinas (4493 & 4499) , 14. Motor vehicle dealers, used only (5521), 15. Miscellaneous personal services, not elsewhere classified (7299), Coin operated service machine operations, Comfort station operation, Escort service, Locker rental, Massage parlors (except those employing licensed therapists), Rest room operation, Tattoo parlors, Turkish baths, Wedding chapels, privately operated, 16. Power laundries, family and commercial (7211), and 17. Transfer stations (4212). The Subdistrict includes the following additional use restrictions and intensity standards: 1. Commercial uses will be limited to a maximum of 250,000 square feet, a hotel (max. FAR 0.6 and a maximum of 150 rooms), and an assisted living facility (max. FAR 0.6). 2. Residential will be limited to a maximum density of 11.74 units /acre, calculated on the gross acreage of the project, inclusive of any commercial portions, for a maximum of 360 dwelling units. 3. A single (one) automobile service station may be permitted anywhere within the Subdistrict. In lieu of an automobile service station, accessory fuel pumps in association with a grocery store or membership warehouse type facility may be permitted. Page 2 of 4 H:\2013\2013043 \WP\NIM\Vincentian NIM Handout 7- 17- 2014.doex 4. A recreational site for the use of the adjacent RV or mobile home parks may be developed on a maximum of 3 acres. The recreational site.may include facilities such as a pool, clubhouse, and tennis courts. PUDA: A PUD Amendment has been submitted as a companion to the GMP Amendment explained above. The PUD Amendment is necessary to establishes zoning on the property that allows the uses and includes the limitations contained in the in the Vincentian Subdistrict, including the following (see the PUD Master Plan attached: • A 4.5± acre preserve on site located so as to buffer the adjacent residential uses from the project development; • A 41: acre lake, also located so as to buffer the adjacent properties from the development; • All required landscape buffers; Page 3 of 4 H:\2013\2013043 \WP \NMI \Vincentian NMI Handout 7- 17- 2014.docx �al�8 Vegetation arTd Open Space -ONING .lr't'n Native V C 51 Vegetation -'= 29.77 j A GAS Min On-site Native Preservation Re WHISTLER'S STATIO'N 20.TYPE "D" (Commercial) COVE —PUD 29.77 x 15%= 4.46 Ac. LAN DSCAPE Min On-site Native Preservation Req'd (Residential oir Mixed-Us6) VACANT BUFFER- 29.77 x 2 5% = 7.44 Ac. Min Open Space Req'd.(Cbmm. orMixed-.Use) 30.68 X 30% 9.20 Ac' .Min Open Space ReqQlred-(ResideTjtW) 4p z 30.68'x60% 18:41 Ac 20' TYPE "D LANDSCAPE �TRAI L ACRES 0 BUFFER ¢0�.� N ING BUFFER 0 ��` �\ zoo N. TRACT 11mull 10' TYP E "XI EXISTING 15! U.E. LANDSCAPE MIXED USE BUFFER EXISTING 15'U.E. B -15' TYPE "B" 15.' TYPE 11 B" -V LANDSCAPE LANDS -1 -'-OA PE BUFFER. BUFFER Denotes Location f,,Rd/qqested Deviations. Deviations iM cc r 1 1 11 Throughoutthe PUD. TRACT 17 PRESERVE Land Use Summary Description Abrdabej Percent M xed-Use(Traat-MU) 22.05 71.9% Lake (Tract L) 4.17 -61/i Preserve (Tract P) 4.46 14.5% TOTAL 30.68 100.-W- MaAmunn Dwollibg Units- 360 Commercial Uses: Maximum of25O.00O SF, And/or a hotel at 0.6 FAR, maximum of 160 rooms, And /or an ALF at 0.6 FAR TRACT LAKE EXISTING 15"U.E: EXISTING* 5'U. E. --7 TRAILAGRES R$F-4 ZONING .0 0- < z< ON (!) 'Coz p 6 Z L 0 0 z W W z 0 2-- N 0 0' Z W 5 OD boa CL 95a,bcoreWay VINCENTIAN MPUD —rX-10-W. "-d-1/2014 ff11AW- h(K D679 01/2014 19M Naples,, F�L. 34110. Phone, (239) 2.54--'260Q . MASTER. PLAN R IP.9. 'AO'1/26.14 — HOLE'MQNTIE�S gri da Qerlfflcata of Abthoizaton No.1772 B T EXHIIC NL AALE -Hw 1 4LE %TT20w 06/iS'/2014, Page 4 of 4 H:\2013\2013043\WP\NIMWincentian NEq Handout 7-17-2014.docx TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Naples, Florida July 17, 2014 The following Neighborhood information Meeting was held at the Collier County South RPninml I ihrarv- 9065 L ely cultural Parkway. Naples, Florida, commencing at 5:30 p.m. Present: Christopher Shucart, Developer Bob Mulhere, Hole- Montes Key Deselem, Planner Corby Schmidt, county Rich Yovanovich, Esquire ALSO PRESENT: Approximately 25 attendees. TAKEN BY: CHERIE' R. NOTTINGHAM Certified Professional court Reporter Gregory Court Reporting, Inc. 2650 Airport Road South Naples, Florida 34112 (239) 774 -4414 1 2 3 5 6 7 E'12 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MULHERE: Okay, can you hear me okay? Good. My name is Bob Mulhere. First of all, thank you for coming. I know everybody has a busy schedule and I'm glad you showed some interest and that you're able to attend. My name is Bob Mulhere. I work for a company called Hole Montes. It's a civil engineering and planning company with offices in Naples for, I don't know, since 1966. The company's been here a long time. My client is Chris Shucart, and Chris owns the property that we're going to talk about. And here comes Rich Yovanovich right now. And Rich is our land use attorney on the project. we'll introduce him. Oh, Rich Yovanovich, welcome, welcome. Also here tonight from the county, Kay Deselem, who is the planner reviewing the project, zoning elements of the project. And Corby is the comprehensive planning staff member who will be reviewing one of the other petitions we have, which is comprehensive planning. Corby Schmidt. And then they can answer questions that maybe I -- while I 2 3 1 probably would try to answer them, some 2 questions are better for the staff. so I'll 3 defer to them as it comes up. 4 By way of very quick background, I worked 5 for the county for almost 15 years. 14 years. 6 1 left the county in 2001, so I've been in the 7 private sector doing -- I've continued to do a i pn"I, -Pnt- t- io mini int-w -n -{'Arms of pl anni rin 9 consultation for other counties in southwest 10 Florida, preparing land use plans, but 1 also 11 work for private sector clients too, and that's 12 what I'm doing here tonight. 13 so these neighborhood information 14 meetings, I don't know if you've been to one 15 before, really, developers who are smart 16 wouldn't need a rule to require them to do 17 this, they would do it anyway. Because nobody 18 would really want to be surprised getting to a 19 public hearing and find out that there's a 20 roomful of people in opposition, when perhaps 21 simply having a meeting before the hearing 22 would allow the developer to explain what he's 23 asking for, allow the neighbors to understand 24 what's being asked for and allow the developer 25 to hear any concerns and then think about how 1 2 3 4 0 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they might adjust and react to those concerns. But a while back now, 20 -- maybe in 2000 whatever, the county, rewrote this requirement for a neighborhood information meeting. so you have to have this neighborhood information meeting and you have to have it prior to the public hearings starting. And you have to wait until the staff has had a chance to review the project a little bit. You can't have it real early because things can change during the review process. so kind of falls in after the staff has done a substantive review but before the public hearings occur. we are asking for -- oh, by the way, this is Cherie'. she's a court reporter. The county has us record these. we used to just record them on a tape recorder. The county's gotten a little more particular about it, and z can understand why. It's a little bit harder for some staff member to have to listen to a crackly old tape recorder and try to understand what's going on. Then they say we're not going to listen to it anymore, you can listen to them, but want a summary. And we said, hey, this is kind of hard. so Cherie' will record ii NJ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the meeting, I'll try to remember to speak slowly and she'll tell me if I don't. And when you ask a question, if you could just say your name and spell it, unless it's smith. we're asking for two types of petitions. The first is a GMP or a comprehensive plan amendment. In Florida every city and county v--v cr)r-t of high level. If you think about it, it's kind of like the constitution for the United states. It sets policies and it says where certain types of development should occur and where certain types of development should not occur, where rural lands are, where agricultural lands are. This land is within the urban area, as you can appreciate. You all know where it is, it's just off U.S. 41, East Naples. so the land is designated urban. It does not, though -- and it has zoning on it right now. It's zoned PUD. And that's a planned unit development. And a planned unit development is sort of like a document that sets zoning on a particular piece of land. You could have straight zoning which in the Land S 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Development code provides a list of uses and development standards, or you can develop your own list of uses and your own standards and go to the Board and get it approved through zoning. And that happened years ago. That's where were the name Vincentian comes from originally. when this was approved it was owned by the Diocese of Venice. And Venice, vincentian, that's where the name comes from. There have been several owners since that point in time, at least two, but the name has been retained. The PUD right now allows residential uses and commercial uses. But it's got limitations. obviously the commercial uses, right now the PUD limits it to about eight acres. obviously if you're going to build commercial and you're limited to eight acres on an approximately 30 and a half acre site, you're going to put that along 41. The residential use is limited to four units an acre. And typically under this PUD and typically the way it was years ago when this got approved, you would calculate that density on everything except the commercial. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 so you wouldn't be able to count it as commercial acres. As my client has owned the land over a period of time and looked for opportunities to find either a partner, a joint venture or an individual interested in the land to develop it for either the commercial use or the rpS i rip ti a l i j -,p _ it- hpr;imp clear th.;;f- 'rhp rp were issues with what was allowed in terms of the marketplace. The commercial use sort of drives a different -- kind of a strip pattern of development. it doesn't allow for flexibility of design, doesn't allow for a larger commercial use if somebody was interested in one, doesn't allow for something unique in terms of a mixture of uses, residential and commercial. And because of the cost of the land and the small size, this project does not lend itself and therefore there's been no market for low density development such as single - family. Before -- on 20 acres -- I'll go to questions in just a minute. UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Can you repeat that? 7 1 2 3 4 5 [9 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MULHERE: Yeah. I said because of the relative small size and you're talking about in the neighborhood of 80 or 90 dwelling units, this does not lend itself to a single - family development. You don't have enough land to amenitize (sic) it properly and sell it at a market rate. -therefore there's been no buyers. -there's been a lot of lookers but no buyers at that low density. Frankly, if there's been any kind of attraction for the property, it's been folks that might want to look at a higher kind of a density such as an affordable housing project or an adult living facility, which wouldn't be affordable but would enjoy a higher number of units. we don't propose to develop it under an affordable housing scenario, getting a density bonus for that. As you know, there's already a pretty significant affordable housing development across the street. we would like to see this developed at market rate and we're willing to commit to that as part of our proposal. so what we're asking for in the Growth 0 1 Management Plan is to allow for up to 360 2 dwelling units on the property and up to 3 250,000 square feet of retail commercial, or a 4 mixture of the two. 5 Now, I want you to understand that does 6 not mean that we would be able to do all that 7 commercial plus all that residential. Because 9 likes to use to limit development, they want -- 10 they understand the need for flexibility in the 11 marketplace. They want to give flexibility. 12 But the way that we're able to -- that 13 they're able to regulate the degree of 14 intensity, the amount that you can develop, and 15 their concern is traffic. so you do a traffic 16 study and then they limit you to no more than a 17 certain number of trips at peak hour. And I 18 don't know that exact number, but there is a 19 limit. And that limit, whatever mixture we 20 use, if we do some residential, some 21 commercial, all commercial, all residential, 22 however we do it, we can't exceed that trip 23 count, that certain number of trips. 24 In order to have these changes occur, we 25 first have to amend the comprehensive plan. 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 And that's a two -step process. The first step is what's called transmittal. we have a hearing date for August 21st for the comprehensive plan for transmittal of this -- for the Planning Commission, before the Collier County Planning Commission, and then the Board would be for October, I believe. Transmittal is -- gives a chance for the Planning Commission and the Board to take a look at what we're proposing, determine whether they support it, determine if there's any changes that they feel are necessary, and then work with us at that hearing. And if they approve it, they would then transmit it to the state Department of Economic Opportunity. used to be the Department of Community Affairs, but under the current Governor that all got changed a few years ago and now it's Department of Economic Opportunity. so they'll transmit it. That's why it's called a transmittal. The state will look at it. If they don't have any objections within 30 days, they don't have to say -- as long as they don't have objections, 30 days go by and we don't hear anything from them, we'll know by the fact that 10 11 1 they haven't said anything that there are no 2 objections. 3 we can then work on making any changes 4 that the Board discusses during transmittal and 5 then getting final review of the zoning 6 document, which is the Puy, which will be a 7 companion to the Growth Management Plan q nw.�,.- .,1,,....,a- �.Y,. -1 +{ -..�� ^•; � l n!� �-�nai -L��r t� i-�a 9 adoption hearing. 10 And if we go to the Board in October for 11 transmittal, we're probably talking in the 12 range of February for the adoption hearings, 13 which would also be the zoning. You can't 14 rezone the property inconsistent with the 15 comprehensive planning, so we have to go 16 through that process either simultaneous or 17 first. In this case it will be simultaneous. 18 in fact, they'll actually approve or hear the 19 comp. plan on the same agenda, but they'll 20 approve it first and approve the zoning after. 21 Because you have to do it in that order. 22 I'm sure there's a number of things I 23 forgot. Let me just go over the handout rather 24 quickly so that -- you probably haven't had a 25 chance to digest it, and if you look at it and 1 2 3 &I ., 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 have questions. what I've given you is a summary of what -- of the changes that we're proposing. And we are expressly listing 17 uses in our Growth Management Plan Amendment that will be prohibited uses. so I just want to be clear, because people sometimes miss that word, that this list of 17 uses here will be expressly prohibited in our Growth Management Plan Amendment. And then the next paragraph has some additional restrictions, and I talked to you about those restrictions in terms of the maximum square footage and so on, so forth. so I'm sure you're going to have some questions tonight. And we'll try our best to respond to those questions and listen to any concerns that you may have. I want to go over and just take a minute to go over the PUD master plan with you. But I also want to say that if you do have any questions, you can either call me -- I left my business cards in the car but I'll go get them at the end of the meeting, I'll bring them back -- or you can call Kay at the county or 12 13 1 Corby schmidt and we'll try to answer any 2 questions that you have. if you got a notice 3 of this, my number is in that too. 4 so this is an aerial. I'm sure some of 5 you had a chance to take a look at it. It 6 shows you where the property is right here. 7 Hitching Post and Trail Acres. R TM is the Pun mi a�Ster nlAn_ T%1prp's a 9 couple of I think important points I want to 10 make. 11 we've strategically located -- the county 12 requires that a developer preserve a certain 13 percent of vegetation on the site; 15 percent 14 is commercial, 25 percent is residential or 15 mixed use. we've located that to buffer us 16 from the residential development. The county 17 only requires a 15 -foot landscape buffer 18 between these uses, but what we've done is 19 built that up by building our preserve in here. 20 And we've already had the discussions with 21 staff and they're supportive of the location of 22 the preserve. And I think we've actually had a 23 preserve that's actually gotten jurisdictional 24 permits. 25 This is over a 100 -foot width in this 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 location. so we're going to have a much more robust preserve than folks typically have for a 50 -foot landscape buffer. we still have to provide that landscape buffer, but in addition we'll have the preserve. And on this side next to the Hitching Post, we've located -- there's some preserves in here and then we've located our lake here, so there's a lot of separation pushing these uses closer to Southwest Boulevard and Tamiami Trail away from the residential. one more thing, and I'll go right to questions. This right here is the Hitching Post Plaza, so we have commercial right here. okay, I think that's it. I'm.open for questions. Yes, ma'am. MS. KELLY: what was on the -- THE COURT REPORTER: May I have your name, please. MR. MULHERE: wait, what was your name, please? MS. KELLY: I'm sorry. Rosemary Kelly. 25 1 K- E- L -L -Y. 15 1 How many feet is that tract by the lake? 2 Because it's backing right up. 3 MR. MULHERE: This lake right here? 4 MS. KELLY: Yes. 5 MR. MULHERE: This is approximately -- 6 MS. KELLY: Not there. 7 MR. MULHERE: Hang on. I'm going to give R ern! a norcnar-t -iNfP _ Thi c i q -- onp i nrh = a Q _ - - -. 9 100 feet out here. So this is maybe 120 or 150 10 feet, 130 feet. so if you look at that, you're 11 at least 200 foot. In this case, I don't know, 12 400 feet. 13 MR. SHUCART: Maybe not that the far. 14 MR. MULHERE: well, one, two, three, 300 15 feet. 16 MS. KELLY: You're misunderstanding the 17 question. 18 MR. MULHERE: Oh, I'm sorry. 19 MS. KELLY: The question is, I see the 20 Hitching Post. 21 MR. MULHERE: Yes. 22 MS. KELLY: How far from the Hitching Post 23 is the barrier to the lake? 24 MR. MULHERE: You mean where does the lake 25 start? M 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. KELLY: Thank you. MR. MULHERE: Yeah, I'm sorry. That's -- well, this is 15. MS. KELLY: Less than 25 feet -- MR. MULHERE: Yeah, this is 15 right there, so I'd say 25, 30 feet. MS. KELLY: Do you realize that we're in a flood zone? MR. MULHERE: Yeah. That's actually going to help. MS. KELLY: Help you or help us? MR. MULHERE: No, it's going to help you. MS. KELLY: How's that going to happen? MR. MULHERE: Presently there is no water management on the site. There's no water. MS. KELLY: I know -- MR. MULHERE: So the South Florida.water Management District permits the site, has already permitted the site, requires us to retain our water on the site. we can't let that water go off our site and onto your property. we have to design this to retain that water at a minimum of a 25 -year storm event. Then you we're allowed -- (inaudible) just like you guys are -- who knows what 16 17 1 happened when you guys got done. But -- 2 MS. KELLY: But this is within the flood 3 zone currently. 4 MR. MULHERE: Yeah, everybody's in the 5 flood zone. 6 MS. KELLY: The middle of 41 -- 7 MR. MULHERE: You're talking about the 8 cnaSi -al high ha7a _rd area 9 MS. KELLY: Right. 10 MR. MULHERE: But that has to do with 11 hurricane evacuation. It does not include 12 rainfall amounts and flood. That has to do 13 with hurricane evacuation. what we're talking 14 about -- I thought you were talking about a 15 rain event causing water to rise. 16 So this will be designed. It will be 17 better. You will not have any flooding from 18 this property coming onto your property. None. 19 There's going to be a berm. There will be a 20 berm. You won't have any water. There's no -- 21 MS. KELLY: Did you walk that property? 22 MR. MULHERE: Oh, yeah, I've been on the 23 property. 24 MS. KELLY: It's pretty soggy. 25 MR. MULHERE: I know. That's -- trust me, 1 2 tz 4 5 6 7 NE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you are going to be -- MS. KELLY: I trust you if you want to move that lake over somewhere else. MR. MULHERE: Well, it's already permitted in that location. It's already permitted where that jurisdiction is. South Florida water Management and Corps of Engineers had to review this and they did. Now, you can have -- it won't be square like that. It will be -- MS. KELLY: I'm not worried about that side. MR. MULHERE: No, I understand. This lake there helps you. The water's going to go into the lake, it's not going to go across the street. That actually helps you. I know it's maybe a little hard to -- MS. KELLY: Yeah, it is, to comprehend. MR. MULHERE: It's true. I don't have a civil engineer here, but I'll put you in touch with him, if you want to talk to him. So any other questions? Must be a couple other questions. MR. WESTERBELT: Steve Westerbelt. THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry? IN 19 1 MR. MULHERE: Westerbelt. 2 MR. WESTERBELT: Westerbelt. 3 MR. MULHERE: W- E- S- T- E- R- B- E- L -D -T. 4 MR. WESTERBELT: No D. But the D is 5 common. 6 The entrances off the southwest Boulevard, 7 the arrows there, there will be mostly like two O i— �n�vsll J!? kA! :. A .... �.. �� r..s e•� "'0J ' —i = -- "s v.. =� �__ -_ �. .mss" 9 MR. MULHERE: Yeah. Yes. 10 MR. WESTERBELT: Or not at that -- 11 MR. MULHERE: Yes, and the reason for that 12 is if -- if some of this is developed as 13 commercial and some of the back is developed as 14 residential, you'll want to have a separate 15 entrance for the commercial. You wouldn't want 16 people having to come all the way back for the 17 commercial and residential to have separate -- 18 MR. WESTERBELT: Okay. And then in the 19 area that's commercial to commercial where the 20 Hitching Post Plaza is right there, will that 21 be walled off or is it like flow through? 22 MR. MULHERE: It won't be walled off. But 23 there is a requirement for a landscape buffer 24 and there's a requirement to permit -- the 25 Water Management permit requires a berm. So 1 2 3 M 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you're going to have a berm and a landscape buffer. MR. WESTERBELT: I just wanted to know if the commercial tract will flow through. MR. MULHERE: You know, it's a very good point, and that's a very good suggestion. And the county, I don't know what -- Chris, I'm not sure how that -- what that's like right here. MR. SHUCART: Well, there's a large pump station -- MR. MULHERE: Yeah, I think there's -- MR. SHUCART: -- in that area. SO you'd have to go -- you'd have to go back around there, sort of, which -- MR. MULHERE: It's a really -- the county usually would like to see that (inaudible) they pop from one commercial location to another. They can walk. MR. WESTERBELT: Right. MR. MULHERE: But it's a good question. I think there's utility improvements in the way. MR. WESTERBELT: Pump station. MR. MULHERE: Yes, sir. MR. LOVETT: Vernon Lovett. L- O- V- E -T -T. 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 How many acres would Tract L actually be? MR. MULHERE: Oh, I got that right here. Tract L is 4.17. MR. LOVETT: Okay. On four, on page -- Item 4 on Page 4, it says recreational site for uses adjacent to Rv park or mobile home park may be developed on a maximum of three acres. NAP RAI 11 UE70 • v��l� i-h�t � � a nnnri question. MR. LOVETT: okay, show us where that three acres is. MR. MULHERE: First of all, that's a good question. over the years there has been some discussion about maybe -- MR. LOVETT: we live there. MR. MULHERE: You live there, okay, good. so it would be probably in this area right here. MR. LOVETT: There's a pumping station there. MR. MULHERE: Yeah, on the other side of it, though. You know, we'd have to -- I think you can come around this way. There's the ability to create access. it can't be where the lake is so, you know, we do have lake views 21 1 2 M 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 from that recreation tract. MR. LOVETT: So pumping station will not be relocated. MR. MULHERE: No. MR. LOVETT: So if we were to ever in the immediate future decide to purchase a little bit of that, would it have frontage on 41? MR. MULHERE: It's conceivable that you could. I just say that because the state has to permit that. That's a state road and state permits. MR. LOVETT: Okay, so the biggest problem with this kind of stuff is -- MR. MULHERE: They'd be concerned about the distance between these two, so you'd probably have to share that access if you wanted to share it. MR. LOVETT: But we don't have direct access from -- like riding golf carts. Because the pumping station is -- MR. MULHERE: So I see what you're saying. so somehow when we design it we need to create a reasonable point of ingress and egress between the two properties. MR. LOVETT: we own some property there 22 23 1 that's used as a maintenance storage there. 2 It's got water tanks. 3 will that be moved? 4 MR. MULHERE: I think we could design 5 it -- look, I'm not telling you that this lake 6 couldn't shift down. The permitting process 7 allows you to make minor modifications. So if 9 do it. But you still have to go through the 10 process. You have to go over there and show 11 them and, you know, do all that kind of stuff. 12 MR. LOVETT: Because I think we envisioned 13 if we did this pump house thing, it would be 14 about where the tract is, there would only be a 15 notch in that property there. 16 MR. MULHERE: Here? 17 MS. KELLY: Up above. 18 MR. LOVETT: A little bit -- yeah. 19 MR. MULHERE: well, I mean, we can cross 20 that bridge when we come to it. I mean, it's 21 not impossible to modify the permit and change 22 the configuration. I mean, it's not an act of 23 God. we can do it, it's just everything takes 24 time and money. 25 MR. LOVETT: can you give us a time 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 schedule that you think is reasonable for this project to start developing? MR. MULHERE: Yeah. Since we don't really have an end user at this point and, as I said, that's part of the reason for going through this process. It's an expensive process and time consuming, so I just want everybody to appreciate that it's costing a lot of money to go through this. Nobody would do it if they didn't feel like they have to. It's sort of like having your fingernails pulled out. But having said that, I mean, I would defer to you, Chris. would you like to hopefully within a couple of years have -- two years? Because it's going to take us another six or seven months to get through the -- MR. LOVETT: The point of my question is for us to lobby our board we have to have some kind of time frame. MR. MULHERE: We got it, we got it. I would say two years minimum. unless -- you know, the market's so crazy out there right now. I mean, the demand is very, very high. But it's all over the place. MR. LOVETT: So you share our recreational W 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 facilities? MR. MULHERE: Right. MR. LOVETT: And we're in a position to where that's uncertain -- MR. MULHERE: Right. MR. LOVETT: -- as you what's going to happen there for us. we would like to have -- nnn nni.� i�rnr. v /.�G *"4 -11- you might need an acre and a half. MR. LOVETT: It's a question about how much money we want to borrow and whether our 300 people would vote for it. So we've got a few -- MR. MULHERE: Well, we put it in there, so you guys let us know. Mrs. Kelly? MS. KELLY: Thank you. what would be the time frame if we were to entertain something like that? would we be able to keep it undeveloped or does it have to be totally developed? say you negotiate with Chris for a piece of land in the future. MR. MULHERE: No, you could buy the land. You don't have to develop it. MS. KELLY: Even though it's developing 25 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 all around us? MR. MULHERE: Yeah, the use is permitted. MR. SHUCART: Yeah, there would be some coordination between the stormwater -- MR. MULHERE: Yeah. But, I mean, you don't have to develop it right away. MS. KELLY: Just sit on it? MR. MULHERE: I'm just saying, you have to raise the money. You don't have to develop it. This -- you could take a look at it, find out what's the elevation. Any other questions? Yes, sir. MR. GRIMES: Joe Grimes. I notice that -- THE COURT REPORTER: Okay, I'm sorry, I'm just not hearing him. MR. GRIMES: (Inaudible.) And then you turn it back and it says service stations and fuel. so which is it? MR. MULHERE: well, fuel dealers, if you look at the sic Code, that's something different than service stations. Fuel dealers is a larger industrial kind of fuel dealer. You wouldn't know that from looking at that, 26 27 1 but it's based on that Sic code, that number 2 that's after it, 5983 to 5989. 3 Although that sounds like it might be a 4 service station, it's not. one service station 5 is permitted, or we're requesting to have one 6 service station permitted. And service 7 stations are permitted right now. 9 MP C -RTMFq - Tc that with fl IPl ? = a 9 MR. MULHERE: Yes. Gas station. 10 MR. GRIMES: It's a direct opposite of 11 what this says (inaudible). 12 MR. MULHERE: No, it's not the opposite, 13 because the prohibited use is not -- where it 14 says fuel dealer, that's not a gas station. 15 That is an industrial -- 16 MR. GRIMES: Jowl? 17 MR. MULHERE: Pardon? 18 MR. GRIMES: Jowl (phonetic). 19 MR. MULHERE: See, it's like a big -- like 20 Evans Oil. 21 MR. GRIMES: All right, I understand. 22 MR. MULHERE: So that's what that refers 23 to. But one gas station. 24 MR. GRIMES: I have another question. 25 MR. MULHERE: Yes. 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 MR. GRIMES: when I read through this, somehow it was just kind of like listening to the news when we hear somebody speaking in the Congress. And what all does mixed use -- could the whole thing be commercial? MR. MULHERE: That's a good question. Yeah, it could. The flexibility, the way we wrote it, we put the maximum flexibility, is it could either be all residential, all commercial or a mixture of both. A few years ago East Naples Civic Association was looking at the corridor and doing some design work and they had a plan developed, never got adopted, didn't go anywhere, just was done. This particular piece, because of its -- there's a lot of small -- there's a lot of 10,000 square foot parcels and 20,000 square foot C -3, C -4 parcels. This is 30 acres. And it's not 30 acres of developable land, but it's still 20 or 22 acres of developable land. That he's makes it unique. Plus it's at the intersection here. So the East Naples Civic Association identified this, they called it Navaho Trail -+ 29 1 mixed use node or commercial node. 2 Now, as I said, it doesn't have any weight 3 in the government. it was just them planning. 4 They were just looking to try to make things 5 better at East Naples. 6 A lot of new things have happened now. 7 Now with all the development that's occurring 9 1 rP not nn to SPP a !or of interest in hi ri na 9 opportunities. That's whys we want the 10 flexibility. we don't really know right now 11 exactly which way the market's going. one 12 thing we know, we know the commissioner in the 13 district and other folks, there's a concern 14 that East Naples has enough affordable housing. 15 And we're not asking for that. 16 we're even willing to restrict our 17 residential use to a marked degree so we can 18 give people a sense of comfort that we're not 19 asking for that. 20 MR. GRIMES: I think this is the third 21 meeting I went to on that property. Nothing 22 happens. That's the way it's been. It was 23 commercial and then assisted living. 24 MR. MULHERE: Yeah, it was assisted 25 living. That's how -- 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 (inaudible. Two people speaking at once.) MR. GRIMES: -- because I had to cut my melaleuca trees and they didn't. You know what I mean? MR. MULHERE: Yeah, yeah. MR. GRIMES: But I just was concerned about whether it could be full commercial or not on that -- MR. MULHERE: Yeah, there's a lot of the exotics on that piece there. That will be cleaned up. MR. GRIMES: I know, but that was just a joke. MR. MULHERE: Were you developing the property? MR. GRIMES: MR. MULHERE: MR. GRIMES: MR. MULHERE: clear the exotics? Pardon? Were you developing it? No, I owned property. And they made you go and MR. GRIMES: They wouldn't let me cut down all those trees. I had to cut down only the exotics. MR. MULHERE: Yes. By hand. MR. GRIMES: And every time a limb fell on 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the ground I had a And it went on for MR. MULHERE: MR. GRIMES: MR. MULHERE: code enforcement violation. a long time. It isn't easy. Vo, no, it's not. Yes? MS. KELLY:. if you develop this as residential, would say you describe what you 1,1jo; U1 d nlyi- in thpre? MR. MULHERE: It would be multi - family, marketing multi- family or townhomes. Maybe townhomes. Depends on, you know, what the -- MS. KELLY: How many stories high? MR. MULHERE: Right now I think we can go 50 feet. MS. KELLY: And if it's assisted living? MR. MULHERE: Assisted living is a little bit higher. MR. SHUCART: I think they're all the same. MS. KELLY: what about hotel? MR. MULHERE: You know what, I don't -- how many units? MS. KELLY: No, how high. MR. MULHERE: How high. Let me look, because I don't want to answer something that 31 1 2 3 isn't accurate. Just give me a second, i have that document here. i have it here. okay, building height. Here we are. it's 4 1 50 feet. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. KELLY: Fifty feet. So it's all about the same. MR. MULHERE: Yeah. i just wanted to make sure i didn't misspeak. MS. KELLY: And where would that -- MR. MULHERE: Well, they're not going to want to be invisible, so -- MS. KELLY: That would probably face 41. MR. MULHERE: Yeah, if a hotel went there, they would want exposure. And, you know, that's kind of why i said we knew that if there was going to be any concerns it would come from folks living close by. That's why the design was to create a good separation. MS. KELLY: Well, we can swim over and meet you every now and then. MR. MULHERE: But you'll have a landscape buffer here too, and we'll make sure it's substantial. MS. KELLY: i'll be over there watching. MR. MULHERE: That's good. You keep us 32 1 2 3 M 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 honest. You had a question? MR. WEST: Cary West. You say that you'd be willing to restrict affordable housing. At what point in this process will that come into play where that actually goes on paper? nno PAj 11 uGQG' cn rl 01iaS 'inn _ MR. WEST: Are we someplace where we need to voice our concerns that we don't want to see more of that, or is this way ahead of the game? MR. MULHERE: No, you're not ahead of it. This hearing that's coming up is when we intent to introduce that. So that's the 21st of August. we're going to put the language in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. MS. KELLY: Is that an open meeting? MR. MULHERE: Yes. And you should -- if you're within 500 feet, you'll all get noticed. And you'll see some signs on the property and there'll be an ad in the paper. MR. ZENZ: That's it, 500 feet? That's all you're -- MR. MULHERE: 500 feet of the boundary. So anybody that's within 500 feet of this -- 33 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 it's larger in the rural area, it's 1,000 feet in the rural area because, you know, lower density involved. well, that's why they do signs and the newspaper ad too. Yes, sir? MR. HENDERS: Jerry Henders, Trail Acres. would our access (phonetic) be the preserve and /or lake or would it be restricted to people in the development? MR. MULHERE: That's going to be a stormwater lake so, i mean, I wouldn't eat anything caught in it. You can catch it and throw it back. And as far as the preserve goes, if it's developed as residential, perhaps a developer would want to try to use some of it as an amenity and they would put in some boardwalks. But most of the time with something of that size, that's not the case and it's just separate. They put some signs up, this is a preserve. Because the agencies are very particular and sensitive about having it get degraded by people using it. A larger preserve, somebody would spend the money to do it because they consider it to 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 be an amenity itself, the project. so I'm not saying somebody couldn't do a multi - family project and put a little thing down to the lake. I mean, that could happen. That could happen. Yes. UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Chris is the owner of the nrnnarty or S hQ tha -- MR. MULHERE: Chris is the owner. MR. SHUCART: Yeah, I'm one of the owners. MR. WESTGATE: Are you willing -- are you partnering with a developer? Have you thought about developing it yourself, or what are your visions -- what are your visions for the property? MR. SHUCART: Yeah, our visions are as of right now we don't have a lot of concrete definitive plans. we want to first get through the entitlement process and understand what we have as far as a way of development. we are looking at some joint venture commercial developments. we're looking at a number of different multi - family developments. we may end up selling the site. so there's a possibility of that as well too. So at this 35 1 2 3 M 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 point I can't really give you a great answer. we're looking at a lot of different avenues. MR. WESTGATE: Are you a current developer in the East Naples area? MR. SHUCART: Yeah, we actually own the shopping center right next door to the property. UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: MR. WESTGATE: So you have a vested interest in East Naples. MR. SHUCART: We have a vested interest not only in East Naples but in this particular corridor. The better this particular property is developed, the better it's going to enhance our property next door as well. we also have an interest in Port of the islands Marina, which I still consider East Naples, but -- so the better East Naples is, the better even Port of the Islands will be affected by it. MR. WESTGATE: So you can understand the concerns of the -- I don't know where you live, but you can understand or share the same concerns as possibly the people that live within this immediate area of the -- whatever W 37 1 is going to be developed on the piece of 2 property. And the limits to traffic, the type 3 of housing or type of commercial. 4 And had you ever envisioned building or 5 selling it to a developer that would build a 6 multi - family, low- income housing facility or 7 deal with somebody such as Habitat and develop 4±- a.- knkrn u +hj-E -n-- .1 1.01ter► it infin Wkpt th.ov -- 9 MR. SHUCART: Absolutely not. I don't 10 think that's really the -- I don't think that's 11 the highest and best use for this particular 12 site. As Bob had mentioned, we're going to 13 write into the documents that there is market 14 rate housing not to allow an affordable housing 15 component. we don't want to see it, we don't 16 think that that's really the best use for this 17 site. There's better opportunities for it than 18 to have that. 19 MR. WESTGATE: It may be the most 20 profitable for the investor. 21 MR. SHUCART: It's not going to be. 22 Affordable housing doesn't always mean 23 profitable. And with the market the way it is 24 right now, I think there's more profitable ways 25 to go other than affordable housing. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MULHERE: And there's ample -- I mean, you've heard the argument made, but -- and there hasn't been a recent study done. I don't know when the last time there was a study done related to the amount of affordable housing. A few years ago there was one, and it was pretty substantial amount of available affordable housing, in particular in East Naples. so, you know, I don't -- it's tough to get through the process in Collier County. dust in case anybody doesn't know, there's five Commissioners, and in Collier County to get a Comprehensive Plan Amendment approved for a rezone, you need four. MR. WESTGATE: once it's approved a rezone -- MR. MULHERE: It's called a supermajority. MR. WESTGATE: But once it's approved and rezoned, part of that rezoning would allow for, you know 360 -- MR. MULHERE: Well, that's why we're putting language in. MR. SHUCART: That's why we're going to write the language in market rate. MR. WESTGATE: Yeah, I'm not real FAM 1 2 3 4 5 Nlo 7 S2 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 comfortable with that. I'd have to -- MR. MULHERE: Yeah, but that's -- MR. WESTGATE: What's market rate? I mean, the market is -- I mean, an affordable home sells for $140,000. Is that market rate? MR. MULHERE: We can define -- it is defined what's affordable. It's defined by the mmei int- n-F your i nrnmp _ ynl ! knniAt that- vo! i haivp to -- that you can afford to spend on housing. And I don't have the exact formula. MR. SHUCART: You get government subsidies with the affordable housing. I mean, that's part of why people do affordable housing, because of the tax incentives associated with it. And that's the element that brings in the ability to offer low rent, because you get government subsidy on a tax basis. MR. MULHERE: I mean, we understand that concern, and we want to -- MR. WESTGATE: I mean, it's a pretty busy -- it's a pretty busy intersection already. So to add, you know, the density such as that many units, I just don't see that it could handle that much. MR. MULHERE: We've been through the 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 $; 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 WA 23 24 25 traffic analysis and we're okay with the cap that they put it. It may be fewer units and more commercial, it may be all commercial. But there's a cap and it's the number of trips. And they've done the analysis, the county's done the analysis. That's how they arrived at it, that this is what the capacity is, you can only have this number of trips. MR. SHUCART: And also, if there's additional improvements needed at that intersection, there's certain triggers that require improvements to that intersection there. The signal's already there, which has made a big difference. And so if an extra turn lane needs to be added, that has to be our cost. If an extra inbound lane needs to be added, that would be at our cost. And it would have to -- you know, there's additional studies that would have to be done in order to determine if the intersection's going to function properly. MR. MULHERE: Which you do at -- MR. WESTGATE: I hope you share the same value of the homeowners in the area of not putting another whistler's cove on the corner Fi NUM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of southwest Boulevard. MR. SHUCART: 1 100 percent appreciate that. And the local commissioner is adamantly opposed to anything like that. So if you have some other suggestions, I'll defer to Bob and our attorney as far as coming up with some better language to further suggestions. MR. WESTGATE: When Donna Fiala comes back in September from her vacation, we have a meeting set up with some of the other neighbors and myself about how that's going to be and what's going on with that. MR. MULHERE: That's good. Great. UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Because she said that stuff to us before when we had -- (Inaudible. Telephone interruption.) They say things and they go along with the developers. MR. SHUCART: We're open to figuring out a way to bridge that gap as far as writing it in. I'm not sure there's been other developers that's actually written it in before but -- MR. MULHERE: No, that's never happened. MR. SHUCART: -- but Bob can speak to 41 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that. MR. WESTGATE: Because we fought against having Habitat buying out properties and developing a Habitat. MR. MULHERE: You're talking about in the Manor? MR. SHUCART: No, they were purchasing some trailers. MR. WESTGATE: Some? No, a lot. In Trail Acres. They destroyed First and second street. MR. MULHERE: I didn't know that. MR. WESTGATE: There's just no stopping them. You know what I mean? MR. MULHERE: There isn't. Because in that situation there's no legal way. They have the right to go buy them. I think we have to have do this now at the zoning stage. And we may need some -- we may need some guidance in terms of the language. But we're committing to you that we're going to put that in there and we'll figure out the right way to get it in there. MR. SHUCART: Because we believe in the same concept. I mean, that's not what's going to benefit the area and it's not going to WA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 benefit the property next door and it's really not what's needed in the area. we've got -- you know, East Naples finally has some great momentum going again. And it's nice to see the things that are going on in the neighborhood. The Fresh Market and the outbacks and all of those things coming about. n ,P iAiGg7I G -rG Thera' nthp r , Mini know.. property. The gated communities are kind of protected within their gated community as far as home value. But if you're not living in a gated community, you really don't have protection -- MR. MULHERE: You don't, but -- MR. WESTGATE: -- as far as value. So -- MR. MULHERE: A rise in tide, you know, floats all boats. what happens is that over time the market values will increase as East Naples matures and you get a lot of this really nice housing selling. And even then the non -gated communities, you're going to see market values go up. And there's no better way -- MR. WESTGATE: But they always find a way. They always find a way. 43 1 2 3 4 5 on 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MULHERE: well, right now they can do it because if you go in and ask for an affordable housing density bonus, the land costs have gotten so high that they only way you can do that, you can afford to do that, is if you're subsidized. If he had: Man. I didn't know anything about that, which is very hard tort as well. UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Across the road there -- THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, I didn't hear what you said. UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: But we don't want anything more like that. MR. MULHERE: I understand that. MR. WESTGATE: Yeah, that was actually -- that was not supposed to happen. And it did. MR. ZENZ: Because Fiala pushed it. she pushed it. That was when they wanted affordable housing. That's been going on for years. That's what I'm saying, you said she says no. she does. MR. MULHERE: she does to us when we go see her. she's pretty clear. Maybe she changed her mind. .i 45 1 MR. ZENZ: You have Habitat. venetian 2 Falls, which is right next to the Hitching 3 Post. 4 MR. SHUCART: where is the venetian Falls? 5 MR. ZENZ: Right next to Hitching Post on 6 41. 7 MR. MULHERE: I think it's down a ways. Q kAD ?CA17 • T+* v c r4 q6-1- -av-t- i-,In -tip r;nr l4 n 9 station. Down a ways. i think it's called 10 venetian. same thing. They put that through. 11 And then there again, they gave the bonus of 12 letting more people be on that -- those are the 13 smallest lots. whispering cove is the same 14 way, they stuck that in. 15 MR. MULHERE: charlee Estates? It's a 16 Habitat project. 17 MR. ZENZ: Like I said, it's right where 18 you go past the Hitching Post on that big empty 19 lot that's for sale. 20 Ms. KELLY: No, RaceTrac is coming there. 21 RaceTrac gasoline station. 22 MR. ZENZ: No, I know. Once you go past 23 that, you're going more south towards 951. 24 There's a whole big Habitat -- 25 MR. MULHERE: so, you know, again, we 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 understand that. we're willing to put the conditions in there to the best of our ability. we'll work with you and we'll keep you posted. You can communicate with us as we move forward. It's a public meeting on the 21st. You should show up and express your concerns if you have them, you know, with respect to that issue, you know. MR. WEST: Thanks, Chris, we'll be in touch with that. MR. MULHERE: I do want to see if there's any other questions before we close. MR. LOVETT: on 59, correctional institutions, 9223. Does that keep somebody from building a facility that helps felons get back on their feet? UNIDENTIFIED AUDIENCE MEMBER: Halfway houses? MR. MULHERE: You're talking about something like St. Matthews House? MR. LOVETT: Yes. MR. MULHERE: Homeless shelters and soup kitchens are prohibited. MR. LOVETT: But that's -- it's not one of those main things that the idea is -- FA � CE 2 3 4 5 6 7 O 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. KELLY: This is prohibited. MR. LOVETT: That's what I'm saying. Does it prohibit? MR. MULHERE: I would say it does. You're talking about a rehabilitation facility. MR. LOVETT: That's not a place for felons. rehabilitation. MR. LOVETT: Rehabilitation. MR. MULHERE: I don't know if there's anything that specifically works for felons. But this -- MR. LOVETT: It was just a question. MR. MULHERE: Yeah, no problem. Any other questions? (No response.) MR. MULHERE: okay, I'm going to run out to my car and get some cards. I'll bring them back in so that if somebody has a question, they can call me. Sorry, I should have brought them in with me, but I -- MS. WHITE: I have a question. MR. MULHERE: Yes. MS. WHITE: Is it legal for you to put in 47 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 E:2 02 KIM 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 there that you can't sell to -- MR. MULHERE: very good question. M5. WHITE: And are you then by doing that setting up one of those crazy lawsuits that -- MR. MULHERE: No, your question is very, very good. we don't know the answer to that. I'll repeat the question for these guys. Rich, we've got to get you in on this. The question was, is it legal to put in some language that would restrict the market that we would sell this to. And I said I'm not sure that we know the answer to that. It's never been done before. we think maybe we can do it. Depending on the language we use we can do -it. But I'll defer because it isn't up to me. I know I like to play an attorney, but I'm not one, so -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Our intent is to work with the county Attorney and craft appropriate language to assure that we deliver to you everything we've committed to delivering to you, which is it's going to be a mark rate -- I would telling this gentleman, luxury. if it's a rental community, it would be a luxury rental. It would not be whistler's cove. I F• 1 forget when that went through, but i think it 2 may have been before Donna became the 3 commissioner in that area. And i think it was 4 when john Norris was. i won't swear to it but 5 1 think it was. 6 But you've got to remember, there were 7 different times back then regarding -- but 9 was -- did get federal subsidies to buy the 10 property. And in exchange for that they had to 11 agree to certain restrictions on affordability. 12 1 believe it was a 30 -year commitment, 13 whistler's cove. 1 may be off a few years, but 14 1 think it was a 30 -year commitment. 15 so we -- our goal is to be direct and put 16 right in the PUD that we will do -- we are not 17 doing any affordable housing and we are doing a 18 luxury rental or multi - family type project. 19 whether the County Attorney is going to let me 20 get away with being that direct, i don't know, 21 we may have to massage it a little bit to make 22 sure that we're okay legally, but we will get 23 there. 24 MR. ZENZ: But if you change the zoning 25 and then the developer decides i don't want the 1 2 3 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 property anymore, I'm going to sell it. so the next person comes in and says oh, well the zonings changed and I can put 360 rental residents and it's already done and over with. MR. YOVANOVICH: Couple things you have to factor in and do your own homework. one, you have to factor in land price, that goes in a prorated cost. Then you have to build it, so you have to figure your construction cost. By the time you figure all that in, you have to make a profit on the rents. At some point I think the math is going to show you that it's not going to be an affordable housing project. Because when you throw all of those costs in, and you want to make a profit, you're not going to be able to rent it to people who qualify for low- income housing. MR. MULHERE: But I just want to also -- I mean, if we put a condition in there, it runs with the zoning.. You can sell the land, but you're still subject to the same conditions. it does not go away if it's sold. It runs with the land. That's why we're suggesting you put it in zoning. Because you can't get around that. You can change -- you can go in and 50 51 1 rezone it if you want, but then we'll have 2 another information meeting and then -- yes? 3 MR. SCHMIDT: if I can, Bob had mentioned 4 earlier as well that language about the kind of 5 housing they propose might even appear in the 6 Comprehensive Plan itself. And that's just 7 another level of protection you would have. O nnn !!�� IA i frm►�r . Tr+� ..� t ...�e 1 4,� %+- r�nr -#-!� 9 change that. very good point. 10 MR. SCHMIDT: We've got two layers of 11 protection that would end up controlling the 12 property. 13 MR. WEST: what about the difference 14 between -- you know, there's a difference 15 between a rental development and a -- 16 MR. MULHERE: Fee simple owned. That you 17 cannot regulate. That is a form of ownership. 18 zoning has nothing to do it whether it's a 19 rental apartment or a fee simple owned. The 20 way to get it is to make it market rate. 21 MS. WAGNER: Melody Wagner. 22 I guess I want clarification. The way 23 it's zoned right now, you're saying four units 24 per acre. 25 MR. MULHERE: Correct. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 X, 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. WAGNER: I just did the math, and with only 22 acres, that means 16 plus eight units per acre now. MR. MULHERE: It's actually based on the total acreage. You go with the 30, not the 22. MS. WAGNER: Oh, I see. . MR. MULHERE: It's based on the total. It's actually 12. It's below 12, it's 11.7, I think. MS. WAGNER: And I guess -- you said 50 feet. How many stories is that 50? MR. MULHERE: Four. Four. In today's -- under today's high ceiling market. Four stories, three or four. some people don't build four, they only build three. MS. WAGNER: That's still a huge building. MR. MULHERE: Well, the setback, there's further setback. Besides the buffer, there's a setback requirement too, and that's based -- the setback is largely based on the height of the building. MR. YOVANOVICH: I think something you really have to factor in. The existing zoning, the front of it that fronts commercial, it's already zoned commercial for that. And the 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 back is basically the residential type of use. That zoning really hamstrings the ability to develop a quality project on this property because you're going to have strip retail up front because you've got a long narrow piece. And you're going to have a relatively low density project that you can't amenitize. so Wnl rp nni- oni my -1-n meat +-tip ki oh -onfl residential uses on that property on a small little piece that you can't provide any amenities to as far as zoning. so what this is going to give the developer is the flexibility to provide a multi - family project that can have appropriate amenities that will increase market values around you, or provide appropriate commercial that will increase the property values over what currently can be built on the property. It's a tough piece of property to develop with quality development. Ms. WAGNER: well, if you're familiar with Mercado -- MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm very familiar. Ms. WAGNER: -- you've got mixed use. And you've got mixed -- you've got commercial on 53 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 the first layer and then you've got one or two layers of high -end residential. MR. MULHERE: On some of the buildings. MR. YOVANOVICH: And if you're familiar with the condo and you're familiar with Bay Front, Bay Front they can't keep quality commercial in there. They -- I'm telling you, I mean, I represent them, okay. so I know it's been a struggle to get that retail space leased. They sold the units quick, but the retail is -- MR. MULHERE: It's taken Mercado a long time too, but -- . MR. YOVANOVICH: The exact opposite happened in Mercado. They filled up -- MR. MULHERE: The commercial. MR. YOVANOVICH: -- the commercial. But the residential is tough to sale. I mean, mixed use is really not making it in Naples. MR. MULHERE: we do allow it. we allow it. And so if we got the right mix of uses, something like that could happen. My guess is it would probably be more like commercial in a separate multi - family building. Not necessarily in the same building, but same 54 55 1 campus. 2 MR. SHUCART: Similar to Naples Square 3 downtown, they've got a 20 -acre piece. 4 Three - quarters of it in the rear is going to be 5 residential and then the commercial will front 6 on 41. Now, it's considered a quote, unquote 7 mixed use, but it's not the residential over —' a —• •— = _:a_.. _.. — . _— • 9 I think, you know, as Rich said, it's not 10 really been a proven entity anywhere in town. 11 Even on Fifth Avenue it's struggled. You know, 12 to live above commercial is a younger type of 13 mentality. But you've got to have a certain 14 number of income to live in that area and it 15 just -- they're almost polar opposites. 16 so I see it as more residential in the 17 rear and then more the commercial frontage type 18 in the front if it goes that direction. 19 MS. WAGNER: what is the acreage of the 20 commercial that's available according to right 21 now? 22 MR. MULHERE: Right now? 23 MR. SHUCART: Just under 10 or right at 24 nine. 25 MR. MULHERE: Yeah, eight or nine acres. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 MA 23 24 25 MS. WAGNER: And this would increase that. MR. MULHERE: This would allow you to do all commercial, all residential or a mixture of both. MR. SHUCART: And right now there's 115,000 square feet of commercial on the nine acres. So percentage -wise there'll be -- if the entire site is developed as commercial, it would be -- MR. MULHERE: Less intense. Because we're capped at 250. So right now it allows 115 on nine acres. If we did it all commercial at 250, that would be on 22 acres. so it's a less intensity. MR. SHUCART: well, really it would be 30 acres. MR. MULHERE: Yeah, hopefully. Any -- it's 6:30. I want to kind of wrap it up, but I also want to make sure I answer any of your questions. So any last questions? (No response.) MR. MULHERE: Really appreciate your coming. I'm sure you've going to think of some more questions. I'm going to run out to the car and get my cards. If you want to call me, 56 1 2 tv 4 5 6 7 0 5 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you can. some people don't like to ask questions in a group. (At which time, this meeting concluded at 6:30 p.m.) 57 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER state of Florida ) County of Collier ) I, CHERIE' NOTTINGHAM, Notary Public, in and for the state of Florida at Large, certify that I was authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing proceedings. I further certify that I am not a relative, employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I financially interested in the action. Dated this 21st day of duly, 2014. h evi Pao CHERIE' R. NOTTINGHAM Gregory Court Reporting 2650 Airport Road south MERIER.NOTMGHAM Naples, Florida 34112 , *MY COMMISSION #FF131691 My Commission No. FF 131691 F EXPIRES: July 12, 2018 Expires: July 12 , 2018 ��oFFl.°r'�� Banded ihru Bodo Nobry8wica SIGN POSTING INSTRUCTIONS (Section 10.03.00, COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) A zoning sign(s) must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen (15) calendar days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s) must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent through the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be construed to supercede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to Section 10.03.00 of the LDC. 1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street right -of -way or easement. 2. The sign(s) must be securely affixed by nails, staples, or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened securely to a post, or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage. 3. The petitioner or the petitioner's agent must maintain the sign(s) in place, and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost, or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the petitioner's agent must replace the signs NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE ASSIGNED PLANNER. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, PERSONALLY APPEARED ROBERT J. MULHERE, FAICP WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER GMPA- PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10 IG ATURE OF APPLICANT OR AGENT ROBERT J. MULHERE, FAICP NAME (TYPED OR PRINTED) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER HOLE MONTES, INC. STREET OR P.O. BOX 950 ENCORE WAY, NAPLES, FL 34110 CITY, STATE ZIP The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 27th ROBERT J. MULHERE , personally known to me or who produced and who did/did not take an oath. J,-U,infn Q"Aq IkOA Signature b f Notary Public STEPHANIE KRROL .r MY COMM18510N # EE 163504 ;y= EXPIRES: March 9, 2016 Bonded TM Notary PuNic Underwriters My Commission Expires: (Stamp with serial number) day of February , 20(715, by as identification Stephanie Karol Printed Name of Notary Public 4- I s a k �� Si W no join a Ia &i t F i PL: isles afiui :.. A .. x _ ra m m. ... = .. top 1;WA 0 IAL y es 1 w .. OL 6, i1� L1 Lil Q 1 pa {j- � � P 4i {i � � ae• M � LL 1h1 {'Oi 1 SV CM e1� a.•. tzI —I— tip e. ds I j vo J ; J ~ Owe• j wJ 5. 4 L a Ck -i Y IJ7 e+sil, y UO ryT�` 5 CS3 LLJ : E:? i iti 1 c± `d,, 1..�? PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF MEETING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCES Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, April 28, 2015 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL. The purpose of the hearing is to consider: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ESTABLISHING THE VINCENTIAN MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT IN THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL ONLY, COMMERCIAL ONLY OR MIXED OUSE PROJECT AT THE FOLLOWING DENSITYANTENSITY UP TO 7.3 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FORA MAXIMUM OF 224 - RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000-SQUARE- FEET 'OF COMMERCIAL USES, A 150 ROOM— - - - HOTEL, AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY AT A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 0.6. THE COMMERCIAL USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT ARE ALL PERMITTED USES AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE C -3 COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE ZONING DISTRICT, AND THREE PERMITTED USES AND ONE CONDITIONAL USE IN THE C -4 COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING DISTRICT IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WITH CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST) IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 30.68± ACRES, [PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10] AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ZONING DISTRICT TO A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 224 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000 GROSS SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL LAND USES, A HOTEL LIMITED TO 150 ROOMS, AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY (ALF) AT 0.6 FAR. THE COMMERCIAL USES ARE SUBJECT TO CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF THE PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE OR IF A HOTEL OR ALF IS CONSTRUCTED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41 IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 30.68+/ - ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 99 -37, THE VINCENTIAN PUD; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDZ- PL20130001726] \-\ LELY. A R DRT COMMUNITY MANOR ORI28 m 27 U U WHISTLERS PROJECT TREE T�ACS LOCATION 33 i 34 VINCENTIAN 5) WENTWORTH ESTATES All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed ORDINANCES will be made available for inspection at the Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning, Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, fourth floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Suite #401 Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Tuesday, April 28, 2015, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite #101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS - COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TIM NANCE, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: Teresa Cannon Deputy Clerk (SEAL) No. 231121302 April 8 2015 NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Public State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve appeared Daniel McDermott who Inside Sales Manager of the Naple, newspaper published at Naples, in distributed in Collier and Lee cour attached copy of the advertising, b PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICI was published in said newspaper 1 on February 27, 2015. Affiant further says that the said published at Naples, in said Collie newspaper has heretofore been coi County, Florida; distributed in Col each day and has been entered as s office in Naples, in said Collier Cc year next preceding the first publi advertisement; and affiant further promised any person, firm or corps commission or refund for the pure publication in the said newsp (Signature of affiant) Sworn to and ' ubscnbed before This 2nd day o March 2015 � J (Signature of NOTICE CF IE'ING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCES Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Pkmnk p Commission sitting as the local planning agency and the Environmental Advisory Council, will hold a public meeting on Thursday, March 19, 2015 at 9:00 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Fto% County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL. The purpose of the hewing is to consider: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED. THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAID USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ESTABLISHING THE VINCENTIAN MIM USE SUBDISTRICT IN THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL ONLY, COMMERCE- ONLY OR MWED USE PROJECT AT THE FOLLOWING DENSRYANTENIMY.. UP TO 7.3 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR A MAXIMUM OF 224 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES, A 150 ROOM HOTEL AT A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF Q8 AND AN ASSISTED LANG FACILITY AT A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 04 . THE COMMERCIAL USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT ARE ALL PERMlITTEO USES AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE C-1 GENERAL OFFICE THROUGH C-3 COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE COLLIER COMM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WITH OONVERMW AND LIMITATIONS IF PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT; AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSM87TAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNIT`Y. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41(TAMIA I TRAIL EAST) IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 30.86* ACRES. tPL20130001MICP- 2013 -101 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE MAN" 200441, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH E$TABLSHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING R&OL"TIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE, ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PlW) ZONING DISTRICT TO A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE VIJCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 224 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000 GROSS SOUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL LAND USES, AND A HOTEL LIMITED TO 150 ROOMS AND A 0.6 FLOOR AREA RATIO ( FAR) AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY (ALF) AT 0.8 FAR. THE COMMERCIAL USES ARE SUBJECT TO CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF THE PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MW(ED USE OR IF A HOTEL OR ALF S CONSTRUCTED. THE SLSJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41 IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF MAW- ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 99-37, THE WNCENTIAN PUO; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PUDZ- PL201300017261 All interested parties — invited to appear arid be heard, Copies of the proposed ORDINANCES will be made avaNeble for inspection at the Planning & Zoning Department, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Nom, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerks Office, fourth floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 East Timiami Trail, Suite #401 Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section of the Planning & Zoning Department. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thursday, Marctr 19, 2015 will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Pianniing Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. if you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite #101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hewing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office, Mark P. Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, FL CAROL POLIDORA hfllPlow - 311111111111 of Florida CeeMIMeNNoe tR FF 185630 My CARM11. EN*" DOC 28.2018 kR W"0 Naticllal Notary Assn. LELT, A R Y COMMUNITY NOR t\"%.�ES ERs PROJECT TREE T LOCATION AA ORES 32 33 34 RNCEN AN (5) ME,ITW ESTATES NCTORIA FALLS All interested parties — invited to appear arid be heard, Copies of the proposed ORDINANCES will be made avaNeble for inspection at the Planning & Zoning Department, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Nom, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerks Office, fourth floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 East Timiami Trail, Suite #401 Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section of the Planning & Zoning Department. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thursday, Marctr 19, 2015 will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Pianniing Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. if you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite #101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hewing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office, Mark P. Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, FL CAROL POLIDORA hfllPlow - 311111111111 of Florida CeeMIMeNNoe tR FF 185630 My CARM11. EN*" DOC 28.2018 kR W"0 Naticllal Notary Assn. PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF MEETING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCES Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission sitting as the local planning agency and the Environmental Advisory Council, will hold a public meeting on Thursday, March 19, 2015 at 9:00 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL. The purpose of the hearing is to consider: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ESTABLISHING THE VINCENTIAN MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT IN THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO ALLOW A RESIDENTIAL ONLY, COMMERCIAL ONLY OR MIXED USE PROJECT AT THE FOLLOWING DENSITYANTENSITY UP TO 7.3 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR A MAXIMUM OF 224 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES, A 150 ROOM HOTEL AT A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 0.6 AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY AT A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 0.6. THE COMMERCIAL USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT ARE ALL PERMITTED USES AND CONDITIONAL USES IN THE C -1 GENERAL OFFICE THROUGH C -3 COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WITH CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT; AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST) IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 30.68± ACRES. [PL20130001767/CP- 2013 -10] AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ZONING DISTRICT TO A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 224 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000 GROSS SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL LAND USES, AND A HOTEL LIMITED TO 150 ROOMS AND A 0.6 FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY (ALF) AT 0.6 FAR. THE COMMERCIAL USES ARE SUBJECT TO CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF THE PROJECT IS DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE OR IF A HOTEL OR ALF IS CONSTRUCTED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41 IN SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 30.68 + /- ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 99 -37, THE VINCENTIAN PUD; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDZ- PL20130001726] T9 LELY, A R ORT COMMUNITY NAPLES MANOR (DRI) i 0 rn O MICEU� 29 28 27 m (S) •s MYRTLE v% WOODS WHISTLERS COVE PROJECT TREE TOPS LOCATION TRAIL ACRES 32 33 34 VINCENTIAN (S) WENTWORTH ESTATES VICTORIA FALLS Al interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed ORDINANCES will be made available for inspection at the Planning & Zoning Department, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, fourth floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Suite #401 Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section of the Planning & Zoning Department. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thursday, March 19, 2015 will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite #101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark P. Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, FL No. 231123961 February 27 2015